OUYA - Android console

With guys like Ed Fries and the kindle man on board I'm not too worried on the business side of things.

I doubt very much they're gonna upgrade the GPU specs at this point, but you never know...

As for audience, the last retail game I bought was something like Reach or Uncharted and frankly I'm bored with 'm. Enjoying the Fez, Journey and Limbo's of this world much more.

It's all about the apps.
 
Kindle Fire says hello.
:???: Kindle Fire offers value in portable functionality. No-one bought it just because it was cheap - it actually does stuff, you know.

It is still low enough to be an impulse buy for many people. Plus, it is not just a gaming device...
1) If it's just an impulse buy, will they then back it up with software sales? 2) Not just a gaming device seems a crux of the issue. What else can it do that people will want to connect it to their TV?

It will most likely have 80,000+ on day one, then I imagine you could count Tegra 3 android devices... including the Nexus 7.
How many of those games will be worth spending $99 on a console for? Is the company going to spend massive dollars on securing some key EA, Ubisoft, and Activision content, or will they be ports of touch-games mapped to a controller?

It runs Android. I'm sure development will be similar to Tegra Zone.
It doesn't just run Android though - they've been particular about that. I don't think this is an "Android box on Tegra 3, end of." The SDK is important. If it runs the Android SDK, I can see its value as an Android development box, Actually, no I can't as it hasn't got the touch screen. It's pretty useless for developing tablet apps on. Devs will stick to plugging their tablet in to their PC.

If they were backing the venture with their own strong software offerings, I could see a chance. But all I see are Android touch-games being ported and Gameloft titles. The audience who would rather play NOVA over HALO or MW does not strike me as a large one.

I'm a big advocate of Android gaming being a future alternative for console gaming, but via the back-door of tablets getting connected to TVs. You'd have high-quality tablet games suitable for core gamers (slowly being introduced), then tablet games with controller support that can be played mobile or on the TV, and then specifically designed controller games and the market for dedicated Android TV boxes. But this move seems to be jumping the gun, wanting an Android box that is dependent on specific TV-based games before anyone's making such games, and I doubt they'll be able to secure the developer support unless it's amazingly easy to port Android titles across and devs will give it a nose, making ports of NOVA and Dungeon Hunters and the like. 'AAA' games as the Kickstarter suggests is pie-in-the-sky dreaming unless you go by a mobile standard of AAA and not the PS360 standard. Who's going to sink $20+ million on a launch title for a $99 Android console backed by an unknown with nobody knows what marketing backing? Who's going to invest in a company making Android consoles if Chinese knockoffs will be half the price and tablets and TVs wil be able to play the same games too? This is too much like the Phantom and other console ideas IMO. Taking in everything needed to launch a console from a new contender, it just doesn't seem plausible. Devices like the Gizmondo and GP2X have sold themselves to their tiny audiences based on their potential, but without the software to suport it and keep the platform alive, the customers won't come and it dies out. Just being cheap or homebrew doesn't change that. The only reason I give Raspberry Pi a chance is because it's throwaway-cheap and will attract geek interest ensuring some form of install base, but it's highly questionable as a viable platform to develop games for.
 
It's my understanding that both Apple and Google are licensed to transfer money, and you really buy from the creator, with Apple/Google taking a cut. My understanding is that having that status is prohibitively expensive from a legal standpoint unless you're moving a lot of money.

MS are not a licensed money transferrer and the way Live works is you set a wholesale price then MS sets a retail price and buys the copies off the creator (I assume as they are sold), because of the wholesaler/retailer relationship there are more hoops to jump through for submission/price changes etc etc.

Why aren't Microsoft licensed yet? They have Windows Store going 'Live' in a matter of months and they've been selling games and other content on Live for quite a while. Is there any other disadvantage to being licensed apart from the cost involved?
 
I don't see this working. How does the company get money?
From a cut of the hardware, they'll be open to clones just as IBM was.

