@Castle
As we both know - knowing what you're doing is qualtified by still being in business and how much profits you make. To that end Nintendo have at times known what to do and at times not, but they still exist. Same deal with Sony's gaming division. The Xbox Division though I think is on rocky grounds as MS don't like to share that division's financials separately. That hints as not so good results there. Those in the past like Sega who were doing so well has all existed the hardware market. As well as a few vanity projects like the Apple Pipin that was dead on arrival.
So can google pull this off? My answer is no. But I think why I think so is more important.
Most people who pull things off successfully do so when the new ideas or ventures are similar to their core product or idea they do.
Nintendo for example always made toys and games and playing cards. A gaming console is just a game with a screen. It's not that much of a stretch. Sure gaming has evolved a lot since then but the base premise is what Nintendo has done for 100 years. That's why fun games is what Nintendo consoles do best and stuff like online functionality they are not the best at. Nintendo historically has sold fun and made lots of money from it.
Sony was always in the entertainment industry so a console for them is not a stretch too. The fact that they focus on hardware and others make all the PS games is no surprise as Sony's history is not making the content, it was always creating the platforms for others to put their content on. Also having their consoles as movie players also feeds into this idea that their hardware is a platform for as many content creators as possible.
Microsoft has always been about productivity software and computer operating systems. That's why the Xbox has the best online platform of the 3 major consoles. It's almost like MS have a functionality and specs first approach and fun come second. That's the same with Office, Windows and the like. Not fun to use but they get the job done. Same with the Xbox. Not fun to use, but totally gets the job done it terms of hardware specs and online functionality and systems. This is just the base OS and hardware itself, not counting the games as they are mostly made by other studios. Because MS does not have a gaming background.
google? Their background is advertising and internet search. Basically providing us better ways to search for the data they allow us too and buying/aquiring lots of data they can use to sell us things. That kind of background is quite dangerous when applied to a gaming console. As we've already established, what a company does overall manifests as the best features/parts of their consoles. I think this is not an optional thing, it always happens because it's like DNA. A comony's DNA - ie what they are best at is in all of their products.
This asks the question, how will google incorporate advertising into their consoles? It's going to happen, whether they officially announce it or not.
Will google sell the data they expect us to consent to giving them to actually use the console?
Will google force integration of their google online service platform into the console? As in will we have to sign into our google account to play online games?
Will google have it's own online gaming store? And if so will they log things like our purshase history and sell that to advertisers and game developers?
How safe will our paymwent details be? How close to the legal line will google tred in relation to using this data to make google more money?
The obvious non advertising question we need to ask, how will google handle 3rd party studios. Important as I doubt google will develop any of their own games like Nintendo. google will be more like MS and Sony who primarily use 3rd parties to make games. Through partnerships or outright purchasing the whole studios. Also will google be ok with multiplats or will they push for an exclusive or two?
Personally I would steer clear from any google console until we know how advertising will be integrated into it. Also how much google tell us about this vs how much they actually do will be nice to know too. Will google be upfront about everything or will they try to hide the important details?
I don't think this is why the google console will not do well. Most people do not think rationally about gaming consoles like this. Most of the time its perceived fun mixed with hype and a little questionable advertising from the company to suck most people in. To this end I feel most people who are interested in gaming are already invested in one of the 4 main markets. The three bug players or PC gaming. A new player going up against 4x established ecosystems I think is doomed to fail.
google need to learn from their dabble into the smartphone market. On a hardware sense google failed massively. But on a software/OS sense they have done very well. As much as I do not like android as an OS, it is very successful in terms of profit made from it for google. Also gmail and other new software ventures google have tried have panned out well for them. Most of google's dabble into hardware of any kind has not done so well. google did need an open market though to thrive. By that I mean google needed the more open amdroid phone market to out their OS on. They could not use the iPhone as much as Apple closed off that market. The same deal with the major 3 consoles. Nintendo, Sony and MS have closed them off. Sure they are open for games, but for things like other OSes, competing digital storefronts, competing onlnie infastructure accessible on the console etc etc, very closed. Only one chise for each of them. For google to do what they are traditionally good at on a console, google have to do what they are traditionally bad at.
In other words this means google need to make their own hardware (which they are bad at) to put their own OS, digital store front, online systems and advertising infastructure on (which they are good at). google can't just jump on already existing gaming hardware or get someone else totally different to make the hardware for them. It seems lose-lose for google. They can't only go what they are good at.
