Google Developing Android Game Console

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Google Developing Android Game Console

Posted by Soulskill on Friday June 28, 2013 @12:49AM from the with-thanks-to-ouya-for-doing-the-proof-of-concept dept.

An anonymous reader writes "A report by the Wall Street Journal says Google is working on an Android-based gaming console in addition to the long-rumored smartwatch. 'The hardware plans are the latest sign of Google's determination to build on the success of Android, the software it launched in 2008 that powered 75% of all smartphones and 57% of tablets shipped globally in the first quarter, according to the research firm IDC. ... The people briefed on the matter said Google is reacting in part to expectations that rival Apple will launch a videogame console as part of its next Apple TV product release.' This development push comes as the company is wrapping up work on Android 4.3, and as the Kickstarted, Android-based Ouya console is finding success in retail markets. Google is also reportedly working on a revision to its Nexus Q media streaming device, which the company announced last year and quickly shelved after they realized it was a bit weird and not terribly useful."

29 of 143 comments (clear)

Min score:

Reason:

Sort:

Is it called Ouya? by TWiTfan · 2013-06-28 00:56 · Score: 3, Funny

Because I could swear I just saw one of these in a Best Buy flyer last weekend

--
The cow says "Moo." The dog says "Woof." The Timothy says "Thanks, valued customer. We appreciate your input."
1. Re:Is it called Ouya? by TWiTfan · 2013-06-28 01:09 · Score: 2
  
  Of course it doesn't use the Play Store. It's not meant as a general-purpose Android platform (and neither would any Google console). It has to have it's own specialized store. You can't very well have a console loading apps that expect a touch screen, accelerometer, etc. Even if Google let their console use the Play Store, they would have to wall it off into it's own area.
  
  --
  The cow says "Moo." The dog says "Woof." The Timothy says "Thanks, valued customer. We appreciate your input."
2. Re:Is it called Ouya? by RaceProUK · 2013-06-28 01:12 · Score: 3, Insightful
  
  Unfortunately the Ouya doesn't use the Play store
  Hasn't hurt the Kindle Fire.
  
  --
  No colour or religion ever stopped the bullet from a gun
3. Re:Is it called Ouya? by h4rr4r · 2013-06-28 01:21 · Score: 2
  
  Any modern controller will have a touch screen and an accelerometer.
  Far better would simply be a requirement for the game to support controllers. Then people could run those on their phone too provided they had a controller.
4. Re:Is it called Ouya? by h4rr4r · 2013-06-28 01:26 · Score: 3, Insightful
  
  It has prevented me and several other folks from buying them. Might not have hurt it much, but surely there are some lost sales.
5. Re:Is it called Ouya? by drinkypoo · 2013-06-28 01:50 · Score: 4, Insightful
  
  Of course it doesn't use the Play Store. It's not meant as a general-purpose Android platform
  it doesn't use the Play Store, but that's not why.
  
  It has to have it's own specialized store.
  this begs the question, does it have to have its own specialized store? And the answer, for those who know what they are talking about, is no.
  
  You can't very well have a console loading apps that expect a touch screen, accelerometer, etc.
  If Ouya would implement emulation of accelerometer from a joystick, then you certainly could. In fact, you could then use a PS3 Sixaxis controller to play those games, by mapping its accelerometer axes. But, they haven't done this. They should also emulate screen touches from controller presses. There's an app that does this, but it's an obvious thing for an android game console to do out of the box.
  
  Even if Google let their console use the Play Store, they would have to wall it off into it's own area.
  Why don't you get some relevant experience before running your suck? The Xperia Play uses the Play Store, and it's a phone from 2011. You just put "optimized for xperia play" (maybe in all caps) into your game description, and it automatically shows up in the list of available Xperia Play software in the special games launcher which appears when you slide out the gamepad. In short, you have no idea what you are talking about, and you are just pulling shit out of your ass and slapping it down on slashdot.
  
  --
  "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
6. Re:Is it called Ouya? by Kleen13 · 2013-06-28 02:32 · Score: 2
  
  I would love that, and why not? That's a great idea.
  
  --
  That sinking feeling deep in your gut when you KNOW you screwed up bad summed up with: {head desk} {head desk}
7. Re:Is it called Ouya? by drinkypoo · 2013-06-28 03:04 · Score: 2
  
  It's only an issue if they're really incompatible. If your console looks like the Wii U controller, I don't see why anything would have to be incompatible. (Same AC as GP.)
  Instead of speculating wildly, you could visit the pages on the Ouya SDK, and then you would know that they've created their own custom mechanisms for talking to controllers. This makes Ouya games incompatible with Android in general, and vice versa. Only games which allow remapping controls to arbitrary input events (pet peeve: this should be all games, but it sure isn't) or games written specifically to support Ouya (which is not complicated, I am not much of a programmer and even I understood the examples) will work on Ouya.
  
