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!

Star Wars Galaxies Console Versions On Hold

simoniker posted more than 11 years ago | from the wookie-no-lookie dept.

PC Games (Games) 15

Thanks to an anonymous reader for pointing to a Gamespot news story indicating that the console (PS2 and Xbox) versions of Star Wars Galaxies are now on hold. Although they were announced at E3 in 2002, and may appear eventually, a Lucasarts spokesman said of the MMORPG: "We are currently focusing all of our efforts on the successful launch of the PC version of Star Wars Galaxies." Meanwhile, the Star Wars Galaxies official site at its publisher, Sony, has links to some new mini-previews and E3-released gameplay movies from this title, which also has a thorough fanpage at RPGPlanet.

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

Good Move (2, Insightful)

suineg (647189) | more than 11 years ago | (#6021277)

I think this is a very good move considering how many problems the PC version has right now. Then they will have to figure out whether console players will be on the same server etc.

Two obvious concerns (1)

MMaestro (585010) | more than 11 years ago | (#6021309)

First, how are the two going to communicate. I won't go further keeping in mind that keyboards for the consoles aren't out yet and not everyone wants to hear a whiny 9-13 year old kid's voice through their speakers/headphones. Second and more importantly, how is the user interface going to work? History has shown that computer interfaces are usually overly complex for controllers while console interfaces tend to be unappealing and dull to PC users.

Re:Two obvious concerns (2, Informative)

Lazyhound (542184) | more than 11 years ago | (#6021627)

I'm not sure about the X-Box, but the PS2 can use any USB keyboard, which also conveniently addresses your second point.

Re:Two obvious concerns (1)

sn0 (638732) | more than 11 years ago | (#6022099)

Keyboards for the consoles aren't out? What the hell is this thing thats pluged into my PS2? It has letters and numbers and produces text on the screen. Odd.

What's wrong? (4, Funny)

ArmorFiend (151674) | more than 11 years ago | (#6021310)

I feel a sudden disturbance in the force ... As if millions of consumers cried out in longing, and were suddenly silenced.

They ought to just cancel it all together (-1, Troll)

Kethinov (636034) | more than 11 years ago | (#6021761)

Online games are meant for PCs not consoles. Sometimes I wonder why game companies like Sony and Nintendo even bother making consoles anymore as PCs clearly have more uses. There are only 2 reasons consoles sell.

People are dumb and don't know how to use computers.

All the best games from Sony and Nintendo are ONLY released on consoles which forces the people who want to play them to buy the respective console.

Personally I think everyone would win if game companies stopped making consoles and focused strictly on PC games.

Re:They ought to just cancel it all together (1)

toddhunter (659837) | more than 11 years ago | (#6022024)

Every tried to have 3 mates sit around a PC for a bit of multi-player fun? No?, guess not then.

Re:They ought to just cancel it all together (1)

Kethinov (636034) | more than 11 years ago | (#6025547)

Ever tried to have 3 mates sit around a PC for a bit of multi-player fun? No?, guess not then.
Emulator + gravis gamepads = Yes. I have.
1. They [consoles] are cheap
No argument there, but you get what you pay for seeing as how their usefulness compared to a computer is crap.
2. They JUST work. No need to install and maintain an OS, not to talk about updating it.
Sounds a lot like the first reason I mentioned. People don't know how to use computers.
3. A game loads almost instantly.
That argument is valid if the computer you're using to do games is dated. I've had no problem loading high end games like quake3 just as fast as you can load any playstation game.
I, myself, think that if you have a reasonably high-end PC, there's not much reason to invest in a console.
My point exactly. I play, and enjoy console games quite readily except via ZSNES, ePSXe, Project64 etc emulators. You can do more with an emulator than you can with a console. For example, you're not limited by the tiny space of a playstation memory card. If I want to save my FF7 286 times well hot damn I can do that! And no you don't have to be a super-nerd to use an emulator. Besides, think of how much easier it would be if the "emulator" were infact manufactured by Sony/Nintendo/etc themselves intead of a bunch of college kids. ;)

Point being, computers are, and always will be superior to consoles. And no amount of -1 Troll moderations is gonna change that.

Re:They ought to just cancel it all together (1)

Dot.Com.CEO (624226) | more than 11 years ago | (#6022327)

Hehe, excellent tr^H^H contribution. OK, I'll tell you why consoles still exist:

1. They are cheap. 200$/euros buy you an excellent console. No need to spend any more money, no hidden costs. It all is in the box.