I don't know if you saw the presentation videos and the kickstarter webpage, but they are also a 1st party game developer, afaict.
They plan on making money on the hardware first (though I imagine it won't be much) and then they plan on developing Android games.

From a cut of the software, they'll need massive distribution which'll need people to buy it.

Distribution is made through Google Play. Their game catalog app is the same as Tegra Zone app.

And what's the incentive to buy an Android box over a traditional console or a touch device?

Fully supported gamepads.



I think they have a chance to succeed because:

- They seem to have an overwhelming support from indie developers, which will gladly include support for their gamepad.
- They definitely have the support of gaming journalists/media (free marketing).
- They the thumbs up from the general public, looking at how much they managed to raise in the first 3 days (they now have almost $4 million).
- They will definitely have the support from the open source community.


I think the OUYA is going to be like a Pandora that didn't have a 3-year delay, and not like a Phantom.
At least that's what I'm hoping for.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
I don't know if you saw the presentation videos...
I did not, and if they have decent game development on the boil then it'll have a fighting chance. Although $4 million won't fund a single AAA title.

Distribution is made through Google Play. Their game catalog app is the same as Tegra Zone app.
I mean if they make money from software sales, taking a small cut from every sale, they'll need developers to sell LOTS of software. That requires a large install base, or very high sales per customer. Android can just about manage it because there are so many Android devices out there, that reaching to 0.01% of the amrket is still a sizeable unmber of customers. An install base of 300k-1000k users is going to make funding high quality software difficult.

Fully supported gamepads.
Why not run a kickstarter for software and a OUYA controller for existing tablets then? It'd be a lot cheaper and serve the same market pretty much. Whatever games they are making for their console they could make for other Tegra devices with an already large install base. Ring up Epic and EA and get them on board - Android already provides an open publishing platform; it jsut needs the software.

- They seem to have an overwhelming support from indie developers, which will gladly include support for their gamepad.
I'm very hesitant. It's easy to sing praises. Actually putting in the hours to create titles is something else. I recall many high-profile consoles that talked about 100+ games in their launch window, and yet they only get about a quarter of that. How many indie developers will actually finish their products for this OUYA as opposed to those who are saying their in favour and will start looking but will eventually give up and release something else on something else?

- They definitely have the support of gaming journalists/media (free marketing).
Well, free marketing to games-console owners. Now if OUYA were creating a controller standard that I could use on my ASUS tablet and back it up with relevant software, I may be interested. But buying a new console to play similar games I already have with the highest production values on my PS3, it's not serving a great purpose. The only way that'll change is the library becomes something amazing, with indies creating fabulous titles not hampered by the limits of publishers and restrictive console companies. That'll be proven after time though - I won't be an early adopter, who'd have to be very optimisitic IMO to buy this early on.

Alternatively they can reach the audience that doesn't yet have a PS3 or 360, at which point what is the sales pitch? "You know all those games consoles that people have that you wish you had but don't as you can't afford it? Well here's a console for $100 with cheap games!" That'll work for some people. What other sales strategies are there? The USP is 'cheap' AFAICS. Maybe, possibly, it'll be 'unique games experiences', but PC has had that for years, and touch devices have that.

- They will definitely have the support from the open source community.
Can that really be relied on? If they are running Android, sure. But PS3 never had any interest from the open source or homebrew communities despite Sony specifically targeting them. The homebrew bunch seem pretty fickle to me. They'll start a great, new, exciting project, and then drop it when they get bored or some new project comes along. The general quality of the Android apps I've looked at has been poor. I don't see how this box will change that, meaning it won't offer a high-quality experience. Now if they have top-tier, professional developers involved, like Epic, and they can show high-quality, real games, then my opinion will change. Without the software though, up front and ready to go, I doubt it'll survive past launch any more than other startup console homebrew devices.
 
I think you misunderstand, as I wasn't saying the OUYA doesn't do anything, but there's no point trying to explain things if you can't be arsed to read them. Makes me wonder why you're part of a discussion forum if you've no interest in discussion beyond one-liners.
 