  --
  "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
8. Re:Is it called Ouya? by tepples · 2013-06-28 03:15 · Score: 2
  
  If you create a game that uses iOS 7's new API for MFI controllers, it'll work on an iPhone 4 or iPod touch (fifth generation) with or without AirPlay to an Apple TV. Likewise, if you create an Android game that uses a controller, it can work on an Android phone paired to a Moga controller, on an uncommon handheld Android device with buttons such as Xperia Play, Shield, JXD S5110, Archos GamePad, or on a console such as Ouya or this new Gooya. It's just that most phones aren't sold in a bundle with a controller, and different genres of game work on a multitouch screen compared to a controller. Platformers and fighting games, for example, need a controller, and they can be next to unplayable on a multitouch screen alone.
9. Re:Is it called Ouya? by perpenso · 2013-06-28 05:48 · Score: 2
  
  I doubt they are selling the Kindle line at a loss, given the pricing is comparable to similar devices from other mfg's.
  When the Kindle Fire was released various analysts looked at the components, did the math, and determined that it was basically being sold at cost. The various google nexus products also seem to be sold at cost. It seems that neither Amazon nor Google look at their devices as profit centers. Their pricing also puts incredible pricing pressure on other tablet vendors.
More options by crashcy · 2013-06-28 00:56 · Score: 3, Interesting

So the Ouya is out, and Apple, Google, and Valve are all working on consoles. I'll be interested in seeing how they develop, but the more competition for Microsoft/Sony, the better for the consumer.
1. Re:More options by crashcy · 2013-06-28 01:04 · Score: 2
  
  Agreed. But I think the odds are good that the Ouya, Google console, and Steambox at least should all share a library for the most part. Which could put pressure on the others to join in.
Re:We need one that supports emulators. by The+MAZZTer · 2013-06-28 01:11 · Score: 2

You don't read Penny Arcade, do you? From what I've heard its store has a bunch of emulators on it already.
Re:We need one that supports emulators. by TWiTfan · 2013-06-28 01:12 · Score: 3, Informative

Ouya already has a bunch of emulators. BYOR, though.

--
The cow says "Moo." The dog says "Woof." The Timothy says "Thanks, valued customer. We appreciate your input."
a bit random? by kennethmci · 2013-06-28 01:15 · Score: 2

ever get the feeling Google is just throwing crap at the wall to see what sticks? i mean, im not try to suggest their products arent good ( ive got the nexus 10 which is great ) - but they seem to at a stage of being reactive in the industry and if something doesnt make enough of a bang, they can it.
1. Re:a bit random? by Anonymous Coward · 2013-06-28 01:19 · Score: 4, Funny
  
  Here, you dropped these: ' ' ' '
2. Re: a bit random? by O('_')O_Bush · 2013-06-28 01:23 · Score: 2
  
  That is part of capitalism. Sometimes you innovate, sometimes you replicate. Companies are driven by profits, not ideals.
  
  --
  while(1) attack(People.Sandy);
3. Re: a bit random? by serviscope_minor · 2013-06-28 03:29 · Score: 2
  
  Companies are driven by profits
  No, this is a very fundemental, yet very common misunderstanding.
  Companies are like Soylent Green: they're made of people. As such they are driven by the whims and desires of the people in charge. Clearly they have to make a profit to stay around, but beyond the "enough profit to not be going out of business", companies can happily flop and flail round doing whatever the people making up the company actually do from day to day.
  In practice, the rutheless drive for profit does not affect very many of the employees from day to day. And many of the things that companies do are simply whatever someone sufficiently important thinks is a good idea. They might believe or hope that it improves profit, or they may just feel that's the way things "should" be done, or they get on some kind of personal crusade (that is REALLY common) or they are out maximise their personal profit, not the company's.
  Even with the best will in the world, there's not enough to try even two variations of anything like working environment.
  The end result: companies are driven by random mental ramblings of a few employees.
  
  --
  SJW n. One who posts facts.
Speculation by coinreturn · 2013-06-28 01:19 · Score: 3, Insightful

More speculation. When a similar rumor came out about Apple, all the haters here cried about how /. was reporting on imaginary hardware.
apple already has a game console by alen · 2013-06-28 01:38 · Score: 2, Insightful

two in fact. they are called the iphone and the ipad. the ipad version has the graphical power of an xbox 360 and some games like real racing take advantage of it.
the Apple TV is a cheapo device to allow you to stream the games to your TV along with some streaming options
Apple is not going to sell a full game console because
1. game consoles have this problem of being locked to a TV. you can't play on the train to work
2. the "real gamer" market is a minority now. there are tens of thousands of iOS games out there. lots of them make more money than the real console games.
3. apple uses the same parts in all products. building a special console means a more powerful chip with a limited manufacturing run. apple is not going to do it
4. a more powerful Apple TV is going to cost more money and sell less units. apple uses flash memory. you can't have a good console with 16GB flash
1. Re:apple already has a game console by BasilBrush · 2013-06-28 02:13 · Score: 2
  
  apple uses flash memory. you can't have a good console with 16GB flash
  Note that Ouya has 8GB flash and Nvidia Shield has 16GB flash. And Moore's law would indicate that the next Apple TV release would have 32GB flash.
  iPhone and iPad are indeed great mobile device platforms. They've already taken that market from Nintendo and Sony. But they can have all the graphical power of a 360, they don't compete against TV and game-controller based consoles. Apple TV could.
  I have no doubt at all that the next Apple TV will be capable of running apps. But maybe Apple won't launch it specifically as a console. Releasing public specs for controllers now implies that they aren't going to be doing their own. They're perhaps encouraging 3rd parties to add the missing pieces to make Apple TV into a console, with them only adding an Apple TV SDK and App Store and controller spec to the mix.
Re:Problem was cames not Compatible consoles by TWiTfan · 2013-06-28 01:41 · Score: 3, Insightful

