Jump to content

Talk:Ouya

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

i have some sources that would be (likely) suitable for article

[edit]

Oh and also some sources state that console is also built to be hacked and cost for 99 USD.

Here are:

Extended content
http://www.digitaltrends.com/gaming/digital-blend-the-android-powered-ouya-console-throws-a-gauntlet-down-for-the-big-three/

http://www.slashgear.com/ouya-android-device-will-be-a-99-game-streaming-box-05237385/

http://www.redmondpie.com/99-android-game-console-named-ouya-on-the-way-images/

http://www.gamasutra.com/view/news/173624/Open_and_inexpensive_Android_home_console_Ouya_detailed__report.php

http://gamepolitics.com/2012/07/05/report-tech-luminaries-backing-99-ouya-home-console

http://www.lifeofandroid.com/news_detail/announcing-ouya-the-affordable-android-app-games-console/

http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/2012-07-03-USD99-android-console-ouya-is-a-real-thing

http://www.digitaltrends.com/gaming/ouya-the-99-google-android-game-console-backed-by-ed-fries-the-man-behind-xbox/

http://www.geek.com/articles/games/ouya-a-99-android-games-console-2012074/

http://liliputing.com/2012/07/99-ouya-hackable-android-game-console-in-the-works.html

http://venturebeat.com/2012/07/04/99-dollar-android-game-console-ouya/

http://www.theverge.com/2012/7/2/3134004/ouya-a-99-hackable-android-game-console-designed-by-yves-behar

http://legalnews.findlaw.com/article/06x70b2eabfjj?q=Sony

http://dvice.com/archives/2012/07/ouya-is-a-100-a.php

http://www.psxextreme.com/ps4-news/47.html

--82.139.5.13 (talk) 12:47, 11 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

oh and also i've found pictures featuring Ouya's gamepad. look don't look at pictures of some people that are accidentally here. --82.139.5.13 (talk) 12:52, 11 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

DRM?

[edit]

Isn't it misleading to the average Wikipedia reader, to call it an "open-source video game console", as it currently says in the article? Yes, it uses open-source software, but the console itself doesn't seem to be 'open source'. Will it use an exclusive Ouya store? What DRM is involved? Most people hear "open-source" and think "OMG", but this console may be a DRM nightmare. Anyone have more information? --82.170.113.123 (talk) 16:57, 11 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I don't think it's misleading at all. DRM and Open Source are not mutually exclusive concepts. You can have an open source game that functions with DRM. Are you thinking of The Free Software Philosophy? 109.170.137.113 (talk) 00:55, 13 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Looks like someone changed it. It's better now, IMO. It now says: "[...] is an upcoming video game console built upon open-source technology running on the Android mobile operating system." --82.170.113.123 (talk) 17:55, 13 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Too early for Wiki page?

[edit]

Other kickstarter projects like Yogventures have had their wiki page removed because all the information is hype for an upcoming project that hasn't been made yet. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.110.20.135 (talk) 18:28, 13 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Multiple reliable sources have done multiple reports on it. It passes the notability test, easily, even if it ends up being vaporware. ♫ Melodia Chaconne ♫ (talk) 18:45, 13 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I was just going to say the same thing as Melodia: Even if it was cancelled today or something, the coverage and analysis being done by reliable sources would be more than enough for it to pass the WP:GNG. Sergecross73 msg me 20:20, 13 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]
See Category:Vaporware game consoles for all the video game consoles that were announced, but never made and yet still have articles. SilverserenC 21:06, 13 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Generation

[edit]

Is this console part of the eighth generation of gaming consoles? If so, what's the threshold for mentioning this on the eighth generation wiki page? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 174.20.104.32 (talk) 00:17, 14 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The threshold would be determined at the other article. Check out the ongoing discussion over at History of video game consoles (eighth_generation). -- ferret (talk) 00:19, 14 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Julie Uhrman Industry Veteran?

