OUYA: A $99 Android console meant to open up console gaming

[DaMonz]

Fixed, and read my sig plz

You seem to be missing my point completely. Oh well.

First of all, your sig goes both ways and doesn't prove anything. I know pretty well that pessimism and realism are two different concepts, but expecting the worst is NOT always realistic.

Secondly, there was nothing to be fixed. There ARE reasons to believe the project will succeed. There is a team. There is organisation. There is equipment. There are prototypes. There are deadlines. There is vision, a mission, and clear objectives. There is a lot of support. There are 9 million unexpected dollars that were added to their budget.

These are, I think, the most important reasons to believe the project CAN work. I'm not saying it will, I'm saying it CAN. I have yet to see a single counter-argument to that fact that isn't based on speculations.

A few dollars

Why are you speculating that a port can generate just "A few dollars"? Where are your numbers? Have you even looked at real revenues generated by different game ports on various devices? "A few dollars" in this case can range from 0 to potentially any number. Let's say your game costs 3$, let's say you keep ~70% of it, and you sell 1,000 copies. That's 2.1k$ straight in the dev's pockets. If you sell 10,000, that's 21k$. I think the time for porting (in this case, let's say a week's worth of work) is very well invested. Fun fact: in my case, porting the game I'm currently making would probably take no more than a single day.

I know these numbers are fictional, but they seem pretty realistic to me.

[The Derrit]

P

Also as I've mentioned, so so so many times. Big or small, if you have a game on Android, then you already have a game for Ouya, and putting it there is essentially free money.

Also if you are building a game, on any platform, with Unity (one of the leading multiplatform game making tools):

They are also partnered with Ouya, so theres probably going to be an option for Ouya. Again, basically "Free Money" outside of the cost of the Unity license to do so.

If you can't understand that "compelling argument" then nothing I can do for you :/

it *would* be free money except that who in their right mind is going to pay 100 dollars to play the same games they could have bought somewhere else? all of these small developers would have made these games anyways; being able to port them to ouya easily doesn't make ouya itself a smart idea.

the only compelling argument there is for developers, except that developers are smart enough to know there aren't that many people who are going to put up 100 dollars for the opportunity to buy a port of a pre-existing game. this is what you just don't seem to understand; making a system and being like 'hey you can all port your games here for super cheap!' is not a selling point for buyers. unless there are NEW games that are GOOD, and they're significantly more visible/better quality than the standard market fare, where is this going to go? When was the last time a system came out, said 'hey we do absolutely zero new things for the consumer, and we're less powerful than the current generation. but the price tag is about 50 dollars less!' the only thing i can think of is the game boy micro, and that didn't go so great. all of the 'crazy awesome' innovations? they're not even recent. great, you can stream twitch tv. xbox streams every soccer match ever, along with practically every other sport, as well as netflix, amazon video, crackle, epix, espn (as aforementioned), hulu plus, syfy, tmz, fiosTV, Zune video, last.fm and more.

everything you're saying is talking about how great this is for developers. which is great. but what does it do for the consumer? zero. new. things. whatever games these indie developers are making, they were going to make anyways. and put on steam. or xbla. or somewhere they would be played. now they can also put them on ouya. great!

i actually searched the ouya kickstarter again today, and all of the other related searches were for indie games, for windows, mac, linux, iOS and (maybe) ouya. like that's literally what they say. unless there's distinguishing software there's zero pull for anyone to buy this system. because it really has no consumer merits on it's own.

also, unrelated but the free-to-play model is hands down the worst model when it comes to positive in-game community development. forcing that on developers is not something i would do. but that's a pretty minor thing not really a make-or-break.

edit: OH and other funny thing, i searched for ouya exclusive games, and there's one. literally, one.

There ARE reasons to believe the project will succeed. There is a team. There is organisation. There is equipment. There are prototypes. There are deadlines. There is vision, a mission, and clear objectives. There is a lot of support.

if you take out the prototypes part, this can be said of some of the worst global crises the world has ever seen, such as wars, the holocaust, anti-gay activism, organized crime and slavery. let me make clear i'm not comparing ouya to these things. what i AM saying is a decisive plan with motivated people does not a good idea make.

