

Nvidia plans a Tegra 4-based portable gaming device - tnorthcutt
http://www.pcworld.com/article/2023841/nvidia-plans-a-tegra-4-based-portable-gaming-device.html

======
AndrewDucker
The best thing about this is that it will increase the number of Android
games, meaning that all Android consoles gain. This means that the Ouya will
be helped by this too.

I'm vaguely hopeful that if we can get people used to the idea of Android
gaming then you'll see someone like Sony announced that they have an Android
compatibility layer so that you can play Android games on the PS4. I shan't
hold my breath though.

------
hospadam
First things first - this device looks great. I'm willing to set aside the big
unanswered questions (price, how are they selling it, who makes it, when will
it be available) - but one big lingering question remains: games.

I know that this runs Android... so existing market games will run on it. But
just like the Ouya, games are going to need some special development to work
with this game pad so they have a worthwhile experience.

Typically, when a gaming system launches... they trot out all the big
developers who have committed to building a AAA title for launch day. If they
manage to get several big must-have games - awesome! If not, it could be a
tough sell.

Don't get me wrong - I love this and the Ouya... I think android-based game
consoles are great and I hope they're the future...

~~~
roc
It's my understanding there's already a "tegra" store for Android games. And
it basically _is_ the market for 'console-quality' Android gaming.

So they've seemingly got a leg up in developer interest and would have an
existing library to leverage.

~~~
fusiongyro
It's kind of an interesting thing. The Tegra store isn't a separate store.
It's sort of a searchable link warehouse that sends you on to the Play store
to do the actual buying. They even throw up an info screen about this the
first time you launch it.

------
mstefanko
Such a strange twist to everything. While everyone was already second guessing
their ouya backing. Nvidia essentially releases a much better device months
before the ouya is due out. The major complaint of everyone buying the ouya is
there was no screen. Not sure why people are saying this will fail. Ouya
raised 8.5 million for a non portable version of this with a worse controller.
I think initially this will help out everyone, including android in general,
and the ouya. The only thing that would kill this is a high price tag which
i'm at this point kind of expecting. 199 or 169 the retail 3ds prices are a
bit high imo. The $99 price is what sold the ouya. I'm pretty curious where
this will fall in the market.

~~~
mtgx
I've tried to warn OUYA countless times that if they're going to launch in
2013, they're going to need a 2013 chip, not a 2011 one (Tegra 3 was initially
launched in 2011, and was also delayed a bit). They're probably going to lose
points in reviews because of it, and everyone will be overall less excited
about it having significantly less graphics quality and performance than the
latest high-end (granted, more expensive) smartphones.

I thought Tegra 4 or something in that rage, was a MUST for OUYA. But they
didn't listen, either because it was impossible to make the switch at that
point, or they couldn't get a good Tegra 4 deal, or they just didn't think it
was that important. But I hope they at least expected that this is going to
hurt them at least a bit, and they might need a change of strategy.

I think OUYA could still succeed if instead of targeting it against Nvidia's
Shield, and towards more "hardcore" gamers, they target it more as sort of a
"toy", like something they could sell at Toy R Us on the cheap, and for sub
12-14 year old kids. Another strategy is of course promoting it heavily as a
cheap media device, kind of like an Apple TV or Roku alternative.

There's still a way for them out of this, if they do it right, but personally
I'm still disappointed it's not coming out with a Tegra 4 chip or something
cutting edge like that. Hopefully OUYA 2.0, if launched in 2014, will have
Tegra 5 or some other cutting edge 64 bit SoC with support for OpenGL ES 3.0
and OpenCL. This is the sort of stuff that gets "gamers" excited, and they've
kind of ignored that. But again, it might not be a huge problem for them, if
they refocus on a slightly different market.

And I agree that OUYA, Shield and other such devices will basically help each
other, and Android gaming in general.

~~~
martythemaniak
I don't feel bad about backing the OUYA at all to be honest. Even without
pushing boundaries, you can imagine how hard it is for a small team to ship
their first device - they have to get a number of things right - controller
design, casing, UI, app store etc. Once they get the basic right, it'd be much
more straightforward to upgrade the internals.

