#1 Posted by smileyforall220 (31 posts) -

The console is fine for $100, yet it's being judged as if it should be a 600 dollar console. The controller feels fine, people calling it the worst controller ever made is just pure hyperbole. Jeff on the bombcast was trashing the console after playing some non ouya native apps, and not playing the exclusive game just feels weird. You can stream just about 1:1 PC to your tv with the device, playing steam games through the box on the tv. Also towerfall is really fun, they should try it out. /end rant

#2 Edited by crusader8463 (14422 posts) -

It's terrible for any amount of money. If I wanted to play android games I could buy a great smartphone for the price of this thing and not have it crash and screw up constantly.

#3 Posted by falserelic (5437 posts) -

Not alot of the games seems interesting, and to most people it doesn't seem like its worth it.

#4 Posted by psylah (2177 posts) -

The hardware is garbage.

The controller is garbage.

The games are garbage.

If you want to play games for 100 bucks, buy a used DS lite.

#5 Posted by smileyforall220 (31 posts) -

Ah, so mostly hyperbole then. I assume none of you guys ha e played it? The co triller isn't garbage, it feels fine. I'm assuming you guys wrote off every launch console when it didnt have great games out at the start?

#6 Posted by Mister_V (1286 posts) -

I just don't know who the Ouya is for. Where is this mythical group of people who want to play phone games on the TV with a controller? And with MS and Sony going hard after indy developers I wonder how many of the announced games for the Ouya with actually come out.

#7 Posted by EarlessShrimp (1639 posts) -

Ah, so mostly hyperbole then. I assume none of you guys ha e played it? The co triller isn't garbage, it feels fine. I'm assuming you guys wrote off every launch console when it didnt have great games out at the start?

well generally it sounds like the.. uh, co triller? feels cheaply made, and considering they sell extra controllers at 50 bucks a pop, that's no small beans for a co triller. If you take that into account the ouya itself should only cost 40 dollars to make. So, why would the console be less to manufacture than the co triller?

HOWEVER: I smell trolling in our midst and will summate with this statement: you're hyperbole. I win.

#8 Posted by smileyforall220 (31 posts) -

The ouya is targeted towards people who want to stream 1080p to their tv like a streaming box, as well as the ability to play games. Indie games are the target developer since its an open platform to develop for.

#9 Edited by Wuddel (2092 posts) -

Hate .. that's just the internet man. People hate everything even if it affects them in any way. Example:

@psylah said:
If you want to play games for 100 bucks, buy a used DS lite.

Japanese games are garbage IMHO.

In seriousness though: I own an OUYA. The controller is not fine. I bought it because its kinda hackable (turns out not really, locked bootloader etc.). It's aimed solely at these people. The Linux users under the gamers essentially. The communication is though that's for everyone. I am not sure about that.

#10 Edited by mrfluke (5158 posts) -

It's terrible for any amount of money. If I wanted to play android games I could buy a great smartphone for the price of this thing and not have it crash and screw up constantly.

#11 Posted by MideonNViscera (2257 posts) -

It's a stupid idea from the get-go.

#12 Posted by JasonR86 (9710 posts) -

lol

#13 Posted by smileyforall220 (31 posts) -

@mrfluke: I wasn't aware an android phone streams 1080p video feed to your tv, and lets you stream steam big picture mode through it to play on tv at 1080p. Also not surprised your subsidized android phone costs the same. And no trolling, on phone so autocorrect fun.

#14 Posted by falserelic (5437 posts) -

@smileyforall220 said:

Ah, so mostly hyperbole then. I assume none of you guys ha e played it? The co triller isn't garbage, it feels fine. I'm assuming you guys wrote off every launch console when it didnt have great games out at the start?

well generally it sounds like the.. uh, co triller? feels cheaply made, and considering they sell extra controllers at 50 bucks a pop, that's no small beans for a co triller. If you take that into account the ouya itself should only cost 40 dollars to make. So, why would the console be less to manufacture than the co triller?

HOWEVER: I smell trolling in our midst and will summate with this statement: you're hyperbole. I win.

LOL! the con triller is a fitting name for the ouya's source of controls, it just con trills..

