A google game console codenamed "Yeti" could take on mainstream consoles

[Zodiark1593]

5 hours ago, porina said:

Did you buy a console in the 80's thinking you'll have retro fun with it in 2020? You gain most of the value early on. Anything after that is a bonus.

 

I got a Dreamcast at the time just for House of the Dead 2. Light guns for it only work on CRT TVs, so technology has already moved on to prevent me from using that. Rather than look back, I'm looking forwards. I have VR offering me what could only be dreamt of even a decade ago. I don't expect the current incarnation of VR to last forever either, but whatever will replace it will certainly be interesting.

Actually, I still use my PlayStation 2 pretty extensively. More so than anything modern. It's only bit of a pain to change the cables around to composite every time I want to play a PS1 game.

[Zodiark1593]

3 hours ago, AshleyAshes said:

I mean... That's literally how Sony and Microsoft got started.

 

Sony: "FUCK THOSE NINTENDO FUCKS!  They think they can snub our deal ON STAGE at E3 and announce a partnership with Phillips!?  You! Ken Kuturagi!  Strap this MIPS processor to a CD ROM drive and go kill Nintendo with it!"

 

Microsoft: "We don't just want to be on the desktop, we want to be in the living room.  We need some kind of Living room Box that runs DirectX.. A DirectX Box if you will.. X...Box... But we'll need billions of dollars to force our way into the market, where are we going to get billions of dollars!?  Wait, we HAVE billion's of dollars!  BWA HA HA HA! :D"

 

(Fun fact, Microsoft lost five BILLION dollars on the classic Xbox from 2001 and that was basically part of the PLAN just to get their toe in the door.)

Can we get a video re-enactment of the above please, especially with the Sony one?

[AshleyAshes]

Just now, Zodiark1593 said:

Can we get a video re-enactment of the above please, especially with the Sony one?

It should then cut to the Nintendo execs being 'Ha ha, what's the worst that Sony can do?  All they do is make microchips and CD players!  Lawlz!'

[Cheezdoodlez]

6 hours ago, porina said:

Did you buy a console in the 80's thinking you'll have retro fun with it in 2020? You gain most of the value early on. Anything after that is a bonus.

 

I got a Dreamcast at the time just for House of the Dead 2. Light guns for it only work on CRT TVs, so technology has already moved on to prevent me from using that. Rather than look back, I'm looking forwards. I have VR offering me what could only be dreamt of even a decade ago. I don't expect the current incarnation of VR to last forever either, but whatever will replace it will certainly be interesting.

Nothing really prevents you from playing HotD2 right now. Sega didn't replace your CRT TV by force. Thats the difference imo. With this product they can (and they will) pull the plug and you're left with a paper weight.

 

Sure I had no plan to keep my SNES, PS2, Gameboy, Wii, Switch, Xbox360 forever, but as long as the device don't fail I can keep it around forever. With this the longevity seems extremely limited at best. Planned obsolescence is a term that springs to mind.

[apm]

3 hours ago, noobadin said:

Until there's much better internet service I don't see cloud gaming becoming a thing. 

it doesnt really work that well even with good internet speed. 

i have 100mbit, tried ps now (sonys cloud gaming service) and had a very noticeable delay every time i tried it during the free trial.

you really cant play anything that requires fairly fast reactions.

[Gullerback]

so its basically a nvidia shield but not.    shield already does streaming/GF now well enough.

[Zodiark1593]

1 hour ago, valdyrgramr said:

In the words of James Hetfield, Macho Man Randy Savage, and the Koolaid Guy, "Ouya!"

I think the Raspberry Pi had/has far better potential as a tiny game console than the OUYA ever had. I kind of wish it had seen usage as a gaming console tbh. It's GPU also kills the OUYA.

[Ertman]

I think even if google pushed out a product, they would probably abandon it with a year or two.

[MetEishYa]

8 hours ago, apm said:

it doesnt really work that well even with good internet speed. 

i have 100mbit, tried ps now (sonys cloud gaming service) and had a very noticeable delay every time i tried it during the free trial.

you really cant play anything that requires fairly fast reactions.