Shifty Geezer said:
Makes me wonder why you're part of a discussion forum if you've no interest in discussion beyond one-liners.
Yeah, I'm here for the discussion part and valuable insights. I'm not here to watch people tear down products and ideas they apparently know nothing about.
 
Yeah, I'm here for the discussion part and valuable insights. I'm not here to watch people tear down products and ideas they apparently know nothing about.
I presented my views on the product, have not in any way insulted the idea or torn anything down, and am open to be convinced otherwise by intelligent arguments to the contrary. Perhaps if you'd bothered reading the rest of the post you'd have seen that.

For clarity given your apparent misinterpretation of my above comment, I was not implying OUYA does nothing where Kindle Fire does. I said nothing sells on cheapness alone, with price only a factor in value. Kindle Fire offers value in portable functionality that's worth $99 to a lot of people; no-one bought it just because it's $99. The question is where is the value in OUYA, specifically regards USP in a market that is already very well served across consoles, PC and tablets? Is it going to be worth $99 to millions of people as an Android games machine? I question that. Will it have extended functionality providing value? Maybe it will. But it needs more than just a $99 price tag to sell, which was all you were presenting as a reason people would buy it. If I was to consider developing an expensive title for this platform (the AAA games that the kickstarter alludes to), a $99 price tag on its own won't be enough to convince me to back a potential failure (because most devices that have entered the console space have failed).

What makes this different from the likes of Gizmondo and GP32? What is the marketing strategy to reach the necessary milions of installed users needed for a healthy platform? If it's not much more than Android in a box, then why don't they pursue the idea of a controller for Android tablets, at least in addition to the console, and reach a far larger market from day 1? That strikes me as a much more sensible and safe move.
 
The Kindle Fire was $199 not $99.


EDIT:
What makes this different from the likes of Gizmondo
For starters:

Not a handheld
1/5th the launch price
~16x more powerful
Network connected
Rootable out of the box
Android


Or I might ask how is it remotely similar to either of those devices?

What is the marketing strategy to reach the necessary milions of installed users needed for a healthy platform?
It already exists?
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Or I might ask how is it remotely similar to either of those devices?
In principle. Lots of companies have launched lots of gaming devices over the years, most of which have failed because they could not manage to establish a strong enough, game buying userbase to justify developer interest, meaning a lack of games leading to no consumer interest especially when there are viable alternatives.

It already exists?
:???: The OUYA hasn't been released yet, and if it's just an Android box, see all my other concerns. Although TBH I won't bother discussing this with you further if you can't manage to string more than a few words together in the vaguest of sentences. You're interest in actual discussion clearly extends no further than "I have my opinion and that's that" without talking about where you and the opposition view may be right or wrong.
 
Shifty Geezer said:
You're interest in actual discussion clearly extends no further than "I have my opinion and that's that" without talking about where you and the opposition view may be right or wrong.
Odd, that was my exact impression of you.


EDIT: Just for the record so that my opinion not be misinterpreted by others.... I do not know if the OUYA will be "successful" or not. I do not think it is the greatest thing since sliced bread. I do find it to be an interesting device at 99 dollars. I do believe it can certainly be profitable. And I have no interest in saying it will either be wildly popular or doomed to irrelevance. That REALLY doesn't matter to me. I simply like the device for what it is, at that price point. Anyone who doesn't like it, probably shouldn't buy it or concern themselves with it. Not everyone owns a kindle, or an iphone, or a PS3, or a Nook, or a Roku, or an Apple TV, or Wii, or DS, or Vita, or Nexus, nor should they.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
I did not, and if they have decent game development on the boil then it'll have a fighting chance. Although $4 million won't fund a single AAA title.

They don't want AAA titles. They're both an indie game developer and an indie console developer. They want to make money from the low-budget games they make.

