Should Pyra have a Camera?

Should Pyra have a Camera?

  • Yes

    Votes: 111 43.0%
  • No

    Votes: 147 57.0%

  • Total voters
    258

"I don't understand the young'uns infatuation with tight jeans. They can't even carry a lottery ticket in their pockets without it looking like the collected works of Tolstoy" 

Brilliant old swedish humorist :)
 
It kind of does. Because if all those people are playing puzzle games, card games, or board games, then it is further data that strengthens my point that the genres that AR games tend to be useful in aren't popular.
Thats true, but that was not what I meant - I was getting at how long peoples attention span can be on a mobile device, and that the situation is very different now, with people actually spending more time on such games than 5 min.
 Yes, but it still doesn't matter if the things they are spending their time on are genres that AR games don't fit.

Oh, certainly this could be possible. However, this can't happen until someone gets an idea for one and attempts it.
...However, I believe that there just aren't enough developers attempting them for this to even start to be a problem yet.
As said before there are already examples of AR games of different kinds on Android/iOS available for a long time - and even I (have to) use it sometimes when a new Lego catalogue pops up and my children want to see some of the models come to live or one of them wants to test its building skills with "Life of George" - without any real hit on the market. Maybe it needs a "precursor technology" like the upcoming VR glasses hype to pave the way. But even then, the games that could be made will suffer from not beeing able to be used where it would give one the biggest possibilities: the outside world. But who really knows, maybe it will be the next "newold" technology for theme parks like it is with 3D in cinemas now.
Ok, I feel we need to clarify what you consider a "game". I don't honestly believe you can call a lego catalog app a game, just like I can't call the AR feature in the Yelp application (the Monocle) a game.

Second, you said there are examples of AR games, but the only one you've mentioned so far was Ingress, which wasn't even the kind of AR game we were talking about. Sure, some exist, but not nearly as many as you seem to suggest. Not to mention, it can't just be an AR game, it needs to be a good AR game that is not doing well, so as to prove your point.

-God Ginrai
 
So the question is not "why should people carry both a pyra and a phone" but "why should people buy a Pyra instead of a controller (iCP and such) for a smartphone they probably already have" ?
Well, that's interesting, IMO people  tends to prefer all-in-one instead of two device. Also the battery on a smartphone is a huge problem when you want to play games.

Thats no fact at all, and if you can't come up with reasonable arguments to support that claim, thats just another case of "if i say so" and nothing a reasonable decision can be based on.
You may not talk about the form (which you did initially) but that is only one side of the coin - you still got the software side, in which I do not really see any point where the Pyra could be superior:


You mentioned typing of short messages - who writes the software that you want to conveniently use ? And even if it would be there, short messages are meant to be short by design, so the time you spend getting the Pyra out opening it up, starting the sms application and eventually start typing probably neglects the win in typing speed - which isn't something that everyone will have - people get used to touchscreens and looking at people (especially woman) in public transport shows that touch typing can be really quick (some weeks ago I even saw one typing blind on their iPhone, how akward is that ?).


So it would be really nice of you to go into detail why it is a "fact".
When I talk about "form" I talk about the fact smartphone is tighter and easier to use quicly.

Pyra will be able to do pretty all that a smartphone can do. The plus is that it is full open so you will be able to do more and add more, you are free, your software and hardware is your so you can do more. When I say that you can do it better is because of the form for games and typing, desactivate wifi quicly, analog sound controller, all customizable (backlight, led), and you can do all that longer.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
When I talk about "form" I talk about the fact smartphone is tighter and easier to use quicly.
Pyra will be able to do pretty all that a smartphone can do. The plus is that it is full open so you will be able to do more and add more, you are free, your software and hardware is your so you can do more. When I say that you can do it better is because of the form for games and typing, desactivate wifi quicly, analog sound controller, all customizable (backlight, led), and you can do all that longer.
In a world where people readily hand over their data/documents/etc over to big corporations for the sake of convenience, the above seems to be not that much of a plus for most people.

I do agree that products which are fully open and trully free (as in freedom) are better than devices which might be more convenient but closed and which force restrictions on their users.

