The Daily Click ::. News
 

News - GamesGadget Gaming Device
News posted 11th January, 2012 by The Chris Street  
I thought this was worth mentioning, having received a press release from the company involved, which is admittedly a bit out of date, but here we go:

A device called the GamesGadget is due for release soon, and its main purpose is to allow portable, on-the-go gaming. It can run games in various formats. What does this mean for us, as a freeware gaming community? Well, it's not inconceivable to believe that the device could run EXE files, meaning that programs created with The Games Factory and MMF2 could potentially be compatible with it.

The GamesGadget will also have an iTunes-style store, allowing developers to submit their games for free, and to charge whatever they want for them to be made available to download. Assumptions are to be made that Blaze, the company behind the GamesGadget (and also behind the portable Mega Drive released in the UK a couple of years ago) would take a small portion of the profit.

Still, this is exciting news for game developers, but is it likely to seriously compete in a high-stakes environment populated by iTunes and Android? It probably is a bit doubtful, but I personally would love to see some of my old games on the system again... just imagine playing Eternal Daughter, Duel Toys 2, etc, while on the bog :)

Click here for the full Press Release




Posted by Hayo 11th January, 2012

That's really nice, I want it
 
Posted by Windybeard Games 11th January, 2012

This could be awesome! bet it never appears though, and if it does there will be a bigger scam than Istore, negative i know but small companies need higher fees.

I very much hope i am wrong though
 
Posted by ..::hagar::.. 11th January, 2012

I like it
 
Posted by Dave C 11th January, 2012

looks like a fail to me.. for this to be a success they'll need a massive install base.. do people really want an iPhone AND one of these? or do gamers really want a DS/PSP AND one of these?
 
Posted by Jon Lambert 11th January, 2012

that's just to be a mainstream success. it's a success as long as they turn a profit, and maybe they don't need to sell that many to do so.
 
Posted by Dave C 12th January, 2012

they won't attract me (or 99% of developers) unless they have a large install base.
 
Posted by Windybeard Games 12th January, 2012

if its cheap enough i would have one just to mess about with.
 
Posted by lembi2001 12th January, 2012

Just read the press release and it's linux based so I assume we would need to use the Anaconda runtime in order for us to play MMF and TGF games on the device.

"GameGadget 1.0 uses a Linux based Operating System which has been highly optimized for handheld consoles. This allows programmers to develop content just like they would do for any other Linux based system."

Price is just shy of £100:

"The GameGadget 1.0 will be available exclusively from www.gamegadget.net SRP £99.99. GameGadgetGames is scheduled to launch January 2012."


 
Posted by ILIKESCIFI Games 12th January, 2012

It looks great. And I ve been always a great fan of "noname" handhelds. So I will def. get one of those. the only problem I see is the one with this MASS of mobile devices with dual core, gfx chip & miniguns mounted! Mobile phones these days are faster than my old pc and i think they are holding this monopole...
The bad thing bout those devices: they have no buttons - no haptic input. So Gamegadget go go go!
 
Posted by ..::hagar::.. 12th January, 2012

Dave why would I want to have a touch screen calamity for gaming when I have one of these and an xperia play?
 
Posted by Blue66 12th January, 2012

The things lembi said completely castrate this thing. So you can only play Linux games on this thing and it costs almost as much as a 3DS?

fail
 
Posted by MasterM 12th January, 2012

first of all: linux has games?

well i know all the humble indie bundle games also work on linux but i think they would all need to be optimized for this system.
like don't games probably need some extra run times. if a game asks me to control it with A and S how does this system know if it has just A B X Y buttons and a d pad?

the ammount of linux games is slim and i dont think there is a single game that will instantly work without the dev fiddling around with his game which no one will be bothered to do.

i might be wrong.
 
Posted by Jenswa 12th January, 2012

Off course Linux has games, just search the internet for it: Doom, FreeCiv, 0 A.D., OpenTTD, Schorched 3D, Cube, Sauerbraten, Nequiz, Torcs, Neverball, The Zod Engine, OpenRA & Warzone 2100.

But back on this linux device, will it run arm or x88-32/64 code? Is there any other info about the specs then a Linux Operating System with SDL compatibility?

Aren't the buttons a little small?

And the thousand-dollar-question, can I just build my game, put it on SD card and run it on the device? Or should it go through a complicated iTunes style detour?

Other that it looks like a nice gadget for gaming. But can it compete with the 3DS or PS Vita?
 
Posted by MasterM 12th January, 2012

But can it compete with the 3DS S Vita? 

No.
but I don't think it's trying to in the first place. I think they are fully aware this thing isn't main stream enough for the mass market.
 
Posted by UrbanMonk 12th January, 2012

It'll prolly run the same Linux software as the game park and those other home brew devices. You'd be better off buying a wiz.

Moving along, nothing to see here!
 
Posted by ..::hagar::.. 12th January, 2012

The Xperia Play imo offers a better alternative to the Wiz (Ps1 and N64 runs pretty damn smooth as well as the 16 bit era).

