#23000 - benjamin - Fri Jul 02, 2004 2:26 pm
Realizing that the DS is not out until November, and that it will take at least sometime before it penetrates the market, how much longer does the GBA have at the top of the portable gaming world? The PSP won't be out until March either, so are we talking at least a solid year until next June (05), or perhaps even further?
At what point will publishers start to seriously ramp down their projects for GBA in order to focus on the newer hardware?
#23005 - benjamin - Fri Jul 02, 2004 5:57 pm
Maybe this belonged in the General topic section, sorry about that.. Anyway to move it?
#23008 - Lord Graga - Fri Jul 02, 2004 6:08 pm
Moderators can move it.
Anyway, I think GBA will last longer than till just the release of the DS. At least GBA demos will.
#23009 - Miked0801 - Fri Jul 02, 2004 6:12 pm
My guess is that next year will be its last big year. The year after there will be a trickle of titles and it will be declared dead after that christmas
#23028 - MonkeyBoy666 - Fri Jul 02, 2004 9:06 pm
wow dead
.......... Must die in classic battle star glatica pose..............
Best...Death.............ever
of cousre there is alway the gamecube that will keep the gameboy alive and kicking so i don't expect it to be completely dead until one of 2 things happen.
1. Nintendo releses some sort of wireless adpter to make the gamecube compatable with using the DS much like the GBA for compatable games. This will make the gameboy absolete for these games.
2. This new revelution consol thingy come out. This will also bring a death to the gamecube thus in trun bringinga death a death to the GBA. because they go hand and hand.
Well they are just my predictions.
#23033 - keldon - Fri Jul 02, 2004 11:00 pm
since many developers will still be making GBA games, plus the odd delay here and there we should see a couple of releases after DS launch, and a few games moved over to DS development.
#23052 - tepples - Sat Jul 03, 2004 4:15 am
| MonkeyBoy666 wrote: |
| there is alway the gamecube that will keep the gameboy alive and kicking so i don't expect it to be completely dead until ... This new revelution consol thingy come out |
Once Nintendo stops selling new GBA and GBA SP systems, it will become next to impossible to obtain flash carts, and if you're not running the program on GBA hardware, then you might as well have made an SDL program instead to begin with (see here and here which claim that you're not an NES homebrew developer until you've soldered up your own flash cart from parts).
_________________
-- Where is he?
-- Who?
-- You know, the human.
-- I think he moved to Tilwick.
#23058 - jma - Sat Jul 03, 2004 6:22 am
There will be a big market for GBA games long after the GBA stops selling. That's because the DS is backwards compatible (can play all GBA games -- dunno about GB). Developers want to go with what "potential" is there for sales. There are X number of GBA units in circulation right now. After a year from release there will be N DS units in circulation. Until N > X, you can bet there will be more GBA games made than DS games, simply because there is less worry.
_________________
massung@gmail.com
http://www.retrobyte.org
#23059 - Gramps - Sat Jul 03, 2004 7:10 am
Just a little side note for everyone. There have been rumors that the PSP may be delayed even longer than the first quarter of 2005. I read recently (I forget where) that Sony has not even released developer kits yet!!
SOOOO..... I would expect to GBA SP to last for a little while yet. Also don't forget as the price of the SP falls, I would expect parents to be a even more willing to spring for this unit.
#23076 - benjamin - Sat Jul 03, 2004 2:02 pm
| Gramps wrote: |
| Just a little side note for everyone. There have been rumors that the PSP may be delayed even longer than the first quarter of 2005. I read recently (I forget where) that Sony has not even released developer kits yet!! |
Those rumors of delay seem to be coming from industry analysts, and Sony are denying them, FWTW...
http://www.gamesindustry.biz/content_page.php?section_name=pub&aid=3711
#23109 - ampz - Sun Jul 04, 2004 10:40 pm
Contrary to popular belief, the DS will most likely be quite expensive compared to the GBA.