I know these numbers are fictional, but they seem pretty realistic to me.

....

I have yet to see a single counter-argument to that fact that isn't based on speculations

counter-argument to that fact that isn't based on speculations

based on speculations

speculations

Edited August 31, 2012 by The Derrit

[Dhsu]

it *would* be free money except that who in their right mind is going to pay 100 dollars to play the same games they could have bought somewhere else?

So where else can you get an HD version of Final Fantasy III without an annoying on-screen controller?

[DaMonz]

Dude. My numbers aren't based on speculations. They're based on tons of similar examples on similar devices. Which are facts, btw.

[The Derrit]

So where else can you get an HD version of Final Fantasy III without an annoying on-screen controller?

i suppose this somehow makes final fantasy III an exclusive game in your book? it's only been released on i dunno, multiple other systems by now. metal gear solid: twin snakes was a pretty bitchin' gamecube exclusive too. and mario 64 ds. best exclusives ever. this is more sarcastic than i like being but if you're trying to imply that final fantasy iii, even a repolished 3d version of it, is an 'exclusive' then you're deluding yourself. it's not. it's final fantasy iii. the game that came out over 20 years ago.

i like square, but looking at their track record all that probably means is a higher resolution version of the ds release.

Also DaMonz i think you need to revisit the definitions of the words 'imaginary,' 'speculation,' and 'fact.' and then go do some editing.

Edited August 31, 2012 by The Derrit

[Dhsu]

My point is there is a reason to buy it. People pay extra all the time for apps optimized for tablets when they could've gotten the same thing for their phone. In fact, there are tablet apps that aren't even available for phones, e.g. Sword & Sworcery, Spacechem, Uplink, etc.

Edited August 31, 2012 by Dhsu

[The Derrit]

My point is there a reason to buy it. People pay extra all the time for apps optimized for tablets when they could've gotten the same thing for their phone. In fact, there are tablet apps that aren't even available for phones, e.g. Sword & Sworcery, Spacechem, Uplink, etc.

fair. that's the truth, people do do that. but what people don't do is buy an ipad specifically to get the app optimized for a tablet. that right there is the important part. what i'm trying to get at here is that the purpose of the system isn't the problem (though it's hardly as groundbreaking as it's getting made out to be), it's the purpose of buying it in the first place. even if i were to concede to you that final fantasy iii is an exclusive, now there's two. and unlike the incremental upgrade from smartphone to ipad, this upgrade also creates the large tradeoff of having to be in front of the tv, not being able to take your game with you, and having no other functional use outside of gaming/entertainment (unlike an iphone or ipad which still has fully functional internet and phone services).

[DaMonz]

Ok. Sorry if you didn't get my point, my english isn't flawless yet. I meant something like "based on speculations that are based on opinions or feelings or nothing at all". You know, not facts. I hope you can now understand my point.

[Dhsu]

fair. that's the truth, people do do that. but what people don't do is buy an ipad specifically to get the app optimized for a tablet. that right there is the important part.

Dunno, I'm definitely thinking about it now that TWEWY is out for it...

what i'm trying to get at here is that the purpose of the system isn't the problem (though it's hardly as groundbreaking as it's getting made out to be), it's the purpose of buying it in the first place. even if i were to concede to you that final fantasy iii is an exclusive, now there's two.

Well, FF III was just an example. The existence of Ouya would hopefully be motivation for similar ports that support HD and physical controllers across the board.

and unlike the incremental upgrade from smartphone to ipad, this upgrade also creates the large tradeoff of having to be in front of the tv, not being able to take your game with you, and having no other functional use outside of gaming/entertainment (unlike an iphone or ipad which still has fully functional internet and phone services).

Yeah, but just that's the normal trade-off between any console and a phone. And often when there's a game for both console and mobile people end up buying both versions because the app is like $3.

[Nabeel Ansari]

Dude. My numbers aren't based on speculations. They're based on tons of similar examples on similar devices. Which are facts, btw.