[edit]

I have noticed that Julie Uhrman is listed as a games industry 'veteran' and that the citation points to a digital marketing company web page. I don't believe this information is particularly reliable and would suggest a more reliable source be quoted or this information not be listed as it is not pertinent to the console itself. Julie Uhrman is noted as working for IGN previously and after searching IGN directly there is little information with regards to Julie Uhrman http://uk.ign.com/search?query=Julie+Uhrman. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Termin8tor (talk • contribs) 17:20, 29 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I see no problem with toning down that description. We could either introduce her with something more concrete and objective, like whatever her job title is or something. Or just introduce her as a name without any sort of descriptor. Or something else. Sergecross73 msg me 18:03, 29 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Maybe something with her relevant history? She was VP at Gamefly and General Manager/VP of Direct2Drive (ign's digital distribution division WAS Direct2Drive). http://arstechnica.com/gaming/2012/07/99-ouya-wants-to-bust-down-console-gamings-walled-gardens/ This is the best reference I could find for the Gamefly involvement right now. That link just says she was an exec at Gamefly. This link http://www.digitaltrends.com/gaming/ouya-game-console-smashes-kickstarter-records/ specifically mentions that she was the Gamefly VP, but I figured Ars is a better source. All this stuff used to be easily viewable on her Linkedin profile, but she's wiped that clean. --174.60.51.49 (talk) 04:26, 30 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]
If true, Gamefly VP seems relevent and objective. (Though, if true, I'm not really sure why we're challenging the "industry veteran" label to begin with. You'd have to know the industry pretty well to be a VP of a company like Gamefly...) Sergecross73 msg me 15:49, 30 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Ok, I looked around and found what appears to be a good source for the Gamefly job. http://www.insideview.com/directory/gamefly-inc That site still lists here as "VP, Digital". So I don't think she was vice president of the entire company, but specifically the digital distribution stuff. Even so, experience with mailing out discs isn't that relevant anyway; experience with top positions at digital distribution platforms really, really is. Something to note is that Direct2Drive, the other digital distribution platform she was VP of (and general manager) was actually absorbed by Gamefly in 2011. I don't remember when she stopped working for Gamefly, but perhaps that acquisition was how she got her position in the company. If we want more sources I can also dig up something for when she worked at Vivendi Games & Sierra. She's been in the industry for a while now. --174.60.51.49 (talk) 23:12, 30 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I don't know if I would call Uhrman a veteran in the gaming industry. I never heard of her until this new game console was announced. Majinsnake (talk) 20:09, 16 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Nor had I, but did you read the comments above? There's sources that show she was a Vice President of sorts at GameFly and IGN. You don't need to be as vocal as CliffyB or as present in the public eye as Shigeru Miyamoto to be considered an industry veteran... Sergecross73 msg me 20:24, 16 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Eighth Generation Console

[edit]

I have noticed that a few of the last edits were to add the Ouya to the eighth-gen category and in the infobox. The current consensus is that the Ouya would not be included at this time (not that it would never be, but just that it isn't right now). If you have anything to add either for or opposed to such an inclusion, please continue the discussion on the eighth-gen talk page: Talk:History_of_video_game_consoles_(eighth_generation). It may be useful to wait for more information to come out, news of a production run, hands-on reviews from third-party sites (such as IGN, Game Informer, or other major gaming sites), or similar, before pushing for inclusion. -Kai445 (talk) 23:41, 2 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Wrong Processor

[edit]

Thought that the OUYA was getting the Tegra3 Wayne Proessor - an ARM Cortex-A15 MPCore not an A9

Will return with the page but should be updated since the post-March 2013 launch date exists to get on the A15 MPCore bandwagon. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.71.30.192 (talk) 15:28, 9 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Julie Uhrmann confirmed in an interview they are using the Tegra 3 T33. Anyone who said codename Wayne is just wishfully thinking or spreading misinformation. Not to say they couldn't change their minds and use something more powerful as a surprise, but that would conflict with what their CEO directly said they were using and is entirely speculation. -Kai445 (talk) 16:20, 9 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Introductory Price

[edit]

Wouldn't it fit to mention $99 is the introductory price for KS, and then the introductory price for the rest of the future consumers, as stated on the ouya.tv site's pre-order page? $99 (KS) $109 (US) $119 (Int'l) ? 74.105.26.215 (talk) 00:29, 10 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The price is still $99. $10 is shipping. There's no reason to believe that it would be greater than $99 retail (brick and mortar, assuming they strike a deal with a big box or two...) -Kai445 (talk) 02:06, 10 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Is it against Wikipedia guidelines to have a section about how this is probably a scam?