DS games will probably be just as expensive as gamecube or xbox games.
The audio and video capabilities of the GBA are still good. I think it will live on for quite a while. Especially if Nintendo come to their senses and add a GBA link port to the DS.
#23123 - Gramps - Mon Jul 05, 2004 3:16 am
First of all the GBA is no longer in production. In fact I have not seen any new ones in stores for quite some time now.
Secondly reguarding the GBA SP - they are still coming out with new colors ect.... I think you will see this little guy for a least a year more if not longer. Don't forget, the SP price is pretty good and likely to drop lower. This should entice a few more parents to spring for the kids. Don't forget $130 is still not pocket change and I think the price is still alot particularly for pre teens. I have swayed many a parent humming and hawing over the purchase of an SP when I explain the savings due to rechargable batteries. (they are thinking future cost as well as immediate if you understand what I am saying)
As far as the DS goes - first the official price still remains to be seen. Also don't forget, this is a DEVELOPERS SYSTEM. To me this is almost like an experiment. Its like NINTENDO is saying, here is a bunch of new stuff, lets see what you can make it do. All the ideas are great, but the consumer gets the final say. Its Evolution. If the developers and CONSUMER like the new features, I think they will stay and develop further. If they don't like a feature, that feature will die.
We will only see once it is actually in our hands, and we see how the features work. Believe me if the consumer likes somethng they will say. If they don't THEY WILL SAY. Remember how upset everyone was when the exluded an earphone jack off the SP! NINTEDO heard that and put it back on the DS, didn't they.
How much the public embraces the DS and all of its features will ultimately determine the lifespan of the SP and/or its successor.
Sorry, if this is long winded, I tried to keep it as short as possible. I'm actually very excited about the DS, but not because it is a new or better system, but because of the concept and ideas behind it. This really has the potential to change ALL gaming. Who knows what other neat ideas have yet to be tried on a video game system of any type.
#23151 - dagamer34 - Tue Jul 06, 2004 1:08 am
| Gramps wrote: |
This really has the potential to change ALL gaming. Who knows what other neat ideas have yet to be tried on a video game system of any type. |
The DS very well may be the first handheld that gets real respect from console developers. That would be a lot of change right there.
_________________
Little kids and Playstation 2's don't mix. :(
#23157 - benjamin - Tue Jul 06, 2004 2:43 am
| dagamer34 wrote: |
| Gramps wrote: |
This really has the potential to change ALL gaming. Who knows what other neat ideas have yet to be tried on a video game system of any type. |
The DS very well may be the first handheld that gets real respect from console developers. That would be a lot of change right there. |
I'm not sure I follow. Why would console developers not give respect to the GBA? Many console developers come from the SNES and prior era, so what if any stigma is there surrounding the GBA?
#23177 - Miked0801 - Tue Jul 06, 2004 5:48 pm
Because REAL programmers would NEVER code on a system where resources ae so limited and the graphics aren't as good. I've had to deal with this view for a few years now when talking with other developers. It's like most console developers see handhelds as the kiddie pool where they earn their stripes. I personally see handhelds as a fun challenge - get a really fun, cool looking game while fighting its limitations. Others would rather be able to put 200K of info on the stack to store their local boolean array instead of thinking that just maybe there is a better solution :)
#23180 - poslundc - Tue Jul 06, 2004 6:38 pm
I know you're just telling it like it is, Mike, but this outlook really pisses me off. :P
Dan.
#23183 - sgeos - Tue Jul 06, 2004 7:36 pm
| Miked0801 wrote: |
| Because REAL programmers would NEVER code on a system where resources ae so limited and the graphics aren't as good. |
Would or could? =P
-Brendan
#23185 - ampz - Tue Jul 06, 2004 10:13 pm
| Miked0801 wrote: |
| Because REAL programmers would NEVER code on a system where resources ae so limited and the graphics aren't as good. |
I'am sure modern programmers, who are used to unlimited resources and tons of unnecessary libraries, don't like handheld systems. Theese programmers are used to write bloated software. You don't have to be incredibly skilled to write a piece of software when you have access to a unlimited number of libraries, and have no limitations whatsoever to worry about.
