Whichever can run TODOA, of course.

An Xbox One or a PS4 to get all those great kid-friendly launch titles

My six year old loves my Wii, but she'll play anything.

Wii is probably a good choice for those ages, and both the console and games should be dirt cheap by now.

Get them an NES or a Sega Genesis, then get a lot of 100 games on ebay. Spend less, have more.

Why play Xbox and PS4 when you can have the edutainment of SOCRATES!

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/VTech_Socrates

HEYOOOOOOOO

My one and a half year old loves things with buttons. Maybe your children like buttons as well. You should get a console that has buttons. Then they can press buttons, which is fun.

How about... books?

Vin's honestly probably right. There's no real reason to get them hooked on videogames until they are. Books be better ya.

just give them a ps1 dude

OUYA?

No one should need to buy that thing...

Why do you say that, Kroko?

Because it's an awful piece of crap in every way?

I'll bite.

Can you be a little more specific on this? Don't get me wrong, I understand that this is simply an android box that does little more than what it sounds like. However, if someone's purpose was to buy one to use as an emulator to play many different classic games, I don't see why this wouldn't be a fairly cheap and reasonable way to do so. (Which seems to be what a vast majority of OUYA owners are using it for).

Can we turn this into a fight about whether the PS4 or Xbox One is better?

Well I own a OUYA, but I won't defend it. It sits unloved in it's box. I find it to be too expensive to justify it's use solely as an emulator.

Well, the Xbox One isn't out yet, and almost every PS4 that's been sold is defective,...



so obviously the PS4 is better.

A. The CPU is fairly old, so emulation is sketchy at best, depending how far up the generations you go.
B. The controller is literally garbage. Bad sticks, unstable connections, useless touchpad, next to no range. They finally fixed the buttons but only if you weren't a kickstarter backer.
C. The thing has the potential to overheat. They tried to fix it in a patch by running the fan harder, but their brilliant industrial design ensures the fan doesn't actually blow in or out of the vents.
D. You can get a Wii for practically the same price, and get a LOT more fun out of it.
E. The non-emulator parts of the system, aka, the real purpose, is a travesty. The UI is slow, no games list their prices, the system needs an update that has trouble installing on first boot, much of the system falls back to the old Android UI which is out of place and not exactly designed for a controller.
F. The few exclusives OUYA had are moving to other consoles, so they can actually MAKE MONEY.
G. Most other games coming out for it were Kickstarter projects that promised the world, which apparently includes Ouya.
H. It has a lifespan of like, 0. Seriously, it's based on phone technology that was brand new two years ago. Smartphones are advancing so quickly that, if given even three more years, this system won't even be able to play new games at all. And I'm being horrendously optimistic, since it's already having trouble.

I never understood the hype for Ouya, it seems to be founded on some anti-corporate sentiment and a large dose of hope and dreams.

I. E-store API and security problems, like repeat attacks, apps having direct access to the store without any user intervention, each developer having to implement "custom" encryption on a per-app basis.

founded on some pro-fedora sentiment and a large dose of mountain dew

I'm still hoping to see a successful Android console. I know Amazon is working on one, but I guess it might take Google's backing to really take off.

With a few tweaks, I think Chromecast could make an interesting gaming platform. Imagine multiple people standing around a big screen TV using their phones as controllers.

I'm still hoping to see a successful gasoline-powered rocket ship. I know McDonalds is working on one, but I guess it might take Applebee's backing to really take off.

speaking of which when is boeing going to mount flamethrowers on a new jetfighter?

I'm not trying to be a jerk or anything, but the idea of an Android console is pretty moon-man logic to me. You've been mentioning it for a long time, but I still have no idea why you like the idea of an Android console so much. What, specifically, would Android bring to a console, which better, more-appropriate purpose-built systems wouldn't?

Computer system design is about trade-offs. The trade-offs Android made to be good at cell phones make it super terrible at scientific computing. And I'm not just talking about the software, I'm talking about the hardware too. Once you take the batteries and radio away, the entire platform makes zero sense. Like, Nvidia Shield has to have its own custom It's-Finally-Fast-Enough-For-Games-No-Really-We-Mean-It-This-Time bespoke artisanal NDK rewrite, and when you remember that Shield is still a handheld you'll start to realize that **** aint right here.

