×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

Firsthand Impressions of Now-Delayed NVIDIA SHIELD

timothy posted about 10 months ago | from the blame-agent-99 dept.

Android 74

NVIDIA's Android-based gaming gaming handheld called SHIELD was to start shipping today to customers who had pre-ordered it. Reader MojoKid writes "Unfortunately, in its last round of QA work, NVIDIA uncovered a problem with a third-party component used in SHIELD and will be pushing the launch date out into July. NVIDIA is, however, allowing some members of the press to talk a bit about their experiences with a couple of Tegra 4-optimized games — namely Real Boxing and Blood Sword: Sword of Ruin — and also about an AR Drone controlled by SHIELD with a bird's eye view. The AR Drone streams video from its on-board HD camera to the SHIELD device as you fly. Just launching the thing high into the air and peering into trees or over the houses in the neighborhood is really cool."

cancel ×
This is a preview of your comment

No Comment Title Entered

Anonymous Coward 1 minute ago

No Comment Entered

74 comments

Both links to the same page... (2, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 months ago | (#44121699)

...for double the hits.

Re:Both links to the same page... (2)

briancox2 (2417470) | about 10 months ago | (#44122161)

"NVIDIA's Android-based gaming gaming handheld ..." ... for double the gaming too!

Re:Both links to the same page... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 months ago | (#44125791)

Meh. Too large to be useful as a handheld, too weak to be useful as a console.

Re:Both links to the same page... (1)

Graspee_Leemoor (302316) | about 10 months ago | (#44130935)

We aren't getting the handheld we want, but the handheld we need NO WAIT We aren't getting the handheld we want or need. NO WAIT We aren't getting the handheld.

Drone (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 months ago | (#44121703)

Great! Maybe someone can build something fancy using this and some fertilizer to take care of a politician or two?

Will July be late enough? (0)

drinkypoo (153816) | about 10 months ago | (#44121745)

Ouya could have benefited from another month or two...

Re:Will July be late enough? (1)

tepples (727027) | about 10 months ago | (#44122093)

Is Ouya having hardware issues? Most of the issues I've seen reported are system software issues that could be fixed in the "month or two" you describe.

Re:Will July be late enough? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 months ago | (#44122601)

Yes, such as the controllers being cheap junk.

Re:Will July be late enough? (1)

Dishevel (1105119) | about 10 months ago | (#44123073)

Being a PS3 guy I do not like the XBox like layout of the Ouya controller.
Since though it is Open Source I can wait for someone else to create good PS3 type controllers for it and then use those.
Bonus.

gaming gaming (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 months ago | (#44121759)

NVIDIA's Android-based gaming gaming handheld called SHIELD was to start shipping today to customers who had pre-ordered it.

I see the editor is a fan of Little Ceaser's

Re:gaming gaming (1)

Megane (129182) | about 10 months ago | (#44122139)

They did that so they could bring you "Blood Sword: Sword of Ruin". So you can have your Blood Sword Sword on your Android Gaming Gaming. (Doh yawg, I heard you like gaming gaming, so...)

another failed device (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 months ago | (#44121769)

people want this?

Re:another failed device (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 months ago | (#44121817)

people want this?

people want this?

I know that I want this. Being able to stream PC games to a handheld anywhere in the house opens up more gaming time.

Re:another failed device (1)

jtownatpunk.net (245670) | about 10 months ago | (#44121947)

Totally! It's just so much effort to walk all the way to the gaming rig to play a game. OMG, it's like all the way across the room. And why would I want to play my PC game on a 27" screen when I can play it on a 5" screen?

Re:another failed device (1)

slashmydots (2189826) | about 10 months ago | (#44121999)

Or my 7" Avatar Sirius tablet version 1 for $80 with a Mali 400 GPU onboard that can play basically anything and has micro-HDMI out and weighs less and has better battery life and has more carrying case options and can fit standard screen protectors on it.

What carrying case with a gamepad? (1)

tepples (727027) | about 10 months ago | (#44122131)

Say I were to buy an Avatar Sirius tablet to game on. Is there a carrying case option that flips open to reveal a gamepad, like on the Game Boy Advance SP, the Nintendo DS family, and the Shield?

