• Ever wanted an RSS feed of all your favorite gaming news sites? Go check out our new Gaming Headlines feed! Read more about it here.

Durante

Dark Souls Man
Member
Oct 24, 2017
5,074
also if other services work lot better?
No streaming service will ever work better for me than my own high-end PC.
(And I can't really imagine a cloud streaming service much better than what NV is already doing, at least from my perspective. They have the best latency/quality in the business currently, and you can use your existing games you own -- what else would I want?)

This is something to expand the core audience, it won't be in a position to supplant local devices in quality -- just in convenience.
 

Toriko

Member
Dec 29, 2017
7,663
Sony infrastructure can't be compared to Ms / Google or any of top players (isn't either In the first top 20 I think) and also because first party games aren't there on day one
Google and Ms will both very likely have the half latency (or less) than psnow
Very different serivces

Please stop. This is what Google has done coming years after playstation now

I will post what I posted in the other thread.

Ars Technica's review of the Google streaming service

As for latency, we're neck-and-neck with the likes of the modern PlayStation Now, a service that has crept its latency rating up on an annual basis. Meaning: we're not about to practice professional Street Fighter V sessions with Stream's level of input lag, but a 30fps game like AC:Otends to feel playable enough (with occasional moments that feel as slow as a standard HDTV with its "game mode" turned off)

Now we await MS's magic sauce as some are convincing themselves. I am going to predict that it will likely be in the same ball park as Playstation now and Google and there will be no magic sauce. The same is going to be true for Amazon too. Streaming tech will be democratized eventually and everyone who is entering this space worth their salt will have similar streaming capabilities. The real differentiator will be content.

You will see EA streaming it from their site when this Happens. Content will be the differentiator. Not the tech.
 

zedox

Member
Oct 28, 2017
5,215
xCloud will just be apart of Game Pass. (As long as you have GamePass you can stream your own games that you own)
GamePass will have tiers for quality of service (and probably # of users)
Google imo will be more of a backend service than a front facing one. It seems to me that they are building something for third parties to have their games launch on their own game services. Amazon seems to be making something similar to MS but without the hardware platform. To me, MS has the best position to get the traditional and the streaming to make the best of both worlds.
 

Serious Sam

Banned
Oct 27, 2017
4,354
Game streaming is not the future. Subscription models like Gamepass are the future. Having games running locally has pretty much been perfected by now. It's cheap and efficient way to game. Having to buy 300-400$ gaming device every 7 to 8 years is a very small price to pay. There are too many drawbacks and limitations associated with streaming.

The way I see it this is just another scaremongering article in lines of "mobile gaming will kill console gaming", "PC gaming is dead", "single player story gaming is dead" etc.
 

THEVOID

Prophet of Regret
Member
Oct 27, 2017
22,830
Some of us has been saying this for a while console sales aren't going mean squat in the coming years.
 

unicornKnight

▲ Legend ▲
Member
Oct 27, 2017
13,159
Athens, Greece
Game streaming is not the future. Subscription models like Gamepass are the future. Having games running locally has pretty much been perfected by now. It's cheap and efficient way to game. Having to buy 300-400$ gaming device every 7 to 8 years is a very small price to pay. There are too many drawbacks and limitations associated with streaming.

The way I see it this is just another scaremongering article in lines of "mobile gaming will kill console gaming", "PC gaming is dead", "single player story gaming is dead" etc.
I agree but consumers don't see it that way, this is why MS is considering putting the price of the console under a subscription.
 

scitek

Member
Oct 27, 2017
10,050
xCloud will just be apart of Game Pass. (As long as you have GamePass you can stream your own games that you own)
GamePass will have tiers for quality of service (and probably # of users)
Google imo will be more of a backend service than a front facing one. It seems to me that they are building something for third parties to have their games launch on their own game services. Amazon seems to be making something similar to MS but without the hardware platform. To me, MS has the best position to get the traditional and the streaming to make the best of both worlds.