#15 Posted by JouselDelka (967 posts) -

You can stream just about 1:1 PC to your tv with the device, playing steam games through the box on the tv.

I'm indifferent towards the Ouya but, um, why do I need a $100 box to play my PC games on a TV? I'm sure you're aware of HDMI cables..

#16 Posted by EveretteScott (1489 posts) -

@mrfluke: I wasn't aware an android phone streams 1080p video feed to your tv, and lets you stream steam big picture mode through it to play on tv at 1080p. Also not surprised your subsidized android phone costs the same. And no trolling, on phone so autocorrect fun.

You seem obsessed with 1080p.

#17 Edited by alwaysbebombing (1588 posts) -
#18 Posted by RedCream (705 posts) -

Criticizing isn't hating.

#19 Posted by Scampbell (498 posts) -

It's terrible for any amount of money. If I wanted to play android games I could buy a great smartphone for the price of this thing and not have it crash and screw up constantly.

I don't know about you, but I kinda think playing on a phone sucks 99% of the time. Yes, the Ouya controller should be better than it is, but I would still rather play a platformer on the Ouya with its native controller than on any phone or tablet. I'm also curious how you would connect a random smartphone to a TV.

#20 Posted by rebgav (1429 posts) -

The Ouya is a "game console" for nostalgic pirates and people who love phone games (so just pirates then.)

A system that can play roms and stream video?! It's like the future of theft, today!!!

#21 Edited by TyCobb (1972 posts) -

@scampbell said:

@crusader8463 said:

It's terrible for any amount of money. If I wanted to play android games I could buy a great smartphone for the price of this thing and not have it crash and screw up constantly.

I don't know about you, but I kinda think playing on a phone sucks 99% of the time. Yes, the Ouya controller should be better than it is, but I would still rather play a platformer on the Ouya with its native controller than on any phone or tablet. I'm also curious how you would connect a random smartphone to a TV.

I don't know about you, but I think 99% of phone games suck. =)

To your question about hooking up phones to TVs, here's the cable that would work for my phone. I never used it, but I guess it depends on what kind of phone you have of course.

EDIT: here's the HDMI version of the cable: http://www.htcdepot.com/smartphone-experts-hdmi-cable/5A205A7426.htm

#22 Posted by The_Laughing_Man (13629 posts) -

I think it started with the Kickstarter. Wasnt it for a wile after it got funded it got oddly quiet? Like they did not even have a website for the longest time?

Then people where waiting for this magical emulator machine and got this little box with a cheap feeling controller and severely limited launch games.

#23 Edited by FMinus (394 posts) -

The ouya is targeted towards people who want to stream 1080p to their tv like a streaming box, as well as the ability to play games. Indie games are the target developer since its an open platform to develop for.

Meh, my TV from 2009 already supports all that, as for gaming (lol), I don't think android games qualify as that, there are exceptions but the majority is hot garbage not worth 5 cents.

#24 Posted by Wuddel (2092 posts) -
#25 Edited by MariachiMacabre (7096 posts) -

It doesn't do what it's supposed to do very well.

#26 Posted by tourgen (4501 posts) -

@smileyforall220: java/android sucks for games. There I said it. Too much abstraction from the hardware with far too little gained for the cost. Great, so you get a ready-made library of phone games. But they were built for phones with a completely different input device so they provide a bad experience on a TV.

Overall just a misguided cash grab.

#27 Edited by cloudymusic (1118 posts) -

It's a subpar piece of hardware that leaned on the "open and hackable" angle hard enough in its sales pitch that lots of people decided to buy in just to stick it to the man.

Maybe someday there'll be a really cool CFW for it, but that day is not today, and you're still pretty much required to use a third-party controller to get any sort of a decent experience.

#28 Posted by CornBREDX (5303 posts) -

Because they got money through kickstarter.

This thing would be ignored otherwise.

I do think Ouya has potential to be interesting, but they have a little bit before they get there.

#29 Posted by thatdutchguy (1273 posts) -

Oh my ..

#30 Edited by Itwongo (1198 posts) -

I messed with one this last weekend. It was pretty bad. That controller is awful, and yeah, lots and lots of phone game ports. There was this one game that was pretty good, but I don't remember what it was called.