Re:What carrying case with a gamepad? (1)

slashmydots (2189826) | about 10 months ago | (#44122589)

No, it's far more advanced than a clamshell design. The screen is actually built into the tablet, as are the touch controls, lol.

Re:What carrying case with a gamepad? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 months ago | (#44123737)

it's far more advanced....as are the touch control

Sounds less advanced, as in less effective and useful. YMMV

Re:another failed device (1)

tepples (727027) | about 10 months ago | (#44122109)

And why would I want to play my PC game on a 27" screen when I can play it on a 5" screen?

That depends on how your PC's operating system implements dual-monitor support. I imagine that if someone else is using the 27" screen for Facebook or YouTube or something, you can use the 5" screen for your game.

Re:another failed device (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 months ago | (#44125897)

Why would someone else be using his PC?

Not everyone lives alone (1)

tepples (727027) | about 10 months ago | (#44126197)

Why would someone else be using his PC?

Because not everyone lives alone, for one thing. For "someone else" read "another member of the household" or "a house guest".

Re:Not everyone lives alone (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 months ago | (#44126807)

Whether he lives alone or not is irrelevant and doesn't answer the question. Why would someone else be using his computer?

Not even my girlfriend touches my PC, nor I hers. For a house guest to ask to use my PC is considered the height of bad manners. You either bring your own device or you go to an internet cafe.

Re:Not everyone lives alone (1)

tepples (727027) | about 10 months ago | (#44128251)

For a house guest to ask to use my PC is considered the height of bad manners. You either bring your own device

You may consider asking to use your computer "the height of bad manners." Someone else might disagree with you, considering denial of use of a guest account itself a selfish act and "the height of bad manners." If my family is hosting an annual reunion, for example, "go back to Arizona and get your laptop, or I'll have to exclude you from participating in video games" isn't going to cut it.

or you go to an internet cafe.

If two children live together, how do you recommend that they play a two-player video game?

Re:Not everyone lives alone (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 months ago | (#44128357)

It's selfish for guests to not consider that before coming over. There is no excuse for someone not having their own PC, tablet, smartphone or whatever.

If they were my children, I'd have bought them each their own PC. You can get a decent, non-netbook laptop for like $300.

PC and Internet hospitality toward house guests (1)

tepples (727027) | about 10 months ago | (#44128447)

There is no excuse for someone not having their own PC, tablet, smartphone or whatever.

The excuse for not carrying a smartphone is that not everybody has hundreds of dollars of discretionary income to spend on a data plan. Verizon and Sprint refuse entirely to activate voice-only service on a smartphone, and AT&T is known for cramming a data plan onto a voice-only SIM when the SIM is inserted into a smartphone [slashdot.org]. Should someone carry a laptop everywhere and risk having it stolen just in case he needs to access the Internet at someone's house? And even if so, would you let a house guest use your WLAN?

If they were my children, I'd have bought them each their own PC.

Would you also buy a laptop for one of your child's classmates who is on a play date at hour house but whose parents cannot afford to buy him his own laptop?

Re:PC and Internet hospitality toward house guests (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 months ago | (#44128899)

Sure, I'll let guests use my wifi, just not my computer. They can bring their laptop, tablet or use a different telco.

If the child's parent doesn't have $300 of disposable income, then they probably should not have had a child.

Re:PC and Internet hospitality toward house guests (1)

tepples (727027) | about 10 months ago | (#44132353)

use a different telco.

Which "different telco" do you recommend for occasional-use voice-only service (120 USD per year or less) on a smartphone?

If the child's parent doesn't have $300 of disposable income, then they probably should not have had a child.

A lot of circumstances can change between conception and when the child is old enough to learn how to take care of a laptop.

Re:PC and Internet hospitality toward house guests (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 months ago | (#44139087)

Which "different telco" do you recommend for occasional-use voice-only service (120 USD per year or less) on a smartphone?

T-Mobile, Net10, H2O, Kajeet, PlatinumTel, Total Call Mobile, Page Plus Cellular, Consumer Cellular and a bunch more. Did you even bother to look?

A lot of circumstances can change between conception and when the child is old enough to learn how to take care of a laptop.