Google has something that can work on anything with Chrome. I think that's a huge advantage. Like, I'm testing Project Stream right now, and all I'd have to do to continue my AC Odyssey session at work is bring my controller lol
 

Durante

Dark Souls Man
Member
Oct 24, 2017
5,074
And powerful PCs aren't of much use if you travel or you're in transit.
I already stream from my own PC when I travel, and have for a while now.
(Depending on how far I travel, a more local data center would of course be faster. But honestly, I don't play that much when I'm traveling in the first place, and when I do it's not twitchy)
 
Nov 12, 2017
2,877
How many subscribers is the most popular streaming service likely to have in the next 5 years?

How many machines do you need to support that userbase?

How much will provision for that cost?

Will that cost challenge the several billions Sony spends annually right now on the existing logistics of game distribution alone?

I'd wager the likely upper end of scope of a mass streaming service in the next 5-10 years is unlikely to challenge the scope of the physical distribution market Sony is already dealing with today.

I think in these discussions, people also ignore an obvious set of infrastructure that Sony/MS/Nintendo could leverage, and that would favour those companies that pump more hardware into homes. Do not be surprised if Sony (or indeed MS) ends up allowing users with sufficiently good internet connections to lease back portions of their idle game machine time back to the cloud for streaming to other users. Sony technically has stepped into this territory with private sharing. They could turn on a more general virtualisation across their entire PS4 consumer network and use that to augment datacenter capacity. 'Even' Microsoft - and Nintendo ultimately - could be minded toward a strategy like this for the benefits of reach it could offer.



Why the assumption this won't improve? If PSNow bumped their bandwidth baseline to match Google's - for example - that alone would allow them to cut latency, without any other initiatives.


when I said "money" I was talking about a long-term investment already made by amazon, microsoft and google.
Azure as aws or google datacenter are already there ... they need just to put some rack (and i think until scarlet like the story of "4 xbox in a rack" will change with something more standardized)

Azure earns by already offering services. thing that does not do psnow. for this reason psnow is practically an already old service before the real fight for streaming became reality. To maintain and invest datacenters all over the world it takes a huge amount of money ... money , seeing the difference between these companies, that probably Sony has preferred to invest in R & D or in their first parties. I understand the reason of the purchase of gaikai by sony and it 'was done just not to be too far behind in an inevitable future of streaming.
I am more than sure that the streaming service offered by sony will improve. I am equally sure that it will never be on a par with those who have been investing in the cloud for 20 years. To all this you must add that it is not only an infrastructure problem .... psn network has suffered (and suffers) of many problems I do not know how much I would bet on the success of sony in an area where the software to the detriment of the hardware It is king. 12 years to change a nickname..man
 

Dest

Has seen more 10s than EA ever will
Coward
Jun 4, 2018
14,025
Work
Absolutely not. You cannot continue to tell me that A. ) I won't really own hardware or software that allows me to play games. and B.) Yeah, that latency isn't bad, but as someone who plays with really low latency equipment, input latency is bad. Really bad. I'm so used to low latency that, despite having tried PSNow, Parsec, Remote Play on my own local network, it's enough to make me feel sick.
 
Nov 12, 2017
2,877
No streaming service will ever work better for me than my own high-end PC.
(And I can't really imagine a cloud streaming service much better than what NV is already doing, at least from my perspective. They have the best latency/quality in the business currently, and you can use your existing games you own -- what else would I want?)

This is something to expand the core audience, it won't be in a position to supplant local devices in quality -- just in convenience.
oh yes...it will be an option..at least for us....for the mass market ( especially for mobile gamers) it will be a paradise probably
 

BlueManifest

One Winged Slayer
Member
Oct 25, 2017
15,301
Why is GeForce now always left out of articles like these esp when its currently the best
 

SuikerBrood

Member
Jan 21, 2018
15,484
Absolutely not. You cannot continue to tell me that A. ) I won't really own hardware or software that allows me to play games. and B.) Yeah, that latency isn't bad, but as someone who plays with really low latency equipment, input latency is bad. Really bad. I'm so used to low latency that, despite having tried PSNow, Parsec, Remote Play on my own local network, it's enough to make me feel sick.

