EA wants an open gaming platform
By Nilay Patel 
posted Oct 19th 2007 12:21PM
posted Oct 19th 2007 12:21PM
Considering EA is the king of repackaging the same game for multiple consoles (and multiple years -- hello, Madden), you wouldn't expect the company's head of international distribution to call for a single universal platform, but that's exactly what Gerhard Florin told the BBC he wants. "We want an open, standard platform which is much easier than having five which are not compatible," he said, adding that "You don't need an Xbox 360, PS3 or Wii -- the consumer won't even realise the platform it is being played on." Florin's comments were based on his prediction that set-top boxes would eventually contain enough horsepower to stream and run games over the net, a development he said would kill the market for dedicated consoles in the next fifteen years -- which means he's obviously never had to struggle with a cable company DVR, because we think we'll stick with a console that can register more than three button presses without locking up, thanks much.[Via Gamesindustry.biz]
PC anyone?
My Linux box is a PC. And so are Macbooks and all that. Yet I can't get a normal "PC" game running on either one of them without having to jump through hoops or buy a specialized version of the game.
So then you have two choices:
1. stick with the predominant PC gaming platform (Windows) - mind you, I exclusively use Mac/Linux (but don't game ;)
2. create a ROM loading OS for the PC (x86), and run your PC as a console just like the XBOX, PS3 etc...
Yes, Lev, I agree. Stick with Windows if you want any gaming done, but thats not what EA/This blogpiece is about, its about an open gaming platform. No more porting, just do one build, and it'll run anywhere, like Java, I guess.
And uhh...who is going to keep someone from creating a new platform on the hardware currently in place? Do keep in Mind that Windows was out then someone got the idea to create Linux...Same thing can happen with this device...someone will create a better OS to run.
/Not saying Linux is better.
//it's not
The PC and OpenGL/AL/etc. already provide a standard platform that runs on Mac, PC and ALL consoles "could" be made to run OpenGL. Too bad Microsoft doesn't want that.
Actually, they should just make bootable game CD/DVDs. That way, the games are OS independent, and you don't have to deal with the anti-virus slowing down the system, etc, etc, etc.
KC: Because the drivers would have to be run off the game DVD, there would be different versions of the game for ATI and Nvidia cards, defeating the point.
EA wants your money
He basically wants the gaming equivalent of Windows on set-top boxes and consoles.
On one hand I feel his needs. On the other hand, this means implementing unique platforms like Wii would be that much harder.
Good thing the market doesn't follow orders from one single man, or corporation.
i think what he's getting at is that they want to plop out one code for the game instead of 5. one code that works cross platform like mp3. I think it's fabulous idea. i'd rather have them spend the time/budget making a better game than coding it for multiple platforms.
Damn right we dont follow this geezer.
The only reason why this hasn't qualified for a "CE-Oh no he didn't" title is because he's not high ranking enough.
Considering that games require more and more 'horsepower' to run I doubt that set top boxes will pack enough 'horsepower' to run these games. it would be a waste of expensive hardware for those that just want a DVR and not enough for gamers.
Maybe EA should come out with their own universal hardware since it sounds so easy and logical.
two words 3DO and CD-i (by Phillips)
they failed... with today's generation this idea will continue to faulter.
Sounds like EA should write their own cross-platform code and license it out if that's what they want. Essentially making an SDL of sorts for consoles
http:\\libsdl.org (for those who don't know)
Someone should blow him right now!!!
THE DAY EA makes a real, completed game... then maybe we can talk about it! (YEAH... i'm a medal of Honor : Airborne Frustrated!!!!!!!!)
They already make a f*ck by taking a bad port from Xbox to PC and sell that crap...
YAH... you can put the same games on PC, Xbox and PS3... even Wii... BUT IT'S NOT THE SAME THING (or at least.... shouldn't
PC games have WAY better graphics than Xbox or PS3 because they have more power. Games on Xbox should be written completely for Xbox, PC games coded entirely while tinking for a PC, and the same to PS3...
That's a real shame a company like EA can't even do that!!! I don't remember the last game EA sold that was REALLY optimised! I'm talking now about Medal of Honor Series AND Need for Speed Series... Even the Sims! I never played EA Sports so I don'T know... but that really sucks!!!
Sorry... I had to tell all of this!
