Google is making a videogame console.

  • Thread starter Deleted member 13524
  • Start date
I think that the new GT640 gives a good hint at what cheap hardware could achieve in near future (it is still a 28nm product), see that review for extra details.

The card (so does the HD 7730 by the way), runs lot of games in medium quality just above 30fps (which is different from sustained 30FPS) @1080p. The card burns 49Watts, the chip is 79mm^2 and fast GDDR5 is accessed through a 64bit bus.
It is quite a feat.

It is interesting to see how the GT640 evolved from v1 to its second impersonation:
they removed a third of the tex units, cut the ROPs in half, they did the same to the memory bus, on the plus side they increase the ALU throughput (higher clock speed) and the bandwidth.

As a side note it got me to wonder about MSFT choice in Durango, I actually wonder if the "south of 70GB/s" they have to the main bandwidth would have been actually enough, on its own, for a system build around a reasonable GPU aiming at resolutions in between 720p and 1080p.
That is a bit OT, but it is pretty interesting to see that a custom tegra SoC could power a cheap next alternative.
I've search for proper comparison between Jaguar cores and A15, did not find something real good, looking at some anandtech figures, the x4 A15 @1.9 in the tegra 4 lags slightly the performances of a quad core Kabini @1.5GHz. There seems to be room to clock the A15 higher.
Now if those rumored 8gb gddr5 actually make it to the market it would be possible to pack 4GB of RAM on a 64 bit bus.
The thing would fall short of the XB1 and further from the ps4 yet it would be a sane target for ports.
NB that is based on 28nm technology, I would estimate the size of the whole SoC (4+1 CPU set-up, Gt640 GPU, video engine) around the size of Cap Verde, that an be sold for cheap.

That kind of realization makes me more confident that more companies will give "consoles" a try, not sure what Amazon effort is about (home or handheld) but I guess that it will be a repeated effort /the product will get upgraded more or less at the same pace their Kindle line is.
Speaking of Nvidia, they already released an handhled and it seems that they are to realese a slate under their own brand, one has to wonder if they could go a bit further than too, I wonder if they could find some agreement with Steam and launch something based on Android.
From Google pov all those (possible) efforts from companies that could possibly bypass their "PlayStore" has to be ill perceived, which ultimately makes me believe that even in a reactive manner Google may have to do something on its to secure the sales of software through their appstore.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
With guys like Amazon who sell basically all kinds of goods online, they could offer discounts to their console owners on the Amazon store. So in their case the console is also a Trojan horse to get more people one click buying from Amazon. Given that Amazon sells everything from electronics, wine, food, books, apps, you name it, it could be a hugely lucrative venture for them even if their average user only buys 1 or 2 games a year. That wouldn't matter if they now start buying their paper towels, steaks, and electronic gizmos from Amazon. They have their Prime membership they could leverage as well, maybe make that free to console owners so everyone can access their video store free and get free fast shipping on all Amazon items. They could leverage it to sell more Kindle's as well. And as you mention it's must easier to build a console now with companies like Nvidia and Amd hungry to get a foothold in this market and offering very complete systems off the shelf. With Intel's turrets slowly moving into the low power low cost space, the time is now for those two tech companies to make it happen and lock down a piece of the action.

It's weird because at a quick glance Amazon doesn't make much sense as a console candidate. But when I think about it more it actually makes quite a bit of sense. What's even funnier is given that they sell games for the other consoles means more Amazon customers via their console lets them take a cut of profits from games sold on other consoles as well.
 
They just want to be the category leader for digital goods too. ^_^ (Music, movies, books and games)

If the game publishers focus too much on willing and dealing in the Xbox vs Playstation battle (instead of making great games), I suspect they may lose control of their future.
 
Interesting article on Google success in the mobile gaming space. Apple is doing even better and as I said a while back both Apple and Google are potentially poised to disrupt the home console market.

http://allthingsd.com/20130821/goog...st-nintendo-and-sonys-handhelds/?mod=atdtweet
I would add this:
http://www.engadget.com/2013/08/23/google-tightens-android-app-rules-that-ban-device-interference/

They start to clean what is a bit of a mess, those decisions also shows that Google won't let Amazon or others benefit from Android while not letting Google its shares.
Pretty much for me the marking is on the wall, Google has to enter the console market on way or another to avoid to be excluded of their own market in a specific niche (aka Android running device in the console home/handheld realm).
 
Didn't I read about an Android game that had 99.1% piracy rate recently?
 
