Quake 3 On Xgp

[Cyclops]

why don't people realise that we will not know anything until the consoles are actually released? I've never seen an open-source console, just consoles that allow you to easily develope for them, and run applications created by just about anyone.

For comparison, Of all the released handhelds I've played with, I'd say the gp32 started of the most closed, as it would only run signed applications until the freelauncher thing came along.

​

People see the benefits of open source, well they see lots of free games/emulators/commercial ports in this case on a very different device. Yet most people run a version of windows, buy/copyright infringe apps regularly, and do not understand what open source is, and really why should they. most people don't have a political stance on software licencing or a real interest if you can see/change/examine the source they just want the free games/emulators/commercial ports.

Without it being released, its clear it is possible to develop for the GPX2 and the XGP, so it is fair to say that open-source applications will probably work or be made to work on these platforms. The ease of how easy it is, is another matter.

What is clear is that the GPX2 uses linux(kernel) which will be open-source because it has to be. What will be useful from this is unlikely. Although the magiceyes site implies most of the Media components are seperate from the kernel and closed source. Its also clear that it will use SDL for development which is quite popular.

It seams that the XGP is also able to be developed for and will uses an extension of that already on the GP32 although such things are still up in the air, or just plain vaporware

 

[Julius]

Nice, quake 3 running on a handheld would look good..

Now if there is other pc games ported with simular gfx quality id be interested in getting one..

​

Wow the quake 3 engine was used in a lot of games, Call of Duty % Soldier of fortune 2, they are a bit more advanced I wounder if they would run on lower graphic quality?

Very Excited about this!

​

This is not how it works. With the Quake3 source code you can port Quake3, but that is it.

The rest of the games have to many changes in enginecode, which are not open source.

P.S.: I don't get it btw, FPS games are already horrible to control on home consoles, and it is even worse on portables. So what is the point of having Quake3 on the XGP? Doom was still enjoyable because it was only 2.5d, and Quake is somewhat nice because it still mimics the gameplay of a 2.5d game to a certain extent.
Oh and Quake3 is also kind of boring in singleplayer isn't it?

 

[Talyz]

On an Open Source console you would have the complete information on what hardware the console has, how it works and how to access it, which would simply make the development easier and more efficient, right?
But still, if there is a SDK or something similar, there are possibilities to develop programs even if you don't know exactly what hadrware you develop for, eh?

Please correct me, someone who knows; I've always wanted to know if this is the correct definition of an Open Source console/platform...

 

[Rob]

Quake3 on a handheld system is worth to see and if it works properly to buy. I just hope that GPH will come out with something even more interesting.

 

[Squidge]

On an Open Source console you would have the complete information on what hardware the console has, how it works and how to access it, which would simply make the development easier and more efficient, right?
But still, if there is a SDK or something similar, there are possibilities to develop programs even if you don't know exactly what hadrware you develop for, eh?

Please correct me, someone who knows; I've always wanted to know if this is the correct definition of an Open Source console/platform...

​

"open source" usually just means that the source code to all the code run on the system is available to download. You don't have to disclose the hardware specs, or how to talk to the hardware, but you do have to disclose your code that talks to said hardware.

The GPX2 has an "Open license SDK", which normally means that anyone can use it to develope applications, but the source code is not provided. Problems with this is that nobody knows how efficient this SDK is, so people will always want to write there own to squeeze the last few drops of performance out of the system.

 

[Talyz]

"open source" usually just means that the source code to all the code run on the system is available to download. You don't have to disclose the hardware specs, or how to talk to the hardware, but you do have to disclose your code that talks to said hardware.

The GPX2 has an "Open license SDK", which normally means that anyone can use it to develope applications, but the source code is not provided. Problems with this is that nobody knows how efficient this SDK is, so people will always want to write there own to squeeze the last few drops of performance out of the system.

​

So, the big problem, then, would be if they enclosed the info about how to talk to the hardware (directly; not via a SDK)...

 

[Squidge]

Well, Craig has now said that "i don't think these devboards are coming with the sdk, its not done yet", so unless GPH give us a bit more info about how to talk to the hardware (or a lower level api than the sdk), it's going to be a bit difficult to write apps for...

No doub't we'll find out in a few weeks, as Craig will no doubt be the first person to mess with one

Of course, by the time the system is released, the SDK will be finished, these are probably just a couple of preproduction units that no doubt key-developers will be loaned or whatever to help out GPH with the launch.

 

[pongplaya]

open source ..... ??


i think it doesent matter as long as you can run any homegrown porgramm without getting it verified in some way by the console.. contrary to the psp (memstickswaps dont count

 

[polooo2]

some clarification...


Quake 3 isn't running on XGP right now, but GP is working to run Quake 3 on XGP. Subtle word different, huge meaning difference.


XGP is an open SDK policy, but not open license or source.


And GPX2 is open license. dunno about it being open source.


Cheers.

 

[Alpha2]

Neither are technically open source. Both will require a dev kit assuming you dont already know how to program for their specific inards. The only difference is how accomodating the companies are to people developing for it.

I beleive the XGP will likely require code to be signed but they'll do it for free assuming it's not an emulator where as the GPx2 will let you make anything you can get running on the hardware.