*facepalm*

Why are you speculating that a port can generate just "A few dollars"? Where are your numbers? Have you even looked at real revenues generated by different game ports on various devices? "A few dollars" in this case can range from 0 to potentially any number. Let's say your game costs 3$, let's say you keep ~70% of it, and you sell 1,000 copies. That's 2.1k$ straight in the dev's pockets. If you sell 10,000, that's 21k$. I think the time for porting (in this case, let's say a week's worth of work) is very well invested. Fun fact: in my case, porting the game I'm currently making would probably take no more than a single day.

I know these numbers are fictional, but they seem pretty realistic to me.

You need to stop crying "SPECULATION!" when that's all you are doing.

There's still the unaddressed point that the market demographic is ridiculously small, which can cause problems in terms of Ouya being able to sustain itself as a business.

Edited August 31, 2012 by Neblix

[Dhsu]

Yeah, I personally doubt they have the marketing resources to make this thing go anywhere. It took Microsoft an entire generation before they finally started actually making money, and freakin' SEGA had to drop out the race altogether.

However, the fact that the console is open means that development can continue regardless of whether it's officially supported or not. Heck, the NES is getting a Cheetahmen II port.

[Nabeel Ansari]

I simply think the notion that this is guaranteed to succeed based on speculated developer opinions (not actual ones) and the fact that "there's no reason it wouldn't succeed" is ridiculous.

[Crowbar Man]

it *would* be free money except that who in their right mind is going to pay 100 dollars to play the same games they could have bought somewhere else?

Well, about 60K people, plus anybody whos preordered, so far.

everything you're saying is talking about how great this is for developers. which is great. but what does it do for the consumer? zero.

Well my entire point was arguing that the system should be attractive to developers. Also mind you: Developers make games. Its important to attract them to your console by any means necessary. The more games a console gets, the more attractive it is for the consumer. The more attractive it is for the consumer, the more buy, the numbers grow, the more developers get compensated, the more developers come on board. Rinse Cycle Repeat.

also, unrelated but the free-to-play model is hands down the worst model when it comes to positive in-game community development. forcing that on developers is not something i would do. but that's a pretty minor thing not really a make-or-break.

Uh, where do you keep coming up with this BS about being forced to have to be free or Free 2 Play? Again, the only minimum requirement is a part of the game has to be free, like a demo. Giving out a free demo is one of the oldest economic models in the industry, its how id got their start. Why do you ignore this every time its mentioned?

**lots of talk about exclusives for some reason**

I have never said there would be a lot of exclusives to Ouya, especially at the start. In fact i said just the opposite, it is not a place for big budget exclusives. Its an indie console. Since it is an upstart, they will heavily rely on preexisting IPs until they become more established. This is why piggy backing on Android and partnering with Unity will give them a big break, because they can get multiplatform games on their system easily.

However, smaller indie devs who can't even touch the market with Steam/XBLA/PSN would easily find a way into the market on Ouya (and by extension, Android). You may see exlusives coming just from that fact. And again, since a lot of genres are better with a controller (ie: FPS, platformers) even if there is an Android/iOS version of a game, it will suck on a touch screen, so it would be better to get the Ouya version.

EDIT: Also, I should mention, the SDK hasn't even been released yet.

It took Microsoft an entire generation before they finally started actually making money, and freakin' SEGA had to drop out the race altogether.

Keep in mind:

Microsoft produced an expensive, expensive console. Too expensive for anybody but MS to be able to make at a loss, not make it back, and still continue. They also were going the traditional route, with games/units in stores worldwide.

Sega had made many expensive hardware mistakes in the past that caught up with them. Sony's lies combined with the popularity of PS1 and the bad rep Sega had put them at a huge disadvantage when they unfortunately stopped the hardware business during the Dreamcast cycle. They were also going the traditional route every iteration, developing an expensive powerful systems, distrubuting games/units in stores worldwide.

Ouya is taking a ton of short cuts. The cheap Tegra 3 SoC (not theirs), downloadable titles so no need for store distribution, the console is NOT a powerhouse, and they are piggy backing on Android (and Indie's, and General Mobile Market's, and Free 2 Play's, and Unity's) success, etc etc.

