Jump to content

Kenogu Labz

Members
  • Posts

    698
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    1

Posts posted by Kenogu Labz

  1. The Android market has no barrier for entry. It is almost impossible to find a game that is good simply by browsing the Google Play store. Try it: pull open the Google Play store and just find something that actually looks playable and is not simply a duplicate or rip-off of an existing game. Nope, couldn't find any here either.

    Apple has a barrier for entry. It is much easier to find something that is worth playing on the Apple Store. That's not to say that it doesn't have its fair share of bad apps, but at least a good amount of the low-quality junk is filtered out, which helps enormously in actually finding something worth pursuing.

    Those aren't necessarily the sole determining factors, but it is a much bigger problem than you seem to think it is. Discoverability is practically non-existent without a barrier, because anything good can simply be lost in the sheer volume of other junk apps. OUYA's problem is magnified because there are no commercial developers even there to set any sort of externally-imposed quality bar.

  2. Keep in mind mainstream consoles need the high budget games to lure customers because they are $400+ and $60 per game. This console is $99, and games average less than $20 if even that. That is like nothing. They advertise a lot of free to play stuff to. So for those who want lots of indie games, but don't want to shell out $400+ for a new console or hook up a PC in the middle of their living room, the Ouya (or microconsoles in general) is an option. It just needs more quality Indie games, but games take time too.

    Oh, I'm not saying it makes sense. But human reasoning doesn't necessarily make sense, either. The theory is nice; the reality is that it simply doesn't work that way.

  3. A higher barrier to entry does not mean better products. Just means less little guys and more corporate same ol same ol.

    False dilemma.

    Who were you referring to then?

    You were trying to set up a straw-man. Stop trying to chase it down.

    It will only be a "failure" if the company behind it gives up and closes up shop.

    Do keep in mind that they can only stay running as long as is feasible. If they don't have the funds to continue creating or supporting it, then they will close up shop. You can only gather momentum for so long. Time is of the essence here.

    As long as the Indies continue to reach out on more platforms that's all that matters in the end. Whether its Ouya, VitaTV, something from Google/Apple, another microconsole, etc, this idea of a low barrier console will live on no matter what.

    Wait, where is the focus of this discussion? I thought it was the OUYA, not indie developers.

    Back to what Derrit was saying about 'install bases': The primary drivers for console sales have always been corporate entities. Big-name developers lay the foundation for a user-base that indie developers can then leverage. The OUYA has no corporate backing whatsoever; there's no guarantee of high-budget content, and few people are going to be willing to fork over for a console that has zero guarantees of ever having more than a few indie gems on it. While a lot of indie games do make it into the spotlight, there are thousands more that simply don't. Commercial games may be predictable, but at least they are stable and predictable and drive sales through channels that indie developers often can not.

  4. "Who wants to make games for the Ouya?" You say? Anybody big or especially small that wants to. That is kinda the systems whole point :)

    I think you may have missed what he was questioning; the problem is that the market share for people who are shown to be willing to purchase games for the OUYA is far, far smaller than would be required to make it worth their time, especially if the game would be platform-exclusive.

  5. It's not punishing. Anyone who's used Steam for a while knows that's how they operate, and therefore must decide to either take a risk and buy now or wait until they're sure they can get it at a lower price. Conversely, seeing a game you weren't looking for show up at a lower price is more likely to trigger an impulse purchase.

    All this is multiplied ten-fold when they're running a major sale like they are now. Pick up a game now, or risk it going off sale entirely? That's something the consumer knows about and has to consider before purchasing. Annoying? Occasionally, but it's far better than getting no deals at all. In the end, it's up to each person's level of risk tolerance to decide.

  6. And the point they're trying to make is that it's not really a deal, just an advertising stratagem. If you manage to find 10 people who'll pay for it, you've basically been 'paid' for putting in the time and effort to advertise for them, and you'd get more out of your time by doing actual work.

  7. I got stuck partway through and never finished it. I guess that must have been back around 2008 when I was talking about the soundtrack in this thread. I have kind of been meaning to check out the Steam port, though. I'm interested in hearing what's been done with the music.

    It sounded like they just put some fairly mediocre midi patches over the original arragnement versions. Not terribly impressive. Kind of like what happened with the Cave Story update.

  8. Nice! I know some cyclists who might be interested in this.

    Shame about Big Blue...I think it comes down to the art not looking that great and people (who didn't play Ecco) not seeing how a game like this would be much fun. To be honest, I sort of fall in that camp myself...I kinda wish they'd split off the soundtrack as its own Kickstarter. With Spencer Nilsen *and* Bear McCreary, it would be funded in no time.

    Bear McCreary??

    Man, now this has my attention. Too bad it's too late. :(

  9. Very much agreed. I'm just trying to view the discussion from a high-level perspective. The reasons you list are the primary ones I've run into when considering this; similar reasoning can be used when looking at Linux game development, a bridge that's only recently being gapped by industry developers as standard platforms become stable. No developer would want to spend months - or even years - accounting for every possible fine-tuned environment Linux users may have. A PC or a Mac would have similar potential issues, corresponding more with the hardware. Consoles are certainly unique in their ease of development and usability.

    That's why I'm hoping the two worlds can be merged at some point, using the age-old software engineering method of abstraction. Remove the complexity of the underlying system from the developer's hands, and allow them to build on a stable system: console, PC, or even mobile devices. Abstract the interfaces away from the machines, so users can view and control their games without needing to understand every detail about how they need to be connected.

    A pipe dream? Perhaps, but that's the high-level reason many people are arguing that PCs are the 'master race': eventually, given time and years of progress, it will subsume the very concept of consoles. You can see companies pushing that way now, with remotely streamed games, systems such as the OUYA, or even products like Steam for Linux. Inherently, they're devices that perform the same tasks: Consoles are your specialists, PCs are your generalists.

  10. It's GOG again, but this deal could be pretty attractive to people who've been looking into these games:

    D&D Dynamo Stacking Promo

    The more of the games you are purchasing or already own, the bigger the discount. It pans out such that if you're getting half of the games or more, it's likely cheaper (!!) to get all of them.

  11. But why not develop those same games for a PC? The only reason is that of consistent hardware with concrete capabilities. That is the defining point of a console: the hardware and architecture are known. Once we can safely abstract these architecture differences away from the game developers without causing a loss in performance or flexibility, consoles will be a moot point. Will that day come anytime soon? Perhaps not, but many of the issues are already dealt with.

    Another aspect could be the market. The market for consoles is alive because there used to be a niche to fill; it could be that many do not realize that the niche is very small, and could be filled by their other devices just as well. Either way, the console creators can still thrive on that niche because the PC isn't seen as a viable competitor, even when it has the capacity to be.

×
×
  • Create New...