OUYA will make its way to Retail Stores

[TCRe]

I can't wait for this really, Tegra 3 is great for emulation N64 games run really well on my Nexus 7.

 

[raulpica]

What's your definition of 8th generation console so?

Proprietary architecture and proprietary OS. Focusing on videogaming means having first-party developers too.

Grabbing Android, slapping it on a Raspberry Pi look-alike and shouting "HURR DURR I IZ CONSOLE" doesn't mean creating a console. It's just something in for a quick buck, it's blatant as that.

 

[Kouen Hasuki]

Proprietary architecture and proprietary OS. Focusing on videogaming means having first-party developers too.

Grabbing Android, slapping it on a Raspberry Pi look-alike and shouting "HURR DURR I IZ CONSOLE" doesn't mean creating a console. It's just something in for a quick buck, it's blatant as that.

I like you

 

[Deleted-185407]

-

 

[LightyKD]

Gaming is the last thing you should be doing on the Ouya.

Like great, it has OnLive and emulators. Whoopie. Like I enjoy OnLive for what it does but its library is still dwarfed by any home console or just a decent computer. Emulators, you have about a thousand devices that can do this, take your pick.

If you're really buying into the notion of "Ouya exclusives" that are perfect then you need to take a step back. They're either A) not gonna happen or B) be microtransition/ad ridden messes. At most you'll be lucky for Jetpack Joyride, MAYBE Temple Run (and its sequel) for decent, free games (they have microtransactions but they're not so in-your-face obnoxious).

The Ouya would be great if we lived in a money-less utopian society but we don't.

I somewhat agree with you. I'm using my Ouya to replace my OnLive console (which I still have) and to add more multimedia features to my living room TV. I'm still not sure if I want to migrate some of my Android collection over to the console (meaning that I would have to re-purchase some games and I don't want to) or just only buy bigger Android games that I deem good enough for TV. I really wished that more Android games had cloud saving (i.e. Dead Trigger), then I would have no problem at all having the same games on my tablet (my main portable) and Ouya.

 

[LockeCole_101629]

You seems misunderstand his point.
it's the "android" part

that OS was designed/created mainly not for games, ofcourse it's still debatable since it also can play games.
as for consoles part, it doesn't matter how powerful the hardware it still has limitation since the core is based on android.
Unlike the other consoles, which is really had 1 purpose, games. (those extra capability is just an extra)

then again... you might said, "OUYA will also had their premium/exclusive games"
considering they really want to make money of their games, I doubt it. Sooner or later those games will also available on android market.

that is the main problem of this consoles concept
just re-packaging whatever is out there on market which also playable with any generic android device, brand it with "OUYA" compatible, voila you got a deal.

this thing also can't be considered as multi platform since the core of the OS is the same.
it just another android device, which publish/develop by OUYA (or whatever name of this company) to play Android Games.
Even with same title on Sony/PC/Xbox/Wii/U often it's entirely different gameplay.

nvidia also do the same thing but they have different concept with their project shield
http://shield.nvidia.com/

and imo, they have far better concept.

people nowdays are very consumerism, they will buy anything they like even it has no use in the long run, with low price it's even worse. (or better depends with your points of view)

the selling point of OUYA is
1. it also can play any Android games.
2. Had better support from developer (if any)
3. Cheap (relative)
4. Small, and powerful than generic android device.
5. Exclusive games (that's what they said)
6. Can do lot's of thing (but... it just like any android device)
7. HD capability.
you put the list.

I agreed with raulpica said, probably it's one of the best way to gain quick cash.
since android is used in almost everything, people already know what android capable of.
instead create something from zero that no one will know, it's easier to get attention from game developers out there to put their work into their system.

I'm not even surprised if they re-pack a free android game and sell it into their system because that is the purposed.
Note: repackage as in remodel the setting/control/graphic etc, but also they might add nothing and just put it in the market because they can.

For me & probably many others, OUYA just another android device variant with better capability to play "android" games (probably), people will know it, people will buy it, and soon forget it, The End.

Good Night.