It won't be a cakewalk, they will still have to be serious to make it all work. But honestly, at the very minimum it will be another Android based device, and they do fine on their own. There seems to be a misconception that if its not some massive worldwide super success its not worth any time. Kinda shallow.

Edited September 1, 2012 by Crowbar Man

[DaMonz]

I simply think the notion that this is guaranteed to succeed based on speculated developer opinions (not actual ones) and the fact that "there's no reason it wouldn't succeed" is ridiculous.

I agree with you that this notion is ridiculous and that this isn't guaranteed to succeed. What I'm saying though is that there is no reason to believe that this project *can't* succeed.

Edited September 1, 2012 by DaMonz

[Gollgagh]

Is anyone here actually saying that it won't succeed?

(don't answer for other people thanks)

[Gollgagh]

I said don't answer for other people, thanks.

[Crowbar Man]

Yeah, I caught that and decided to delete. Thanks!

[The Derrit]

Well my entire point was arguing that the system should be attractive to developers. Also mind you: Developers make games. Its important to attract them to your console by any means necessary.

wait... but yet...

I have never said there would be a lot of exclusives to Ouya, especially at the start. In fact i said just the opposite, it is not a place for big budget exclusives. Its an indie console. Since it is an upstart, they will heavily rely on preexisting IPs until they become more established. This is why piggy backing on Android and partnering with Unity will give them a big break, because they can get multiplatform games on their system easily.

making a console based on ports and existing ips instead of new games is hardly a way to become established. i doubt anyone making games agrees with you so i'll just let this one be though.

Uh, where do you keep coming up with this BS about being forced to have to be free or Free 2 Play? Again, the only minimum requirement is a part of the game has to be free, like a demo. Giving out a free demo is one of the oldest economic models in the industry, its how id got their start. Why do you ignore this every time its mentioned?

the part where on the kickstarter it says verbatim "We borrowed the free-to-play model from games like League of Legends, Team Fortress 2, Triple Town, and many others." that's pasted straight from it. either they're wrong or you are. pick one.

However, smaller indie devs who can't even touch the market with Steam/XBLA/PSN should probably not be trying to make console games just yet. You may see exlusives coming just from that fact. And again, since a lot of genres are better with a controller (ie: FPS, platformers) even if there is an Android/iOS version of a game, it will suck on a touch screen, so it would be better to get the Ouya version.

honestly the second half of this is completely reasonable. there are definitely advantages to the console format for some genres, a good reason to get a system like this. one of your first good reasons.

EDIT: Also, I should mention, the SDK hasn't even been released yet.

Keep in mind:

Microsoft produced an expensive, expensive console. Too expensive for anybody but MS to be able to make at a loss, not make it back, and still continue. They also were going the traditional route, with games/units in stores worldwide.

Sega had made many expensive hardware mistakes in the past that caught up with them. Sony's lies combined with the popularity of PS1 and the bad rep Sega had put them at a huge disadvantage when they unfortunately stopped the hardware business during the Dreamcast cycle. They were also going the traditional route every iteration, developing an expensive powerful systems, distrubuting games/units in stores worldwide.

Ouya is taking a ton of short cuts. The cheap Tegra 3 SoC (not theirs), downloadable titles so no need for store distribution, the console is NOT a powerhouse, and they are piggy backing on Android (and Indie's, and General Mobile Market's, and Free 2 Play's, and Unity's) success, etc etc.

you do realize everything but the digital distribution you've mentioned here aren't good things, right?

It won't be a cakewalk, they will still have to be serious to make it all work. But honestly, at the very minimum it will be another Android based device, and they do fine on their own. There seems to be a misconception that if its not some massive worldwide super success its not worth any time. Kinda shallow.

it's not kinda shallow, because if it's not a popular and doesn't sell well, it will falter and fail. it's shallow of you to suggest just because a few people want it, it can continue to exist and thrive without money or widespread support.

that should do it.

Edited September 1, 2012 by The Derrit

[Crowbar Man]

making a console based on ports and existing ips instead of new games is hardly a way to become established.