I mean if they make money from software sales, taking a small cut from every sale, they'll need developers to sell LOTS of software. That requires a large install base, or very high sales per customer. Android can just about manage it because there are so many Android devices out there, that reaching to 0.01% of the amrket is still a sizeable unmber of customers. An install base of 300k-1000k users is going to make funding high quality software difficult.

Why not run a kickstarter for software and a OUYA controller for existing tablets then? It'd be a lot cheaper and serve the same market pretty much. Whatever games they are making for their console they could make for other Tegra devices with an already large install base. Ring up Epic and EA and get them on board - Android already provides an open publishing platform; it jsut needs the software.

Shifty, it's really hard to argue either its concept will work or not if you apparently haven't read/watched what the OUYA really is..

It's a home console, to be connected to a large TV.
It's the first thing they stress, it's that they all grew up playing in home consoles, and now the most simple and innovative games have only been focused on smartphones and tablets. They want to change that.
They want to make indie games for home consoles, but there's no console out there with an admission system adequate for indie developers. So they're creating the console first, and the games later.




I'm very hesitant. It's easy to sing praises. Actually putting in the hours to create titles is something else. I recall many high-profile consoles that talked about 100+ games in their launch window, and yet they only get about a quarter of that. How many indie developers will actually finish their products for this OUYA as opposed to those who are saying their in favour and will start looking but will eventually give up and release something else on something else?

Well, free marketing to games-console owners. Now if OUYA were creating a controller standard that I could use on my ASUS tablet and back it up with relevant software, I may be interested. But buying a new console to play similar games I already have with the highest production values on my PS3, it's not serving a great purpose. The only way that'll change is the library becomes something amazing, with indies creating fabulous titles not hampered by the limits of publishers and restrictive console companies. That'll be proven after time though - I won't be an early adopter, who'd have to be very optimisitic IMO to buy this early on.

Android's game library is already quite decent. Take away a couple of AAA titles, I'd say it's comparable to the 3DS and PS Vita (and look at the games with the best reviews for those consoles, they're not AAA games).

The problem with releasing indie games for the Wii, X360 and PS3 is that the system is built for publishers. Nintendo, Sony and Microsoft take a way too big percentage of each game's sales, the admission process is way too long and expensive.

As they said, they were inspired by the Indie Game documentary. It's way too risky for a single person or small team to develop a game for the current consoles, even if they come up with a brilliant idea, because of the large initial investment (without certainty that the game will even be accepted) and time that it takes to get to the virtual distribution channels.


I think it's more like:
The Indie developers will flock to OUYA like bees to honey because the console looks - by far - like their best chance to survive and see their dreams come true.




Can that really be relied on? If they are running Android, sure. But PS3 never had any interest from the open source or homebrew communities despite Sony specifically targeting them. The homebrew bunch seem pretty fickle to me. They'll start a great, new, exciting project, and then drop it when they get bored or some new project comes along.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but AFAIK PS3's homebrew died because of Sony's disinterest, not the other way around.
Homebrewerd couldn't even have access to the GPU, and even then there were many interesting things like Folding@Home and media players being developed for it, before Sony axed the whole thing with a software update.

The general quality of the Android apps I've looked at has been poor. I don't see how this box will change that, meaning it won't offer a high-quality experience.

Look at the best-selling games in Android's library. Take away a couple of games from EA and Rockstar and you have many games that are simple yet really fun to play.


Now if they have top-tier, professional developers involved, like Epic, and they can show high-quality, real games, then my opinion will change. Without the software though, up front and ready to go, I doubt it'll survive past launch any more than other startup console homebrew devices.

As I've said above: OUYA isn't looking for that.
It can't anyway, the thing is weaker than a PS Vita.
 
Most of the talk I have seen about people interested in OUYA view it as a media box first, game box second. Personally, if it is quiet and I can do Netflix and browse the web on it I am already sold at that price point.

Also hackable, FOSS friendly hardware tends to stay useful - lots of folks still using WRT54GL routers because of the ability to install Linux on them for example.