Luckily it's an optional thing. Next gen there will be consoles, powerful ones, to play games on. Microsoft has stated this over and over.
 

Saint-14

Banned
Nov 2, 2017
14,477
Why is PlayStation Now constantly ignored in these discussions?
Apparently if you don't announce everything you have planned for the future then you are doing nothing and just sitting there and watching others, even though you were one of the first to offer a streaming service and acknowledge it as an important thing for the future, not to mention the new PlayStation boss is big into digital and services, it's naive to think Sony is not working on the future of PlayStation.
 

Sylmaron

Member
Oct 28, 2017
1,505
Game streaming is not the future. Subscription models like Gamepass are the future. Having games running locally has pretty much been perfected by now. It's cheap and efficient way to game. Having to buy 300-400$ gaming device every 7 to 8 years is a very small price to pay. There are too many drawbacks and limitations associated with streaming.

The way I see it this is just another scaremongering article in lines of "mobile gaming will kill console gaming", "PC gaming is dead", "single player story gaming is dead" etc.

Microsoft withdrawing games out of Gamepass as well as adding them makes me very unconvinced it will be the way forward. Gamers like building catalogues.
 

Dark1x

Digital Foundry
Verified
Oct 26, 2017
3,530
it is the exact same thing of when we get spotify nd netflix....
with my rickenbacker i played in a post-rock band (around the world) for some years...and i was a music (vinyls and cds later) collector when i was young....now? i dont give a fuck.....spotify all the life
That's fair but...for music I care about I buy CDs or vinyl and for movies I want to own I buy UHD Blu-rays. I DO use Netflix sometimes, sure, but mainly for TV style programs and docs. I do not use Spotify or streaming music services at all, though.

Games are more important to me than either of those mediums, however.
 

Dest

Has seen more 10s than EA ever will
Coward
Jun 4, 2018
14,025
Work
Luckily it's an optional thing. Next gen there will be consoles, powerful ones, to play games on. Microsoft has stated this over and over.
Yeah, but if this is what keeps getting pushed, years down the line it might become to norm. Even if it were perfect I still wouldn't want this service and I desperately want it to not happen but I fear 10 years from now that might just be what we have.
 

SuikerBrood

Member
Jan 21, 2018
15,484
Apparently if you don't announce everything you have planned for the future then you are doing nothing and just sitting there and watching others, even though you were one of the first to offer a streaming service and acknowledge it as an important thing for the future, not to mention the new PlayStation boss is big into digital and services, it's naive to think Sony is not working on the future of PlayStation.

I agree! It'll be interesting to see how Sony will change their policy. Will we be able to play the new God of War, Uncharted or Gran Turismo at launch on our phones in 2020? Will they also have a streaming box? Etc.

Interesting times ahead.

Yeah, but if this is what keeps getting pushed, years down the line it might become to norm. Even if it were perfect I still wouldn't want this service and I desperately want it to not happen but I fear 10 years from now that might just be what we have.

Why wouldn't you want it if it's perfect?
 

Deleted member 23046

Account closed at user request
Banned
Oct 28, 2017
6,876
Those who see in streaming an occasion for Microsoft to take their revenge on Sony , just like if the only five mainstream companies they know were able to provide worldwide demanding networking service, your should stop daydreaming because it will only be true in your little forum sitcom.

Microsoft has a lot to lose here and that's why focusing on their existing customerbase of Xbox owners is the best they can do, because the amount of exclusives content they can provide is limited when anyone can stream all the Windows content without the need of their services, including the Microsoft content.

Verizon, Comcast, Netflix, Wal-Mart, Trump Hotel, Joe's Bar and Ammu-nation could open their streaming services tomorow if they wanted, and having more or less the same catalog that Microsoft provides. And I won't talk about Valve or Nvidia who will certainly not stay arms crossed.

An like during the gold rush those who made money were picking axe merchants, here patents owners are already sharpening their legal injunction. And guess who owns two or three wallets of patents consecutive to companies buyback ?
 
