5 ms·

Could this enable more powerful, android based games consoles? I'm just imagining a console based on an i5 and one of today's epic NVIDIA/AMD chips, with dev's

Could this enable more powerful, android based games consoles? I'm just imagining a console based on an i5 and one of today's epic NVIDIA/AMD chips, with dev's already able to develop using the SDK/NDK, could be pretty amazing. (Web developer, not hardware or GFX guy here :D)

wmf 15y ago
If I was building a new console I think I'd just use straight Linux; what value does Android bring?
- nupark2 15y ago
  An application sandboxing/deployment/sales system, coupled with high-level application/platform APIs that are considerably more coherent than the gnome/kde/whole-universe-of-libraries C mess.
  - bryanlarsen 15y ago
    A console maker is going to bring their own deployment/sales system, and they're going to choose a single library stack. So no advantages there.
    - nupark2 15y ago
      An existing console maker. On the other hand, look at the Kindle Fire, and the rest of the Android ecosystem.
      - dtwwtd 15y ago
        I'd just like to point out that Amazon didn't use the Android Market for the Fire but used their own ecosystem (whether you want to argue that they built the Amazon app store for the purpose of putting it on their own devices is another story). So they didn't actually use the existing Android sales/distribution ecosystem.
      - ralfd 15y ago
        But the purpose of the Kindle Fire is to be part of the Amazon ecosystem.
      - ippisl 15y ago
        I don't understand why amazon didn't offer HDMI connection on the fire(and a separately sold cradle). They could have sold more units, have more prime users and get some control on the TV and the gaming market.
  - te_chris 15y ago
    That's what I was thinking too when I asked the question. With all the commodity hardware - controllers etc - around these days surely someone with motivation could build a ps3 equivalent around android, x86 and AMD/NVIDIA chips. Build their own app store etc for their games (or not, they would just kill any phone :P). It's a really exciting and intriguing concept to me - disrupting console gaming.
georgemcbay 15y ago
It could, if someone were willing to build it. The harder part would be getting developers on board to write games that actually take advantage of it. Most current Android games are heavily tied to touchscreen input, and thus wouldn't map well to the traditional console experience. On the plus side, developers who have already sunk costs into developing Android paths for their rendering engines would at least get a lot of code reuse out of that. FWIW, Android on x86 isn't wholly new even in the retail device space, the current Google TV devices like Sony's $200 Bluray player with Google TV, their full TV device and the Logitech Revue are all sporting Atom chips (so... less powerful than an i5 but still x86) and other than the Logitech Revue these devices are all up to Honeycomb now. Google TV 2.0 on those Sony devices is actually quite nice and will likely get even better with ICS+. I hope they stick with it and get past all the bad press that came out of 1.0 and Logitech's vocally negative experiences with it.
nextparadigms 15y ago
I'd rather they stick with high-end ARM chips for that, so they ensure cross compatibility between Android devices. Like a game on a Tegra 3 "console" should work on a Tegra 3 tablet, too, and vice-versa. I don't want an Nvidia 580 GTX Android game, that would have no hope of working on Tegra 3 on the tablet. High-end ARM graphics look good enough for most people now. I also think it's a better strategy for Android to "flood" the console market with cheap $100-$150 ARM consoles, than $500 Intel/Nvidia ones. People would still prefer PS3/Xbox 360 over that.

wmf 15y ago

If I was building a new console I think I'd just use straight Linux; what value does Android bring?

nupark2 15y ago
An application sandboxing/deployment/sales system, coupled with high-level application/platform APIs that are considerably more coherent than the gnome/kde/whole-universe-of-libraries C mess.
- bryanlarsen 15y ago
  A console maker is going to bring their own deployment/sales system, and they're going to choose a single library stack. So no advantages there.
  - nupark2 15y ago
    An existing console maker. On the other hand, look at the Kindle Fire, and the rest of the Android ecosystem.
    - dtwwtd 15y ago
      I'd just like to point out that Amazon didn't use the Android Market for the Fire but used their own ecosystem (whether you want to argue that they built the Amazon app store for the purpose of putting it on their own devices is another story). So they didn't actually use the existing Android sales/distribution ecosystem.
    - ralfd 15y ago
      But the purpose of the Kindle Fire is to be part of the Amazon ecosystem.
    - ippisl 15y ago
      I don't understand why amazon didn't offer HDMI connection on the fire(and a separately sold cradle). They could have sold more units, have more prime users and get some control on the TV and the gaming market.
- te_chris 15y ago
  That's what I was thinking too when I asked the question. With all the commodity hardware - controllers etc - around these days surely someone with motivation could build a ps3 equivalent around android, x86 and AMD/NVIDIA chips. Build their own app store etc for their games (or not, they would just kill any phone :P). It's a really exciting and intriguing concept to me - disrupting console gaming.

georgemcbay 15y ago

It could, if someone were willing to build it. The harder part would be getting developers on board to write games that actually take advantage of it. Most current Android games are heavily tied to touchscreen input, and thus wouldn't map well to the traditional console experience. On the plus side, developers who have already sunk costs into developing Android paths for their rendering engines would at least get a lot of code reuse out of that. FWIW, Android on x86 isn't wholly new even in the retail device space, the current Google TV devices like Sony's $200 Bluray player with Google TV, their full TV device and the Logitech Revue are all sporting Atom chips (so... less powerful than an i5 but still x86) and other than the Logitech Revue these devices are all up to Honeycomb now. Google TV 2.0 on those Sony devices is actually quite nice and will likely get even better with ICS+. I hope they stick with it and get past all the bad press that came out of 1.0 and Logitech's vocally negative experiences with it.

nextparadigms 15y ago

I'd rather they stick with high-end ARM chips for that, so they ensure cross compatibility between Android devices. Like a game on a Tegra 3 "console" should work on a Tegra 3 tablet, too, and vice-versa. I don't want an Nvidia 580 GTX Android game, that would have no hope of working on Tegra 3 on the tablet. High-end ARM graphics look good enough for most people now. I also think it's a better strategy for Android to "flood" the console market with cheap $100-$150 ARM consoles, than $500 Intel/Nvidia ones. People would still prefer PS3/Xbox 360 over that.