It all comes down to how much a person values freedom over convenience. And that's the problem, the people which can't be arsed to carry two devices are frequently (but not always) the ones which have no issue with using a closed platform as long as it is convenient. Those people won't see the value in an open handheld console, and instead will only see the flaws ("why doesn't it work like on Android/iPhone?").

Sorry that sounded a bit too FSF-like. :lol:
 
Yes, but basics function like smartphones' ones are easy to use and we aren't talking about mainstream but people who would be able to reach the Pyra. So this doesn't really apply.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
If you're talking to me, you should precise what you're talking about.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Yes, but it still doesn't matter if the things they are spending their time on are genres that AR games don't fit.
true again, but you where saying that my argument "usually ar games fail to extend peoples interest beyond the initial phase of a new experience" is moot because that is something games on mobile plattform have generally in common, which I deem wrong.
Ok, I feel we need to clarify what you consider a "game". I don't honestly believe you can call a lego catalog app a game, just like I can't call the AR feature in the Yelp application (the Monocle) a game.
Thats true, we were specifically talking about games, and the Lego 3d catalogue does not fit, but "Life of George" does. And altough not originally intended by me, the questions comes up if "successfull" software besides games wouldn't propel the success of a technology in all fields.
Second, you said there are examples of AR games, but the only one you've mentioned so far was Ingress, which wasn't even the kind of AR game we were talking about. Sure, some exist, but not nearly as many as you seem to suggest. Not to mention, it can't just be an AR game, it needs to be a good AR game that is not doing well, so as to prove your point.
Coming up with games isn't a big problem:Sky Siege 3d, AR Invaders, ARSoccer, ARDefender, Toyota AR, Temple Treausre Hunt, Spectrek, Zombies Everywhere, etc... etc... etc

And I can come up with a rather large list if I invest more than two minutes , or you just use your favourite search engine.

But your second request is undoable and partially uninteresting: How to make a universally appliable definition of "good", regarding games ? Thats practically impossible as this involves too much personal assessment, look at how game reviews can differ (and if you span that cross countries, cultural differences come into play too).

And I'm not convinced that this is really a criterium to look at: If "good" games are needed, why do we have games on mobile plattforms in general ? The first games were crap (compared to the rest of the market), still the aspect of playing something on the go kept (customer) interest high enough, so the market could evolve. Or take electronic gaming in general, the first games were crap compared to what the traditional gaming market had to offer, but the technology was interesting enough to keep the overall development going.

Well, that's interesting, IMO people tends to prefer all-in-one instead of two device. Also the battery on a smartphone is a huge problem when you want to play games.
As said before that did not hinder smartphones to get market domination, so while a good battery runtime sure is a nice "feature", it is highly unlikely that it will be the tip of the scale in favour of the Pyra as for the drawbacks that come with a "Pyraphone".Even in this community, where you can only find people that are here, because they appreciate what the Pandora offers (and the Pyra will be) only a sparse amount of users has interest in the Pyra beeing used in as a phone. Try to extrapolate that on a market, where only a small percentage is even interested in what the Pyra will have to offer.

When I talk about "form" I talk about the fact smartphone is tighter and easier to use quicly.

Pyra will be able to do pretty all that a smartphone can do. The plus is that it is full open so you will be able to do more and add more, you are free, your software and hardware is your so you can do more. When I say that you can do it better is because of the form for games and typing, desactivate wifi quicly, analog sound controller, all customizable (backlight, led), and you can do all that longer.
Would you mind not repeating things you have already said, and start saying the things that support your claim ? Haven't we already talked enough about that the Pyras hardware (case, form factor, cp, gpu, screen) will be inferiour in every way (except maybe "weak" factors, like battery runtime and keyboard) ?
Beeing free to do things you want is nice, but only if you know how and are able to do it. While pretty much everything of the Pyra in terms of software is already "covered" in some way > you will get a Pyra with a OS that at least lets you do the basics: start the system, utilize keys/nubs/screen/ports, install software, etc. this is mostly because the Pyra tries to imitate / uses standard hardware so things that are already there can be reused. Like connecting to WiFi networks: we can do this (rather) conveniently because the work was already done by people outside of the project (and a long time ago, so the software already is in a mature state). Same can be expected for mobile dataconnections as it is widely used on linux desktop for years now. But for the phone part, there aren't many precursors to build upon - sure there are already open OS projects for phones, but their components are far away from beeing that modularized/standarized so that they can be as "easily" transported/integrated into the standard desktop OS the Pyra will sport.