I spoke a couples of times about a reinvented "PC market" be it in this thread or in the thread about Valve Steambox. I think this could be a great basis for that:
http://www.engadget.com/2013/10/29/motorola-project-ara-modular-smartphone/

Geeky and unlikely talk is to follow though I have to make some use of my imagination...
I would love that concept to be applied to PC, one block would include the RAM+SoC, one other the SSD/HDD or storage, there could be multiple ones for connectivity. The thing would be standardize so you can swap everything, the "base" (area) of any module would be fixed but the module could vary in height and color. The size of the Mobo would be pretty conservative in between a wii and a wiiu to give a reference so it would make for a neat set top box.
I would be user friendly anybody can do it whereas opening a pc tower scares a lot of people.

Another thing, not exactly related is the constrains set by ISP and TV providers alike on the one like Google, Sony MSFT, etc. in the living room. In France we already have pretty complex set top box, tv usually comes for free along with the web, etc. It is really tough I think for competitor sto impose another hub for media consumption.
As wireless is getting better I wonder if along with such a reborn PC they could shift the business model to something closer to phones tablets. If such a device is sold with its own access to internet you can by pass the ISP/TV provider infrastructure, along with phones and tablets having their own internet access it could get good enough for lots of users. Personal example ,though I read a couples of posts from users here whom are not blessed with a great DSL connection either, I found out that actually where I live I've more bandwidth through my 4g connection (~3.5Mb/s) than through my DSL connection (3.1MB/s). Actually the real picture is worse as I receive TV via my DSL connection which means that I've less bandwidth to play and it is shared by at least two devices (my wife and I laptops).
If we had such a device+subscription (not different than what I give to my ISP/tv provider wrt costs), that would means that the cumulated bandwidth in my household would raise to x3 3.5mb/s (the device + 2 phones) if there was a way to mutualize the bandwidth available to those three devices.

Overall all that is not really google related, other could do it, but I feel more and more that there is way for a profound change, in the console market but also in the land of personal computing following in the step of the mobile revolution. ISP and TV providers are getting in the way of the OS providers (and their appstores), in a lot of places wireless is competitive with cable/dsl connection (at my place which is not in the middle of nowhere).
If I put together all this from Google pov, their close to monopolistic place in the phone market, device like ChromeCast, I could think that we are getting close to the point where extending the phones business model to the whole personal computing realm could be an option.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Right but the current console gaming audience doesn't seem interested in things like cloud or kinect which they prefer to fight at every turn, they just want status quo with better graphics.

Can't really blame someone for prefering the status quo with improved visuals over the status from 3 decades ago because that's all you can do with laggy motion controls. Go ahead and enjoy pretending your arm is a tennis racket while everything else on the court happens automatically. Me, I'd rather not be at the mercy of wonky motion detection. Hard to ignore that every attempt to make motion games with a modicum of complexity has resulted in utter failure thus far.

I think the whole motion nonsense is a fools errand personally. Our hands and fingers are precision tools, and in order to work properly they need tactile feedback.

Thanks Minority Report for starting this trend.
 
There is no backdooring the console market. Nothing Google did in previous approaches to new markets will work for consoles.

If Google wants to compete in the space, its going to have to roll up its sleeves and invest billions into its device and associated software.
 
Is the console market worth that kind of investment?

Especially with 3 entrenched incumbents? Nintendo WiiU may look weak but Nintendo has a do or die mentality in gaming so they may not go away. They could flip the script and come out with another console that takes off.

I think if Google is going to make a mark, they'd probably have to come with something with the potential to disrupt the traditional console model, which may not be secure.
 
Is the console market worth that kind of investment?
Debatable. I'm often reading in the tech press how Apple, Google and Microsoft are all battling to "win" the living room. If Google are serious about this, and it's really difficult to tell with Google, then they must be considering decent gaming hardware if they are going to persevere with a hardware strategy, e.g. a Nexus Q2.
 
Well a general media player is one thing, but I'm not sure about the $60 games console having great growth prospects.

Cable TV business saw loss in subscribers this year so maybe in a few years, that paradigm may have to change, the notion of paying a lot of money for a bundle of channels. Maybe things like IP streaming has a chance to work.
 
Well a general media player is one thing, but I'm not sure about the $60 games console having great growth prospects.

Cable TV business saw loss in subscribers this year so maybe in a few years, that paradigm may have to change, the notion of paying a lot of money for a bundle of channels. Maybe things like IP streaming has a chance to work.

Why not, each gen the console market grows despite that prices of the hardware and software has grown? The most successful launches ever in the console space for both hardware and software happened over the last 3 months.