Real programmers is something else. Don't confuse the two.
Chris Sawyer, Sid Meier, John Carmack, The entire System 3 crew.
All of the programmers/artists above have accomplished incredible things on limited hardware. In my eyes, thoose are real programmers.
#23187 - sgeos - Wed Jul 07, 2004 1:11 am
| ampz wrote: |
| Real programmers is something else. Don't confuse the two. |
Any idea how the talent pool is spread across industries and platforms? What can a "real" programmer get done with unlimited resources?
-Brendan
#23190 - ampz - Wed Jul 07, 2004 2:05 am
John Carmack still make the best 3D games.
#23198 - jma - Wed Jul 07, 2004 6:16 am
Please, people. Hackers and Painters, by Paul Graham. Buy it, read it, then post.
Jeff
_________________
massung@gmail.com
http://www.retrobyte.org
#23210 - ampz - Wed Jul 07, 2004 4:25 pm
Available online: http://www.paulgraham.com/hp.html
Great reading.
He stresses the importance of attention to (sometimes seemingly insignificant) details, but I think he fails to mention that with too much abstraction, you loose that important attention to detail.
#23212 - poslundc - Wed Jul 07, 2004 5:08 pm
Excellent article. Now this is drifting into off-topic, but I don't feel like creating a new thread.
Now, how do we reconcile Paul Graham's thesis with systems that require the application of engineering, such as safety-critical systems (nuclear reactors, space shuttle, etc.) where the software has to work 100% correctly in practice the first time?
Dan.
#23215 - jma - Wed Jul 07, 2004 6:15 pm
Don't kid yourself in thinking that they run 100% all the time -- especially not the first time. Those systems are developed interactively before ever being turned "live", with massive simulations behind them.
It would be like you creating a complete GBA game without ever using an emulator to test it before shipping and releasing. Fat chance.
Jeff
_________________
massung@gmail.com
http://www.retrobyte.org
#23216 - ampz - Wed Jul 07, 2004 6:19 pm
| poslundc wrote: |
Excellent article. Now this is drifting into off-topic, but I don't feel like creating a new thread.
Now, how do we reconcile Paul Graham's thesis with systems that require the application of engineering, such as safety-critical systems (nuclear reactors, space shuttle, etc.) where the software has to work 100% correctly in practice the first time?
Dan. |
First you write the software trial-and-error style (as described in Graham's thesis). When you are done, you write (or update) the specification, and then you write the software again, from scratch.
By starting over from scratch, you prevent any bugs due to the trial-and-error phase from entering the final code. But you still get all the code quality benefits as described by Graham.
#23219 - poslundc - Wed Jul 07, 2004 6:40 pm
So if we liken the "sketching" phase to the concept of modelling in engineering, would it be fair to extend the analogy and say that no code from the model should make it into the final product; that it should be recoded from scratch, essentially?
Dan.
#23220 - keldon - Wed Jul 07, 2004 7:05 pm
That is basically prototyping in a nutshell. Now it is a much better idea to either throw away the first model and start an evolutionarily prototyping, or the reverse (in general practise); for which the second is generally better.
#23231 - sgeos - Thu Jul 08, 2004 2:48 am
| jma wrote: |
| Hackers and Painters, by Paul Graham. |
Excellent read. Programming and cooking also have much in common.
-Brendan
#23246 - Abscissa - Thu Jul 08, 2004 6:12 pm
| sgeos wrote: |
| jma wrote: | | Hackers and Painters, by Paul Graham. |
Excellent read. Programming and cooking also have much in common.
-Brendan |
Yes. Like "Too many cooks spoil the pot", for instance.
Very good article.