Having a library of games at all is important. You can keep denying that if you want. The exclusives may come later (may not). Not even big name consoles have a lot of exclusives or interesting games at launch. That is why backward compatibility is sometimes a selling point. "Android" is sort of their "backwards compatibility" if you think about it in a very odd way

the part where on the kickstarter it says verbatim "We borrowed the free-to-play model from games like League of Legends, Team Fortress 2, Triple Town, and many others." that's pasted straight from it. either they're wrong or you are. pick one.

They do support the Free 2 Play model and encourage developers to use that model. However, "force" indicates that there is no other options and you have to do this. I've pointed out (and other people) over and over and over, the only minimum requirements is at least some portion, ie demo, of the game has to be free. See Final Fantasy III (Free Demo, pay full price for unlocking the rest of the game), and more than likely, Minecraft, Shadowgun, etc (Unless they change the way they are sold on Android). So no, I'm not wrong, they aren't wrong, you are wrong. Geez.

smaller indie devs who can't even touch the market with Steam/XBLA/PSN should probably not be trying to make console games just yet

Why not, if an affordable option becomes available, exactly? This comment makes no sense.

you do realize everything but the digital distribution you've mentioned here aren't good things, right?

Uh, how do you figure? Especially for people making an inexpensive console for indies, like oh say... Ouya is trying to do?

it's not kinda shallow, because if it's not a popular and doesn't sell well, it will falter and fail. it's shallow of you to suggest just because a few people want it, it can continue to exist and thrive without money or widespread support.

I doubt everybody wants a Rasberry Pi. Didn't stop Rasberry Pi, doesn't stop people from buying it, doesn't stop it from being used and loved by the people who do.

Edited September 1, 2012 by Crowbar Man

[HoboKa]

Not trying to rain on any parades but this editorial may offer some considerations.

Eh, the editor is just a real pessimistic dink. At worst, they'll have to push back the release date of OUYA. And they could always stealth-change the specifications of the system, if they so desire. Regardless of the post, this is one of the coolest ideas in VG dev'ing that I've seen in a long time >.< EA, Squeenix, Capcom, Activision, etc can go die in a fire for all I care

[Nabeel Ansari]

I doubt everybody wants a Rasberry Pi. Didn't stop Rasberry Pi, doesn't stop people from buying it, doesn't stop it from being used and loved by the people who do.

1. Rasberry Pi is an actual thing that got support when it was an actual thing.

2. The market for Rasberry Pi is far bigger than the market for Ouya.

3. Rasberry Pi is dirt cheap with no need for things like elegant design and fancy hardware.

4. The premise of Rasberry Pi is a small cheap Linux computer that you can run code on. The premise of Ouya is playing indie games. One requires the self, and another requires a big dev community.

I'm fine if you somehow think a niche market demographic for a hardware system will survive, because I don't think it will but don't know for a fact (like I said, it is still unaddressed at this point), but don't use Rasberry Pi as a success story example that Ouya can follow. It can't; it doesn't appeal to nearly as many people. They're completely different things. You buy a Rasberry Pi to do stuff. You don't need a dev community to MAKE things for you to do on it. (and don't even bother suggesting that one of Ouya's "draws" is hacking the system itself. There's no reason to get a system with a Tegra 3 for a coding wankage)

It's a good idea. I don't think it will last long on $9 million, and like I said many pages ago, I think you're grossly overestimating the amount of support for this. "Pretty much every dev" "No reason not to" etc. etc.

Also, I can't believe I didn't post this before, but this pretty much quashes the "no reason not to port" reasoning:

“Mojang has committed that Minecraft (and their other games) will be on OUYA,” the Kickstarter page stated. The next sentence, however, makes it very clear that there is not the case: “But only if we prove that we can make a great product (that’s our job) AND enough people want their games (that’s your job).

No reason not to, huh?

THEN MOJANG

Y U DO THIS

For the reason I said before: Not to waste their time. Time is a thing that people do care about.

