NVIDIA Announces Project Shield

This is actually a pretty interesting idea...never occurred to me that you could do a hardware-based encode on a h264 stream and have a hardware-based decoder at the endpoint.

The only thing that has me concerned is how the encoder handles audio and other system hardware. If the encoder is primarily an nVidia thing, I'm guessing the software tricks the game into thinking that HDMI audio is being used as the output, which for some games that have specialized audio settings, could be a problem.
 
[RIP]Zeus;1039491434 said:
Imo this is going to give Sony and MS, and possibly Nintendo a run for the money.

I mean think about this, you buy a high end machine, and you can play EVERY game in your steam library on your couch with a big screen TV.

And have a great gaming rig to boot for them MMO's or what not.

This will be the first time I would buy a console. :D
Click to expand...

I like/LOVE the idea of newbie pc gamers trying to play BF3 on a big screen TV with a controller :p lol
 
jwcalla said:
Basically allows your PC to double as a console. No need to carry your PC to your big screen TV anymore. ;)
Click to expand...

Yup, exactly. This is incredible.

One doesn't have to lug their PC into the living room or have a PC there. Just bring this. :D
 
DASHlT said:
I like/LOVE the idea of newbie pc gamers trying to play BF3 on a big screen TV with a controller :p lol
Click to expand...

HAHAHAHA

We old school PC gamers know what real gaming is. :D

If this takes off, all this kiddie gamers are going to get there ass handed to them HARD!;)
 
Horrible stick placement is horrible.
They should have went with the 360 controller as a model instead of the PS3.
 
I'm kind of mixed about this. I first read about Shield this morning and, after having time to mull on it, I can kind of grasp the advantages. Bringing PC gaming into the living is a noble goal, to be sure. But:

On the one hand, thats possible already with current technology, and I'm not talking about just plugging your desktop into your TV. We have SFF systems like the Zotac Zboxes, the Dell Alienware X51, or the Intel NUCs that are smaller and lighter than consoles and pack more powerful hardware (Zotac just released some new Zboxes sporting Ivy Bridge chips). So trying to push a big desktop PC out of sight isn't really an issue anymore. I'd like to see Nvidia start really pushing mini-ITX and/or NUC as the standards of choice for a living room PC. One thing I'd love to see is a graphics chipset designed specifically for SFF; its more powerful than a mobile chipset (which is what all SFF platforms use) but doesn't eat as much power or spew as much heat as a desktop graphics card.

On the other hand, what Nvidia is doing with Shield is interesting, but I wonder if it goes far enough. As I can understand it, its similar to what is being done with networked CableCARD tuners. You have a central, networked hub containing all your tuners and then you have a bunch of lightweight of set-top boxes that you can setup anywhere in your house. The thing that makes that setup cool is that you can have multiple set-top boxes all over your house, each using its own tuner to watch/record something different. In this case with Nvidia's Shield, you have the central hub and the set-top boxes (thats what the Shield controllers basically are), but you don't have the flexibility of playing different games concurrently. I've personally never been in a situation where I suddenly want to play my console games in a different room. My living room is pretty comfortable and I want to keep my gaming there. I have run into a situation where the console is already taken by someone else and I have to wait for them to get off it. In THAT case, it'd be great to just go to another TV, fire up its set-top box and play something else using the same hub/PC. If Shield can accomplish that, its awesome. If not, then....I don't know. It wouldn't feel as awesome as it could be.

In reality, it'd probably be a mix of both. You'd have your central hub/server containing all the games and your set-top boxes essentially being "thin-client" terminals that pull all the game data from the network. You could probably pull off some sort of mixed rendering where most of the heavy lifting is done on the hub while the local client fills in the gaps once the data arrives (or just have the client do all the rendering if it has a powerful enough graphics chipset, this might be configurable).
 
It's an interesting device to be sure.

I have a pc connected to my tv via hdmi, with wireless xbox 360 controllers. I'm pretty sure that's a better solution than this for gaming on the tv.

