Not sure if I'll be able to answer everything, but I'll try...

Quote Originally Posted by Schizophretard View Post
Yeah, that sounds like what I'm thinking of. Would Onlive be a similar analogy because to my understanding it is like a virtualized console on a server that streams games to the customer's Micro-console? Would it be just like that except instead of streaming the "virtual console" it would be embedded into the hardware and/or downloaded onto it?
Streaming is a different thing, though I'm sure that's where we'll all ultimately end up. But that won't be until broad band with the throughput of Google Fiber is available everywhere.

I believe what is most likely going to happen is with those two companies, the companies to be announced in the near future, and the devices their OUYA Everywhere app will work on that they are trying to get out in the next 6 months will determine OUYA 2.0 specs. Most of OUYA Everywhere and mostly from the OUYA Everywhere app will be only OUYA 1.0 for lower end devices. Then the more higher end devices like NanoTech's and MadCatz's would be both OUYA Everywhere 1.0 and 2.0 later. So, If you look at a M.O.J.O. then you have a pretty good idea of what the OUYA 2.0 will be.
I concur. As you've already noted, the hardware of these two partners is basically identical. That's not a coincidence.

OUYA's goal this year is growth. OUYA Everywhere will be critical to that because it will piggyback users from other manufacturer's devices. I don't think they'll hang their new partners out to dry by releasing a stronger spec just as their partners get rolling. Especially if OUYA is seeing some money from licensing, I'd be highly surprised if Madcatz or Nanotech were willing to sign on unless OUYA Everywhere was going to provide compatible games for at least one more iteration of the OUYA.

That is exactly it. I believe that if all the potential users gained by OUYA Everywhere bought a console instead then the console would get better support. To give another analogy of the concern would be if the Big 3 had Big 3 Everywhere where there were devices that could play Sony's, Microsoft's, and Nintendo's libraries with three separate stores on one device. If most of their user bases had Big 3 Everywheres then there wouldn't be cross platform games because why would a developer port to all three stores on the same device? From the developer's perspective the hardware itself would be just one platform with 3 stores on it. If I had one then from my perspective and their perspective it would be just one console and I wouldn't need to see the game three times. Just getting on the console once would be on the console. So, instead of all three stores having exclusives and cross platform games they would start to have nothing but exclusives. That would be fine for the majority that owns Big 3 Everywheres but for the customers that have the Big 3 reference devices they would only have the exclusives of one of the companies and no cross platform games. If you put more than one platform on a device then it is really just one platform because it is one customer with one device. The reason developers go cross platform/hardware agnostic in the first place is so that they can increase the chances of being on a device that I the customer own. If OUYA is going cross platform/hardware agnostic too then they are following the cross platform/hardware agnostic developers to devices they are already on instead of bringing those developers to OUYA's console. That seems like it would only bring the gamers on those devices to the OUYA but not the developers because those developers already have those gamers on those devices.
You need to think of OUYA and OUYA Everywhere as more of a platform service like OnLive. OnLive has a dedicated device as well to facilitate it's services to those without a PC. But they also provide their services to PC's. At one point, even the OUYA was going to play host to it. Of course, the "minimum spec" of OnLive is more on the server and bandwidth rather than in the client-side hardware. OUYA is obviously different from OnLive in that it's not a streaming platform, but rather one that runs games locally. So a minimum/maximum spec is important.

OUYA simply doesn't care about the device itself more than cultivating a platform. Part of that puzzle (and to avoid a 3DO-like price alienation) is to create a low cost "reference" device which solves a few issues around creating a standard for the platform. But as I said before, the OUYA itself is made of commodity parts. They've prided themselves on it. Those that don't like the idea of OUYA Everywhere generally can't get past that their little box, without the OUYA software, is more or less a Tegra 3 tablet without a screen.

With the Nuvola NP-1 none of their customers will give the developers of the PC games an incentive to port to OUYA. I'm not exactly sure what PC games it plays with the Play-PC feature but whatever they are none of those developers have an incentive to port their games to OUYA because they already have those customers. The customers also have Google Play, Tegra Zone, and preinstalled games and apps. Any of that content that their customers already have access to will take away the developers' incentive to port them to OUYA because the customers already have them. Those games/apps are already on the Nuvola NP-1 platform. Porting onto the OUYA would be unnecessary duplication. On the other hand, if the only way to get to an OUYA user is through the OUYA console then there is a higher incentive to port because there would be no duplication. They wouldn't be just porting from one store to another on the same device to the same customer but porting to a new device to a new customer.