Edited September 1, 2012 by Neblix

[The Derrit]

Having a library of games at all is important. You can keep denying that if you want. The exclusives may come later (may not). Not even big name consoles have a lot of exclusives or interesting games at launch. That is why backward compatibility is sometimes a selling point. "Android" is sort of their "backwards compatibility" if you think about it in a very odd way

keep denying what? i didn't say that. and yes android is their backwards compatibility, if you think about it from a 'i'm going to pay 100 dollars to play these games that i already have on an essentially free console' kind of way.

They do support the Free 2 Play model and encourage developers to use that model. However, "force" indicates that there is no other options and you have to do this. I've pointed out (and other people) over and over and over, the only minimum requirements is at least some portion, ie demo, of the game has to be free. See Final Fantasy III (Free Demo, pay full price for unlocking the rest of the game), and more than likely, Minecraft, Shadowgun, etc (Unless they change the way they are sold on Android). So no, I'm not wrong, they aren't wrong, you are wrong. Geez.

you do have to do that. i just quoted where it said so. i don't care if it's a demo or microtransactions or whatever, that's a free to play model, by definition. there is no way to say that i'm incorrect for using ouya's definition for free to play. let me rephrase. either their definition of free to play is wrong, or you are wrong. once again. pick one.

not to mention that this is the most moot point of this conversation.

Why not, if an affordable option becomes available, exactly? This comment makes no sense.

because if they can't round up the money/support/clout to release the product they want, it's probably not good enough. that goes multiple ways; some people have made games for next to nothing that get traction because someone credits it as a good idea. some people get funding for a bright idea and go on to make great games. if you can't get someone to recognize your work and help you put it on the platform you want, either in the intial or post-production stage, then it's not good enough. see quote two below.

Uh, how do you figure? Especially for people making an inexpensive console for indies, like oh say... Ouya is trying to do?

making an underpowered system off of existing, dated technology while also bringing nothing new to the consumer is not a good thing to 'try to do'

I doubt everybody wants a Rasberry Pi. Didn't stop Rasberry Pi, doesn't stop people from buying it, doesn't stop it from being used and loved by the people who do.

because the rasPberry pi (note the p) is a 25 dollar piece of hardware that costs nearly nothing to produce and has no prerequisite to use. you just tinker to your heart's delight. after the rasPberry pi people sell it to you, their job is completely done. nothing else needs to be taken care of. the ouya requires an interface, significantly higher manufacturing costs, server maintenance, a steady stream of quality software, as well as consistent and significant game sales.

rasPberry pi can survive without a large user base. ouya cannot. like there's no way you can possibly think the two are 'pretty much the same thing.'

also, quotes from that article:

“If you want to develop a game for consoles with less gatekeeping than PSN or XBLA, I’m pretty sure that’s what XBLIG was supposed to be for, but people aren’t exactly going crazy over selling their games there. If openness is your main concern, I’m not sure what is stopping you from targeting the PC and selling games directly through your website. I personally believe that until you’ve got a high quality game on your hands, where you sell it or which gatekeepers you have to get past aren’t your biggest problems.” - Antichamber developer Alexander Bruce

“My main problem with the OUYA is that it’s selling a dream: ‘The Console for Indie Developers.’ It’s primary selling points are that it’s cheap and developers can make games for it without buying expensive development kits. However, you can already get all that with a cheap PC and unlike the OUYA, the install base for the PC is already massive. The reality is harsh; we’ve seen what happens with open platforms. Look at Xbox Live Indie Games, where very few developers were able to make a living off of it and now the platform is dominated by knock-offs of popular games and wannabe Japanese softcore porn.”