I haven't tried splashtop to game on the ipad, I might, but truthfully i have a lot of computers and laptops that are all gaming capable so I haven't had much need.

The shield controller doesn't look as comfy as the 360 controller and the analog stick placement is better on the 360 controller than the ps3/shield in my opinion.

Would I buy this instead of a new ipad or nexus tablet? I guess that really depends on price. I like the concept, but I'm a bit skeptical as to whether it will do anything better than I'm already doing. And.... I currently have amd gpu's so I'd have to buy a new video card for one of my pc's.

Like a few others have mentioned, I'm actually more interested in streaming games from a fast desktop to a laptop or windows 8 tablet. I can get way better video cards for a desktop and use the laptop for the screen/sound/keyboard/xbox controller.
 
Forget Onlive

THIS!! is what I've been talking about for years. A private cloud.

I like it very much.

Although I was expecting a 7" tablet a la nexus7 and a detachable controller.

Bye bye PSvita, bye bye Ouya, bye bye onlive.
 
As a gamer, this is a really cool device that will eliminate the one remaining need for a media center PC on the TV.

As an Nvidia shareholder, I'm really wondering why the stock price is getting hammered on this and the Tegra 4 news. Volume is almost at the average daily level and we're not halfway through the day.
 
Stoly said:
Forget Onlive

THIS!! is what I've been talking about for years. A private cloud.

I like it very much.

Although I was expecting a 7" tablet a la nexus7 and a detachable controller.

Bye bye PSvita, bye bye Ouya, bye bye onlive.
Click to expand...

This.

If this is what Nvidia is going for, turning your gaming PC into a true cloud server for your LAN, then that is awesome (it also helps justify high-end hardware, you'll need alot of horsepower to serve up multiple games across the network at once). However, from reading the documentation, I get the impression that Shield is just meant to act as a display streamer only. Basically, it just removes the cable between the PC and the TV. If that is the end goal, then I think its not being ambitious enough.
 
DASHlT said:
It wont take off as a stand alone gaming device. You can get gaming on mobile phones nowadays. Why would someone want a device that only plays games.

Sony Failed with that, And even Nintendo isnt doing all that great with the new 3DS.

Tegra 4 though....looks killer, but as a stand along gaming device. I don't think it will work.

Physx anyone?
Click to expand...

The 3DS sold, as of last September, 22 million consoles worldwide. The 3DS has outsold the PS3 in Japan. If that's bad, it's bad for Sony, not Nintendo. For a console or handheld being out for a year and a half, the 3DS sales beat them all. It overtook the original DS' sales about a month or two ago (sales at the same age, not overall lifetime sales).

For this device, I have been waiting to see what Tegra 4 can really do, but not for a handheld gaming like device, more for a tablet. I want a nice 10 inch tablet, and I was hoping Tegra 4 would be a good choice, especially in a Transformer tablet that Asus would make.
 
So if its touchscreen...? I could maybe see this taking off in some capacity, otherwise, i'll stick to my HDMI cable. If it's about $50? I would buy 4 simply on the principle of multiplayer possibilities.
 
Last edited:
andrewaggb said:
I have a pc connected to my tv via hdmi, with wireless xbox 360 controllers. I'm pretty sure that's a better solution than this for gaming on the tv.

I haven't tried splashtop to game on the ipad, I might, but truthfully i have a lot of computers and laptops that are all gaming capable so I haven't had much need.
Click to expand...


Yes that is a better solution, really the best overall solution... but that leads in to your second point

Splashtop on the iPad works great, even better on Android Tablets with Tegra inside as then you can map controls on screen if you wish to use touch controls. It is worth a try for the wow / cool factor alone. Really it is convenient cause as I said I'm not away in another room playing a game and can at least have a presence among my family :D.

The second part of what you say is the key to this product... you have multiple PCs and laptops capable of gaming.. most of us here do... but most average consumers do not, which is why they would rather buy a console than a second gaming PC to hook to their HDTV because of cost and ease of use. They have to look at the broader market and where they can make their money.