 

[LightyKD]

You seems misunderstand his point.
it's the "android" part

that OS was designed/created mainly not for games, ofcourse it's still debatable since it also can play games.
as for consoles part, it doesn't matter how powerful the hardware it still has limitation since the core is based on android.
Unlike the other consoles, which is really had 1 purpose, games. (those extra capability is just an extra)

then again... you might said, "OUYA will also had their premium/exclusive games"
considering they really want to make money of their games, I doubt it. Sooner or later those games will also available on android market.

that is the main problem of this consoles concept
just re-packaging whatever is out there on market which also playable with any generic android device, brand it with "OUYA" compatible, voila you got a deal.

this thing also can't be considered as multi platform since the core of the OS is the same.
it just another android device, which publish/develop by OUYA (or whatever name of this company) to play Android Games.
Even with same title on Sony/PC/Xbox/Wii/U often it's entirely different gameplay.

nvidia also do the same thing but they have different concept with their project shield
http://shield.nvidia.com/

and imo, they have far better concept.

people nowdays are very consumerism, they will buy anything they like even it has no use in the long run, with low price it's even worse. (or better depends with your points of view)

the selling point of OUYA is
1. it also can play any Android games.
2. Had better support from developer (if any)
3. Cheap (relative)
4. Small, and powerful than generic android device.
5. Exclusive games (that's what they said)
6. Can do lot's of thing (but... it just like any android device)
7. HD capability.
you put the list.

I agreed with raulpica said, probably it's one of the best way to gain quick cash.
since android is used in almost everything, people already know what android capable of.
instead create something from zero that no one will know, it's easier to get attention from game developers out there to put their work into their system.

I'm not even surprised if they re-pack a free android game and sell it into their system because that is the purposed.
Note: repackage as in remodel the setting/control/graphic etc, but also they might add nothing and just put it in the market because they can.

For me & probably many others, OUYA just another android device variant with better capability to play "android" games (probably), people will know it, people will buy it, and soon forget it, The End.

Good Night.

A bit negative but I get your POV. At least you're not of the camp that says mobile games aren't games at all. With that said, let's just be frank and admit that some higher end Android games are fairly suited for the TV I do wonder if it's possible to allow Ouya games to turn off most of Android and gain more of the control over the system allowing for better performance. My only gripe with Ouya so far is the yearly upgrade bullcrap! To me that makes it less of a "console" and more of a "device".

As for this argument that Android isnt exactly a OS made with gaming in mind, what do we say about Windows? Yes most games are on Windows but the OS was never created with gaming in mind, it evolved into a OS that was good for gaming. The same can also happen for Android.

 

[zanfire]

if you have kids or just want to play some android/smartphone games with proper controls, this isnt that bad. 99$ isnt much, hell most people will spend that or more on a single game with DLC or a single collectors edition of a game. There are a few decent games that would be cool with console controls and since its so cheap and easy, indie devs can make stuff on it just fine.

Will it be the next xbox/nintendo/ps3....not a chance in hell, but an amusing little sub to them....for the price, why not?

 

[Deleted-185407]

-

 

[LockeCole_101629]

My only gripe with Ouya so far is the yearly upgrade bullcrap! To me that makes it less of a "console" and more of a "device".

As for this argument that Android isn't exactly a OS made with gaming in mind, what do we say about Windows? Yes most games are on Windows but the OS was never created with gaming in mind, it evolved into a OS that was good for gaming. The same can also happen for Android.

Windows is a more complex, I mean computer having capability to play games far long before DOS even arrived, Windows just following the legacy.
Yes it could be happening in the future.

The whole "repackaging" argument is also nonsense. That's effectively what current console manufacturers do, they take existing hardware, plug it all together, and sell it off. The next generation of course is rumoured to be primarily focused around PC components and architectures. The Oculus Rift in their original prototype also just took mobile phone parts and plugged them together. Re-using existing components is a good thing, not a bad thing.

this repackage is just my thoughts

and for others machine usually we call it ports
computer also have lots of different OS (Unix/Windows/and last thing I know is Chromium OS) and it's not compatible each other.
just like iOS & Android.
even technically both can running the same game, but each own using different code. In most case Developer will pick the one which has bigger user based (for computer is windows) because they are looking for profits, it is profitable thus from both Windows & game developers will continue to support computer to be able to play games (make sense right?).

I said repackage because theoretically we probably able to play vanilla (clean) direct android games with OUYA, unless that game is from another platform (say iOS) then it's called a port, but since they scrap the touch screen ability they need to rework it so it will work with controller.

" Let's make another device based on android and we classified as a console "

we are trapped with their HYPE, making lot's of argument and so on
I'm sure Apple could do the same thing with their line up if they want too.

Computer capable to do almost any consoles out there, but are we classifying computer as a console? or vice versa, for example XBOX also able to use windows XP long time ago, or a PS3 with Linux do we classify it as a computer?

it's not a console, it just another GADGET android based specified to play Android games, that's it.

 

[Deleted-185407]

-

 

[FAST6191]

or a PS3 with Linux do we classify it as a computer?

PS2 as well to an extent ( http://www.joystiq.com/2006/06/20/ps2-is-not-a-computer-says-lord-justice/ ) and a lot of European countries as far as taxes are concerned said yes, yes you do count it as a computer
http://kotaku.com/179245/why-the-ps3-is-a-computer-sony-dodges-euro-tax-men

Edit- see also export restrictions if you want to come at it another way- http://www.nytimes.com/library/review/061399china-chips-review.html

 

[Obveron]

Why does it have such a crappy xbox-like d-pad?