Last edited:

Heraldic

Prophet of Regret
The Fallen
Oct 28, 2017
1,633
I'm excited, but Google stream won't work for me. It starts out amazing, then it lags. The graphics will downgrade and then it kicks me out. I reported the issues to Google on their survey. It's ironic cause I finally got Overwatch to run properly without constantly booting me out of the game. Took awhile to troubleshoot. Had to run several tests, and report it to Blizzard on the forums. It's a hassle.
I just hope they can fix the latency kinks for my internet cause it looks really promising. I just fear that because I live in a rural internet "dead zone" I may miss out.
 

Saint-14

Banned
Nov 2, 2017
14,477
I agree! It'll be interesting to see how Sony will change their policy. Will we be able to play the new God of War, Uncharted or Gran Turismo at launch on our phones in 2020? Will they also have a streaming box? Etc.

Interesting times ahead.
Not necessarily next gen, I'm not convinced streaming will be any big by then, though PS Now should be more appealing by then as we have seen they are already working on it.
 

SuikerBrood

Member
Jan 21, 2018
15,484
Those who see in streaming an occasion for Microsoft to take their revenge on Sony , just like if the only five mainstream companies they know were able to provide worldwide demanding networking service, your should stop daydreaming because it will only be true in your little forum sitcom.

Microsoft has a lot to lose here and that's why focusing on their existing customerbase of Xbox owners is the best they can do, because the amount of exclusives content they can provide is very limited when anyone can stream all the Windows content without the need of their services, including the Microsoft content.

Verizon, Comcast, Netflix, Wal-Mart, Joe's Bar and Ammu-nation could open their streaming services tomorow if they want and having more or less the same catalog Microsoft provide. And I won't talk about Valve or Nvidia who won't stay their arms crossed.

An like during the gold rush, those who made money were picking axe merchants, here patents owners are already sharpening their legal injunction. And guess who owns two or three wallets of patents consecutive to companies buyback ?

I think most are well aware what the consequences of this can be within gaming and who will be able to compete without having a dedicated box. Content will be key.
Guess what? I want Nvidia, Valve, Amazon, etc. to join the fray. Let them fight, for our benefit.
 

Dark1x

Digital Foundry
Verified
Oct 26, 2017
3,530
I agree! It'll be interesting to see how Sony will change their policy. Will we be able to play the new God of War, Uncharted or Gran Turismo at launch on our phones in 2020? Will they also have a streaming box? Etc.

Interesting times ahead.
Why wouldn't you want it if it's perfect?
It would still be streamed. It wouldn't be something I can own and rely on playing decades later.

I can do that with my older games and I still do it regularly. I was just playing some carts on Sega Genesis yesterday, in fact. They still get a lot of use.

I'm against streaming games on principle.
 

SuikerBrood

Member
Jan 21, 2018
15,484
It would still be streamed. It wouldn't be something I can own and rely on playing decades later.

I can do that with my older games and I still do it regularly. I was just playing some carts on Sega Genesis yesterday, in fact. They still get a lot of use.

I'm against streaming games on principle.

Streaming =/= not owning. I can own Halo 5 digitally and stream it on my Android phone (for example). You are still fighting digital media it seems.
 

KratosEnergyDrink

Using an alt account to circumvent a ban
Banned
Oct 27, 2017
1,523
It's probably the futur or at least a part of it (just like Netflix for movies now, but there are still physical DVDs and Blu-rays and these won't go away anytime soon).

But more like the 10-20 years from now future rather than next-gen-future. Internet infrastructure just isn't ready for this.

Netflix & Co were superior to everything before. immediate access to movies you want. You don't have to go to a retailer or have to wait for Sky & Co to show it. The image quality was almost as good as on physical media and you could even download the movies to watch them offline.

Game streaming is a whole different thing. People already have eShops and can download and play every game they want. The image quality in streaming is way below a native console/PC experience. Streaming is only viable for specific "slow" games and 60FPS is just impossible to achieve through streaming. Not to mention other problems like noticeable lag and fps "hickups" and online is obligatory.