[edit]

As evidenced by Ouya headquarters' address, listed on their homepage, being a rental mailbox behind a gas station, it seems more than a little likely that this either was a scam from the get-go or at least a project of someone who had no feasible plan to deliver the product (also notable through the developer consoles being supposedly 3 months from release and there still potentially being no engineers employed by the company). I mean, hey, you never know I suppose, but it seems worth considering whether Wikipedia should balance out the hype. 74.109.121.154 (talk) 23:47, 28 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

If this is just your personal discovery/theory, then no, it's not acceptable. However, if a reliable source, like IGN or GameSpot, did an article on it or something, then it could be worth mentioning to some degree. Sergecross73 msg me 23:52, 28 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Most of the anti-Ouya rumors are really silly.
  • Not listing their walk-up address is totally reasonable and normal, especially for a project that's guaranteed to generate such fan-boy enthusiasm and rage.
  • Rental mailboxes are entirely legitimate. They're preferable over Post-office boxes because they can receive deliveries from Fed-ex, UPS, etc, while post-office boxes only accept mail from the official postal system.
  • The company they got the rental mailbox from is an entirely legitimate business, in a good sized facility. ([1]) Why does it matter that the facility is next door to (not "behind") a gas station?
  • They "potentially" have no engineers? Sure, they "potentially" have dinosaurs on staff. We don't know. Why would we? They're not obligated to list their entire employee roster, and it would probably be a bad idea for them to do so. (Again, think of the fanboys, would you want them to have your real name?)
Now, I'm not trying to say that I can say with 100% certainty that Ouya will actually be delivered, or even that I can be sure it's not an intentional scam. But I can say that the people I've seen who think they have "evidence" of a scam are fooling themselves in a very child-like way. It would be a bad idea for Wikipedia to repeat those poorly thought through rumors as though they should carry any weight. APL (talk) 00:50, 29 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I know, if there was a legitimate concern for fraud, surely the story would be all over the internet, covered in reliable sources. I just wanted the IP to answer his/her own question. Sergecross73 msg me 02:46, 29 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Lets put this simply. If it is a case of you (original poster) thinking it may be fraud then it can't be included but if news agencies, major video game websites, suspicious investors wanting their money back etc suggesting that the Ouya is a fraud then it can be included.--70.49.83.129 (talk) 03:54, 5 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Why does there need to be a source showing it's a scam when there's nothing showing it ISN'T a scam beyond their word? The only 3rd party information anyone can find is just information parroted by the company itself. No distributors or partners have been able to show an iota of information beyond what is on their site. Kronchev (talk) 17:45, 18 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Because otherwise practically anything could be put on Wikipedia. JaeDyWolf ~ Baka-San (talk) 17:56, 18 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
In general, you need sources to back up any information that is challenged, per WP:BURDEN. With making such a wild claim without any sort of proof, pretty certain you're going to find opposition, and thus need a source. It's a pretty large jump from "there's no info from distributors" to "It's a scam". What if there's privacy agreements? What if progress is going poorly and they're just behind schedule? What if they have failed but intend on returning everyone's money somehow? There's all sorts of possible alternative that don't involve it being a scam, and as such, you can't make that claim without further sources. Sergecross73 msg me 18:06, 18 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Their partners are listed and sourced in the article. (Square Enix, for example.) But that doesn't really tell you anything interesting. A "Partner" would not necessarily have inside information.
Distributors? They're doing direct sales! They're not selling these at Best Buy.
(Maybe you meant "Suppliers", but their suppliers wouldn't have anything interesting to say either. Even if there were no NDAs, who would write a press release that says "Small start-up company used our catalog to order a small number of off-the-shelf microchips!") APL (talk) 22:38, 18 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Regardless, nobody is obligated to prove a negative. If there is any reason to believe that it is a scam at this stage, that claim must be substantiated. -Kai445 (talk) 03:48, 19 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I agree, there is not enough evidence at this point to show that this is a scam and if it later is shown to be one the article can be updated at that point. Wikipedia should not be leading the charge on this tough.--174.93.171.10 (talk) 22:02, 21 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

And today, is it a scam? Exist now any reliable Information? Erik--84.138.95.129 (talk) 11:00, 17 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

If it were to be confirmed to be a scam, you wouldn't have to ask to find out - it would be all over the internet. That sort of news would spread like wildfire... Sergecross73 msg me 13:37, 17 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
It is not a scam. I've already got mine. (I paid extra for the early developers' package.)
I'd offer to take a photo for the article, but the clear-cased developers' units are hard to photograph well. APL (talk) 19:45, 17 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