The nice thing about OUYA is that they aren't bound to the traditional console
pricing nonsense - launch a loss-leader, then sell crummy old hardware for a
decade to make a profit. They can iterate every year and make some profit both
from the hardware and the app store.

~~~
mstefanko
I give credit to their team, I can hardly imagine how hard it is to reach
goals and deliver a hardware product while driving a martetplace and
partnerships to deliver content to your new device.

That being said, I think you're making too many assumptions before it exists.
Hardware is expensive, I have no idea how much profit they make per device, or
if all the seed money from kickstarter is completely gone. But I know that
their future depends on several things. Aside from future sales being a must.
In order to iterate, they need to get a lot right -- now. I don't think Ouya
is that much more free than any other piece of hardware. They will not be able
to iterate that fast, fix bugs that fast, push updates that fast, or sell
consoles every year, easily. There's always hope that a random assortmant of
people will hack it to the point it's constantly relevant, or that the games
that end up getting launched on their marketplace all hit a home run. But it's
completely unclear to me at this point. In the age of crowd-funding, a funny
thing happens. Backers are already invested in products before they are even
created. Speaking much further than just monetarily. There's a fake sense of
success and security even knowing that projects can and will fail. Ouya's
massive funding only proved the idea, not the implementation.

That being said, when it's finally here, it still has to get people excited.
People will still have to want it when it arrives, and when they plug it in,
it still has to essentially be awesome. Right now, its too much speculation,
if you pick up the real thing and say -- hey, aside from the shit controller,
and the lack of power, i still love it. Than, that will mean something
significant. As it stands now, Ouya is kind of floating aimlessly in the
market, they got too big too fast, haven't really carved out a dedicated chunk
of the market. And is already falling far behind as far as the technology
used. It falls between a media device and a toy, but in kind of a bad way. If
I wanted a media device, i'd buy a roku or build one. If I wanted an android
based gaming system in 2013, as of right now, i'd probably end up with a
shield. I think that says something. I think the ouya will be a nice little
device for sometime, but i'm having a lot of doubts about it's future and it's
ability to grow in the competitive and expensive space they opted to jump
into.

Ouya, on launch day, will not be able to handle the newest games on the
android market. That is a significant issue, one crowd-funded projects are
going to have to solve or abandon in the next few years.

------
snogglethorpe
The term "portable" is really pushing it... this thing is _huge_ (and kinda
clunky).

I'm sure it's a nice gaming platform (real controller, big screen, powerful
graphics, etc), but I can't imagine many people with one of these things on
the subway, or really anyplace else except at home. It's way too big to just
slip into your bag and carry around with you.

One of the big reasons the Nintendo GB beat out its competitors for so long
was that it was _really_ portable, really tough, and fairly cheap. Even the
larger PSP is quite portable.

I assume they've done some market research to gauge acceptance, but ... I'm
slightly mystified as to the market. Maybe as a home gaming device for kids in
their room, and others in a post-TV culture (lots of people I know just "watch
TV" on their laptop)?

------
dexter313
Looks silly to me, like an oversized controller with a mini tablet stuck on
top. I don't see how that is portable, unless "portable" doesn't mean you can
put it into a pocket anymore.

I guess it's a nice prototype but this won't make it to the shelves in this
form.

~~~
potatolicious
> _"I don't see how that is portable, unless "portable" doesn't mean you can
> put it into a pocket anymore."_

Portable gaming has never had pocketability as a core requirement. The
original Game Boy was _way_ too big for pockets, as is the PSP, and to a
lesser extent the Nintendo DS. The closest we really got was the Game Boy
Pocket.

Portable gaming has always been about devices that you can whip out during a
plane ride, bus ride, train ride, or in a waiting room without it being
unwieldy and awkward - this seems to fit that bill. The 5-10h battery life
also helps considerably.

~~~
cube13
Form factor is still important, though. The handgrips can catch on stuff in a
bag, which is an annoyance.

Compared to a tablet, phone, or any of the current portable systems, it's a
lot thicker, too. That can make it a bit unwieldy to keep in a bag.

~~~
potatolicious
You're right, but it's also why I think Nvidia's idea can work.

This product is not competing with tablets and phones - that market has been
lost long, long ago. After the rise of smartphones Nintendo's entire portable
market vanished very quickly. Casual gamers are no longer interested in
carrying around (and paying for) a purpose-built gaming device. When you want
to blow away 15 minutes on the bus you won't ever pick a Nintendo DS or PSP
over your phone or tablet.

The remaining bit of the mobile gaming space is strictly hardcore, and that's
currently underserved - there are a substantial number of gamers who want a
mobile device that can actually play console-class games. The only player in
this space right now is the PSP, and the execution on that device is poor
enough to warrant new competition in the space.

A device with great battery life (good enough for a plane ride), a solid
selection of games, and most importantly, a solid modern software platform
(read: Steam-like), would do well. The only portability requirements here are
"fits in your bag".

------
roc
If they can make Airplay-style beaming of android games to living-room screens
performant-enough for twitch gaming, that's a much bigger deal than the
portable device itself.

------
thefreeman
> The device can also play PC games through the Steam streaming service by
> taking advantage of Nvidia's Grid,

This sounds pretty cool. I am curious as to how they are able to run steam
games? Is this talking about the beta linux steam client? Or are they
referring to steam games which would specifically be built for their Nvidia
Grid architecture?

~~~
bane
I believe the games run on remote hardware and are streamed to the device.

~~~
mtgx
Which to me makes a lot more sense, at least right now, and until we put the
whole world on fiber with very low latency. Then maybe the "cloud" game
streaming will make more sense.

------
r3demon
NVidia is creating just more hype around Tegra 4, very unlikely we see this
device in real life.

------
bitwize
GeForce Experience?

GFE?

I know there's this long-standing stereotype of gamers as lonesome, horny
males, but geez Louise.

------
jondiggsit
Ultimately, Valve will rule this console new-comer space with Steam's Big
Picture.