2. They JUST work. No need to install and maintain an OS, not to talk about updating it.

3. A game loads almost instantly.

4. They fit in the living room. Well, kind of, all three of them are UGLY as hell, but better than having a PC there...

5. All the best games are ONLY released on consoles which forces the people who want to play them to buy the respective console :-)

I, myself, think that if you have a reasonably high-end PC, there's not much reason to invest in a console. Sure, you'll never get to play Zelda, or Mario, or Ratchet and Clank, and you'll play Final Fantasy and Vice City years after they come out for the consoles, but there's SO MUCH out there that you won't miss it.

I do agree with you on the online games thing, though. Even though I'm quite happy to play DAOC on my PC, I cannot imagine playing something like that on a console. But that's me... I do guess, however, that Lucasarts agree with me since they seem to be focusing on the PC port first...

Re:They ought to just cancel it all together (1)

Albert Pussyjuice (675113) | more than 11 years ago | (#6023862)

"I do agree with you on the online games thing, though. Even though I'm quite happy to play DAOC on my PC, I cannot imagine playing something like that on a console."
There are many types of games out there. I have Madden 2003 for the PS2, which I play online, and it is quite enjoyable. You agreed with the original post that online gaming for a console should be scrapped. Why? You cite one game. Sports games in particular have always, in my opinion, been better on a console and I don't see why an online component should not be included.

Re:They ought to just cancel it all together (1)

Dot.Com.CEO (624226) | more than 11 years ago | (#6023932)

Sorry, I was talking about mmorpgs specifically. I don't know why, I just cannot imagine myself playing that kind of game in the livingroom. Can't wait for online fighting / racing games to tell you the truth... GT4 online should be excellent...

Re:They ought to just cancel it all together (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#6027033)

Why should I be labled dumb because I simply prefer my PS2 to a PC? A gaming console is exactly that- an inexpensive device to play games. No Windows FU, no spreadsheats, no web browsing, just games. They are cheap enough to 'upgrade' (trade in for a new one) when new boxes come out. The controllers are awesome (nothing can yet hold a candle to the Dual Shock). The games are innovative and more diverse (in my OPINION) than PC titles.

Consoles offer a different experience than PCs. They are perfect for those of us who couldn't give a shit about the newest graphics accelerator or OS. I want to turn on the box and play a game- that's it. If I need to balance my checkbook, browse the web, edit video- I'll turn on my computer.

Online gaming is NOT just for PCs any more than recorded music is JUST for vinyl (remember those black round things?) Technology evolves and splinters many offshoots. It is pretty narrow minded and naive to discount an attempt at innovation just because it doesn't get YOU excited.

And what about those of us who prefer MAC to PC? Are we stupid too? Mac gaming generally underwhelms but they are otherwise a much better computer for what I need. I am not going to blow a couple grand on a tricked out PC just to play games. Give me Vice City on the PS2 and a Mac with Final Cut Pro and I am a happy man...

How would we all win if developers stopped making consoles? Seems it would only result in the lessening of innovation and options for consumers.

Gating measure (0, Flamebait)

Dachannien (617929) | more than 11 years ago | (#6021884)

The availability of games only on PC is a gating measure which keeps those of obviously insufficient age (say, single-digits) out of situations for which they are socially and emotionally not ready. Grade-school kids thrive on console games, and the inclusion of them in the wider MMOG community would in many cases create significant customer support problems.

I can only hope that this ends up being permanent, but since there's money to be made, that obviously won't be the case.

Yes (1)

Mensa Babe (675349) | more than 11 years ago | (#6022314)

Unfortunately, programming console games is a real pain. (I have yet to try writing anything complex, but believe me, even a simple Test Drive 2 clone can be a real pain in the a*s.) Targeting PC's is easier not only because of superior hardware quality and better performance, but also (or maybe should I say, first of all) because of cryptic APIs and subtle differences between platforms, while with PC you have just one target, you only have to master DirectX (which can be hard sometimes, of course, but there's only one standard to learn) and this is why some of the great gems aren't being published for the console market. I really do hope that when console manufacturers start to use Linux as their official operating system, this situation will change, as they will be one standard for console programming (glibc, SDL, OpenGL, OpenAL, etc.). But meanwhile, I guess, I'll just have to play Star Wars Galaxies on my PC... *sigh*

Anatomy of failure: What Killed FreeBSD (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#6022354)

The End of FreeBSD

[ed. note: in the following text, former FreeBSD developer Mike Smith gives his reasons for abandoning FreeBSD]

When I stood for election to the FreeBSD core team nearly two years ago, many of you will recall that it was after a long series of debates during which I maintained that too much organisation, too many rules and too much formality would be a bad thing for the project.