#23248 - sgeos - Thu Jul 08, 2004 6:38 pm
| Abscissa wrote: |
| Yes. Like "Too many cooks spoil the pot", for instance. |
I was actually thinking about prototyping.
-Brendan
#23253 - jma - Thu Jul 08, 2004 7:43 pm
Programming is an art form, like cooking, painting, karate, baseball and the list goes on... I'm glad everyone enjoyed Graham's little essay (btw, do buy the book -- show support and there is a lot more in it than the one essay, but yes, most of these are on his website, too).
<rant>
However, my beef with the thread was the posts that began using the word "real" in front of "programmer". This is not only stupid, it emphasizes the posters' ignorance and arrogance. Either age or lack of experience in the real world (or both) was beginning to shine through.
Was Charles Babbage a "real programmer"? He didn't use a computer. What about an SQL database designer/programmer? That would never work on an embedded device. What about an HTML web page designer? I can't make good web pages, but I program PS2 and XBox games professionally; is one of us a "real" programmer and not the other? No. We're just different. So what constitutes a "real programmer"?
What many young (or inexperienced) programmers fail to grasp is that they are just beginning a cycle that all that came before them have gone through. Almost all good programmers tend to follow the same cycle in their career. This mostly involves learning to program, and then learning over and over again, all the new and wierd languages and strange programming paradigms they can.
But finally, at the end of the day, real work needs to get done. This is what makes a "real" programmers. The one who can get it done. I've met several very talented programmers who can't do this.
A beautiful example of this is OOP. OOP is a design concept -- a tool used to help in the design process. But many programmers treat it as a religion; everything must be OO. I just laugh, becuase at the end of the day you need main() -- which isn't OO.
The fact is, every tool has its place (that's why it was made), and you use the right tool for the job. Mr. Graham is a Lisp advocate (and a good one). I love Lisp, sajimori does, too. That's great. Would I use Lisp to program a lexical parser? No -- it isn't designed for text parsing -- C is. Would I use Python for embedded programming? No, I have Forth for that. Would I use Forth for shell scripting? No, Perl works just fine. Would I use Perl for AI scripting? Hell no, that's what Lisp is for!
What I hoped some of the posters (and anonymous readers) would get out of Mr. Graham's essay was that programming is not sequencing together statements or functions in a particular language or using a particular paradigm to find the solution to a given problem. Programming is nothing more than getting an automated process to solve a problem for you, whether using Matlab, recursion or creating a weaving loom. To do this, you need to completely understand the problem and the tools you have at your disposal.
</rant>
Ack, sorry for that ;)
Jeff
_________________
massung@gmail.com
http://www.retrobyte.org
#23258 - tepples - Thu Jul 08, 2004 10:23 pm
| jma wrote: |
| A beautiful example of this is OOP. OOP is a design concept -- a tool used to help in the design process. But many programmers treat it as a religion; everything must be OO. I just laugh, becuase at the end of the day you need main() -- which isn't OO. |
And then the OO Cult will make your program into an instance of an object, making all input event-oriented, and hide main() in a library.
_________________
-- Where is he?
-- Who?
-- You know, the human.
-- I think he moved to Tilwick.
#23263 - Miked0801 - Fri Jul 09, 2004 12:06 am
What's a library? Shouldn't I just #include all my source files into my main to make it work? ;)
BTW, I was the one who made the original real programmers post. I was just refering to the what I have personally experienced from others in the field. YMMV. BTW, I believe a real programmer is someone who gets the job done and whos code can be used in "unexpected" ways without breaking :)
#23297 - benjamin - Fri Jul 09, 2004 3:12 pm
| Miked0801 wrote: |
What's a library? Shouldn't I just #include all my source files into my main to make it work? ;)
BTW, I was the one who made the original real programmers post. I was just refering to the what I have personally experienced from others in the field. YMMV. BTW, I believe a real programmer is someone who gets the job done and whos code can be used in "unexpected" ways without breaking :) |
I'll settle for "being used in *expected* ways without breaking".. :)