And that is just one OUYA Everywhere device. When OUYA Everywhere gets on hundreds or maybe even thousands of devices then the most common games/apps that those customers already have access to will be games/apps that the developers have gained no incentive to port to another store on the same device. That could be potentially all the most popular games/apps that are already everywhere. That is a huge concern for me because it is like OUYA is creating this huge user base to say to developers,"Now look at all of these millions of users we have that you already have too! Doesn't that just give you all kinds of reasons to port to our platform so that you can get the same users twice?!" That is what it looks like to me but I believe OUYA isn't that retarded so I believe I am overlooking something. I also know you are a smart guy and you like the OUYA Everywhere idea. So, I believe you see what I'm overlooking but I can't tell if you only see it from a developer point of view. I need to see it from your gamer point of view. I need to grasp what arcticdog the gamer would like about using an OUYA 5.0 reference device as a console after years of a very successful OUYA Everywhere Initiative. Maybe you have already said it and I'm just not getting it yet.
Even if OUYA Everywhere is on other devices, it's still the OUYA ecosystem. The games within it have some guarantee to work because of the nature of the met specification that got the device to be a partner. The gamer will get a game that's guaranteed to work because all of the boundaries to allow the game to work have been enforced. The gamer doesn't have to think about.. "will this version from Google Play run at all?" or.. "Does this game have controller support?" If it's an OUYA game it's going to be guaranteed to work on the device that OUYA has put their stamp of approval on.

Because OUYA isn't an Android device. It is but it isn't just plain Android. It is Android customized for very specific hardware that makes the whole package a console. Instead of just programming for Android in general you are programming for only one device. You are also programming for a very specific group of users. Those users are console gamers who just want your game to work on a TV with no tinkering ,as plug and play as possible, and with only one device to choose from so that they can say with confidence,"If I buy that console then the games I am looking for will just work." Console gamers are hardware idolaters because we know that praying to one device will answer our gaming prayers. So it goes both ways where both the developers and gamers are focusing on one console.
Actually, from the technical overview, it is one. OUYA's use case is geared toward that of a gamer, with features that look more like an X-Box than a tablet. But the execution environment isn't special. Otherwise you wouldn't be able to side load.

What makes it more "console like" is that it's got a predictable specification, an app store that sells software around that predictable specification, and it has a team of evaluator's making sure that the game sort of plays in the wheelhouse of a console game experience. Software obtained from it is expected to "just work", unlike Google play devices which are largely a play at your own risk kind of prospect. But those predictable specification boundaries can be defined on any device with compatible hardware.

Mojo users have found out the hard way that Google Play games don't necessarily play nice on their hardware. Madcatz's partnership with OUYA sort of admits this fault as a company. With the partnership, OUYA games will work on Mojo without a user having to install and pray. Mojo Gamers who've been frustrated with finding compatible games from Google Play now have an alternative.

I know most of the thinking here is alternatives to OUYA. But on these other devices, OUYA is the alternative choice. And that's where the value is. There is costs involved in engineering, testing, etc. to add OUYA to the fold, so I doubt Madcatz and Nanotech are just doing this blindly. These device manufacturers wouldn't be putting OUYA on it at all if there wasn't worth in doing it.

Unless there is some profit sharing agreement involved, it's got to be that the user experience is better. Whether that's allowing more choice, or giving users an avenue where they don't have to worry about finding games that work.

But why is OUYA needed for that? Couldn't you just develop your game/app within the same specs as OUYA Everywhere and put it in different stores to run on the same devices that OUYA Everywhere is on? And what about the gamer side of things? What will they find worth in buying the same game from OUYA that they can get from another store on the same device? By the same I mean it is identical. It is as identical as if I bought a Wii U game from Walmart or Best Buy.
Sure. You could develop for the same spec, but where would you sell it? Google Play? That will work. But then you'll get down-rated by those with devices that it has trouble running on.

Really the benefit here is that no company has successfully made a predictable gaming platform other than the consoles. There is a lot of worth to the gamer and the developer to know that a game will "just work".
Just like you don't have to think about if you put a DVD in any player boasting DVD capability that it will "just work".

It's really less technical and more organizational. 3DO tried to do this a long time ago (provide some license-able DVD/VCR/Blu-ray-ish kind of standard for games). But they priced themselves out.
The challenge is to get the consumer and developer to buy into this kind of thing. For the high end, Sony and Microsoft will continue to take turns being the "standard", and have everyone start over every few years. If there's a low-end, affordable standard that gains wide acceptance over time, it's plausible that it could challenge the high-end at some point.

And yes.. there's a danger that if this kind of organization is successful, you'll have independent app-stores that boast "OUYA compatibility" that follow the specification and have a business outside of OUYA's own Discover. But OUYA's got an asset in their brand and can probably charge a license for making such a boast (similar to how commercial Blu-ray media has to get a license to carry the blu-ray logo).