$60 for a game is not out of whack with most other forms of entertainment in terms of the cost divided by hours of entertainment given.

Smartphones has taken over the market because of their features that goes just beyond making a call. But the phone is still the backbone feature of the device as derivatives that lack that ability sell no where near the rate as smartphones.

Just because people are happily making use of the extra functionality provided by consoles doesn't mean you can strip out or cripple the primary feature of a console and still expect success.

People don't buy iOS and Android to game. They game because they bought an iOS and Android device. The console market is different as people buy the hardware to game. Its the reason why console adverts revolve around the software while smartphones adverts revolve around the hardware. And the console market was built on the shoulders of GTA, Halo, SMB, GT, DMC, COD and titles that pretty much try to fully exploit the hardware not Angry Birds or Candy Crush or lite gaming wares. So providing titles like those on a less than capable device isn't going to disrupt the console market.

To me its like trying to disrupt the NFL with a flag football bikini league and thinking there is a chance of success because the NFL has cheerleaders.

Cheerleaders are nice but the NFL is about football and consoles are about gaming. Its the one area it is not wise to take short cuts especially for someone who doesn't operate in the space and knows relatively little about console gamers.
 
Well a general media player is one thing, but I'm not sure about the $60 games console having great growth prospects.

Cable TV business saw loss in subscribers this year so maybe in a few years, that paradigm may have to change, the notion of paying a lot of money for a bundle of channels. Maybe things like IP streaming has a chance to work.

Only after decades of unbroken growth which peaked in 2011 at around 89% of US tv households. One could argue that the traditional pay tv market is saturated.
 
Arstechnica has a paper one what are (/supposedly) Google's plan for the year.

Now I hope Nvidia (may be not this year) will open the door to more powerful systems. Tegra K1 is nice but starting with Maxwell products if all or most their gpu embark CPU it means that they can run ANdroid (or whatever other OS on their own).
 
If I put aside the immaturity of "Android TV" I think that the Nexus Player is completely underwhelming as a gaming device:
I think Google simply miss the point with the input, they had an easy model for them to copy on and failed to do it: the WiiMote
A unique Wiimote style input device, with proper motion control would have served the platform way better than a sucky remote and a non included "hardcore gaming" type of pad.

=> bad call, even if Android TV matures I think their choice for input is going to hamper the platform development, they could react fast though but I don't think they will.
 
To me any console that runs your standard android os and android games from google play doesnt have a chance in hell of being successful as a home console. Why are companies still trying this?
You can play all these games on platform everyone has your smart phone.
 
To me any console that runs your standard android os and android games from google play doesnt have a chance in hell of being successful as a home console. Why are companies still trying this?
You can play all these games on platform everyone has your smart phone.
That is the only relevant part of your post, whenever I lived in the US or here France it is always games that are topping the charts on Google Play. Lots of people play different games than what hardcore gamers do.
Google is trying to offer a proper platform, a software one, to gather lots of modern differents usages of TV. Imo Android TV has potential because they took in account how fragmented the market (and broadcast solutions) is and offer a software platform that has the potential to attract ISP around the world (for the ref in France SFR STB already offers access to the playstore, I don't think they use Android TV). I believe that there could be a trend here, ultimately the Nexus Player is only Google's take on hardware and the underlying OS is the broader part of their push toward the living room.

A better, if not proper, remote would have allow easier ports (motion control) of some games, kids loves motions control, parents like cheap things, mobile games are cheap, often free, etc.

Edit, the beginning of my post than harsher than it really is, take it easy ;)
 
That is the only relevant part of your post, whenever I lived in the US or here France it is always games that are topping the charts on Google Play. Lots of people play different games than what hardcore gamers do.
Google is trying to offer a proper platform, a software one, to gather lots of modern differents usages of TV. Imo Android TV has potential because they took in account how fragmented the market (and broadcast solutions) is and offer a software platform that has the potential to attract ISP around the world (for the ref in France SFR STB already offers access to the playstore, I don't think they use Android TV). I believe that there could be a trend here, ultimately the Nexus Player is only Google's take on hardware and the underlying OS is the broader part of their push toward the living room.

A better, if not proper, remote would have allow easier ports (motion control) of some games, kids loves motions control, parents like cheap things, mobile games are cheap, often free, etc.

Edit, the beginning of my post than harsher than it really is, take it easy ;)

SFR TV STV have only an access to Google Play l, but the next BBouygues Telecom STB will use Android TV...
 
Back
Top