I'm not saying that an Android console couldn't be popular - lord knows people have gone ape**** over more aggravating things - but expressing that particular desire around game programmers is a pretty fast way to shed popularity.

Jon'C, I'm really not interested in debating it. Thanks for mocking me, you make valid points.

I don't know, I look at the Wii and see a console based on nothing but Nintendo's backing and a low price point. Is the Wii hardware anything special? I'd like to see something like that but more open to developers, more customizable. I guess really I'd like a PC without the need to pay $100 for Windows. Linux simply hasn't attracted game developers like Apple or Android has, maybe SteamOS will be Linux's tipping point.

I would think as a software developer you might appreciate some of these sentiments. But fine, I'm a naive dreamer.

EAH_TRISCUIT, the Ouya is an object separate from you. It's qualities do not define you. It is not true that Jons attack on the idea of Ouya is also an attack on you.

On a game console the OS doesn't matter at all. The system code is more like MS-DOS than it is like the big heavy preemptive multithreading systems we use today, like Windows and Linux/Android. Which is ideal, because on a game console you really want it to do one thing - run the game - and do it as quickly as possible.

That's why Android doesn't really make sense on a console. You just don't need the sorts of facilities provided by a big operating system, and the API isn't necessarily any nicer than what you'd use running on 'bare metal'. Manufacturers can lock down an Android device just as easily as they can open up their custom SDK.

Reid, I'm not defending the OUYA. I don't mind attacks on it.

I found this particularly mocking, and I'm fairly sure I'm taking it exactly as intended:

its a non sequitur

Which is why I tried to clarify the meaning by saying: I'm not trying to be a jerk or anything, but the idea of an Android console is pretty moon-man logic to me.

Because it doesn't make sense.

Because on a video game console, Android has absolutely nothing to offer.

Like powering a rocket ship with gasoline.

I would suppose that Jon is frustrated. He has probably explained why the Ouya is a bad idea before, maybe even to you. He's resorting to mockery because he feels he has run out of options.

As he stated, the hardware made for Android phones is specifically designed for phones. A good analogy might be: wanting an Android console is like wanting a large golf ball. You can play soccer with a large golf ball, but it would hurt your feet to play and would be rather expensive. It would therefore make more sense to play with a soccer ball, which is engineered to be soft on the feet and cost-effective.

I understand that you dislike the current economic model for producing consoles. I dislike it as well; however, the Ouya is a rather poor solution to that problem.

Not even, I just thought the image of a gasoline-powered rocket was funny.

Jon'C, is it your position that an 'open' console can't be successful? Is there a better alternative that is free and has 'enough' game developer's willing to support it?

Possibly, but I'm not obligated to agree with his logic no matter how flawless it is. My posts were not directed at him and I dont mind his continued attempts to educate me provided I don't feel attacked. I honestly don't see the concept of an android console as completely childish or foolish. I find it hard to believe that my logic is so flawed when large corporations are throwing millions of dollars at this idea right now.

There is definite room for an open console to be successful. That's more or less what Steam Machines will be; unlike other consoles, they will allow the installation of alternative operating systems and software stores, and they will run unsigned software. (Of course, the PC is really the ultimate open console already.)

Android isn't even a particularly open OS anyway. The source code is quasi-open, but to call yourself an Android device and to distribute with Google's apps and Play you need to be certified under the CDD and agree to some secret licensing agreement, which means it's closed de facto. And if you aren't distributing with Google's apps, why bother using Android at all? Plain old Linux is better.

For devs: Software env doesn't matter to game developers as long as there's a decent business case for the release and a platform that isn't too unusual (both in software and hardware). Devs don't target OpenGL ES right now, so an Android port would be just as much work as porting to proprietary_api[n+1]. The only specific developers who might support an Android console are Android fans, which is a pretty sad list.

Ouya had a load of hype behind it, Shield had a load of cash, it's just not enough. Companies can throw trillions into that hole, it's just not going to happen. It has to be a good console first, and an Android device second.