There's no need. There's no sources calling it a scam or claiming it to be. This talk section has gotten more attention that really necessary, and probably should have just been removed as trolling. -- ferret (talk) 19:48, 17 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I don't know that it counts as trolling. It was probably an honest question. "Ouya is a scam" was a popular internet meme right up until they actually started shipping units. APL (talk) 20:14, 17 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

RFC: Eighth Generation Consoles

[edit]

I'm looking for additional outside opinions into the inclusion or exclusion of Video Game Consoles into the 8th Generation article. I have started a new section here and am requesting outside comment. Please discuss the matter here: Talk:History_of_video_game_consoles_(eighth_generation)#.22We_need_hardware_comparisons.22. Thank you. -Kai445 (talk) 07:39, 9 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]


While it could be considered an 8th gen console, its classified as a Microconsole along with all the other android derived hardware on the market or in development. I think it'd be better suited in that category like how Handhelds and Dedicated Consoles (Post First Generation) are in separate categories of their own and considering they run on derivatives of the Android operating system instead of proprietary software. EmOneGarand (talk) 03:21, 22 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Neutrality of "Pre-release" section

[edit]

It seems that this one negative article that is calling the whole project a scam is given pretty heavy weight into the article of this size with only one rebuttal. The WP:WEIGHT that should be given that one article is probably extremely little or ignored altogether. Given that it's 7 months old, and many new news articles have come out about this platform. I tagged the section with a POV tag and brought up the discussion to see what can be done to try to bring this article back to some semblance of WP:NPOV. — raekyt 05:42, 23 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I don't think it's an NPOV or WEIGHT issue so much as an out of date issue. I think the early speculation may be worth keeping, but it could be trimmed down, the quote from PC Magazine is unnecessarily verbose. -- ferret (talk) 16:21, 23 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Agreed. Pretty clearly not a scam, but still worth maybe a short sentence worth of info on it for a background/history section. Sergecross73 msg me 16:38, 23 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
I in fact thing we'd be going NOT neutral if there wasn't a mention of the talk of it being a scam, as it's a pretty important part of its history. ♫ Melodia Chaconne ♫ (talk) 17:24, 23 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
If it's clearly not a scam, then it's not important and provides FAR to much undue weight to one article that was incorrect. It's misleading to the reader. — raekyt 18:30, 23 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
If it's mentioned it should be VERY minor, like a single sentence, with plenty of rebuttal to indicate the writer of that article was quite wrong and it's not a scam. Scam is quite a weighty word too for a something that there was no evidence that they intended or intend to take the money and run. From all appearances they're spending it to develop and release the console, thus entirely not a scam. Even if the console was never released for whatever reason, it wouldn't be a scam. — raekyt 18:34, 23 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Even now, there's a counter-point saying that it couldn't be a scam due to the nature of the definition of the word scam, so I'm pretty sure no one's going to finish off reading that and come to the conclusion that it's a scam. Shortening down is definitely necessary, but it should definitely be there in some degree. Think long term - it could be an interesting fact if this thing turns out to be the next PlayStation 2 or iPhone or something. I know I'd find it interesting if people originally thought those items were scams/hoaxes back in the day. Sergecross73 msg me 19:03, 23 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
There was certainly a widespread belief that anything that does well on kickstarter is probably a scam, and Ouya was at the focus of that. However, it seems horribly unfair to have the whole section on pre-release reaction and have only talk about it being a scam. That certainly has not been the only reaction. APL (talk) 03:46, 24 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
No one is keeping anyone from adding to it. I just think no ones really bothered to add much else. Feel free to add to it, We're Just saying don't remove everything". Sergecross73 msg me

I think I've rewritten it sufficiently to remove the neutrality-disputed tag. -Kai445 (talk) 19:21, 17 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, I think that's good. (But then again, I wasn't the one who was taking offense either.) Sergecross73 msg me 19:27, 17 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you. I have also added some criticism of the controller supplied with the dev system, which I think was noteworthy. -Kai445 (talk) 19:40, 17 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Black or Red logo?

