• Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.

Google developing Android-based gaming console - Wall Street Journal

Symthic

Banned
If Apple releases a console, I want it to be called the Pippin 2.

Still, I don't know how much a chance anyone has against Microsoft, Sony, or Nintendo.

Although if they release it cheap and the games are cheap, it could be a more economic and casual console to appeal to the child/family demographic the same way the Wii did.
 

MisterC20XX

Member
I've explored Android boxes quite a bit and wound up purchasing a Minix Neo X5 last fall. Right now I'd probably go with a Matricom G-Box Midnight X2 ($97 on Amazon) rather than an Android box dedicated to gaming. What I've found is that at the end of the day the Android-box-as-a-gaming-device situation is a complete mess fraught with questions:

  • Is there any support for a dedicated controller?
  • Do you have to buy-in to a closed marketplace?
  • which games will work well on a TV or monitor?
  • which games support and/or recognize usb controllers/mice?
  • Does the box have full Google Play support?
  • If it supports controllers is there any analog support or is it just re-mapped digital controls?
  • what games run on this or that box builders ROM etc, etc.
If Google can somehow deliver something that standardizes these things--while also leaving them open to tweak for those who desire to do so--I could see their box being *the* choice for budget gaming (Game Loft, etc), xbmc, emulation and so forth. Having said that there are still many questions on price: can a quality box with a good controller be inexpensive? If not is there really a market for this type of thing above $100? If so how much are people willing to pay for something that has a limited selection of games and a lack of third party support?

TLDR: Regardless of whether or not this Google gaming box materializes I don't think MS, Sony and Nintendo need to be concerned at all.
 

nampad

Member
Guess I am in the minority, which is happy to see Apple and Google moving towards gaming.
They will cater to the casuals which already moved to tablets and phones. I don't see them competing right on with the traditional consoles without high budget games. A cheap platform for indie developers can foster some interesting games like it did on the mobile platforms. It is inevitable for them to do at least some gaming if they want to market a multimedia device. I don't think they will really push into the market, just add it as an additional bullet point to their devices and see what happens. They already have their mobile game platforms.
 
That reminds me - if Google and Apple both believe that their phones would compete in the console space, why would they make actual consoles? :p

This is sort of the reason why I suggested a tablet (or phone, i guess) with a TV out or airplay capability makes more sense than a console.

as it stands, getting into the console business seems like a lose/lose situation for both of them.
 

Darryl

Banned
eh as a kid growing up in the 90s we had way more game systems and companies to choose from. Atari Jaguar, Neo Geo, Sega, Sony, Nintendo, Panasonic 3DO, Phillips CD-I, the pippin, etc.

It actually felt weird in the 00s that there were only 2-3 competitors

it feels different this time because now you have things like flexible engines which make creating games across 6 different ecosystems suddenly feasible.
 
This is sort of the reason why I suggested a tablet (or phone, i guess) with a TV out or airplay capability makes more sense than a console.

as it stands, getting into the console business seems like a lose/lose situation for both of them.

I don't see it as getting into the console business, it would be more of an extension to their TV device business, with a view to integrate it into TV sets at some point. Saying that, the speed the hardware develops, it might be best to keep it separate from a TV.
 
Lol. let's be real here. The Bolded were released and viable for a year or less. The CD-i (which was not really a game console) and the pippin in particular were rare as unicorns. Why not mention the Nuon while you're at it?

Jaguar and 3D0 were around for at least 2 years that I know of

CD-i not really a console??

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_CD-i_games

Rare as unicorns? It was playable and available for purchase in every electronics store in Southern CA and i'm pretty sure even Electronics Boutique and Babbages used to sell it as well.)

The problem here is that an apple "television" has been rumored for a long time, but never actually appeared. The reason for this is obvious. Sony, Panasonic, Sharp, and even Samsung are starting to struggle in the TV market. The profit margin on these things has been obliterated and it is VERY difficult to sell anything high end with any kind of margin. Most companies are ramping down their TV divisions and getting out of the business, not vice versa.

We'll see. Tim Cook is under alot of pressure from investors to introduce new product categories and he has acknowledged and said that Apple will be doing that soon he even hinted at TVs. I myself was perplexed by the rumors that Apple was making a telephone until I saw it for myself.
 
Jaguar and 3D0 were around for at least 2 years that I know of

note i said released and viable. The Jag was technically "pulled from shelves" by Atari in december of 1995, but no one was making games for it by then, retailers had long since banished it from shelves if they carried it at all, advertising had ceased, etc.