If someone was looking to buy a console on the cheap, I'd recommend that $199 Xbox 360 they announced.

#31 Posted by iAmJohn (6120 posts) -

I'll be the guy with the unpopular opinion and say that the resoundingly negative reaction to the Ouya is entirely the fault of its backers and supporters. The device has always been something more akin to the GP2X or the Pandora - an incredibly niche gaming system for people who mostly like to tinker and experiment with Linux and open source development or play emulators. I don't know if it's worthwhile as that, but it's certainly a fine thing to aspire to. But instead, all the crazy supporters bought into this pathetic narrative Ouya was peddling about "upending the traditional game market." Suddenly this very limited device became a focal point for people's anti-AAA games sentiments, and the actual capabilities and limitations of the device got buried under the rallying cry of "an indie gaming device for true gamers sick of the tyranny of EA and Ubisoft."

And look what happened: it didn't live up to those completely unrealistic expectations, and now those same people are attempting to change the narrative into "you expected too much from this cheap device" when they are the entire reason those expectations existed in the first place. You killed the Ouya by making it the Great White Hope to overthrow Sony, Microsoft and Nintendo. You did this.

#32 Edited by Scampbell (498 posts) -

@tycobb said:

@scampbell said:

@crusader8463 said:

It's terrible for any amount of money. If I wanted to play android games I could buy a great smartphone for the price of this thing and not have it crash and screw up constantly.

I don't know about you, but I kinda think playing on a phone sucks 99% of the time. Yes, the Ouya controller should be better than it is, but I would still rather play a platformer on the Ouya with its native controller than on any phone or tablet. I'm also curious how you would connect a random smartphone to a TV.

I don't know about you, but I think 99% of phone games suck. =)

To your question about hooking up phones to TVs, here's the cable that would work for my phone. I never used it, but I guess it depends on what kind of phone you have of course.

EDIT: here's the HDMI version of the cable: http://www.htcdepot.com/smartphone-experts-hdmi-cable/5A205A7426.htm

I didn't say it wasn't possible, so yes, theoretically you could buy a cheap smartphone and a Bluetooth controller and connect it with a cable like that to a big screen. But that still doesn't make it a console, as the games would still be made for a phone. Yes, phone games (mostly) sucks, but I Kinda think that has to do with the fact it is a phone game. The very Idea was to enable console games on an android platform, and when I say console games I'm not talking about graphics, but the fact that a developer can expect the buyer to have certain things like a big screen, a fully featured controller (however flawed) and can know exactly what hardware is available.

#33 Posted by Sooty (8082 posts) -

because it's a piece of shit and I find it hilarious some people on here actually thought it was going to be good, way to get mislead by a well made Kickstarter.

#34 Posted by Glottery (1279 posts) -

I personally recall reading, that some people somehow expected it to be about as powerful (or as powerful as you can call 'em now) as PS3 & 360 or something along those lines. I was just as baffled as @mister_v seems to be, even more now after hearing the Bomb Crew's talk in the latest podcast. But eh, to each their own and so...

#35 Edited by Scampbell (498 posts) -

@iamjohn said:

I'll be the guy with the unpopular opinion and say that the resoundingly negative reaction to the Ouya is entirely the fault of its backers and supporters. The device has always been something more akin to the GP2X or the Pandora - an incredibly niche gaming system for people who mostly like to tinker and experiment with Linux and open source development or play emulators. I don't know if it's worthwhile as that, but it's certainly a fine thing to aspire to. But instead, all the crazy supporters bought into this pathetic narrative Ouya was peddling about "upending the traditional game market." Suddenly this very limited device became a focal point for people's anti-AAA games sentiments, and the actual capabilities and limitations of the device got buried under the rallying cry of "an indie gaming device for true gamers sick of the tyranny of EA and Ubisoft."

And look what happened: it didn't live up to those completely unrealistic expectations, and now those same people are attempting to change the narrative into "you expected too much from this cheap device" when they are the entire reason those expectations existed in the first place. You killed the Ouya by making it the Great White Hope to overthrow Sony, Microsoft and Nintendo. You did this.

Wait what?