Yes some of us [H] are the exception... we don't find PC setup hard, or tweaking games hard, but the general consumer is a bit clueless on these things. Do I think this would be something neat to try out absolutely, it is a smaller more compact form of what I am doing now.

However this will be for in home use or when you are on the same network as the PC you are accessing. How the second part of nvidias announcement will play out for cloud based over the internet gaming.
 
i just see this trying to be a middle man product. it just doesn't make much sense to me.
 
Are you required to use the crappy console style controller or can you actually use a keyboard and mouse?
 
wonderfield said:
I find I hate my desk more and more every day. If I can find ways to do more while lying in my bed, that's what I want. Having a tablet helps, but I can't realistically play Skyrim on a tablet. Even if I could stream it, I'd still need to hack the shit out of the controls to get something going for the touchscreen.

If this thing supports XInput, most current PC games will work on it without a hitch. Reasonably good controls; reasonably-sized display; play whatever I want on it. Seems good to me. It looks ugly and bulky, but if it does its job well, that's what counts.
Click to expand...

I can only say that I think people who prefer lying supine on top of a bed while squinting miserably at some tiny little screen to sitting in a sumptuous chair behind an expansive desk while viewing their games on beautiful, easy-on-the-eyes 1920x1200/2560x1600 27"-30" rgb monitors have missed something fundamental to the joys of computer gaming...;)

I've invested a decent sum in my computer chair and so at the end of the day I'm fantasizing about being home and sinking deep into the caressing folds of that wonderful chair and firing up a game or two--or just browsing--or doing a spreadsheet, etc. That chair is like magic, and has made being behind my computer desk in my home office one of my favorite places to be.

We reserve our semi-large living-room TV for 1080P & BluRay movies because while movies are designed to look wonderful at those resolutions my 27" monitor attached to my computer displays computer games almost immeasurably better. But the fact that we usually sit 12'-15' away from the TV does help improve the illusion of image quality, though...;)

Then when I retire I do so with a *paper* novel on a nice mattress under a suitable lamp...and before I know it I'm.....zzzzzz-z-z-z-z-zzzzz....! That's kind of the idea.

My thinking is that if you are someone who sits in a one-piece plastic molded, high school-lunchroom chair in front of your computer--then, yea, I can see how that would be horribly uncomfortable and why you'd prefer lying around in your bed and squinting at tiny screens while frenetically mashing controller buttons. But I think if you invest a bit of thought and money into your computer desk chair you can easily make it the most comfortable piece of furniture in your home.

As for SHIELD, I have no angst with people who think they might like the concept. It's just that I can't help but think this is nVidia's own vaporware response to the vaporware OUYA and the vaporware STEAMbox. For two products that don't yet exist and haven't yet been reviewed, the OUYA and the Steambox sure get high marks, don't they? I would imagine that SHIELD will follow the fates of OUYA and Steambox, though. If they succeed and become wildly popular, then so might SHIELD. If they don't, then SHIELD probably won't, either. Still, this is positive PR for nVidia, vaporware or not, which is the whole idea, imo.

The really burning question that occurs to me whenever a company--any company--announces a product with 10% the power and efficacy of a current PC gaming box, a comparatively anemic product touted to "change the game" and "move everything to a new level," etc., is "WHY would they even be interested?" Why would they want to pay more to get less than they already own?

My theory is that it's the old bait & switch marketing tactics at work: these companies bait potential customers with implied promises of getting "so much more for so much less" than is possible currently. And a certain number of people choose to believe it right down to the bitter end at which time the product is cancelled pre-production or pulled off the market as a commercial failure.

Remember "real-time ray tracing"? Remember Larrabee? I remember well how all of the mindless speculation, piled as high as mountains by so-called "reputable" hardware sites--was a flimsy house of cards built on rumor and speculation. It didn't matter which Internet pundit had declared that Larrabee "was real and coming soon." Didn't matter at all. Intel cancelled Larrabee pre-production and that was that. The pundits were left with egg dripping down the sides of their embarrassed faces...;)

The Larrabee fiasco is what happens when otherwise smart, capable people allow their desires to completely overrule their knowledge and judgment. When companies come bearing "paradigm shifts"--be skeptical--be very, very skeptical, right up until the day that those products ship and reviewers everywhere have had a chance to see which promises were kept and and which were not.
 