And still someone has to do it, I doubt the Pyra team will have much resources left for that, they probably will have enough on their hands to prepare a OS release that offers a decent experience for the "traditional" features the Pandora already offers. There probably is someone who will do that, but no one can say when this will happen and how long that person is willing to spend time on it ironing out the bugs and supporting it.

Why should Ed not be willing to do that from the start you may ask? Because the resources simply aren't there, look at how long it took till the Pandora got a decent power management (which is something most people would consider essential for a mobile device) or how long it took to have something ready so that a dev could rather easily make use of the dsp.

And we are not even talking about the quality of the user eperience these open solutions might offer.

All that does not mean it won't happen, but that no one knows when it will happen.

An uncertainty that Ed surely won't be ready to raise production costs on.
 
Well, that's interesting, IMO people tends to prefer all-in-one instead of two device. Also the battery on a smartphone is a huge problem when you want to play games.
As said before that did not hinder smartphones to get market domination, so while a good battery runtime sure is a nice "feature", it is highly unlikely that it will be the tip of the scale in favour of the Pyra as for the drawbacks that come with a "Pyraphone".
Even in this community, where you can only find people that are here, because they appreciate what the Pandora offers (and the Pyra will be) only a sparse amount of users has interest in the Pyra beeing used in as a phone. Try to extrapolate that on a market, where only a small percentage is even interested in what the Pyra will have to offer.
Well, that's your opinion, there isn't a significant amount of people who said that they aren't interseted. I'm convinced that A LOT of people will chose to take their Pyra alone instead of Pyra+smartphone especially if there is a camera (maybe not everyday) and I didn't see any relevant argument against it here.

When I talk about "form" I talk about the fact smartphone is tighter and easier to use quicly.


Pyra will be able to do pretty all that a smartphone can do. The plus is that it is full open so you will be able to do more and add more, you are free, your software and hardware is your so you can do more. When I say that you can do it better is because of the form for games and typing, desactivate wifi quicly, analog sound controller, all customizable (backlight, led), and you can do all that longer.
Would you mind not repeating things you have already said, and start saying the things that support your claim ? Haven't we already talked enough about that the Pyras hardware (case, form factor, cp, gpu, screen) will be inferiour in every way (except maybe "weak" factors, like battery runtime and keyboard) ?
Are yous serious? I don't see what you are talking about, the case, form factor etc is superiour to me, don't talk like your opinion is the truth. Also I don't care about gpu etc, to me gpu is the "weak factors". I'm only intersted about what you can do and specs aren't much interesting since Pyra will have a sufficient one (and will use it better, games need less resources for exemple).  And yes I repeat all that can be relevant with adding some elements because someone may not read all our conversation.

The fact is Pyra can do what an android phone can do and much more, so it is better, period.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Yes, but it still doesn't matter if the things they are spending their time on are genres that AR games don't fit.
true again, but you where saying that my argument "usually ar games fail to extend peoples interest beyond the initial phase of a new experience" is moot because that is something games on mobile plattform have generally in common, which I deem wrong.
 Honestly, I still hold to that. The number of genres that actually hold people's attention on smartphones is actually quite few. While there are many people who play them, the genres themselves are only a small part of gaming as a whole. I can't say that the system offers long gaming experiences if that really applies to a small number of genres.

And altough not originally intended by me, the questions comes up if "successfull" software besides games wouldn't propel the success of a technology in all fields.
 I think it would. You just need multiple successes. More stuff like Yelp's Monocle, and less like Google Goggles.

But your second request is undoable and partially uninteresting: How to make a universally appliable definition of "good", regarding games ? Thats practically impossible as this involves too much personal assessment, look at how game reviews can differ (and if you span that cross countries, cultural differences come into play too).
Honestly, that's not undoable at all. If someone truly thinks a game is good, then there is no problem with them using it as an example of a good game in an argument. If the two agree, then it stands. If the two disagree, then they can discuss the reasons for and against calling it a good game.