Do you really think the backers expected to overthrow Sony, Microsoft and Nintendo as the Leader on the console market? I kinda think if this absurd idea ever truly existed, it would not be in the minds of the backers (which by the way primarily consisted of developers), but rather people who don't actually do any research before they go spouting their opinions. When you back something on Kickstarter you know what you are backing. The Ouya Team didn't say: "The Ouya will be an EXTREME GAMING MACHINE! NEXT GEN GRAPHICS! BUY IT NOW AND GET CALL OF DUTY: GHOST FREE!!!! WATCH OUT SONY! WATCH OUT MICROSOFT AND NINTENDO... JUST GO HOME!". (Well at least not quite as bad).

Maybe that was the subconscious message in their kickstarter, I don't know, maybe I'm just not getting the message. Besides it was never supposed to be your primary console, but rather have a supplementary role.

The impression I got was that they wanted to make a fairly inexpensive open android console and make it cheap and easy to develop for. And of course allow self-publishing. It would be a device well suited for emulating your favorite old games. A platform catering to small developers. Something to use for your favorite streaming service, all in a conveniently small box.

Also you seem to be of the impression that it is somehow dead, I don't know how well it is selling but apparently it was outselling the Xbox One in Canada, at least for a while. In any case I would at least wait a few month before declaring it dead.

I'm not a backer or owner, at least until they address the issues with the controller in some way. Whether by releasing a new one, or simple by making the controller optional, and lowering the price accordingly. My primary motivation for buying it, would be like a lot of people; emulation. Secondarily is the hope that it could lead to some great indie games as the support seems pretty good with people like Tim Schafer and Markus Persson supporting it. Lastly I see it is a way to promote Linux as a gaming platform in the future, as this is an area where Linux is obviously severely lacking.

I wouldn't be surprised if they had inspired Sony, as it seems their policies related to self-publishing are basically the same. At least the ideas behind it seems to have inspired if not Sony's policies they have certainly inspired companies like Nvidia, Google and now Samsung.

#36 Posted by Alekss (327 posts) -

were you hired by ouya?

#37 Posted by dkessler175 (84 posts) -

I'm interested to see how the emulators run. I would love to have snes games on my tv especially some of the games that can only be found for around $100 or so.

#38 Posted by Corvak (1077 posts) -

The shipping process is a disaster.

DHL may be huge in some parts of the world, but their canadian division has shown me nothing but incompetence.

An android system with a controller is a wonderful idea, however I think we would have been better served with hardware to act as an interface between a smartphone, a TV, and an existing USB controller.

#39 Posted by alwaysbebombing (1588 posts) -

Because it didn't deliver what it said it would. Not even close. I've held the controller and it feels like one of those cheap clone systems you can buy for $29.99 are your local connivance store.

#40 Posted by danm_999 (74 posts) -

device" when they are the entire reason those expectations existed in the first place. You killed the Ouya by making it the Great White Hope to overthrow Sony, Microsoft and Nintendo. You did this.

Wait what?

Do you really think the backers expected to overthrow Sony, Microsoft and Nintendo as the Leader on the console market? I kinda think if this absurd idea ever truly existed, it would not be in the minds of the backers (which by the way primarily consisted of developers), but rather people who don't actually do any research before they go spouting their opinions. When you back something on Kickstarter you know what you are backing. The Ouya Team didn't say: "The Ouya will be an EXTREME GAMING MACHINE! NEXT GEN GRAPHICS! BUY IT NOW AND GET CALL OF DUTY: GHOST FREE!!!! WATCH OUT SONY! WATCH OUT MICROSOFT AND NINTENDO... JUST GO HOME!". (Well at least not quite as bad).

Maybe that was the subconscious message in their kickstarter, I don't know, maybe I'm just not getting the message. Besides it was never supposed to be your primary console, but rather have a supplementary role.

Read the Kickstarter. I'll quote the relevant bits:

We love console games.

There's something about a big HD TV and digital surround sound that fills up a living room. Shooters, platformers, sports games, arcade classics and experimental indie games just feel bigger on a TV screen. It's how most of us grew up gaming.

But maybe people are missing out.