Not like that it doesn't, not if you're responsible. Long before you ever have a child, you should have substantial savings and assets in order to avoid any unforeseen troubles. It's saving for potential unemployment. If you don't have at least a a constant pension or service pay each month, you should have at least a hundred thousand saved before having a child. Even if you worked at a lowly $10/hour job, you could manage to save that amount from the time between ages 18 and 30.

Re:another failed device (1)

camperdave (969942) | about 10 months ago | (#44122237)

I know that I want this. Being able to stream PC games to a handheld anywhere in the house opens up more gaming time.

Anywhere in the house, eh? Why don't you just read the shampoo bottle, or count tiles like the rest of us.

Re:another failed device (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 months ago | (#44121985)

Yep. I'll hook my occularfag VR helmet up to it.

Re:another failed device (2)

rodrigoandrade (713371) | about 10 months ago | (#44122123)

Not at the currently asking price, nope.

If it worked as a standalone unit, then maybe, but oh wait, I already own a PS Vita, Note 2, Nexus 10, and notebook.

I'm pretty sure most people already have at least one portable device to play games on, making the Shield effectively superfluous.

Either no buttons or no indie (1)

tepples (727027) | about 10 months ago | (#44122213)

I'm pretty sure most people already have at least one portable device to play games on

The vast majority of these portable devices suffer from one of two flaws. It could be that the device has no buttons for applications' use, making it unsuitable for certain genres such as platformers and fighting games. This is true of most phones and tablets, which ship without a built-in gamepad and aren't bundled with a Bluetooth gamepad. For example, the only buttons on many iOS and Android devices are system buttons: sleep, quit, volume up, and volume down. Or it could be that the device has only one app store whose inclusion policy is unfriendly to small developers. This has historically been true of Sony and Nintendo handhelds; it may have changed recently, but I haven't done any in-depth checks.

Android still needs better games. (4, Interesting)

Picass0 (147474) | about 10 months ago | (#44121881)

According to wikipedia there are over 900 million Android mobile devices in the world. That's a lot of potential gamers who want to play something better than Fruit Ninja. At this point EA ports some of their stuff and then there's Gameloft - everything they publish would be laughed off another platform.

I have a Tegra 3 based device - an Asus Transformer - and Need for Speed is the only game I play that doesn't piss me off.

"...but there's no buttons or joystick and so controls suck" Bullshit. I've paired a Wii classic controller through bluetooth and used it to play old MAME arcade stuff. There's countless bluetooth joysticks in the world. Game publishers could code the option to use them (and tell gamers it's heavily recomended) and then start writing some decent games.

Re:Android still needs better games. (2)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 months ago | (#44122029)

900 M devices & most owners who will not pay a single penny for any extra software.

Especially to a US (game) company.

Re:Android still needs better games. (2)

Megane (129182) | about 10 months ago | (#44122087)

...but they will pay for that pink hair on their character. And a sparkly unicorn for it to ride around on. Who needs to charge for razor handles when you can sell personalized blades to pre-teens?

Re:Android still needs better games. (1)

Jeng (926980) | about 10 months ago | (#44122091)

Those whom would pay for extra hardware tend to also be those who would purchase extra software.

Re:Android still needs better games. (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 months ago | (#44122995)

Those who will pay for extra hardware to play extra software deservers neither hardware nor software!

Re:Android still needs better games. (2)

BasilBrush (643681) | about 10 months ago | (#44123719)

Possibly. However people tend to undervalue software. People that complain that a phone app costs 99c, then go spend $3 on a coffee. There seem to be plenty of people that see hardware as tangible and something they won't get for free so they'll pay for it. But then software cost is avoidable, either by just sticking to free software or by pirating commercial stuff.

So I expect there's an awful lot of people that would buy hardware add-ons that won't pay for games.

You said "tend", and I think that's right. But it may be a pretty weak tendency.

Re:Android still needs better games. (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 months ago | (#44140795)

People that complain that a phone app costs 99c, then go spend $3 on a coffee.

Is it really true that the same people who would spend $3 on a coffee are the ones that complain about paying for a 99c app?

Though I'm sure it is true that people value hardware more than software, but I personally find it hard to complain about paying 99c for something that will gives me hours of entertainment.