And I'm not convinced that this is really a criterium to look at: If "good" games are needed, why do we have games on mobile plattforms in general ?
Because Snake, Tetris, and Pac-man were some of the first games to exist on feature phones. Those are certainly good games, and justify people continuing to develop them. And if you notice, mobile gaming, while it existed, didn't really take off until iOS and Android came about allowing for more detail, allowing new good games like Angry Birds and Scrabble. (even if you don't like Angry Birds, you have to admit that a lot of people like it)

-God Ginrai
 
Well, that's your opinion, there isn't a significant amount of people who said that they aren't interseted. I'm convinced that A LOT of people will chose to take their Pyra alone instead of Pyra+smartphone especially if there is a camera (maybe not everyday) and I didn't see any relevant argument against it here.

...
 If you don't want to discuss that topic thats fine be me, but then just say it. You don't need to repeat yourself and ignore any argument that is brought up.
Honestly, I still hold to that. The number of genres that actually hold people's attention on smartphones is actually quite few. While there are many people who play them, the genres themselves are only a small part of gaming as a whole. I can't say that the system offers long gaming experiences if that really applies to a small number of genres.
As said before, that may be due to different gaming markets, "we" are (besides fantasyland) the only (western)country in the world, where adventure games can be successfull after all.But I still doubt it, especially with tablet sales rising over the last few months, devices that are not necessarily used on the go. And its rather hard to believe that a lot of emulators and remakes that appeared in the last months where created for a minority that only plays games on their phones for five minutes.

I think it would. You just need multiple successes. More stuff like Yelp's Monocle, and less like Google Goggles.
so the "3D Catalogue" (I know its a bad example) could be taken into consideration ?
Honestly, that's not undoable at all. If someone truly thinks a game is good, then there is no problem with them using it as an example of a good game in an argument. If the two agree, then it stands. If the two disagree, then they can discuss the reasons for and against calling it a good game.
Huhh, how should that work out ? Even if two agree, that does not mean that others agree or that they are right. Practical example: I deem "Star Wars: Republic Commando" the best Star Wars game (ignoring X-Wing/Tie-Fighter/Xvs.T for a moment) there is. And if I look hard enough, I may find 50 people that agree with me, but most gamers out there would just think I'm beeing silly. Is it a good game or not ?
Because Snake, Tetris, and Pac-man were some of the first games to exist on feature phones. Those are certainly good games, and justify people continuing to develop them. And if you notice, mobile gaming, while it existed, didn't really take off until iOS and Android came about allowing for more detail, allowing new good games like Angry Birds and Scrabble. (even if you don't like Angry Birds, you have to admit that a lot of people like it)
I wanted to get at mobile gaming in general, and while the first titles wheren't bad games per se, the amount of good titles was sparse in my opinion.
 
"we" are (besides fantasyland) the only (western)country in the world, where adventure games can be successfull after all.
I'm not sure what you mean here.

But I still doubt it, especially with tablet sales rising over the last few months, devices that are not necessarily used on the go. And its rather hard to believe that a lot of emulators and remakes that appeared in the last months where created for a minority that only plays games on their phones for five minutes.
 Those sales have risen mainly because of non-gaming apps. Not to mention, emulators and remakes don't really help your argument. Those play games that people already know are good, so they don't have to try to answer the question "Is it worth the install time/money to do this?" just based on a description.

I think it would. You just need multiple successes. More stuff like Yelp's Monocle, and less like Google Goggles.
so the "3D Catalogue" (I know its a bad example) could be taken into consideration ?
 For something that could propel the popularity of AR? Yea, I would guess. I've never seen it.