We get it – smartphones and tablets are getting all the new titles – they're "what's hot.” The console market is pushing developers away. We’ve seen a brain drain: some of the best, most creative gamemakers are focused on mobile and social games because those platforms are more developer-friendly. And the ones who remain focused on console games can’t be as creative as they’d like.

Deep down, you know your best gaming memories happened in the living room.

You busted your ass just to find out the princess was "in another castle." You fought bosses that told you repeatedly how much "you suck." You taped a blanket to half of your screen so your friend couldn't see where you were. You traded the best players onto your team just so you could have the perfect season. And you did it all on the TV.

It's time to upend console gaming

Let’s open this sucker up! It's time we brought back innovation, experimentation, and creativity to the big screen. Let’s make the games less expensive to make, and less expensive to buy. With all our technological advancements, shouldn't costs be going down? Gaming could be cheaper!

We're handing the reins over to the developer with only one condition: at least some gameplay has to be free. We borrowed the free-to-play model from games like League of Legends, Team Fortress 2, Triple Town, and many others. Developers can offer a free demo with a full-game upgrade, in-game items or powers, or ask you to subscribe.

OUYA: The revolution will be televised

OUYA is a new game console for the TV, powered by Android.

We've packed this little box full of power. Developers will have access to OUYA's open design so they can produce their games for the living room, taking advantage of everything the TV has to offer.

Best of all, OUYA's world-class controller, console, and interface come in one beautiful, inexpensive package. All the games on it will be free, at least to try.

Great games come from great developers.

Developers can wave farewell to the roadblocks of bringing a console game to market. Anyone can make a game: every OUYA console is a dev kit. No need to purchase a license or an expensive SDK. It's built on Android, so developers already know how it works.

That doesn't mean OUYA is an Android port. You can create the next big title in your bedroom – just like the good old days! Who needs pants!?

OUYA could change AAA game development, too. Forget about licensing fees, retail fees, and publishing fees.

The Ouya did not pitch itself as a "supplement" to existing consoles. Fuck, it talks about how it's going to "upend console gaming" and cause a "revolution" right in the fucking Kickstarter. It talks about how you're disaffected with consoles that are pushing developers away with stifling controls, license fees and ridiculous budgets. Then it talks about how it offers a "little box full of power" that's going to solve all these issues with wonderful open-ness and innovation with it's 'Stradivarius' of controllers!

Don't kid yourself, the Ouya was definitely marketed as an alternative to traditional consoles, not a supplement.

#41 Posted by Brackynews (4083 posts) -

It was the console people wanted, not the console they needed.

/batman

#42 Posted by LordAndrew (14426 posts) -

It tries to do things that some people simply have no interest in, and it sounds like it doesn't even do those things particularly well. It fails to stand out as a gaming console, a media center, and an Android device.

But at least it's cheap.

#43 Edited by medacris (660 posts) -

I don't have enough money for all the games I want on consoles I already own, so an Ouya's just not in the budget for me. That, and I don't know where I stand on Android products, I've never tried one out.

But these are just my reasons, others may have other reasons for and against the Ouya.

#44 Edited by Crysack (317 posts) -

People are pissed off because, for whatever reason, they thought they were getting some powerful, hyper-moddable/hackable super console when all it is, and ever has been in reality, is an android phone in a box.

#45 Edited by Corvak (1077 posts) -

I predicted this back during the campaign itself. I didn't give them $100 because they were going to "upend console gaming" or compete with Xbox and Playstation.

Android phones don't support USB or HDMI, and they don't work out of the box with an Xbox 360 controller. If devices to do so exist, I am certain that with shipping, they'd cost more than $100.

So yeah. I just wanted a phone in a box.

#46 Posted by Cameron (600 posts) -

They over-promised and under-delivered, that's all. It's not a great gaming console, it doesn't have a good controller, and the interface isn't great. It's probably not terrible, but that's not good enough to compete against an Apple TV, Roku, Xbox 360, PS3, etc., especially not when most people already own one, or several, of those.

If the thing takes off and XBMC gets really good on it I'll probably get one to replace my Boxee Box. I have no interest in playing poorly ported Android games on my TV, not even if they were free. I think they'd be better off selling an additional SKU for $50-$75 without a controller.