On your side you have 100mbit but what connection are they using server side. The more people that start to use the service the more split there connetion is and if the dont continuiosly upgrade there connect, the latency and visual quality will start getting more worse over time.

 

By being high end internet base you have now segmented your-self from what i would guess to be 80%+ of the console market. Then the next big problem is cost if the device cost $100 the subscription fee must be less than $4 a month if games must still be purchased by user. ($400 Console - $100 for the streaming device / 72 months console life = $4.2). Anything more than that and you are better off just buying a console, this is even considering that you will never sell it the console or the monthly stream price of subscription not going up over time.

[MoonSpot]

1 hour ago, Ertman said:

I think even if google pushed out a product, they would probably abandon it with a year or two.

Good grief, I've lost count on how many times they've done that.  They're too fly-by-night for me to jump in bed with them anymore as a consumer.  Don't care to have anymore of their aborted tech babies left on my doorstep.

[LAwLz]

Didn't they already try making a gaming console? It was called the Nexus Player.

 

I like the idea of an Android powered gaming console. I think the problem is that when people hear "console" they think Xbone and PS4. If you think of it as a HTPC with a bunch of emulators for all your retro games, plus some simpler Android games then I think it's a great product that makes a lot of sense.

 

Not a fan of the rumored "game streaming" thing though. I get that it would be an easy way to get around the lack of games, but it's just such a poor solution for it. The Internet infrastructure is not there yet. Might work great in cities with Google Fiber, but that's a really small minority.

[michaelocarroll007]

On 2/11/2018 at 3:39 AM, RorzNZ said:

It will be good if its an extra, like the App Store on Apple TVs (I imagine its competing with that, following Apple's lead).

I don't think there is room for Google to enter the console space when Xbox, PS and Nitendo have a lot covered and have cemented themselves in the market. It will probably run an ARM processor which means most titles like CoD etc won't be able to run - which means pretty much its an Android box .

Its going to be streaming the games so ARM could run COD just like your i3 Ultrabook could aswell with geforce Now. 

 

I Actually subscribed for Onlive when it launched i thought it was The future. This was 7 Years ago now. Still just one of thoese things that feel like the future but not good enough today. Internet Needs to Be Blazing Fast otherwise input lag feels pretty bad. and even then it excludes so much. With gaming on the go with laptops and the switch whats the chances you have a 50Mbps 10ms ping wifi availible.  And then there college Dorms Hotels Ect all have not good enough Wifi.  What about the areas in the US where Internet is slow and has no shot of running this service. 

 

One Day i Still think this will be how we game. Just dont see it for a while. Geforce now im on the waiting list to see maybe i can game Not only at home with my desktop. But i havent tried it yet most other services the lag was just too much. Or the Compression of 1080p video is NO where near the quality of native 1080p in the past services. 

[TacoSenpai]

On 2/11/2018 at 10:59 AM, AshleyAshes said:

I mean... That's literally how Sony and Microsoft got started.

 

Sony: "FUCK THOSE NINTENDO FUCKS!  They think they can snub our deal ON STAGE at E3 and announce a partnership with Phillips!?  You! Ken Kuturagi!  Strap this MIPS processor to a CD ROM drive and go kill Nintendo with it!"

 

Microsoft: "We don't just want to be on the desktop, we want to be in the living room.  We need some kind of Living room Box that runs DirectX.. A DirectX Box if you will.. X...Box... But we'll need billions of dollars to force our way into the market, where are we going to get billions of dollars!?  Wait, we HAVE billion's of dollars!  BWA HA HA HA! :D"

 

(Fun fact, Microsoft lost five BILLION dollars on the classic Xbox from 2001 and that was basically part of the PLAN just to get their toe in the door.)