[edit]

My OCD prefers the Black logo, but the Red one must have been there for a reason, what do you think is better? JackWilfred (talk) 13:02, 22 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I like the black logo better too, but I didn't really care when the random user changed it. -Kai445 (talk) 17:41, 22 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Black it is, if there's any particular reason why it should be Red that's better than my OCD, just change it, it's not really a big issue. JackWilfred (talk) 07:34, 18 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Ouya image

[edit]

Now that the console is publically available, that non-free image of the unit is no longer meeting NFCC, since anyone can now take and publish a free photograph of the unit. There's some existing free images on flickr of people that got the console late last month that meet our CC-BY requirements (one that I will get to commons and here shortly) but this won't be as clean as the current non-free. --MASEM (t) 16:10, 25 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Ouya. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 21:11, 31 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

change to past tense

[edit]

the sentence "The Ouya (/ˈuːjə/ OO-yə), stylized as OUYA,[5] is an Android-based microconsole developed by Ouya Inc" should change to "was an Android-based". since it is no longer sold. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 79.178.216.224 (talk) 17:46, 11 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Clarification on "double storage" claims

[edit]

The article says the following about new editions of the console:

"On November 23, 2013, a limited edition white Ouya with double the storage of the original and a new controller design was available for pre-order at $129. As of January 1, 2014, the limited edition white Ouya went off sale and cannot be found on the official store, nor from any official resellers. On January 31, 2014, a new black version of the Ouya was released with double storage and new controller design."

Does this mean the "new black version" had double the storage of the "limited edition white Ouya" or the same storage as the white Ouya (double the original)?

Developer Coda (talk) 00:15, 31 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Not a gaming console

[edit]

I'd like to rework the article so that it doesn't position the Ouya as a game console to bring it in line with the fact that it is not included as part of the eighth generation of game consoles page. (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eighth_generation_of_video_game_consoles).

For the background to this decision, see the discussion on the ninth generation's talk page. (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Ninth_generation_of_video_game_consoles)

If there is any objections, I would ask that you direct the discussion to the eighth generation of consoles talk page. Otherwise I will go ahead and make the change. CuteCucumber! (talk) 17:54, 7 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I strongly oppose the change. I think it's clear that the Ouya was a "console", and it seems like you also believe that the Ouya is a "console". If so that makes this a WP:POINT edit to try to rally people to your cause in the other article's talk page. That is not good.
As for this article, virtually every source calls it a "console". (or sometimes a "mini-console") Obviously if all the sources call it a thing, we should also call it a thing.
So why isn't it in the list of Eighth or Ninth generation consoles? Probably because Ouya was an also-ran that isn't considered notable enough for inclusion in those lists, which mostly focus on the major players. Notability doesn't always go both ways. ApLundell (talk) 19:46, 7 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
No, sorry, I didn't mean to cause any misunderstanding. I'm certainly not trying to "rally" anyone (and I'm not sure I appreciate the accusation).
And yes, I do believe, that Ouya is a console, but that doesn't seem to be the consensus of Wikipedia.
But the point is that Ouya is not listed on the eighth generation console page so there shouldn't be a link to it in the info box. That page explicitly states that the Ouya is not considered part of the eighth generation. There is alreasy consensus that the link is an oversight so it should be removed. CuteCucumber! (talk) 06:10, 8 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Then I apologies for the misunderstanding.
But if we agree that it's a "console", and sources agree that it's a console, I don't see what the problem is.
I'm not aware of any project-wide consensus that Ouya is not a console.
(Although it is obviously an also-ran, and not one of the major players that define the "generations".) ApLundell (talk) 17:35, 8 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
The problem is that it's not an "eighth generation" console, so I've removed that description. CuteCucumber! (talk) 17:46, 8 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
A mini or microconsole is not the same as a home console, which this is being wrongly classified as. Masem (t) 18:30, 8 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I'm not sure what you're saying, sorry. The Ouya page already states that it is a microconsole, as does the eighth generation page, which argues that it can't be considered "eighth gen". CuteCucumber! (talk) 18:34, 8 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I really don't think I agree. For three reasons. 1) The distinction between "console" and "miniconsole" is pretty new and more than a little fannish/slang. For example, in some contexts/communities/etc it's still perfectly normal to use "miniconsole" strictly for devices that are literal miniature of existing consoles. 2) One is a subset of the other anyway. A "compact car" is still a "car". 3) Most of the sources say "Console" anyway, so that's what we should go with. ApLundell (talk) 19:02, 8 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
It's not a bad argument I'll admit, but how do you fit it in with the other consoles of the time? It's clearly not considered grouped with the major players, which is why it's not in the eighth gen article. How should we distinguish the two? CuteCucumber! (talk) 05:43, 9 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Ouya&oldid=1203682599"