Why We Should Remain Skeptical of the Ouya Android Console 184
An anonymous reader writes "We recently talked about the 'Ouya' console — a conceptual Android-based gaming device that's had a massively successful Kickstarter campaign. While most people are excited about such a non-traditional console, editorials at 1Up and Eurogamer have expressed some more realistic skepticism about the claims being made and the company's ability to meet those claims. Quoting: 'Even if we set aside the issue of install base, one of Ouya's selling points could make developers wary of investing in it. Through the pitch video and on the Kickstarter page, Ouya emphasizes the ability to root the system and hack it without fear of voiding the warranty. With a standard USB port and Bluetooth support, it will be possible to use controllers and peripherals with it other than the one it comes with. What this also opens the door for is piracy and emulation. No doubt a chunk of the audience interested in Ouya are those intrigued by the idea of having a box that hooks up to a TV and can run Super Nintendo or Genesis emulators. Others will look at the system's open nature as an invitation to play its games for free; if it's as open as advertised, it should not be difficult to obtain and run illegally downloaded copies of Ouya games.' Ouya CEO Julia Uhrman has responded to the skepticism, saying, 'Ouya will be just as secure as any other Android-powered device. In fact, because all the paid content will require authentication with Ouya's servers, we have an added layer of security. Hacking and openness are about getting what you want to do with the hardware. Rooting the device won't give you any more access to the software.'"
Re:Their volume is too low to buy the CPU! (Score:2, Informative)
Uh, show me a distie that carries the Tegra 3 with a suitable MOQ. Hell, a quick search of the major disties doesn't show a single one that carries the Tegra 3 in any volume.
Even if you could get then in low volume somehow you can't even get the necessary specs and design documents except from the manufacturer directly, which means you have to have their approval and sign the required NDAs to even begin to design it in.
Re:Kickstarter is such a stupid idea (Score:5, Informative)
Zioneyez used Kickstarter to steal $350,000 and delivered nothing [dailydot.com]
When people complained, Kickstarter said "no refunds" [engadget.com]
If it sounds too good to be true, it is too good to be true. Problem is word is not getting out about all the scams on Kickstarter. All we hear are the successes, so people think everything on Kickstarter is legitimate when it's not, there are plenty of scams on Kickstarter.
How many stories did Slashdot run on ZionEyez? Answer: One, [slashdot.org] and even then the story was "Has this failed?" rather than "Kickstarter project stole $350,000"
How many stories did Slashdot run on Disapora? Answer: At least seven, [slashdot.org] even though Diaspora never met it's Summer 2010 deadline and many would argue it never achieved what was promised despite receiving $190,000 more than their goal [kickstarter.com]
Is everything on Kickstarter a scam? Of course not, but Kickstarter promises nothing on any project, they just give the information. In that regard it's a lot like Craigslist. Craigslist doesn't guarantee the guy you hired for roofing is going to do a good job. Difference is Kickstarter is presenting the information like it's legitimate, and I think that's where the problem is, why people are offering millions of dollars on projects that are obvious scams, because they believe Kickstarter has somehow verified these people when they're really no different than the guy offering to wash your windshield for a buck.
Re:Kickstarter is such a stupid idea (Score:5, Informative)
I've never understood why people fund projects where the outcome is the establishment of some proprietary asset
Okay. I'm part owner in a tabletop gaming company.
We recently kickstarted one of our properties (quite successfully I might add, since our backers completely refunded the project in the last 24 hours of the campaign).
Had we not kicked it, this property would have been put into our normal production pipeline and been out sometime next year (if it didn't get bumped by funding needs for one of our "core" properties).
Our Kickstarter success means it goes into production NOW. It means that this is a game that people find interested and want to play now.
You can play the basic game for free already. The Kickstarter allowed us to fully fund production costs and bring in a couple of valuable properties as add-ons/expansions.
All our backers will be given access to the final form of the downloadable game rules and pieces. But over 97% of our nearly 600 backers opted for higher tiers of support where they get a full copy of the game and some of the premium Kickstarter exclusive one-offs. A huge swath of them also spent out for the add-on/expansions in excess of their basic contribution.
Do they "own" the company that built it?
No.
But they're getting a copy of a game they REALLY like and they're getting it THIS YEAR instead of "maybe next year...ish". And, because they're getting it this year, they're paying for this year's production costs (and kickstarters are getting a bit of a discount off the final on-box price) and not next year's (higher) costs.
This form of funding allows my company to be more agile in our releases and allows our customers to say "I want this NOW! Shut up and take my money!" instead of going "Man! Wish it was coming out now and not NEXT year!"
Does that mean we're going to kickstart everything in our product line? Nah. That's why we have our traditional funding model. But this is an additional avenue to allow us to do MORE.