Today, as I read the latest discussions on the future of the FreeBSD project, I see the same problem; a few new faces and many of the old going over the same tired arguments and suggesting variations on the same worthless schemes. Frankly I'm sick of it.

FreeBSD used to be fun. It used to be about doing things the right way. It used to be something that you could sink your teeth into when the mundane chores of programming for a living got you down. It was something cool and exciting; a way to spend your spare time on an endeavour you loved that was at the same time wholesome and worthwhile.

It's not anymore. It's about bylaws and committees and reports and milestones, telling others what to do and doing what you're told. It's about who can rant the longest or shout the loudest or mislead the most people into a bloc in order to legitimise doing what they think is best. Individuals notwithstanding, the project as a whole has lost track of where it's going, and has instead become obsessed with process and mechanics.

So I'm leaving core. I don't want to feel like I should be "doing something" about a project that has lost interest in having something done for it. I don't have the energy to fight what has clearly become a losing battle; I have a life to live and a job to keep, and I won't achieve any of the goals I personally consider worthwhile if I remain obligated to care for the project.


I'm sure that I've offended some people already; I'm sure that by the time I'm done here, I'll have offended more. If you feel a need to play to the crowd in your replies rather than make a sincere effort to address the problems I'm discussing here, please do us the courtesy of playing your politics openly.

From a technical perspective, the project faces a set of challenges that significantly outstrips our ability to deliver. Some of the resources that we need to address these challenges are tied up in the fruitless metadiscussions that have raged since we made the mistake of electing officers. Others have left in disgust, or been driven out by the culture of abuse and distraction that has grown up since then. More may well remain available to recruitment, but while the project is busy infighting our chances for successful outreach are sorely diminished.

There's no simple solution to this. For the project to move forward, one or the other of the warring philosophies must win out; either the project returns to its laid-back roots and gets on with the work, or it transforms into a super-organised engineering project and executes a brilliant plan to deliver what, ultimately, we all know we want.

Whatever path is chosen, whatever balance is struck, the choosing and the striking are the important parts. The current indecision and endless conflict are incompatible with any sort of progress.

Trying to dissect the above is far beyond the scope of any parting shot, no matter how distended. All I can really ask of you all is to let go of the minutiae for a moment and take a look at the big picture. What is the ultimate goal here? How can we get there with as little overhead as possible? How would you like to be treated by your fellow travellers?


To the Slashdot "BSD is dying" crowd - big deal. Death is part of the cycle; take a look at your soft, pallid bodies and consider that right this very moment, parts of you are dying. See? It's not so bad.

To the bulk of the FreeBSD committerbase and the developer community at large - keep your eyes on the real goals. It's when you get distracted by the politickers that they sideline you. The tireless work that you perform keeping the system clean and building is what provides the platform for the obsessives and the prima donnas to have their moments in the sun. In the end, we need you all; in order to go forwards we must first avoid going backwards.

To the paranoid conspiracy theorists - yes, I work for Apple too. No, my resignation wasn't on Steve's direct orders, or in any way related to work I'm doing, may do, may not do, or indeed what was in the tea I had at lunchtime today. It's about real problems that the project faces, real problems that the project has brought upon itself. You can't escape them by inventing excuses about outside influence, the problem stems from within.

To the politically obsessed - give it a break, if you can. No, the project isn't a lemonade stand anymore, but it's not a world-spanning corporate juggernaut either and some of the more grandiose visions going around are in need of a solid dose of reality. Keep it simple, stupid.

To the grandstanders, the prima donnas, and anyone that thinks that they can hold the project to ransom for their own agenda - give it a break, if you can. When the current core were elected, we took a conscious stand against vigorous sanctions, and some of you have exploited that. A new core is going to have to decide whether to repeat this mistake or get tough. I hope they learn from our errors.


I started work on FreeBSD because it was fun. If I'm going to continue, it has to be fun again. There are things I still feel obligated to do, and with any luck I'll find the time to meet those obligations.

However I don't feel an obligation to get involved in the political mess the project is in right now. I tried, I burnt out. I don't feel that my efforts were worthwhile. So I won't be standing for election, I won't be shouting from the sidelines, and I probably won't vote in the next round of ballots.

You could say I'm packing up my toys. I'm not going home just yet, but I'm not going to play unless you can work out how to make the project somewhere fun to be again.

= Mike


To announce that there must be no criticism of the president, or that we are to stand by the president, right or wrong, is not only unpatriotic and servile, but is morally treasonable to the American public. -- Theodore Roosevelt
Check for New Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?