Huhh, how should that work out ? Even if two agree, that does not mean that others agree or that they are right. Practical example: I deem "Star Wars: Republic Commando" the best Star Wars game (ignoring X-Wing/Tie-Fighter/Xvs.T for a moment) there is. And if I look hard enough, I may find 50 people that agree with me, but most gamers out there would just think I'm beeing silly. Is it a good game or not ?
 The most important thing is that a large number of people believe it is a good game. If most would call you silly, then it is a good game for you, but not a good example in an argument, because the audience that believes it is a good game is low. I simply meant that if you were to come out and gave something like Kingdom Hearts as an example of a good game, that even if I disagreed (because I feel that adding Disney characters in FF is just making FF worse) that we could discuss and I should be able to realize that it is a good game, even tho' I do not particularly like it.

I wanted to get at mobile gaming in general, and while the first titles wheren't bad games per se, the amount of good titles was sparse in my opinion.
Honestly, the amount of titles, period, was sparse before iOS and Android. I don't see how that matters

-God Ginrai
 
I don't have time to catch up to 29 pages of discussion but here's my take on it:

If you want to make something built-in that could also be attached via USB, only do so for things that are:

  1. Appropriate to a portable computer which isn't a phone
  2. Such a hassle if done via external USB that users probably wouldn't bother
...so I'd say yes to:

  1. A high-resolution rear-facing camera which takes ugly pictures but does a good job of scanning QR codes (eg. URLs) and barcodes (eg. ISBN-13). (I'd pair it with software which, when triggered via a global xbindkeys hotkey, displays the resulting text and, if it's a URL, ISBN, or other piece of data which is or can be represented as a URI, offers to hand it off to xdg-open at the press of a key.)
  2. An IR blaster on the back of the Pyra that I could bind hotkeys to and use to control things like volume on TVs and stereo receivers that don't have a working HDMI CEC implementation. (or that I'm not plugged into because I'm using my Pyra to reinvent the TV-B-Gone.)

Aside from that, the rationale for a camera is a little shaky. (I'd probably bind a "take a picture, let me type a comment, and then put it in my 'notes to be sorted' bin" hotkey, but I'm one of those weirdos who neither has nor wants a smartphone.)
 
I'm not sure what you mean here.
Sorry, not clevery phrased from my side, the country I live in (> "we") is deemed one of the few where adventure games are/can still be very successfull. I was trying to find a reason for the differences in gaming behaviour we seem to observe > different countries, different gaming cultures.
Those sales have risen mainly because of non-gaming apps. Not to mention, emulators and remakes don't really help your argument. Those play games that people already know are good, so they don't have to try to answer the question "Is it worth the install time/money to do this?" just based on a description.
I tried to hint at a shift in gaming paradigms/behaviour on Android/iOS devices => tablets are often used at home > more time / more calm environment > bigger incentive to invest more time into game.
For something that could propel the popularity of AR? Yea, I would guess. I've never seen it.
So the already available catalogue of possible of possible triggers (> "good" games/applications) that could have been the "ar killer application" is even bigger.
The most important thing is that a large number of people believe it is a good game. If most would call you silly, then it is a good game for you, but not a good example in an argument, because the audience that believes it is a good game is low. I simply meant that if you were to come out and gave something like Kingdom Hearts as an example of a good game, that even if I disagreed (because I feel that adding Disney characters in FF is just making FF worse) that we could discuss and I should be able to realize that it is a good game, even tho' I do not particularly like it.
So in the end we have a "chicken and egg problem" ? => Without a technology breakthrough we don't get an considerable amount of people that believe it is a good game (due to not many people playing it). But without that we won't get a technology breakthrough ?And I'm still having a problem understanding your universal definition of a good game: First, we need two that agree on that, but if this isn't followed by the acknowledgement of a larger group, it is a bad game again?

Honestly, the amount of titles, period, was sparse before iOS and Android. I don't see how that matters
I was getting at the mobile gaming market as a whole (including now classic devices such as the "game and watch" devices or the Gameboy)
 
I'm not sure what you mean here.
Sorry, not clevery phrased from my side, the country I live in (> "we") is deemed one of the few where adventure games are/can still be very successfull. I was trying to find a reason for the differences in gaming behaviour we seem to observe > different countries, different gaming cultures.
 Where is it that adventure games can/can't be successful? The market here is over-saturated w/ FPSes currently, but I don't think that Adventure games see a barrier to success here.