Re:Android still needs better games. (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 months ago | (#44122187)

I've had games I bought from EAMobile that were marked compatible with my phone at the time I bought them, they ran slow or crashed. Instead of fixing the problem they just marked them incompatible on the market months later and refused to give a refund, which means I can no longer re-download them. If I visit their website on my phone they still have them listed as compatible with my phone and offer a convenient button to purchase them.

Re:Android still needs better games. (1)

internerdj (1319281) | about 10 months ago | (#44122325)

Kind of a catch 22. I'm not willing to pay a single penny because I haven't seen anything worth paying for. No one will develop anything good because no one is buying software. I'm hoping Ouya and Shield will change the market.

No Wii Remote on Android 4.2 (2)

tepples (727027) | about 10 months ago | (#44122159)

I've paired a Wii classic controller through bluetooth

The application you probably used to do this stopped working under Android 4.2 [ccpcreations.com]. Now all I get on my Nexus 7 is "No route to host".

There's countless bluetooth joysticks in the world.

But not 900 million of them. How many people would be willing to buy a $60 Bluetooth joystick that clamps onto a phone or tablet just to play a $3 game?

Re:No Wii Remote on Android 4.2 (1)

Picass0 (147474) | about 10 months ago | (#44122609)

You're right that I'm still running 4.1.1, I wan't aware the Wiimote app had stopped working. To be honest, it's not a big picture solution to the problem.

Ultimately for gaming to expand on Android players need to know when they buy a game
1) It will work on their device.
2) The controls will be more that a hodge-podge of shakes and swipe actions. It's time for bluetooth joystick support to become standard. When you buy computer hardware it usually has stickers "Compatable with..." and then all the flavors of Windows and OSX. There should be an Android sticker there too.
3) I've paid 5 dollars for games on my tablet (one of those - Asphalt 7 - has never worked on any device I've owned. Gameloft sucks.) I don't mind paying for a decent game as long as it's not buggy. Low price points are an idea created by the app store mindset. We all know real games are going to cost more. If there were a good port of an Arkham title I'd buy it without hesitation.

Google needs to step up here.

Re:No Wii Remote on Android 4.2 (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 months ago | (#44126015)

Asphalt 7 runs greats on both my Nexus 7 and my phone. The best racing game for Android and I got it for only $0.99 too. You got ripped off, on both the game and your Android device.

Re:No Wii Remote on Android 4.2 (1)

bbcisdabomb (863966) | about 10 months ago | (#44123153)

The application you probably used to do this stopped working under Android 4.2 [ccpcreations.com]. Now all I get on my Nexus 7 is "No route to host".

This is total horseshit on Google's part. I recently switched from a phone running Gingerbread to a Galaxy Nexus running 4.2.2 and I can pretty definitively say Android is worse for it. Bluetooth connectivity just plain doesn't work for a lot of stuff, what does work takes for-goddamn-ever to connect, the sound quality is crap, and they even took out proxy authintication for the browser. Why? Who the fuck knows? tl, dr: Fuck Google and fuck their Android "improvements"

Re:No Wii Remote on Android 4.2 (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 months ago | (#44123319)

10 to 1 odds you'll defend the next update that breaks graphics driver on linux.

Use a USB controller (2)

neurojab (15737) | about 10 months ago | (#44124151)

It's a little known fact that Android supports USB controllers... I use one from time to time on the nexus 7.
Adding a $9 USB gamepad and a USB OTG cable can immensely improve the tablet gaming experience.

Re:Use a USB controller (2)

tepples (727027) | about 10 months ago | (#44124805)

Adding a $9 USB gamepad and a USB OTG cable can immensely improve the tablet gaming experience.

I've used a USB OTG cable to connect a controller to my Nexus 7. But this runs into a few problems in practice. Solve all these problems and I'll agree with you.

First, it might work for tablets if you already have a stand, but can you recommend something to hold a phone in place while the user is holding the controller? The Shield has a hinge to hold the screen in place, much like the Game Boy Advance SP. It's like the difference between a laptop and a tablet with a separate keyboard, and an integrated keyboard dock is one of the big selling points of the Transformer and the Surface.