Last edited:
illram said:
I've had my gaming rig hooked up to my flatscreen since 2006. Wireless mouse and keyboard and wireless xbox 360 controller for single player games... this stuffs been doable for years. What am I missing here?
Click to expand...

Tablets and UMPCs were being made for 10 years before the iPad, so what were you missing? Smartphones were doing the same for 10 years before the iPhone and archos and rio were making MP3 players for years before the iPod.. Theres just something about giving a product a good advertising push and coming out with it at the right time that changes the game and allows a company to push a ton more sales.

I think the value here will be in how easy it is to setup. If nviida makes this highly automated and pretty care free it could allow people who do not have the motivation or means to hook up their PC to their TV to do so pretty easily. Of course the problem with that is so many of those people only own intel integrated laptops now days. Also if nVidia is mad enough about consoles to really push this with an advertising campaign then it could make a huge difference.Remember the main reason millions more people do not connect their PC to their TV is simply because they dont know they can do it.
 
WaltC said:
I can only say that I think people who prefer lying supine on top of a bed while squinting miserably at some tiny little screen to sitting in a sumptuous chair behind an expansive desk while viewing their games on beautiful, easy-on-the-eyes 1920x1200/2560x1600 27"-30" rgb monitors have missed something fundamental to the joys of computer gaming...;)
Click to expand...
They actually classify the Shield's display as Retina-level, so I'm not sure your "easy-on-the-eyes" argument holds much water. A small screen at a small distance is no different than a comparatively large screen at a comparatively large distance.
 
Yay, playing on a 4" screen, just what I want with Farcry 3 or whatever.

Epic waste of time and money.

What NV? Is moving beyond Fermi to the next level just too hard? Pussy's.
 
wonderfield said:
They actually classify the Shield's display as Retina-level, so I'm not sure your "easy-on-the-eyes" argument holds much water. A small screen at a small distance is no different than a comparatively large screen at a comparatively large distance.
Click to expand...

"Retina-level" holds no meaning and I wish people would stop using the term.

720p quality on a 4 inch screen is pretty high quality, but fonts and HUDs in PC games might be too small for such a screen anyways.
 
"Retina" is simply marketing parlance for "the threshold at which the human eye is unable to resolve individual pixels at typical device-dependent viewing distances". You take the typical viewing distance; you take the display pixel pitch; you determine whether it's above or below that threshold. This is a well-studied and well-understood concept.
 
Proxy said:
Streaming live from a PC with a GeForce in it, to Shield anywhere in my house?





TAKE MY MONEY!


I don't see this replacing PC gaming. It is nice though to know that I don't have to be right in front of my PC whenever I want to mess around in a single player game or something.
Click to expand...

x1000


I've been looking for something like this for a while now. If theres no noticible loss in image quality and lag is minimal, I'd take one of these in a heart beat.
 
wonderfield said:
"Retina" is simply marketing parlance for "the threshold at which the human eye is unable to resolve individual pixels at typical device-dependent viewing distances". You take the typical viewing distance; you take the display pixel pitch; you determine whether it's above or below that threshold. This is a well-studied and well-understood concept.
Click to expand...

Retina is flawed as it depends on generic "typical" numbers. When it comes to human vision, there is too much variance to claim such a standard is worthwhile. Thus we get squinters at small screens. Generally, the bigger the screen and the higher the resolution, the happier people are.

Then there is the pixel density argument. It is valid, but only on similarly sized screens.
 
DASHlT said:
Well to stream it on your Tv, you still need to hook up the device via HDMI to the TV.

So if you want to play on your TV, hookup up your PC to your TV Via HDMI. Just like this device.

There ya go....stream gaming on the TV!

If you want to use a controller, get a wireless 360 controller.