Don'T buy EA's CRAP... just crack it... and if you think the game is "well done" THEN buy it!
stop thinking monopolysoft. What he wants is a unix/linux base that can then be modified as in mac os x, etc. The idea is that games written in machine code on base can run on different processors as linux does; there is already linux for PS3 and for Xbox as well as PC's with Different shell / desktops (Gnome, KDE, etc.)
This is easily doable. just not supported by monopolies.
"Florin's comments were based on his prediction that set-top boxes would eventually contain enough horsepower to stream and run games over the net, a development he said would kill the market for dedicated consoles in the next fifteen years"
Florin is obviously loosing his mind! This comment would imply that everyone would have the same set-top box, which is obviously absurd. Or this would imply that the maker of the set-top boxes would be able to agree on a single API, SDK, and specs for the set-top boxes. IMPOSSIBLE!!!
Good luck with all that, buddy.
... and they will call it the 3DO!
2 buttons before my DVR freezes. Can't wait till I get my Quad Core DVR unit.
1: As long as publishers keep pushing the performance barrier, we will need increasingly more powerful consoles
2: As long as that increasing need for computing power keeps pace with increases in consumer electronic technology, the actual price to build game consoles will be high.
3: As long as the actual price to build a game console is high, there will need to be companies like MS and Sony which subsidize the hardware in return for a cut of the software.
He's basically saying he wants all the software developers / publishers to get together and design a console, and then license the rights to build that console to one or several manufacturers, which would have no control over the content that goes on the console. But just like the initial PS3s and Xbox cost $800 and $500 to manufacture respectively, not including the huge marketing budgets, if they are not subsidized, people wont buy them.
So wait a second... he basically wants a PC/HTPC?...
In other words, EA doesn't want to pay licensing fees to console makers. The less they spend elsewhere the more of your money they get. Good business strategy I suppose, but does nothing to deter my belief that they're a semi-evolved version of the anti-christ.
(I love NHL '08... but that doesn't count so I can bash them without remorse)
EA also wants their personal to work for free and 20 hours a day minimum.
They are such visionaries.
Oh, look. This genius just invented a windows based Gaming HTC. Well hate to bust his bubble but there are Gaming PC in the HTC form factor. Settop box by day, gaming rig by night. I would be more than happy to build any interested party one ;^)...
http://www.nzxt.com/products/duet/
Yes, it's always been clear that EA always has had an understanding of what gamers want.
Didn't MSFT expect Xbox to be something akin to what EA's Florin is talking about? The original plan was to make an OS for games, and establish minimum system requirements for consumer electronic makers who wanted to make the consoles. MSFT was to simply license the embedded OS, and sell games, while partners like Panasonic would sell the hardware.
As long as Microsoft had full control over the design and implantation of the unit and the software on it.. and of course, Microsoft received a handsome licensing fee as well.
Actually, I think that was a goal of the Games for Windows push. You get a PC, you get Vista, you're told your benchmark scores in a small number of categories. Games get published with minimum requirements in each category, and *should* "just work" on any PC that meets the minimums. I don't think it's a bad idea, but I'm not sure it's working out as well as they had hoped.
That said, I think it's surprising how green this makes him look -- there's so much invested in the "undercarriage" of a game console, it would be crazy to think that it could be built under an "open" spec. People can agree on the CPU instruction set; they *might* even be able to agree on a standard for the 3D API and the file system. Tying it all together, though, in such a way as to avoid the problems that plague PC gaming (drivers, timing, heat, etc.) is a big enough task that you'd probably need one "owner" of the final product, the way it has been for 7 generations now.
What else would the head of a branch of EA want besides no competition?
A standard gaming platform would create potentially more competition...
He must be in-line to be next CEO of www.phantom.net.(sarcasm) Or maybe he so rich he didn't realize that a lot people can't afford the gaming PC rigs needed.
You know, my thoughts exactly. So how soon till EA buys Phantom?
when you can afford to pay 300k for the design of one single online banner ad, .... they're not hurtung for money, and they can afford to pay a few coders to recode an engine...
shush it.
I like the idea but i doubt implimenting it will be fun.
Think of it, you buy a box with an BD/HD-DVD drive (whatever one wins), it's a DVD player, and your cable box. it also has DVR and internet function. Then, you can either pop in a disk to play a game, buy a game on the internet and keep it on your hard drive, or (i guess, if you wee really desperate and wanted to) stream a game.