Actually, speaking from my own experience, I can tell you that a lot of gamers at that time had simply abandoned their consoles for Commodore 64's. You could even use the same joystick (beat the hell out of that sorry-ass 5200 controller). Atari had counted on 2600 fans to move on to the 5200. But for the same price, you could just buy a Commodore. And games were a helluva lot cheaper on the Commodore, since it was so easy to pirate them.

--
The cow says "Moo." The dog says "Woof." The Timothy says "Thanks, valued customer. We appreciate your input."
Apple? by ArcadeMan · 2013-06-28 01:43 · Score: 2

For anyone wondering about Apple, most people think it's going to be the Apple TV. Coupled with an iOS 7 update, it will allow wireless controllers.

--
Get free satoshi (Bitcoin) and Dogecoins
Those are not game consoles by tuppe666 · 2013-06-28 01:51 · Score: 2, Interesting

two in fact. they are called the iphone and the ipad.>

I don't disagree with you, you could argue they are full blown computers, TV's...but that would not stop them being relatively tiny compared to a 40" screen with dedicated controllers. I just got my OUYA working...Apple have nothing to compete.
1. Re:Those are not game consoles by alen · 2013-06-28 01:58 · Score: 2
  
  apple tv is only $99. if you want to play games on the TV you buy an apple tv and use airplay to stream to your TV. some games are even coded to display data on the iphone or ipad and the picture on the TV like the Wii
  the whole idea is that for $499 you get a device you can take anywhere and does gaming, internet, books, movies, tv, music, email and other things. instead of a $399 or $499 console that is locked to the TV
2. Re: Those are not game consoles by CODiNE · 2013-06-28 02:41 · Score: 2
  
  I just got my OUYA working...Apple have nothing to compete.
  If you had to "get it working" then Apple most certainly can compete with that.
  
  --
  Cwm, fjord-bank glyphs vext quiz
Re:if its anything like google TV, then eh by gl4ss · 2013-06-28 02:48 · Score: 2

the real joke with google tv is that they spend quite a lot of buck to customize android for it and yet uncustomized android tv boxes work better for the functionality than google tv does. waste of money.

--
world was created 5 seconds before this post as it is.
Re:Xperia Play isn't the only way to say controlle by drinkypoo · 2013-06-28 04:00 · Score: 2

So if I have a phone or tablet paired to a Bluetooth controller, and I want to use this phone or tablet to search for games that will be compatible with both the phone or tablet and this new "Gooya", how do I set Google Play Store to narrow the selection to only titles that support controller operation?
The new Google Play store with games support isn't even up yet, and you're asking me questions about how it works? This is a trivial implementation issue, the only question is whether Google will get it right, not whether it is possible. Also, features like checking for hardware features on your device are already in the Play Store.

You just put "optimized for xperia play" (maybe in all caps) into your game description
Which means the developer would have to buy specifically an Xperia Play to test on, in addition to a Moga, a JXD S5110, an Archos GamePad, etc. so that they can all be included in the description. That's why searching based on the names of devices of similar capability is unsustainable.
No it isn't, and no amount of claiming that it is will make it so. The developer can simply not support those platforms if that's what they choose. An Android smartphone developer who really cares if their software will run correctly on various platforms already has to buy all of those devices, which are much more expensive than any Android game console current or projected, and most of which actually cost more than a Shield. In practice, this has not hampered Android development unduly. As it is, if you code to the basic standards then your code will work on most platforms (except Xperia Play or Ouya, of course) and the existing Play store does a fairly good job of not letting people install your software if they lack required features, e.g. an accelerometer. I would hope that when games are tightly integrated into Play that it is capable of determining whether your device has a gamepad. Hopefully, it will detect any bluetooth partnerships with gamepads as well.

--
"You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
Re:Problem was cames not Compatible consoles by CronoCloud · 2013-06-28 06:31 · Score: 2

Actually, speaking from my own experience, I can tell you that a lot of gamers at that time had simply abandoned their consoles for Commodore 64's.
The more affluent upper middle class kids, perhaps. in 1983 the C64 alone with no printer, monitor or 1541 cost the equivalent of $1400.
People without that kind of money, had to stick with what they had till the NES came out. There's a reason you could still buy new 2600 games in 1987

And games were a helluva lot cheaper on the Commodore, since it was so easy to pirate them.
Which led companies to stop developing them for or porting them to the Commodore platforms and sticking with DOS...since they had more money (obviously) and were willing to actually pay money for games compared to the 2600 owners turned C64 owners.
It's the difference between a PC gamer who spends $1500 on their "rig" who then plays CS:Source or TF2 pretty much exclusively forever, and the console owner who buys a PS3 for $299...who then has $1200 to spend on games.