Whatever the OS was designed for is completely irrelevant to the discussion. Remember that Android is perfectly open-source and they can do whatever they want to the OS and optimise it for their purposes. Besides, to argue that gaming on Android is poor because the OS isn't designed for games, is effectively the same as saying that Windows restricts gaming somehow because it's wasn't designed with games in mind.

Windows DOES restrict gaming.
Gaming consoles use streamlined OS designed for developers to code as close to hardware as they like. Wii allows devleopers to actually pick and choose what is loaded in the OS for their game (which is why there are so many Wii IOS).
Windows is multipurpose and it prevents coding direct to hardware and prevents developers from optimizing their titles as well as they could for consoles. Developers know the hardware they are coding for consoles and Windows games need to offer compatiblity to a variety of hardware. Xbox 360 can have decent titles at good framerates with only 512mb ram an 7 year old GPU, the same titles on Windows need signifcantly better hardware.

Android games need to offer compatibility to a HUGE variety of hardware that is ever-changing to Moore's law on steroids.

 

[Foxi4]

Android games need to offer compatibility to a HUGE variety of hardware that is ever-changing to Moore's law on steroids.

Which is precisely why there are attempts to create branded frameworks for applications. Sony's PlayStation Certified program or NVidia's Tegrazone were created not only to promote given brands but also to assure compatibility.

If you have a Tegra-powered device, you can be almost 100% certain that software bought via Tegrazone will be compatible with it - they're all tested by NVidia after all, and in the rare event that you do run into issues, it's also a convenient way of reporting bugs to the developers.

PlayStation Mobile works in a similar fashion, but more "in-depth" - it's a whole framework based on C# on which applications run practically independently from the actual hardware. Regardless of what device you own, the applications will have the same amount of memory and processing power at their disposal which improves compatibility greatly (at least in theory - everything depends on how good the framework actually is, but from what I'm seeing it's getting regular updates).

Another step in a good direction is posting several versions of the same App in the Google Play store - do note that you often run into a "Standard", "Lite" and "Tegra" (or even several "Tegra" - for Series 2 and 3 separately) versions of the exact same applications. Seeing that most devices use Systems-on-a-Chip, if the App is optimized for a given type of it, you have a higer chance of it working properly on your handset.

The OUYA and the Game Stick will feature similar frameworks for their games and applications - if something's on the OUYA Store, how can it not work on an OUYA? If it's on the Game Stick store, naturally it will be fully-compatible with the Game Stick.

 

[Deleted-185407]

-

 

[Bake]

People will buy anything these days, won't they?

 

[Obveron]

The OUYA and the Game Stick will feature similar frameworks for their games and applications - if something's on the OUYA Store, how can it not work on an OUYA? If it's on the Game Stick store, naturally it will be fully-compatible with the Game Stick.

It's the necessity for Android game cross-compatibility that prevents developers from focusing on optimization for specific hardware. Instead the focus is on wide compatibility so their content is playable on as many devices as possible.
Naturally this cuts into the resources of developers to offer different versions for different hardware, or the other option is limit their game for the lowest common denominator.

High level platform independent frameworks do a good job for compatibility but won't match the performance of low level coding to only 1 hardware set.

Just sayin.

You're really using a very unfair comparison here.

I thought you started this comparison? (IE Console with a multipurpose OS is fine because gaming on Windows is fine)

First reason being, games on PCs are graphically far superior than what the consoles have. The current generation of consoles can barely do 720p and have to use scaling algorithms in order to give the appearance of 1080p resolution in some games. Games like Call of Duty actually have terrible resolutions (eg. 960 * 544) and as a result will naturally need far less hardware to run. So straight off the bat you can't say that games require significantly better hardware to run on Windows. If we were talking about the same resolution with the same amount of texture detail and so on, the requirements for the PC would be far less than what you're thinking of.

PC games are superior in that they can run at higher resolutions and framerates, if the hardware is capable. I realize that a current low-end and affordable windows gaming rig can easily destroy a console in resolution and frames rates in a game like COD. But that hardware is significantly faster than those consoles. But I tell ya, you won't be playing COD BO2 on Windows with a 2006 gpu and cpu and only 512mb ram. There's no question, a console OS can do away with alot of the multipurpose stuff to make it more lightweight.


I agree with you regarding security, it does have an overhead (hopefully ofloaded by a co-processor). I'm not sure it really interferes with a developer's access to hardware, as long as their code is signed.

 

[RchUncleSkeleton]

So... $99 for the console and 1 controller and $49 for just a controller? Ooookay!