Wiki has it selling less than 250,000 units from 1993 to 1995. This is beyond abysmal. Most of those sales would have been at launch or christmas- and you can be reasonably certain sales were basically zero for the last year to six months or so. On average you're talking way less than 5K units a month outside of holiday season. The vita sold 6 or 7 times this amount in march, for reference.The 3D0 wasn't *quite* this bad, but the story is the same. Once the Saturn and PS1 launched, it was dead. FAR more expensive but with noticeably worse looking games, it wasn't long for retail.

CD-i not really a console??

It wasn't. The CD-i was what you might call an interactive media device. Philips ran hour long (?) infomercials to sell the thing, and the vast majority of it was focused on things like the encyclopedias, video CDs, and educational software it could run. It had a handful of token games- mostly the type full of TERRIBLE live action FMV, but that wasn't the point of the unit.
Note that for a "console", not shipping with a game controller at ALL is a very bad sign. The "controller" for the CDi was simply a remote control- to give you an idea of how essential philips thought gaming was to the unit.


Rare as unicorns? It was playable and available for purchase in every electronics store in Southern CA and i'm pretty sure even Electronics Boutique and Babbages used to sell it as well.)

as i noted before, Philips sold the thing primarily via infomercials. It didn't tend to show up in places like Sears, Wal mart, Kmart, Department Stores etc. where most consoles were actually sold. There was a revision later on that was targeted more towards gamers (you might be thinking of this version of the Cdi) but by then, it was hopelessly outclassed. No 3d capabilities, and 2D capabilities that were somehow worse than even the SNES and Genesis by a good amount. It's competition by then (the PS1 and Saturn) were far cheaper as well as being more powerful. It sold less than 500K over its lifespan- this is extremely rare for a console. I think the jag is the only major console with weaker sales- as Atari was basically insolvent and collapsing, this is not a good comparison.

Lol- and the pippin sold a grand total of 42K units and was pulled in less than a year. I'm pretty sure there actually ARE more unicorns than this.
 

Flatline

Banned
It would be nice if Sony had some better competition that doesn't try to ruin the gaming industry every once a while. Go for it Google.
 
Android? They better off making there on OS and getting new games. Android games are terrible. Ouya, Nvidia Shield, now this? How many consoles that do the same thing are needed? Android should announce they making a android console now.

This confuses me greatly.
 
Android? They better off making there on OS and getting new games. Android games are terrible. Ouya, Nvidia Shield, now this? How many consoles that do the same thing are needed? Android should announce they making a android console now.
The problem isn't android but rather devs making simple phone games.
 

Gorillaz

Member
Difference between OUYA and a Google console is the fact Google has the funds and business sense. Along with a strong brand. Not saying the big 3 should be scared but they might do something maybe


edit: aren't Google and Sony suppose to be friendly?
 

PhantomR

Banned
Google should partner up with Nintendo. I'd buy that for a dollar


Funny-gif-Steve-Carell-The-Office-no-no.gif
 

spuit*11

Banned
Double tweest: the ARM processor in the PS4 is this device but integrated. Sell the standalone/google tv/whatever version alongside it.

*gasp*

This will not happen.
 
Difference between OUYA and a Google console is the fact Google has the funds and business sense. Along with a strong brand. Not saying the big 3 should be scared but they might do something maybe


edit: aren't Google and Sony suppose to be friendly?

So did microsoft. They still lost $4 Billion trying to break into the console market, and that was only against Sony and a VERY weak nintendo.

Google would need to contend with a strong and entrenched sony, a strong and entrenched microsoft, AND a weak nintendo to break into the console market. This is not something businesses would do if there were any easier targets. there's a reason no one new has tried it since 2001- and many before that (Philips, Goldstar, RCA, Nokia, Panasonic, Bandai, Apple) tried and failed badly.

Microsoft did it because their core business was potentially threatened by set top boxes. Google's business isn't threatened at all by the console model, so there's no reason for them to start bleeding money for little more than bragging rights.
 

Truespeed

Member
Android? They better off making there on OS and getting new games. Android games are terrible. Ouya, Nvidia Shield, now this? How many consoles that do the same thing are needed? Android should announce they making a android console now.

Looks like you know jack shit about Android games.
 
I always kinda wanted Sony and Google to get into bed together and make a console jointly...seemed like the best way to go after all their main rivals...maybe one day.