“Finally, the creators of OUYA are actively encouraging both free-to-play, all games must be ‘free-to-play’ although their definition is very loose and includes demos and purchase for full version, and hacking. Trying to get a significant portion of an audience like that to actually pay money for a game and not just spend all their time on free emulators for old arcade and video game systems could prove challenging." - Robert Boyd, developer of On the Rain-Slick Precipice of Darkness 3

and the symphony that ties it all together:

"So not only is there no finished hardware, no service at the moment, no controller, and no games—although we’re being asked to take their word that they can create each of those things in eight months—but focusing development costs on an incredibly risky platform with a small installed base and features that make piracy all but given makes no sense for most developers who release games you’d like to play. It’s an environment that not only makes little sense for commercial development, in many ways it’s actively hostile to people hoping to create games for it."

someone who GETS it. finally.

last thing. reading this article he makes the very good point of ouya being like 'yeah there are soooo many people who want to develop for us. but it's like, a secret dude. if we told you we'd have to kill you.' sarcastic language aside, what's likely much closer to true is some people were like 'neat idea, if it works out maybe we'll make a game,' which is the gaming industry equivalent of telling that friend you don't really like 'yeah, if something is going on this weekend i'll let you know, for sure.'

What I'm saying though is that there is no reason to believe that this project *can't* succeed.

uhm... yes there is. though they're not facts (my definition of fact, not yours)

Edited September 1, 2012 by The Derrit

[Crowbar Man]

1. Raspberry Pi is an actual thing that got support when it was an actual thing.

2. The market for Raspberry Pi is far bigger than the market for Ouya.

3. Raspberry Pi is dirt cheap with no need for things like elegant design and fancy hardware.

4. The premise of Raspberry Pi is a small cheap Linux computer that you can run code on. The premise of Ouya is playing indie games. One requires the self, and another requires a big dev community.

1. When Ouya comes it, it will be an actual thing?

2. A hobbyist device is a larger market then that PLUS a game console? Really?

3. Ouya is dirt cheap, and it has a simplistic design with a SoC inside.

4. Raspberry Pi has a community of developers that release things for free. If it can gather developers who aren't even making money, your saying that Ouya can't when developers are making money? And you can make your own programs/games on the Ouya, obviously. You don't even need to hack it. But you can do that too on top of it.

“Mojang has committed that Minecraft (and their other games) will be on OUYA,” the Kickstarter page stated. The next sentence, however, makes it very clear that there is not the case: “But only if we prove that we can make a great product (that’s our job) AND enough people want their games (that’s your job)

Um this was for getting people to join the Kickstarter. They met goal, maybe you didn't hear? It was kinda a big thing. Though they still need to make the final product. Also, Minecraft was running on their prototype, if I recall.

It's a good idea. I don't think it will last long on $9 million

Once again, $9 million is just their Kickstarter. It is not their total funding capital. It was mostly free marketing and a preorder campaign. Seems like it worked!

Obviously they couldn't do it on 9 Million alone. They were only even asking for 950K for the Kickstarter which would of been nearly impossible if that was all the funding they ever had period

The Derrit:

Once again, you are wrong, because you don't even know the definition of Free 2 Play.

"Free 2 Play" model is where you give the entire game away, and the player can complete it without spending a dime. However, it offers several items for sale, that either help or are just for show. See the games you listed in the quote about Free 2 Play.

A demo where you can unlock a full game is not Free 2 Play. Otherwise most XBLA/PSN games are "Free 2 Play" which is definitely not true.

They do support and encourage the Free 2 Play model. That is all they said. They do not require it. Developers are free to charge for their games. They just require a free demo.

And if you are saying you can't make money off games when you give away a free demo, again, thats one of the oldest economic model in the industry, id built their (once huge) empire by doing just that.

because if they can't round up the money/support/clout to release the product they want, it's probably not good enough.

See, this is a terribly anti-indie statement, and shallow thinking. Just because you don't have hundreds of thousands of dollars, doesn't mean you are good enough to make a game? Bullshit.

Again, I guess all the developers who make games that aren't on Steam/XBLA/PSN, but may make it self release/Desura/Indievania/freeware/etc on the PC/Mac/Linux/Android/iOS just aren't good enough and shouldn't be making games.

making an underpowered system off of existing, dated technology

Yeah, nobody else does that. pointing at Nintendo

while also bringing nothing new to the consumer

So there is another inexpensive console which focuses on cheap or free content?

Also, what else do you suggest for someone trying to bring an inexpensive console for indie development?

