OUYA: Open Source Console - Kickstarted in 1 Day

[isiolia]

TL;DR: it can be the cheapest but you get what you pay for, and cheap is usually sub par to consoles, which is not the point of pc gaming.

Thing is, that's kinda considering a PC as a console, which it isn't. It's a multi-purpose device, one that many/most owners would buy even if they aren't going to be gaming. There's the additional expensive of buying a GPU/etc that's well suited for it, but it's not usually accurate to consider the entire cost of the machine.

Plus, you really just need the one machine. Run multiple OSes, VMs, emulators, and so on, and you've got access to decades worth of legit software. Much less the most robust set of emulators for less than legit copies. Relatively speaking, high end modern games are only the very tippy-top of the iceberg of games available in some way on a PC.

[Menegrothx]

Depends on the setup honestly, and your architecture, and your purchasing frequencies, and just how top of the line you want it to be. It can be cheaper than consoles, but honestly, someone want's a PC that an play games better than consoles, which require parts better than consoles, and different games come out that require more and more power.

TL;DR: it can be the cheapest but you get what you pay for, and cheap is usually sub par to consoles, which is not the point of pc gaming.

Yeah, these android games require a mad powerhouse of a computer to run smoothly.

canabalt.gif (7.51 KiB) Viewed 1058 times

Just look at those graphics. You might have to upgrade your C64 or even buy an Amiga 500 if you want to play games like this with a smooth framerate and maximum settings.

[KDub]

Yeah a PC can play all these games. But it maintains its interest because it is a cheap and dedicated console for indie and retro inspired titles. Besides if it can be hacked and modded as easy as we are lead to believe it can be a cool emulation, internet, and streaming box on the cheap.

Unless it comes out and initial reviews show it to be of a terrible build quality and nothing like described right now I don't see any reason why I wouldn't want to spend the $99 bucks.

[brandman]

Thing is, that's kinda considering a PC as a console, which it isn't. It's a multi-purpose device, one that many/most owners would buy even if they aren't going to be gaming. There's the additional expensive of buying a GPU/etc that's well suited for it, but it's not usually accurate to consider the entire cost of the machine.

Plus, you really just need the one machine. Run multiple OSes, VMs, emulators, and so on, and you've got access to decades worth of legit software. Much less the most robust set of emulators for less than legit copies. Relatively speaking, high end modern games are only the very tippy-top of the iceberg of games available in some way on a PC.

True, but if you're gonna have a PC to game on, for it to be significantly better than consoles, it's gonna cost you a pretty penny to build/buy.

Yeah, these android games require a mad powerhouse of a computer to run smoothly.

canabalt.gif

Just look at those graphics. You might have to upgrade your C64 or even buy an Amiga 500 if you want to play games like this with a smooth framerate and maximum settings.

^^^Do it. You make yourself look like an ass when you don't.

[ZenErik]

True, but if you're gonna have a PC to game on, for it to be significantly better than consoles, it's gonna cost you a pretty penny to build/buy.

When I was gaming on the budget HP laptop with AMD Llano last year Skyrim looked and ran MUCH BETTER on the laptop than my PS3. And it is also not just a dedicated console and has a built in screen and is portable, unlike the PS3. Only cost a few hundred more than a PS3 costs. I bet some $350 laptops on with the latest generation of hardware can often output equal if not better graphics than a PS3 or Xbox 360.

It's probably pretty easily possible to make a $350 - $400 desktop that outputs much better graphics than a PS3 or Xbox 360..

But whatever. Graphics aren't everything.

[Menegrothx]

It's probably pretty easily possible to make a $350 - $400 desktop that outputs much better graphics than a PS3 or Xbox 360..

PS3 and Xbox 360 are both fairly outdated technology by now, I reckon it would've been quite a bit more expensive back in 2007/2008. Console technology gets better in big leaps between large intervals (especially now that there's only Nintendo, Microsoft and Sony competing for the market) while PC technology goes through constant linear growth. Atleast untill this happens http://techland.time.com/2012/05/01/the ... happening/

[ZenErik]

It's probably pretty easily possible to make a $350 - $400 desktop that outputs much better graphics than a PS3 or Xbox 360..