Game streaming is not even remotely comparable to movie/music streaming.
 

Dest

Has seen more 10s than EA ever will
Coward
Jun 4, 2018
14,025
Work
That's fair but...for music I care about I buy CDs or vinyl and for movies I want to own I buy UHD Blu-rays. I DO use Netflix sometimes, sure, but mainly for TV style programs and docs. I do not use Spotify or streaming music services at all, though.

Games are more important to me than either of those mediums, however.
Kinda the same way. I will buy media that I find important when it comes to music, movies, books. I will want to have a physical copy of them, feel like I own it and have a reliable way of playing it (assuming I've got hardware) without having to worry about connecting to anything to allow me to listen/watch/read something. I use Spotify on the norm just because it's easy and great for when I'm stuck in the car and my mood changes to suit some other style of listening.

But games are a far more important medium to me, something that I feel for now, and have for a long time and probably will feel for for a long time to come. I don't often go back to play old games, but when I do get that itch I want to be able to grab said game, slap it in a box and get the best experience possible. Latency and compression are something that would greatly diminish that experience, and even if we were able to figure out how to beam absolute lossless video and audio with 1ms latency over the course of hundreds if not thousands of miles, it'd still be taking away my ownership of something that I love and that's something I'm super not cool with.
 

StereoVSN

Member
Nov 1, 2017
13,620
Eastern US
Microsoft is certainly serious about this as it bolsters their "games anywhere" motto, Xbox, Gamepass, etc...

Google will get bored in a year or two and shut the thing down like it does with a myriad of their other services.
 

Noob Pilot

Member
Jun 10, 2018
302
Platform war is hyperbole. Don't see it becoming anything more than a niche like high end VR. Nice to have but won't take off.

I see this appealing to dedicated pc gamers who would most likely have high speed uncapped internet (like myself, but I'm not interested in this) Most consumers will also shun an additional monthly subscription on top of the compulsory subscriptions they may already need to play online.
 

darkside

Member
Oct 26, 2017
11,253
Platform war is hyperbole. Don't see it becoming anything more than a niche like high end VR. Nice to have but won't take off.

I see this appealing to dedicated pc gamers who would most likely have high speed uncapped internet (like myself, but I'm not interested in this) Most consumers will also shun an additional monthly subscription on top of the compulsory subscriptions they may already need to play online.

Isn't this literally the market that would care absolutely the least? People ain't spending $2k+ on a rig to not actually use it.
 

Guymelef

Banned
Oct 25, 2017
2,644
Spain
xCloud will just be apart of Game Pass. (As long as you have GamePass you can stream your own games that you own)
GamePass will have tiers for quality of service (and probably # of users)
Google imo will be more of a backend service than a front facing one. It seems to me that they are building something for third parties to have their games launch on their own game services. Amazon seems to be making something similar to MS but without the hardware platform. To me, MS has the best position to get the traditional and the streaming to make the best of both worlds.

Why do you speak in every thread as if what you say are facts?. Not simple "imo" etc...
 

gofreak

Member
Oct 26, 2017
7,734
when I said "money" I was talking about a long-term investment already made by amazon, microsoft and google.
Azure as aws or google datacenter are already there ... they need just to put some rack (and i think until scarlet like the story of "4 xbox in a rack" will change with something more standardized)

Third party datacenters - which Microsoft also has used to grow Azure - are also 'already there' and available to any company that wants to lease space. Sony's datacenter footprint is a function of how many leases they want to sign.

Of course having footprints already there is convenient, but datacenter capacity is not an unsolveable problem.

Azure earns by already offering services. thing that does not do psnow.

If Microsoft is using custom xbox hardware for their streaming service, there isn't as much potential cost sharing advantage as may have been previously assumed.

In the meantime Sony can, in leasing at data center providers, cost share on that infrastructure with other companies. Including MS, by the by, who leases as well as builds.

for this reason psnow is practically an already old service before the real fight for streaming became reality. To maintain and invest datacenters all over the world it takes a huge amount of money ... money

My questions were - how much money do you think it will take to lease sufficient data center capacity to meet the needs of streaming users in the next 5 years? Does it match the requirement of a total public cloud service?