XBLIG:

XBLIG is trash. MS treats their XBLA devs like trash, so you think XBLIG is better? and they completely hide the fact XBLIG exsists half the time. You can't even play XBLIG games offline I dont think. You can't even port anything to XBLIG easy, it uses XNA tools which at the time basically means just PC and XBLIG. Maybe Windows Phone, the most unpopular platform on the mobile market! Also it uses C# to boot. Android, and I assume by extention, Ouya, can use JAVA (multiplatform) and C++ (the best) with the NDK. Unity also does not support XBLIG and probably never will. I don't think any middleware platform does

There were still some sucess stories there regardless. But it wasn't MS's doing. It was the developers.

Cheap PCs aren't consoles.

You can hack anything to get pirated games/emulators/etc. Doesn't stop games from selling. Tired of hearing about that like thats a real problem.

So again, you find quotes for things I've already mentioned, over and over and over.

Edited September 1, 2012 by Crowbar Man

[Nabeel Ansari]

If you actually decide to read the quote, Mojang's not putting Minecraft until they make a great product and enough people want their games. The latter is debatable, the former has just flat out not been done. They haven't made anything.

Mojang did not say "If they reach their kickstarter goal we will put minecraft on there"

3. Ouya is dirt cheap, and it has a simplistic design with a SoC inside.

*facepalm*

4. Raspberry Pi has a community of developers that release things for free. If it can gather developers who aren't even making money, your saying that Ouya can't when developers are making money? And you can make your own programs/games on the Ouya, obviously. You don't even need to hack it. But you can do that too on top of it.

You flat out did not read, again. I'm talking about a consumer standpoint. For simplicity, let's talk about some dude named Billy.

Billy is a programmer. He wants to buy Raspberry Pi because it lets him do awesome things.

Billy is a gamer. He sees Ouya, but is not sure he wants to buy one because not many great games are on it.

Do you get what I am saying, now? The appeal of Ouya to consumers is highly dependent on developer support, where Rasberry Pi is not. Rasberry Pi IS for developers. They are the market demographic.

Ouya's market demographic is gamers, not developers. That's why I am saying you can not compare them. Or are you suggesting more devs will buy Ouya than gamers themselves?

Edited September 1, 2012 by Neblix

[Crowbar Man]

If you actually decide to read the quote, Mojang's not putting Minecraft until they make a great product and enough people want their games. The latter is debatable, the former has just flat out not been done. They haven't made anything.

Mojang did not say "If they reach their kickstarter goal we will put minecraft on there"

Uh, I said they haven't made the product yet. Obviously since not a single unit has shipped. How exactly do you release a game on a product that is not out? And they did get enough people. The Kickstarter met goal. And if 60K people pledging $9 million isn't enough people to warrant a free port, why exactly did they put this quote on a page only asking for $950K? This was obviously a line to encourage people to join the Kickstarter, which they did.

You are just assuming the numbers Mojang wanted is larger than what they got. Neither of us know this for sure, but regardless, it was on their Kickstarter which met goal.

If Mojang has said "These numbers are still not enough" then at that point, I would be in fact wrong. And Mojang would be dumb

*facepalm*

?

Billy is a programmer. He wants to buy Raspberry Pi because it lets him do awesome things.

Billy should look into Ouya. It can let him do awesome things too

Billy is a gamer. He sees Ouya, but is not sure he wants to buy one because not many great games are on it.

You can say this about any console. But Ouya is the only one where the games are dirt cheap / free. And, may get exclusives from smaller devs in the future.

Ouya's market demographic is gamers, not developers.

Developers make games. Right now it is important for the system to be aimed at developers ease of use and low cost to port/create games. What part of that is hard to understand?

Games will obviously come later if it gets off the ground at all.

Since Ouya themselves do not make games, how exactly do you expect them to magically get games unless they aim to appease developers?

Also, it is marketed at ALL THE ABOVE. Developers, Gamers, and Hobbyist. Anybody who can get their hands on it and wants to play with it and create anything they want with it.

Its part of their mission statement

If you aren't of the creative nature, you can just sit and play games on it (once they start accumulating).

EDIT:

I should mention this is if it gets released. All points are moot if they never make it to market.

Edited September 1, 2012 by Crowbar Man