Yup. Sony is already heavily invested in android which is bearing fruit, so why not look into a deeper partnership with Google? With rumours of MS entertaining the idea of Windows 8 apps on Xbone, why not lend each other a hand to help put it out of its misery before it has a chance to fester? It makes sense on a strategic level to strike on some sort of alliance, however laughable that threat may seem at this point in time.
 
Apple entering the console business.... Oh boy... And coupled with Apple TV features it'll give Xbone run for its money.

Next-gen is going to be exciting indeed.
 

dispensergoinup

Gold Member
Wonder if they'd integrate Google Glass with this and have it act as a HUD. It'd be like the Eyetoy but ...you're the eye.

I can imagine a Cyclops game where you BEHOLD OPTIC BLAST stuff on TV. I'd buy that for $99.
 
I don't care what google does unless it seriously developed its own games to compete with Sony ms. I would love to see a game console built by apple. I wouldn't buy an apple console but that thing would be sleek. An apple console would be sleek and expensive as hell.
 
While I don't think the big three will lose (any more) sleep over this, if I was on the Ouya team, I would be shitting bricks over this news.
 
Android? They better off making there on OS and getting new games. Android games are terrible. Ouya, Nvidia Shield, now this? How many consoles that do the same thing are needed? Android should announce they making a android console now.

And here I am, thinking that Google already is main contributor to the Android project. And what does the OS has to do with how the games are?
 

Darryl

Banned
While I don't think the big three will lose (any more) sleep over this, if I was on the Ouya team, I would be shitting bricks over this news.

out of fear of a buy out? there really isn't many ways to spin this news negative for them. even if google doesn't buy them out, there will be a flood of developers making android games now.
 
Everyone's convinced Apple is going to replicate their success with phones and tablets in the home. Google and others want to get their first (or at least concurrent). Never mind that no one, including Apple, know how to do this yet.

Companies don't want Apple to trick the masses into thinking they did it first so they are rushing with half-baked products to do so.
 

Opiate

Member
So did microsoft. They still lost $4 Billion trying to break into the console market, and that was only against Sony and a VERY weak nintendo.

Google would need to contend with a strong and entrenched sony, a strong and entrenched microsoft, AND a weak nintendo to break into the console market. This is not something businesses would do if there were any easier targets. there's a reason no one new has tried it since 2001- and many before that (Philips, Goldstar, RCA, Nokia, Panasonic, Bandai, Apple) tried and failed badly.

Microsoft did it because their core business was potentially threatened by set top boxes. Google's business isn't threatened at all by the console model, so there's no reason for them to start bleeding money for little more than bragging rights.

I don't think the console we're looking at will be competing with Sony or Microsoft in any meaningful sense.

I mean, we can call it a console in that it's a box that sits in front of your television (or maybe not), but otherwise I suspect the similarities in approach will end there. I would be very surprised if Google was interested in pulling away hardcore gamers and attracting AAA developers.
 
out of fear of a buy out? there really isn't many ways to spin this news negative for them. even if google doesn't buy them out, there will be a flood of developers making android games now.

I imagine that depends on the power of the Google machine. If they go with higher-end specs so as to compete with the next-gen consoles, it's possible that developers will mostly target those baselines. Furthermore, if Google attempts to, say get exclusives...

Basically, the scenario I envision is one where Google releases the higher quality box with a version of Android that works in perfect harmony with the box. As per the Nexus line. The higher quality, bigger name (and possibly stage) would pretty much put the Ouya in a position of irrelevancy.

Of course, this is just one policy. Now personally, I'm hoping that the consoles from both Apple and Google take themselves seriously, as competitors for the big three... rather than something like Ouya, something that gets AAA development and ports. The existing library already means a huge indie scene.
 

Afrodium

Banned
I doubt this will be pushed as a gaming console, but more as a set-top box. This seems like a way easier better way to achieve Microsoft's goal of controlling the living room. Whereas Microsoft will has found it difficult to get consumers to disassociate the Xbox brand with video games, Google will be able to introduce their own box as a media hub that also plays games, and will likely have a much easier time getting the mass market to accept it as such. If Google is able to reach an amount of success with this box, expect to see similar boxes running Android made by Samsung, Motorola, etc, hopefully using the same controller.

This is no Ouya. We're talking about Google. If they're creating a set top box running Android, then it means they have their sights set on getting their OS into the living room. .
 
Top Bottom