PS3 and Xbox 360 are both fairly outdated technology by now, I reckon it would've been quite a bit more expensive back in 2007/2008. Console technology gets better in big leaps between large intervals (especially now that there's only Nintendo, Microsoft and Sony competing for the market) while PC technology goes through constant linear growth. Atleast untill this happens http://techland.time.com/2012/05/01/the ... happening/

Interesting. I welcome that, to be honest.

I have been buying a new laptop every year for a while, but the new one I am getting is supposed to be able to play Diablo 3 on high settings at 30 FPS or better while still being an ultrabook. Will probably keep it for two years instead of the usual 1. Asus Zenbook UX32VD is pretty sweet! Although I expect it to get quite hot.. D:

[MrPopo]

It's probably pretty easily possible to make a $350 - $400 desktop that outputs much better graphics than a PS3 or Xbox 360..

PS3 and Xbox 360 are both fairly outdated technology by now, I reckon it would've been quite a bit more expensive back in 2007/2008. Console technology gets better in big leaps between large intervals (especially now that there's only Nintendo, Microsoft and Sony competing for the market) while PC technology goes through constant linear growth. Atleast untill this happens http://techland.time.com/2012/05/01/the ... happening/

And back in 2007/2008 a PS3 and Xbox 360 cost a lot more, so if we're doing a comparative analysis you need to allow a PC to have a higher build budget if we're talking about that era.

As for the growth, we've already seen a big change with the shift to multi-core processors. It was a direct result of the fact that they couldn't keep increasing clock speeds due to thermal limits. Since modern PCs are already multithreaded by virtue of having a program run on top of an OS this was a good way to improve performance, and as people really start to get into parallel programming the addition of cores is a significant performance boost. I think the real question is whether or not we hit the upper limit of what silicon can do before we change the fundamental design of a processor.

[Jrecee]

I don't know why this is being compared to a pc. Yes the lines between console and pc have been blurring, but this isn't a pc anymore than a sega genesis or a ps3 is. It's a system with specific specs, which is one of the things that separates consoles from pcs. My Ouya will run games the same as yours. This is great from a development perspective. It is also $99. How many people actually buy a second pc to hook up to their tv? Not many, and they definitely don't do it for $99. In the end, I think this is all about convenience. A cheap, dedicated game system, that lets you play indie games in Your living room. Imo this feels like the second coming of retro games, and while I understand being apprehensive about it, I would think this would have everyone on a retro game forum excited.

[Lokkenjawnz]

This shouldn't be compared to PCs, or consoles for that matter. It's not going to compete with PCs because it doesn't have the power, nor the same style of games (i.e. it's mainly controller based). It's not going to compete with consoles, because it simply doesn't have the power, nor the backing behind it.

Let's be honest here: this is an Android device, this is a mobile device without a battery. It's got a Tegra 3, which is a pretty ballsy bit of silicon for mobile devices, I've definitely seen near-console level graphics and gameplay using that, and other high end chips.

However, I really don't see this product doing very well. By the time it comes out, we'll probably be looking at Tegra 4s etc., so this will no longer be high end hardware. Mobile tech just moves too goddamn fast, it's very tough to plan things ahead, especially without major backing from supply companies.

Then it comes down to the fact that what's the market here? Most likely, it's a fairly niche (albeit large) group of hackers, android fans, maybe some retro gamers, etc. As someone who's a huge android fan, I've already got a couple android devices, and both of them are at least as powerful as this console is. They both have full bluetooth and USB capabilities, as well as HDMI out. So what's the draw with the Ouya?

Frankly, I think the proliferation of smartphones is going to kill this device's mainstream appeal. Why buy something new, when you can use what you already have. I think for it to do well, it should implement Google TV, including the HDMI pass through and IR blaster. I'm not sure how much that would affect cost, but I know I'd buy it if it supported that. Also some NFC would be nice, if only for bragging rights.

It remains to be seen what will happen from the hacker scene on this. I think that will make or break it, if hackers can get it doing some cool things, I'm in. Hell, I might still be in right now, out of pure nerdy curiosity. But do I think it'll amount to much? I really don't know.