Another fun fact the only time the Xbox brand has actually profited was in November in the year Halo 2 was released.  Since then its always operated at a net loss.  Xbox is more or less a thing Microsoft does to be part of the "in and cool kids" crowd to show it does more than just office stuff and OS.  Needless to say they've expanded into VR, surface pros/tablets and cloud services with Azure so I don't know if they will continue much longer after the final Halo game is released (Halo 6 presuming it is the final).

 

Sony was at a point, back when the PS4 initially released completely reliant as a company on PS4s profits to stay afloat.  They've gotten better now so I don't know how thats changed.

 

Nintendo does just gaming and consoles so without that they are sunk.  In a sense its their biggest advantage and disadvantage on one hand they have in house first party titles and brand name recognition with the industry as a whole.  On the other if something happens to make consoles irrelevant then they are in trouble.  I believe their design of the Switch as a portable hybrid figured this in as part of their long term calculus.

[Master Disaster]

8 hours ago, LAwLz said:

Didn't they already try making a gaming console? It was called the Nexus Player.

 

I like the idea of an Android powered gaming console. I think the problem is that when people hear "console" they think Xbone and PS4. If you think of it as a HTPC with a bunch of emulators for all your retro games, plus some simpler Android games then I think it's a great product that makes a lot of sense.

 

Not a fan of the rumored "game streaming" thing though. I get that it would be an easy way to get around the lack of games, but it's just such a poor solution for it. The Internet infrastructure is not there yet. Might work great in cities with Google Fiber, but that's a really small minority.

Let's be fair, when the article headline states they plan on taking on the "mainstream consoles" people are within their rights to think of Microsoft, Sony & Nintendo. 

 

I've got a shield TV, it's an incredible gaming device that I play on a lot but would I call it mainstream? Hell no.

 

What Google are suggesting is another Ouya and despite what they say it will never be a mainstream competitor.

[Guest]

4 hours ago, michaelocarroll007 said:

Its going to be streaming the games so ARM could run COD just like your i3 Ultrabook could aswell with geforce Now. 

 

I Actually subscribed for Onlive when it launched i thought it was The future. This was 7 Years ago now. Still just one of thoese things that feel like the future but not good enough today. Internet Needs to Be Blazing Fast otherwise input lag feels pretty bad. and even then it excludes so much. With gaming on the go with laptops and the switch whats the chances you have a 50Mbps 10ms ping wifi availible.  And then there college Dorms Hotels Ect all have not good enough Wifi.  What about the areas in the US where Internet is slow and has no shot of running this service. 

 

One Day i Still think this will be how we game. Just dont see it for a while. Geforce now im on the waiting list to see maybe i can game Not only at home with my desktop. But i havent tried it yet most other services the lag was just too much. Or the Compression of 1080p video is NO where near the quality of native 1080p in the past services. 

The chances of 50mbps with 10ms ping in New Zealand are pretty slim. This will probably only work in select countries.

[Eaglerino]

Going to wind up being another Ouya

[Drak3]

13 hours ago, LAwLz said:

Didn't they already try making a gaming console? It was called the Nexus Player.

No, the Nexus player was primarily aset top box, similar to the Apple TV. While box can run games (controllers are available for the Apple TV), neither were made with that being the main intent and are kinda underpowered for more than retro gaming and Mobile titles with controller support.

[GoldenLag]

On 2/11/2018 at 6:08 PM, AshleyAshes said:

And that was just the five billion dollars that Microsoft willingly lost on the Xbox Project just as part of their long term plans.  Then you have to factor in the Xbox 360 'Red Ring Of Death' which was NOT planned and cost about another billion.  Though RROD asside, the Xbox 360 was a big success in terms of getting Microsoft into your living room.

xbox 360 atm is a really nice CD player. well that what its doing for me atm. i can grab sooooo many cheap DVD`s on sale. not to mention Anime and such. I picked up three season of Rwby on DVD to play on my xbox.

 

If the new G-Box with its mascot G-man had a CD drive, and a Bluray drive im in (why not also add Dolby Atmos and so fourth) . Why not expandable storage through USB 3.1?

 

who am i kidding, that would just be too good wouldnt it. 

 

(please link if there actually is such a box i can pick up)