Second, a lot of cheap USB gamepads that I've tried have a D-pad that makes it way too easy to press diagonally, causing the character to crouch into a roll (Down) or jump (Up) when I'm trying to make him go straight. I've found that Nintendo and PlayStation 1 controllers have decent directional pads, but then I'd need to buy and carry two adapters: one to USB [retrousb.com] and one to OTG.

Last but not least, the game needs to support a controller, and I haven't been able to find an option in Google Play Store to narrow to controller-friendly titles. The fact that not everybody already owns an appropriate controller, adapter, and clamp tends to discourage some developers from porting controller-friendly titles to Android in the first place because who wants to pay tens of dollars for a gamepad, cable, clamp, and shipping to play a $3 title?

Re:Use a USB controller (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 months ago | (#44126091)

Get a Moga or an iCade.

Re:Use a USB controller (1)

tepples (727027) | about 10 months ago | (#44126241)

MOGA: $29.99 plus shipping [toysrus.com]. Thank you for the tip, but I have yet to see evidence that a substantial number of Google Play users are willing to buy a $30 gamepad just to play a $3 game.

Re:Use a USB controller (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 months ago | (#44127089)

Why not? Do you rank your favourite games by how much they cost?

Re:Use a USB controller (1)

tepples (727027) | about 10 months ago | (#44128271)

Do you rank your favourite games by how much they cost?

No, but a video game developer chooses a platform by the size of the audience, and there isn't yet much of an audience for Android games that require a gamepad.

Re:Use a USB controller (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 months ago | (#44128425)

Not yet, but it's growing. Anyone can grab the Moga SDK and add support to their game.

How big has Android+gamepad audience grown? (1)

tepples (727027) | about 10 months ago | (#44132309)

a video game developer chooses a platform by the size of the audience

it's growing

But how big has it grown? Whether or not a company is willing to port a game to Android to reach Ouya, Shield, and Moga users depends on how well those products have sold. I'm surprised that a lot of manufacturers hide their sales figures from the public. I would figure that a manufacturer would want to brag about how many of its product have been sold to encourage developers to port their games.

Re:How big has Android+gamepad audience grown? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 months ago | (#44139207)

It's grown enough, with developer support from such giants as EA, Sega and Gameloft. How much time/money do you think it takes to implement gamepad support compared to the rest of a game project's development? Maybe a couple of days with an SDK?

Not yet ported to Android BECAUSE of no gamepad (1)

tepples (727027) | about 10 months ago | (#44139793)

How much time/money do you think it takes to implement gamepad support compared to the rest of a game project's development? Maybe a couple of days with an SDK?

Sometimes, the producer doesn't even consider porting a particular game to a particular platform until the platform has gamepad support. In such a case, it might take even longer to get the port up and running, as the port team would have to familiarize itself with the new platform. Ouya and Shield hitting store shelves and the "Gooya" announcement are likely to change this.

Re:Not yet ported to Android BECAUSE of no gamepad (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 months ago | (#44140435)

Ouya and Shield hitting store shelves and the "Gooya" announcement are likely to change this.

Precisely. Moga will have more support too and I'm sure it's a trivial matter for each device to have interoperability with games for another.

Re:No Wii Remote on Android 4.2 (1)

Nyder (754090) | about 10 months ago | (#44127465)

But not 900 million of them. How many people would be willing to buy a $60 Bluetooth joystick that clamps onto a phone or tablet just to play a $3 game?

I'm sure the person would play more then 1 game.

Re:No Wii Remote on Android 4.2 (1)

tepples (727027) | about 10 months ago | (#44128197)

I'm sure the person would play more then 1 game.

More than one game? Yes. More than one game that needs a gamepad? Not quite as likely. If ten games are installed on a device but a gamepad improves only one of them, I'm not so sure the person would buy a gamepad.

Re:Android still needs better games. (1)

lexman098 (1983842) | about 10 months ago | (#44122759)

So people are going to prop their phone up in front of them or something while they hold a controller? Android is a great development platform, but you need a separate device that connects to a TV (or tablet) to really use controller based games. The biggest advantage of using android (nexus Q etc), would be that your games stay associated with your account on whatever android device you're using.

Re:Android still needs better games. (1)

mckwant (65143) | about 10 months ago | (#44122861)

> That's a lot of potential gamers who want to play something better than Fruit Ninja.

