Compiler - PSP

[freaky-m0]

Hi,
da ich jetzt nicht das passende Unteforum gefunden hatte schreibe ich meine Anfrage mal einfach hier rein. 

Es existiert ja ein OpenSource Toolchain f?r die PSP (http://minpspw.sourceforge.net/). Meine Frage ist jetz ob es technisch und rechtlich M?glich w?re einen Compiler f?r die PSP in GLBasic einzubauen?

EDIT:

Oh sorry i must speak english here right? 
There is an existing open source toolchain for psp development. I want to know if it is possible to insert a psp compiler for the PSP in GLBasic with it? I dont know much about the technology and laws about that.

[Kitty Hello]

It's illegal, sorry.

[freaky-m0]

The opensource toolchain? 

So if it is illegal why can this exist? > http://ps2dev.org/psp

[doimus]

I have to check Sony policy about this, but if there is option to compile GLBasic for PSP, there is no reason why that would be illegal. Unless Sony prevents any compilers bar their own, like Apple. Nintendo doesn't do that, for example. You can program in anything you like, but their toolchain is already set up, so most developers use it.

What IS illegal, though, is publishing on PSP without being licensed developer.

Which means that,even if technically it was possible to port GLB to PSP, both the GLB owners AND GLB users who wish to develop for PSP should have valid license for PSP development.

[freaky-m0]

And that would cost millions of $ right?

[doimus]

Actually, no. People always seem to think money is the main issue but in reality, it is not.

PSP devkit is $1200 + "testing unit" which is $800.

But the main thing is, you HAVE to be a registered company, you HAVE to have some back record of succesful releases and you must be approved by Sony. PSP is THE CHEAPEST and EASIEST of all current-gen consoles to get license for.

The "huge ammount of money" thing is invented by basement experts who are really just lazy b*tches.

[Kitty Hello]

Please check the legal stuff and provide information about SDL and/or OpenGL|ES.

[doimus]

The company I work for has just been granted PSP license and we're still waiting for actual devkits to see what's the procedure regarding compilers etc. I'm not a programmer so I'm incapable to go into details.


But things I know for sure is that company that owns GLBasic (you have to be a company, private devs are a no-go) has to officialy apply for PSP license. Contact SCEE for specific details, as that is under NDA mainly. Contact SCEE for anything you need, they are very friendly towards devs.

Secondly, you cannot offer your "engine" or whatever to free purchase. You will need to have PSP product separated and sold ONLY to licensed PSP developers (companies, private devs are a NO-GO, again).

And as I said before, getting into PS licensed development is easy: you need few commercial titles (nothing too serious - flash, casual is perfectly fine) under your belt, proof of commercial status as a company and that's it. Easier than running Pizza delivery service!
That's for the upcoming PSP Go digital distribution service - Sony is trying to catch up with Apple so they are accepting more smaller developers. If you want to go into UMD distribution, that's a bit harder.

[Ian Price]

Sony have really cut the cost of development packages recently - this month's Edge magazine states that it is now 80% less than this time last year. Sony are bricking themselves at the moment as none of their products are selling as well as expected and the GO is likely to follow suit with its OTT pricing.

Why is it illegal to produce GLB compiled apps for PSP and DS then Gernot? Homebrew isn't illegal and the end-user would be responsible for circumventing copy protection even if it was, surely. I asked this a while back, but I can't remember if you answered or not.

[Kitty Hello]

I was under the impression that in order to test, run or produce homebrew, you need a modified device, which is illegal. Thus, I'd force people into a crime just providing such a compiler. I'll have to see if I'm wrong and if it's worth the trouble.

[doimus]

Producing commercial software (GLBasic) which compiles on commercial product (PSP), while circumventing official licensing is MOST DEFINITELY illegal. No question about it.

No console manufacturer will ever allow selling software for their platform without them being officially involved. And if you sold GLB for PSP you would be making money on their product, without giving them anything in return. They're not that dumb. 

[Schranz0r]

I was under the impression that in order to test, run or produce homebrew, you need a modified device, which is illegal. Thus, I'd force people into a crime just providing such a compiler. I'll have to see if I'm wrong and if it's worth the trouble.

Gernot,

at some point in time you have to decide how many platforms CAN be supported through all the new versions you're bound to release...   The number of platforms you're supporting is impressive already and with 7.0 you're adding the iPhone as well.
I'd  bet any additional platform will slow down compiler and library development, which is not in the best interest of your existing client base.

Ocean

*signed*

[Kitty Hello]

It depends on how much work it is to get the libraries and use existing code. The Wiz, e.g. was a pretty straightforward port of the XBox-Linux version, mainly. The iPhone was a lot of work due to the OpenGL|ES layer and a new sound system.
Usually I build a new platform just by setting some #define values for what to use as input/video/sound and so on...

But you're right, the more platforms the more problems I get. I try to keep V7 very stable first and then think about adding language features before touching a new platform. Especially when it's old as the PSP and NDS, which micht be outdated in a year or 2.

[doimus]

I think multiple supported platforms are the strongest point of GLB. At this moment, there is not a single game engine ON EARTH that has more platforms supported than GLBasic! OK, those platforms aren't exactly DirectX10 PC, PS3 or Xbox 360, but for a hobbyist engine it's mind-boggling!

More platforms are always welcome! As long as they don't break the functionality on older ones.

If you ever consider going on "BIG" commercial platforms, maybe there could be a separate "Professional" fork of GLB, that would allow development on "closed" platforms.

edit:
And before somebody goes - "but nobody wants BASIC on PS3!", I will say what I said before - the current gamedev market is desperately in need for simple 2D engine for commercial development. There is a huuuuge 2D hole on any platform but a PC, just waiting to be filled.

[doimus]

Native system GUI is an awesome feature even for game programmers (level editors etc.). Better file I/O would also be a benefit to everybody, or at least better documented file i/o.


But I think GLB should go through reality check when general programming is in question... I mean, now we're talking GLB vs. Java, .NET, Python, Ruby etc.
All those mentioned are already well established and FREE, most even Open Source solutions. I think that's a bit like fighting the windmills, especially since GLB kicks ass when compared to other game-specific languages.

I think GLB development must be oriented towards world domination in hobbyist game development. Even casual game development - only minus there is no DirectX on Windows, if you plan to publish on portals, since those guys detest OpenGL.