Those sales have risen mainly because of non-gaming apps. Not to mention, emulators and remakes don't really help your argument. Those play games that people already know are good, so they don't have to try to answer the question "Is it worth the install time/money to do this?" just based on a description.
I tried to hint at a shift in gaming paradigms/behaviour on Android/iOS devices => tablets are often used at home > more time / more calm environment > bigger incentive to invest more time into game.
 Yea, but just because they will use it more often at home doesn't necessarily mean they will play games. Many of them just browse facebook and do Google searches.

So the already available catalogue of possible of possible triggers (> "good" games/applications) that could have been the "ar killer application" is even bigger.
Yes, however, it doesn't matter if it isn't advertised. I'm a big lego fan and I had never heard of that app. I haven't seen Lego do anything to advertise it.

So in the end we have a "chicken and egg problem" ? => Without a technology breakthrough we don't get an considerable amount of people that believe it is a good game (due to not many people playing it). But without that we won't get a technology breakthrough ?
Not at all. It's more a matter of the percentage who have tried it who liked it. If only 10k people have tried the game, but 9.5k say it's great, then you've got a good game.

And I'm still having a problem understanding your universal definition of a good game: First, we need two that agree on that, but if this isn't followed by the acknowledgement of a larger group, it is a bad game again?
If we both think a game is good, but a large number of people don't think the game is good, then in that case, the game is merely a good game "for us", instead of being applicable to a large number of people. While we could still consider this a good game in certain arguments, it would not work for our current discussion, where I have posited that the presence of good games will drive the popularity of the AR genre, because for it to drive the popularity, it needs to appeal to a large percentage of the people who try it.

Honestly, the amount of titles, period, was sparse before iOS and Android. I don't see how that matters
I was getting at the mobile gaming market as a whole (including now classic devices such as the "game and watch" devices or the Gameboy)
Well, honestly, if you were trying to include the mobile gaming market as a whole, then I can not agree with you on the quality of early games at all. The Gameboy had a large number of good games within the first 2 years (1989-1990) of its release:

  • Tetris
  • Q*bert
  • Gargoyle's Quest
  • The Final Fantasy Legend (Square's first game to sell over a million copies)
  • Double Dragon
  • Bomber Boy
-God Ginrai
 
I really hope ED will change his mind and find a smart way to add the camera.
 
Arent most of those old games reimplemented?

A smart way to add a camera is via usb

  • upgrade path
  • modularity, no option mandated
  • doesn't have implicit cost
  • no extra hardware design
  • no extra software design to implement

Get one of those ribbon ones, cut a hole in the front/side wherever, and solder it to some i/O pins.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Arent most of those old games reimplemented?
Double Dragon, Tetris, and Q*bert were games that had existed on other systems, yes. However, Gargoyle's Quest, Bomber Boy, and The Final Fantasy Legend were all Gameboy Exclusives.

Besides, it doesn't matter whether they had already existed on another system or not. The point they were illustrating is that there were plenty of good games out for the Gameboy during its early days. Whether they existed on other systems does not change whether they were a good game or not.

-God Ginrai
 
A "smart" way to add a camera is via usb

  • upgrade path
  • modularity, no option mandated
  • doesn't have implicit cost
  • no extra hardware design
  • no extra software design to implement
:mellow:


And how exactly is it going to stay on the Pyra, especially securely? Otherwise you are carrying another device. Actually, a usb camera is pointless. You basically saying get a standalone camera.

Get one of those ribbon ones, cut a hole in the front/side wherever, and solder it to some i/O pins.
You make it sound so easy. The manufacturer should be able to at least do the soldering part.
 
Get one of those ribbon ones, cut a hole in the front/side wherever, and solder it to some i/O pins.
You make it sound so easy. The manufacturer should be able to at least do the soldering part.
Well, if you want it the easy way, I can help. Here is the easy way:

* ED does not want to put a camera on.

* Most people do not want to put a camera on.

* A camera of any appreciable quality adds a lot of technical complexity, both hard- and softwarewise. 

* There really is no space for a camera in the case/lid.

So, the easy way: Forget about it. Accept that it won't happen.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Back
Top