Except that you're assuming:
a) That all 900M of those devices are still active (bitter about a shoddily made $99 tablet).
b) Of the active ones, that they're capable of gaming (my phone's fine, but the tablets weren't, Android market fragmentation).
c) Of those remaining, that their owners want to game.
d) Of that subset, that they want to play something better than Fruit Ninja.

and possibly:

e) Of THAT subset, that they're willing to pay for it, either directly or in-game.

I'm not really arguing. I'd like to see it, too. But your massive market may not be so massive.

Re:Android still needs better games. (1)

Picass0 (147474) | about 10 months ago | (#44123645)

Nintendo sold 118m Gameboy handhelds. The DS has sold 157m worldwide. Android dwarfs both of those numbers.

I doubt all Android owners are all gamers or that they all have a device worth playing on. Still, nothing changes the fact this is a neglected, potentially huge market for quality gaming. The big names in game development are staying away in droves.

Re:Android still needs better games. (1)

mckwant (65143) | about 10 months ago | (#44126353)

Fine, we disagree. I don't see how one would pitch developing one's game in Android. Too many variables:

- Screen Resolution - A free Android phone from my carrier is 480x800. It isn't, but for convenience's sake, let's call that the base. Top is 1080p (1920x1080, I always have to check), with 4k on the horizon eventually.
- Screen Size - Phone is 3.7", top "vaguely affordable living room" screen is what, now, 80"?
- CPU / RAM - God only knows, let alone the question of resources actually available.
- Local storage - How much? At what speed? HD or flash?
- Network Connectivity - GB cat5 to DSL/Cable, Wifi N to DSL/Cable, Wifi A to Coffeeshop WAP, 4G or 3G?

And yes, you could get the marketing guys to minimax the target hardware / audience, or split your offering by platform (e.g. Non-NFL Madden where roster management is done on tablet/smartphone, gameplay on Ouya or similar, data in the cloud).

But you're adding cost at every step, and your initial install probably has to be under $10, with a free taster edition. That's a lot of in-game sales.

No PHB in their right mind is going to tackle that. Even if you said "ok, only the Android game consoles," there have been, like, three or four already, with a market penetration of (pretty nearly) nil.

Trust me, I want to believe. I just don't see how it works out.

Typo in summary (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 months ago | (#44122225)

Unless "gaming gaming" devices are a thing.

Form factor sucks (1)

TheSkepticalOptimist (898384) | about 10 months ago | (#44122443)

I mean the games could be cool, and the performance great, but it doesn't change the fact they slapped a screen on a controller and called it a day.

At a time when everybody is going crazy about thin devices like tablets and phones, this thing comes out as an affront to good design.

Sure, I guess nVidia is testing the waters and seeing if there is even any interest in them producing a game platform, but I mean its a pretty weak effort IMHO. Maybe their follow up will be more inspiring, if they get to that point. This think almost reminds me of the nGage for its lack of any real focus on design, just a rush to market product to cash in on current trends.

Also considering this thing was originally priced on par with Wii U and only $50 less than the PS4. I mean come on. Even with the $50 price cut this thing is way too expensive for what it is.

I just don't think we need the Ouyas and SHIELDs. We do not need 100 special purpose devices hosting Android games. Make tablets more friendly for living room connectivity, that's all you need, like what Razer did with their Edge products. I'd rather have a tablet that I can use for other things that also happens to play high quality games on my TV easily.

If you are going to repackage phone or tablet guts into a game controller and slap on a screen, you already failed.

AR Drone (2)

Saethan (2725367) | about 10 months ago | (#44122913)

What's the point of mentioning the AR Drone? Any device running Android or iOS (Windows and Linux as well, there are plenty of open source projects that can control it) can do this.

Fantastic for married pc gamers (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 months ago | (#44130111)

I'm married and my wife doesnt like it when I lock myself up in the office and play video games all day. My PC is my media center and my living room console so I do not play at my desk unless my wife is watching TV. But like I said, she also doesn't like when I lock myself up. The shield is gonna be perfect for married gamers.

Check for New Comments
Slashdot Account

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Don't worry, we never post anything without your permission.

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>
Sign up for Slashdot Newsletters
Create a Slashdot Account

Loading...