I am under the impression the open pandora is doing quite well for itself, if this is open I am sure it will do well too.
Comment edited by ..::hagar::.. on 1/12/2012
 
Posted by markno2 13th January, 2012

That looks like a 4:3 screen to me. That's not good.
 
Posted by GamesterXIII 13th January, 2012

What the hell is wrong with 4:3? Are you retarded?

The only reason wide-screen is so common is because it is cheaper to manufacture wide-screen displays than it is to manufacture non wide-screen displays . . . .
 
Posted by Jacob! 13th January, 2012

Widescreen looks much better. The ideal dimensions are 16:10 (1920x1200) since it most closely matches the golden ratio.
 
Posted by Dave C 13th January, 2012

someone should release a new 16-bit console
 
Posted by Liquixcat 13th January, 2012

I highly doubt that this has a sufficiently powerful enough x86 (let alone an x86 at all) to fulfill any of your dreams.

It's out-dated technology that already exists (Google: A320 Dingoo) At least that has a mod community and plays pretty much all the retro you'd ever need.
 
Posted by columbo borgi :C 13th January, 2012

VÓTMÁ
http://www.create-games.com/newspage.asp?id=2043
 
Posted by Diefox 13th January, 2012

yey! Duel Toys 2 on the go! I love this game!
 
Posted by GamesterXIII 14th January, 2012

@Jacob

FYI 16:9 is becoming the industry standard now. Many manufacturers are moving away from 16:10.

That said, saying "widescreen looks much better" is false, but can be subjective when stated differently.

There is no "true" quality difference between 4:3 and 16:9 . . . . only the viewable area changes.


 
Posted by Jacob! 14th January, 2012

The aesthetics of the widescreen proportion look far better IMO. 16:9 is widely used in HDTVs because of the wide array of content for it. As far as computer monitors go, 16:10 is just as common since it merely increases screen real-estate.
 
Posted by ..::hagar::.. 14th January, 2012

Gamester, I still prefer 4:3. The screen area looks bigger to me, but as you have said it's a qualitative rather than quantitative assumption.

So I decided to do some back of an envelope maths (literally) to make a quantitative assessment.

Screens are measured across the diagonal so let's assume we have a 10 a.u. screen, in both 4:3 and 16:9.

4:3 = 6 units high for 8 units wide. Area of 48 a.u.

16:19, 4.9 units high for 8.72 units wide. Area of 42.73 a.u.

A bit of rounding error here and there but the result is well outside my rounding error (an 11% change). 4:3 DOES provide more screen estate.
Comment edited by ..::hagar::.. on 1/14/2012
 
Posted by Eternal Man [EE] 14th January, 2012

Interesting Hagar!
Even more so if you read au=astronomical unit, then we're talking wide screen
 
Posted by Hayo 14th January, 2012

I wonder how this compares to the GP2X, but I can't find any specs.
 
Posted by ..::hagar::.. 14th January, 2012

@EE yeah that would be pretty sweet haha. When I got my first widescreen display I did question it's size. Compared to my previous CRT of a same size but 4:3 my brand new 16:9 LCD looked small - I should have done the maths some time ago...
Comment edited by ..::hagar::.. on 1/14/2012
 
Posted by MJK 14th January, 2012

Maybe I'm missing something but I just don't see what's the point of this device.

When smartphone market is booming like it is and basically everybody will soon (in a few years, in Western world) carry a 'computer' in their pockets with over 3.5" screens and GPUs etc, why would anyone want this thick brick that looks like it has been brought back from the 1980's with a time machine? I just don't get it.

For instance, why would you buy GamesGadget and not Sony Ericsson Xperia Play? (in case you want a game-centric device with dedicated game buttons/controls etc)

They will never be able to create a true ecosystem around this device. I don't understand what is their business case based on and why do they do this. OK, maybe I'll just stop wondering and go do something else instead.
 
Posted by Hayo 14th January, 2012

I think this is a system for grumpy old men.
 
Posted by Eternal Man [EE] 14th January, 2012


 
Posted by ..::hagar::.. 15th January, 2012

Indeed! I am a member of GOMA.
In regard to the area, it's kind of obvious that the more square something is the larger the area. Just wanted to prove it - saying 16:9 has more screen real estate sounds like the type of nonsense Curry's and PC world propagate yet people believe it.

 
Posted by Jacob! 15th January, 2012

I was referring to the common resolutions. 16:9 (1920x1080) does have less real-estate than 16:10 (1920x1200) but more than 4:3 (1280x1024)
 
Posted by ..::hagar::.. 16th January, 2012

My old CRT monitor could easily outdo 1920 x 1080 (~2 MP), 2048 x 1536 (~3.1 MP) I think it was, and I had a larger surface area screen for the same size screen to boot - so my move to LCD has been a technological downgrade for me.

Most people assumed CRT (predominantly 4:3) technology was rubbish because they had some cheap lame excuse of a monitor that came bundled with their PC. CRT also has a better dynamic range btw.

 
Posted by alastair john jack 17th January, 2012

4:3 if you want it to be a good emulator console. Also, I wouldn't be interested in these unless it had a screen that was 6+ inches. PS Vita size minimum though.
 


 



Author Info

Advertisement

Worth A Click