Cheers
 
Correct me if I'm wrong, but AFAIK PS3's homebrew died because of Sony's disinterest, not the other way around.
Homebrewerd couldn't even have access to the GPU, and even then there were many interesting things like Folding@Home and media players being developed for it, before Sony axed the whole thing with a software update.

The whole homebrew scene on the PS3 was pretty dead before Sony removed the otherOS functionality.
 
Android's game library is already quite decent. Take away a couple of AAA titles, I'd say it's comparable to the 3DS and PS Vita (and look at the games with the best reviews for those consoles, they're not AAA games).

And very few are designed to be played without a touch screen that you are looking at.

And the games with the best reviews for PSV are probably Gravity rush and Uncharted, and those are definitely high content games.
 
I think it's more like:
The Indie developers will flock to OUYA like bees to honey because the console looks - by far - like their best chance to survive and see their dreams come true.

From a business standpoint, what advantage does it offer over self published browser games, or just tablet/phone games fro an indie developer?

The concept of shipping a $99 arm based console is fine, putting the hardware in a box and shipping units is just the first step though.
What I don't understand and what the kickstarted campaign didn't explain at all is what their business model is.

Do they just make money on the hardware?
Do they charge a fee for a game to be available for the Ouya store?
How many game will they have in the store?
How will they highlight/filter the "good" content?

It all contributes to what is critical mass interms of sold units, if you have say 100K units in the wild, how many sales does that translate to for an Indie game? and does that justify whatever the developers cost is to publish on the platform?

I'm interested in it to see what their approach is.

I guess the advantage of Kickstarter if you can raise $3M+ is you don't give away any ownership and you don't owe anything to the investors, I just have to wonder how long before one of these big projects turns out to be a scam and the lawsuits start flying.
 
And very few are designed to be played without a touch screen that you are looking at.
Very few games couldn't be played without a touchscreen.. take away Cut-the-Rope and a couple more and most would play just as well with a gamepad.


And the games with the best reviews for PSV are probably Gravity rush and Uncharted, and those are definitely high content games.

Look at the top 6 games in PS Vita:
http://uk.ign.com/games/reviews/vita?sortBy=score&sortOrder=desc

How many would be unplayable on a Tegra 3?


From a business standpoint, what advantage does it offer over self published browser games, or just tablet/phone games fro an indie developer?

It's much cheaper than a high-end smartphone/tablet or PC, has a gamepad for playing games and it connects to a large screen.

And most probably, nothing stops you from purchasing a game in the smartphone and then keep playing it on the OUYA when you get home.
 
It's much cheaper than a high-end smartphone/tablet or PC, has a gamepad for playing games and it connects to a large screen.

That's an end user benefit, not a developer benefit.
I'm asking if they are trying to attract Indie developers to their platform how they are doing that, other than advertising the console as hackable, which being as cynical as I am to me implies easy piracy.
There is some cost to supporting the platform for any developer, even if that cost is as simple as adding controller support, what's the upside to doing it?

There are many things it could be, I'm just saying that the kickstarter centers entirely around simple android box connects to TV anyone can write software for. I can go buy a PI today and do that for 1/3 their price.
To be interesting it needs a workable business model.
 
ToTTenTranz said:
How many would be unplayable on a Tegra 3?
Honestly, by March 2013 Tegra 3 will be pretty long in the tooth. It uses an archaic GPU architecture, lacks the performance for 1080p games, and would be a platform that the market would be growing away from.

If they could delay the launch to April or May and launch with Tegra 4 at 119.99 or 124.99, that would be a much better option IMHO. Then they would actually have a platform the market is growing into, without any worries of being able to play existing Android games at 1080p with a decent framerate. By the end of 2013 (or maybe even before they launch), Tegra 3 will be a 2nd tier SoC, and I don't think that is what their potential customers want. It would also put them out of sync for any sort of upgrade path.

ERP said:
I can go buy a PI today and do that for 1/3 their price.
And much less than 1/3rd the performance...
 
Back
Top