It would be pretty awesome. As for the challenges of special games, just do what consoles have been doing for years, sell the nessisary hardware components for the game, with the game, and sell it for a crap-load of moolah.
Honestly, i like it, as long as it's implimented right, but it won't be because people suck. Microsoft will make one, and then Apple will make one, and then Nintendo will make one, and they won't be compatable, and only the Apple one will support PAL or NTSC, and europe will have it's own, and then EA will release a statement that it wants an open gaming platform...
seriously wax that fox... this sounds to me like the same idea that phantom has been pushing for it's vaporware box...
"One box to rule them all i think not, clever is the one who makes a box that does this, but never rents it only. it will come the day when all set top boxes work without trouble, but that day is not today."
Yoda said it, watch empire again if you don't belive me
You couldn't make an open set-top gaming machine open until you make every component of it open. You'd have to be able to replace every device in it with a competitive device. (Turn off, slide out HD DVD Drive, slide in Blu-Ray Drive, turn on.) This gets back to the console as a PC. We are getting pretty close, but you still have proprietary links inside those today. (Intel vs AMD socket types) If you can't replace the drive in the device, you face a chance of vendor lock in and a closed standard. If you take that to the next step, the actual device itself would need to be adaptive. The connections for the drives that you swap in or out would need to be forward looking so you could "upgrade" later to a drive that uses more or less pins on the connector (or even fiber.)
The only way I see that happening is to get away from proprietary connections, use a single point connection (fiber optic cable maybe?) that everyone can create a device to connect with. The device would have to accept any communication this connection gives it and deal with it. We are a long way off.
How hard is this to figure out yourself? Come on EA!
Step one, build a computer that is a dialectic of fast parts, mixed with small size.
Step two, install linux (Ubuntu 7.10 has gotten a lot hype, maybe base it off that) - build a re-distibutable Game interface
Step three, design games.
Benefits -
-OS upgrades regularly
-Hardware can be upgraded
-Cheaper games
Warning: do not make this a media center. It would suck! Just make it a gaming console.
I don't think my XBL experience would be as good as it is if Microsoft didn't have Sony to compete with.
I highly doubt the Xbox360 and PS3 would have the kind of power they do if they didn't have each other to compete with.
I wouldn't expect Nintendo to come out with innovative products like the DS and Wii if they were the sole player on the block.
Standards are good, competition is better. Without it we will end up with a blatant rehash of last years product with prettier graphics and a few tweaks here and there. It would be the hardware equivalent of EA sports strategy. Oh, wait...
can you say PC? Thanks.
I will tell you exactly where the console market is going in the near future. Laptop consoles...They give everyone the ability to take their consoles anywhere they want with them and play them all at the same resolution...you will also be able to plug them into any TV and run them in HD. Having a laptop console will give you the ability to play strategy based games with your friends because you will each have your own screen. No more will you be confined to just a controller for a console..you will have the built in keyboard and mouse that comes with it. Mark my words...this will be a reality very very soon and then everyone will wonder what we did before laptop consoles. A hacker already did this with an xbox360 so it can be done with no problem. The console would really only cost the price of the 360 now which is 399.99 and then what $150 for a screen and misc keyboard? Oh please there would be tons of kids lining up to get their freakin xbox360 laptop. Maybe they could come up with some unique name for it being portable...ok people thats the question here....what will the name of the Xbox360 laptop be when it comes out? Any suggestions?
In fifteen years, set-top boxes may contain enough power to run the games of today or even tomorrow, but they won't contain enough power to run the games of fifteen years from now. The market of processors and video processors changes so often in the pc world and in the console world that they wouldn't be able to keep up. They'd have to deploy new boxes ever 2-4 years.
What they need to do is make the htpc a little more friendly. If you could provide guaranteed processor power to certain apps it would help greatly. This way you could dedicate power to the tv apps so that you could play games while recording multiple shows without any problems.
AND...where is the Directv tuner for htpc's! We have cable cards but nothing for satellite.
Here's an idea: Build your own console, EA. That way you can flood the market with your over-produced, under-developed games in your own, proprietary code. If I want to play "NFL vs. NBA Street", "Mass Effect - Franchise: Destroyed" or "Need For Speed MCMXVII - Mars Is Burning", I have to have your unit.