I'm asking you also to put that cost up against the cost of running a 'traditional' console business, and the physical distribution logistics therein.

I'm not really seeing any answers or suggestions.

I'm going to put out a bet that I doubt in the next 5 years, the cost scale of meeting streaming demand will exceed the cost scales of supplying the traditional console market today. That being the case, if the latter market is manageable for Sony, I think the former would be also, from a cost and revenue scale point of view. Just for perspective, PS revenue last year was a match for total Azure revenue last year. I'm not very convinced that the 'scale-of-business' leap from the business Sony is in right now to what is likely going to be required to supply the streaming market any time soon is going to be that big. Now, if we think the game streaming market is going to explode to - say - 100m users in one year, then anyone operating here is going to have scaling challenges, not just Sony! I think more realistically it'll be a much gentler boil than that.
 
Last edited:

UnNamed

Banned
Oct 27, 2017
616
I wrote a comment but the forum has eat it.
In a nutshell, we aren't in 2005 anymore, internet worldwide diffusion in not at 10%.
 

Dest

Has seen more 10s than EA ever will
Coward
Jun 4, 2018
14,025
Work
Why wouldn't you want it if it's perfect?
I'm not opposed to the service being perfect. I think for some people and some setups, it might be a great solution, but it still rips away ownership. I just personally would probably never ever subscribe to any such service.
 

upinsmoke

Banned
Oct 26, 2017
2,566
Why is PlayStation Now constantly ignored in these discussions?
I tend to liken this to football (soccer analogy). Some people think football was invented in 1992 because that's when the "boom" happened with the premier league and such. Really it had been around for much longer.

Similar here, it's suddenly become a thing because the media portrays it as such and anything that came before it failed or didht exist.
 

AndyD

Mambo Number PS5
Member
Oct 27, 2017
8,602
Nashville
It's a bit surprising how completely NV is ignored in these discussions, given that you can easily argue that they offer the most "complete" streaming service right now.
- You can stream thousands of games.
- You actually own those games, and can e.g. take your progress in them to a local system (and back).

You can argue that NV isn't a real competitor to those large companies, but they aren't some tiny startup either. And more importantly, they provide the entire stack from the server GPU hardware over the software and infrastructure all the way to the consumer streaming hardware (Shield), and can therefore offer the lowest server-side latencies.

I'm not really interested in any of these services, but if I had to choose one it would be the one where I own my games and save data.
I think it's the limiting factor of having a shield that gets to it. I think the idea with these new services will be that they can come in to any device, pc, tablet, smart TV, anywhere you can attach a USB or Bluetooth controller.
 

gremlinz1982

Member
Aug 11, 2018
5,331
Those who see in streaming an occasion for Microsoft to take their revenge on Sony , just like if the only five mainstream companies they know were able to provide worldwide demanding networking service, your should stop daydreaming because it will only be true in your little forum sitcom.

Microsoft has a lot to lose here and that's why focusing on their existing customerbase of Xbox owners is the best they can do, because the amount of exclusives content they can provide is very limited when anyone can stream all the Windows content without the need of their services, including the Microsoft content.

Verizon, Comcast, Netflix, Wal-Mart, Joe's Bar and Ammu-nation could open their streaming services tomorow if they want and having more or less the same catalog Microsoft provide. And I won't talk about Valve or Nvidia who won't stay their arms crossed.

An like during the gold rush, those who made money were picking axe merchants, here patents owners are already sharpening their legal injunction. And guess who owns two or three wallets of patents consecutive to companies buyback ?
Microsoft has Azure. They have 152 data centers worldwide (last time I checked) and the Azure business allows them to leverage their earnings to try and expand their gaming scope.

Game Pass will be a service that lets you access games as long as you have a subscription on whatever device. Streaming is a way of accessing more gamers who would not have a console or PC. They could game on tablet or phone if need be.

It is also weird seeing you quote different companies that could get into gaming. If it were so easy, they would have done it already.