It's alot cheaper buying a HDMI cable and a 360 controller, then this device.
Click to expand...

That can be a HUGE PITA though. I, personally, don't ever game on my TV because it's cumbersome moving all of my equipment to my living room or bedroom anytime I want to play on a large screen. Finding open wall outlets, hooking up audio, making sure an ethernet cable is available, etc all make it too much bother than it's worth 99% of the time. On top of that, then you have to move it all back when you're done.

A device like this makes all of that moot... providing it works as advertised.
 
The worst part of this is that the PC being used to stream/run the game is essentially locked out to anyone else trying to use it. Unless the device can selectively ignore having the game alt-tabbed and continue to stream the game while another app runs on the foreground.
 
Lorien said:
The worst part of this is that the PC being used to stream/run the game is essentially locked out to anyone else trying to use it. Unless the device can selectively ignore having the game alt-tabbed and continue to stream the game while another app runs on the foreground.
Click to expand...

watch the stream if you can
the showed the PC they where streaming from it was just sitting at the desktop
my guess is you can still use it for non-GPU using stuff
 
With the price of this thing you can buy a new hdtv for gaming and forget the trouble. It's not like tv screens are good for gaming in the first place. Input lag is horrendous already without the lag from the streaming. Double whammy!
 
did every one forget its also a full Android device and its main use is to play Android games on more gaming friendly hardware?
the stream from your PC is just extra win
every one is acting like its the ONLY thing it does
 
Elios said:
did every one forget its also a full Android device and its main use is to play Android games on more gaming friendly hardware?
the stream from your PC is just extra win
every one is acting like its the ONLY thing it does
Click to expand...

You do know 99% of smartphones out there can do the same thing?

And those are smaller, can be used as phones, and fit in your pocket....
 
Why is there so much hate? Size of a handheld as can act as a console with the power of your PC, capable of playing all PC games as well as all android games. Maybe you don't like the sound of it, but this thing is designed to kill all consoles IMO.
 
serious said:
Why is there so much hate? Size of a handheld as can act as a console with the power of your PC, capable of playing all PC games as well as all android games. Maybe you don't like the sound of it, but this thing is designed to kill all consoles IMO.
Click to expand...
Because this is the interwebs and now you must hate everything. Ionno why people doubt it's abilities it's just streaming from an actual computer else you just play shitty android games.
 
I THINK I understand the long-term benefits of this. Eventually we could have tech where we have a single high-performance video computing device in a home (one big badass video card/processor system) and the ability to use it from any screen in the house.

That's the theory anyway.

And as we approach the sci-fi full immersion virtual reality it probably makes sense. Owning more than one 680 class video card in a home is frankly unrealistically expensive for a lot of people.

What if over the next few years Nvidia can begin making gaming PCs with a single powerhouse video card that simultaneously drives TWO or THREE completely independent gaming sessions? THAT would be the ultimate holy grail here.

The PROBLEM, is that in the short term devices like they showed here are frankly stupid. We already have an awesome game rig. And if you are streaming it to some other screen in the house, you are not going to be able to use the PC the 680 is installed in. So... meh.

But yeah, the long term possibilities are huge.
 
Elios said:
did every one forget its also a full Android device and its main use is to play Android games on more gaming friendly hardware?
the stream from your PC is just extra win
every one is acting like its the ONLY thing it does
Click to expand...

But ironically they are pretty much right. Look this is the size of a full controller, you cant just drop it in your pocket so it loses all mobile reasons that a smart phone or mp3 player has become such a ubiquitous device. I think nVidia could have made this a much bigger hit if they would have done one very key thing, make the display house the main components so that you could detach it and drop it in your pocket and take it on the go. Then have the controller just house extra batteries for longer sustained playing. So essentially the controller is just a dock.

By not doing this, they made it so this is only going to sell to gamers, and now it is heavily going to come down to cost. I think this will cost at least $199. How many people will fork out $200 for what they percieve as just a controller in an age where almost everyone already has a smartphone or tablet?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top