I'm envisioning a black or silver box that sits near your TV, directly connects to the Internet, has exclusive content, and only plays games that meet your specifications. You can charge customers to download new games or additional content, and perhaps require a monthly fee to game online with friends. You'd need to make it affordable for the masses, so price it between $400 & $600, but only include one controller/remote and make sure the internal memory device is small enough that it will need to be replaced with a larger one once it fills up from all the DLC. Oh, and be sure your launch games suck out loud (should not be a problem for them).
Oh, wait. I just designed a PlayStation 3, Xbox 360 and Wii (bargain-priced at $250). Never mind.
Anything EA does it evil!
They are always seeking more ways to rip you off.
I hope not but if EA ever realizes this plan, I'll stop playing games.
What he wants is a fairly open, cross-platform, universal development environment.
Which we have.
It's called Java.
Note that he didn't necessarily indicate he wanted an environment that wasn't sluggish, inefficient, and bloated.
I've seen Java based games... the problem (in the past at least) is that the language did not allow you to manipulate the graphics card the way C/C++ could.
And one day they replied... http://www.opengl.org/resources/java/
Gerhard needs to get back to work. I want my NHL 08 for Wii, damn it!
Mr Florin:
Are you now or have you ever been a member of the Communist party?
The entertainment industry is anti-consumer enough. Leave your ridiculous attempts at laying down your dream of a single monopolizing entity selling games for the masses at home when you come to play with the big boys. This is capitalism.
We dare you to subsidize this and try it.
I DARE you.
I actually think this is a good idea. If digital television can do it, why can't game systems. Imagine if LCDs, Plasmas, & DLPs were incompatible with each other. The idea of purchasing a LCD-compatible Directv DVR, VCR & Receiver would be insane.
I think that if game companies pooled the licensing money that they pay to console makers into a development fund plus sell the console at places that can subsidize them (Go to the AT&T store & pick up a system with a two year contract with DSL) I think that it would be doable.
And unique technologies like Nintendo's controller or the Guitar Hero controller could be added with USB or a wireless standard built into the system.
Currently I own all three next-gen gaming systems mainly because of their first party games but with more & more 3rd Party developers designing their games for multiple systems it makes my game purchasing decisions even more difficult. Do I get the PS3 version of Burnout Paradise? Do I buy the 360 version of GTA 4?
Can you imaging if the top twenty 3rd party game developers (EA, Ubisoft, Square/Enix, Capcom, etc.) decide that games they develop for the next gen will be on a single open-standard console? Sony would be screwed since they barely have the 1st party games. Microsoft would try to get some of their proprietary tech built into the console & Nintendo would still design their own console since people buy Nintendo games...period.
We'll see this right around the same time we all drive electric cars.
Wow, has he ever heard of Trip Hawkins? He made this thing called the 3DO, it was an open games platform that failed miserably. Oh, and he founded EA.
I guess that's what happens when you edit your own Wikipedia page to rewrite your company's history; you end up forgetting it.
Yeah, I'd love an open platform like that... But they are all right.. it's a PC.. with set system specs... Or a Mac. But the problem is, Software development is a clusterfuck any way you look at it. On consoles you have to design for 3 seperate fixed hardware platforms.. each with different technical power, and user interfaces... on the PC you have, literally hundreds of possible hardware configurations..... which can choose to disagree with eachother at any point in time. and beyond that, PC games barely sell, save for the BIG BIG names... and PC gamers don't like innovation.
If i had my way, Now that all Game console controllers can be connected to PCs, either by USB or Bluetooth. I'd like to see games be able to use em all. But... PC gamers need it to be Keyboard and Mice all the time.
yes its called windows / xbox 360. games port over with .net working on both sides. tweak for the triple core and memory subsystem and you have 2 games with no effort. nintendo isnt too bad, just take out every single physics/animation/particle/effects system, set resolution to 640x480, and simplify geometry by 9000%. add half assed motion controls. playstation on the other hand, good luck. absolutely sucks from a programmers perspective.
Are you sure you didn't accidentally hit the 'm' instead of the 'k' when you typed in your name? That post would make so much more sense if you did.
And from what I hear the gamers simply want EA to die.
Now what's easier to achieve and has bigger support?
What drivel.
Valve needs to manufacture and release the STEAMbox. Pre-order now!
Ogad, not steam :o