Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Amazon Fire TV

amazon.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

121–130 of 400 posts

Re: Amazon Fire TV

#121

Post by alttab »

bitcrusher wrote: post #111
programminggeek wrote: post #84

This is pretty much what Google TV should have been all along, but Google cares too much about web search and not enough about what people actually want to do on a TV - watch shows and play games. The gaming aspect of this will make it a winner. OUYA's big problem is that it didn't do streaming and was a bit clunky. Amazon has a big game library and just needs controller support. As a parent, a $100 streaming box and…

It's interesting how different perspectives work: > The gaming aspect of this will make it a winner. OUYA's big problem is that it didn't do streaming and was a bit clunky. Amazon has a big game library and just needs controller support. I think the gaming aspects are the worst part and are entirely useless. Who wants to casual game with an underpowered box on a giant TV screen? Goofy games are fun on a 4-7" screen b…

I wouldn't knock it until you tried it. The graphics for games like Bard's Tale and many others are pretty damn good on mobile devices. We all have great mobile gaming experiences, wouldn't it be awesome if you could share that with anyone you had over on a big screen?

You may expect a "crazy immersive experience" but I would venture a guess that you are not the casual mobile gamer.

Re: Amazon Fire TV

#122

Post by runevault »

keehun wrote: post #88
programminggeek wrote: post #84

This is pretty much what Google TV should have been all along, but Google cares too much about web search and not enough about what people actually want to do on a TV - watch shows and play games. The gaming aspect of this will make it a winner. OUYA's big problem is that it didn't do streaming and was a bit clunky. Amazon has a big game library and just needs controller support. As a parent, a $100 streaming box and…

I disagree that this will become a winner. No one wants to play crappy games on their TV, and Amazon can't become a winner with the small population of people who do.

Amazon in theory is looking for more than just crappy games. They grabbed Double Helix and I have to assume that was part of this initiative, and they've recently released several well regarded games in Killer Instinct and Strider.

Re: Amazon Fire TV

#123

Post by angryasian »

bitcrusher wrote: post #111
programminggeek wrote: post #84

This is pretty much what Google TV should have been all along, but Google cares too much about web search and not enough about what people actually want to do on a TV - watch shows and play games. The gaming aspect of this will make it a winner. OUYA's big problem is that it didn't do streaming and was a bit clunky. Amazon has a big game library and just needs controller support. As a parent, a $100 streaming box and…

It's interesting how different perspectives work: > The gaming aspect of this will make it a winner. OUYA's big problem is that it didn't do streaming and was a bit clunky. Amazon has a big game library and just needs controller support. I think the gaming aspects are the worst part and are entirely useless. Who wants to casual game with an underpowered box on a giant TV screen? Goofy games are fun on a 4-7" screen b…

Ouya's other problem was the selection of games. Most of the games on the play store have controller support. You're talking candy crush, I'm thinking emulators and titles like GTA, Modern Combat, Minecraft, and many other rpg and fps titles.

Re: Amazon Fire TV

#124

Post by [deleted] »

bitcrusher wrote: post #111
programminggeek wrote: post #84

This is pretty much what Google TV should have been all along, but Google cares too much about web search and not enough about what people actually want to do on a TV - watch shows and play games. The gaming aspect of this will make it a winner. OUYA's big problem is that it didn't do streaming and was a bit clunky. Amazon has a big game library and just needs controller support. As a parent, a $100 streaming box and…

It's interesting how different perspectives work: > The gaming aspect of this will make it a winner. OUYA's big problem is that it didn't do streaming and was a bit clunky. Amazon has a big game library and just needs controller support. I think the gaming aspects are the worst part and are entirely useless. Who wants to casual game with an underpowered box on a giant TV screen? Goofy games are fun on a 4-7" screen b…

[deleted]

Re: Amazon Fire TV

#125

Post by untog »

ben1040 wrote: post #116
untog wrote: post #99

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes and no. Chromecast requires you having another device to use with it. Grabbing my phone, opening the Netflix app, choosing to Chromecast, searching for a show, hitting play then waiting ~30 seconds for the Chromecast to actually play is not a good user experience. I use my Roku almost exclusively now.

I actually find it much easier to search or browse for content using my tablet or phone, then choose to throw it up on the TV via Chromecast, as opposed to searching for content using a remote like on a Roku or my Xbox. It just seems easier for me to do this in my hand than ten feet away, especially when I have to try to enter text into a TV interface.

I found Chromecast OK when I was using it by myself, but sharing it is a problem. It's difficult to have two or more people crowded around a smartphone screen deciding what to watch. The big screen interface works much, much better.

Even that aside, my girlfriend doesn't want to use my phone to navigate, so she has to install Netflix on her phone too. And set up the user account there. Multiply that by every service we have (and Amazon Instant isn't on Android)... it's just clunky. Fine, but clunky. Having it all centralised on one box works better, as far as I'm concerned.

Re: Amazon Fire TV

#126

Post by maxsilver »

landhar wrote: post #81

What I find most exciting is that this finally opens the doors for indie game developers to write games for the big screen. It is true that Steam was already doing that, but I think the audience of people with a PC plugged to a TV screen in the living room or that owns a Steam box is not as big as what the Fire TV owners might end up being

For what it's worth, OUYA's strategy was literally "let indie game developers write games for the big screen", and they successfully launched that product more than half a year ago.

OUYA has lots and lots of their own problems, but they are the most polished version of the "get indie developers on TV" idea.

Or at least, they were, until today's FireTV launch.

Re: Amazon Fire TV

#128

Post by tortilla »

[deleted] wrote: post #75
swanson wrote: post #32

The side-by-side comparison with Roku/AppleTV actually looks pretty bad for Amazon Fire TV... Same price, the only differences are that the Fire TV has voice search (don't care), a bunch of technical specs that the layperson doesn't care about, and a bunch of games (don't care). It's missing the checkbox for HBO GO (deal breaker for me personally). I was expecting something like a monthly subscription for all-you-can…

[deleted]

Update: Amazon could not confirm that HBO Go is coming to the Fire TV, only saying "we're working to get more content."

Re: Amazon Fire TV

#129

Post by alexeisadeski3 »

declan wrote: post #96

This is a reasonable answer to Apple TV. If you have videos on or subscriptions to iTunes, Netflix, and Amazon Prime (as I do), there's no box I'm aware of that will let you watch all three. So you end up using your Apple TV and then Roku or another box -- the Playstation 3 in my living room takes a long time to boot, and a long time to load the Netflix app, draws quite a bit of power, and is overkill for merely watc…

Apple TV lets you watch all three (iTunes, Netflix, and Amazon Prime).

Airplay is a thing.

Re: Amazon Fire TV

#130

Post by itafroma »

landhar wrote: post #81

What I find most exciting is that this finally opens the doors for indie game developers to write games for the big screen. It is true that Steam was already doing that, but I think the audience of people with a PC plugged to a TV screen in the living room or that owns a Steam box is not as big as what the Fire TV owners might end up being

> this finally opens the doors for indie game developers to write games for the big screen

Sony has had extensive and widely-used support for indie game development for the PlayStation platforms for quite some time.[1]

Microsoft has has had so-so support for indie developers (choice between them essentially acting as your publisher or fending for yourself in the Xbox Live Indie Games wasteland), but they're trying to fix that with ID@Xbox.[2]

Then, of course, there's Ouya, if you're in to that sort of thing.[3] It's an Android platform too.

[1]: http://us.playstation.com/develop/

[2]: http://www.xbox.com/en-us/Developers/id

[3]: https://www.ouya.tv

Post reply on HN