So, how do you think Sony will tackle potential force of Nintendo with MS?

[VallenValiant]

I don't know why so many think this is good news for Xbox. From where I am standing, this is more like MS getting out of hardware and having Xbox turn into another SEGA.

I mean, sure, Xbox games will continue to exist. But Nintendo has the stronger hardware sales these days of the two.

Releasing Xbox games on Nintendo hardware is not a positive sign for the Xbox console. The fact that people are trying to spin it as a good thing makes my head hurt.

 

[Dekuman]

They are dismantling themselves if streaming is the future though.

Click to shrink...

Without knowing details I don't see how. People will still want and buy their games.

It makes power less relevant and guanratees future of devices like Switch

we alreaddy know Nvidia sees its work with Nintendo as lasting decades and this was before it became clear just how big the Switch has become in the past year.

 

[minus_me]

Indeed this kind of stubborness has a good chance of making them being late to future party.
I don't think Sony want things to change.

Click to shrink...

Is it possible that Sony has an actual supply problem with PSnow?

If you have x number of concurrent users, that means you need x number of actual machines in the server farm.

Is the Cell chip still produced to keep making those PSnow server blades?

Maybe they are waiting for the PS5 apu that is backwards compatible with all playstations to stick in its place and expand.

Not a huge gamer, but the topic piqued my interest. Apologies if I'm totally off base.

 

[mas8705]

Plenty of options I'm sure, but it isn't like a Nintendo/Microsoft alliance is going to put Sony in jeopardy or anything. If Sony continues what they are doing, then really there's not really much they need to be concerned about (but they can always improve of course).

 

[Eggman]

You are severly underestimating the kind of cloud service MSFT is providing to customers.
They have the tech, the people and the infrastructure to leapfrog Sony by quite a margin.
A real competitor in that regard would be Amazon or Google, also it's not because we only hear about this just now that they just started working on this.
It's most likely a project that's taken quite the time to mature so that it can be customer ready now.
Sony is providing a service right now but there are indeed companies that could provide a better service, MSFT is among them.


They can but how long would that take, will it be as interesting as what MSFT provides?
If MSFT provides an excellent service in all markets by the end of the year, what chance is there for Sony to provide an alternative if they're already late in working on the project?
Also Nintendo allowing PSNow on Switch is absolutely not a given.

Click to shrink...

How do we know their game streaming service will just leapfrog Sony's? And Sony doesn't need to own the infrastructure to use it. They can host PSNow on whatever servers they want and these other companies won't deny them because they already offer services to competing platforms/services. PSN I believe is already hosted by Amazon servers.

And how many people do you think will be game streaming in these markets that PSNow isn't already available in which consists mostly of 3rd world countries that don't have a good network infrastructure to begin with?

What do you mean by more interesting? Playstation has the best game library that they can utilize if that's what you mean.

Game streaming isn't feasible in "all markets" so it doesn't even matter and I didn't say PSNow is a given on the Switch I just said they have the ability to do so.

 

[Anthony Hopkins]

Is it possible that Sony has an actual supply problem with PSnow?

If you have x number of concurrent users, that means you need x number of actual machines in the server farm.

Is the Cell chip still produced to keep making those PSnow server blades?

Maybe they are waiting for the PS5 apu that is backwards compatible with all playstations to stick in its place and expand.

Not a huge gamer, but the topic piqued my interest. Apologies if I'm totally off base.

Click to shrink...

I don't know, there were like 90 million PS3 sold so maybe Sony are collecting them all back lol.
But what you say absolutely makes sense.
Also it pretty sucks playing such low quality visuals on ps3 games on PSNOW, it would be nice if they did something a la enhanced BC.

 

[Deleted member 7462]

The argument that gamepass rates with Sony's offerings IS absurd.

Any game you can point to, you can point to that game already being available on Sony's store OR you can point to PSNow, which has heads and shoulders more games than Gamepass does.

Nobody will be streaming 2K on Switch when they can buy it outright, and no one will be singing the praises of multiplayer games they have to stream, regardless.

The idea that MS can overtake Sony with worse games, using streaming services Sony is ALREADY leading the charge in, while simultaneously having no games that even compete with Sony's financially or critically, is delusional.

Click to shrink...

Here are a smattering of games that you can play on Gamepass - which, if it ends up on Switch, will expand Gamepass's reach and customer base:

• Banjo-Kazooie
• Banjo-Tooie
• BioShock
• BioShock Infinite
• Fable 2
• Fable 3
• Fallout 3
• Fallout 4
• Forza Horizon 4
• all the Gears of War games

...and that's just through the "G"s.

The idea that these games are not appealing enough to a general audience to drive Gamepass subs is fucking insane. Like, you have to be willfully ignoring the popularity of these games to make the argument that you are making.

Microsoft has a good collection of first- and third-party games, many of which were highly-rated by critics if you care about that (I don't) and many of which are current-generation releases. They have access to the Rare games from the N64 era that Switch owners would absolutely care about on top of that.

If you don't think that these games are popular enough to spur subscription growth in Gamepass, especially if it's placed on Nintendo consoles, and if you don't believe that this will represent a significant increase in revenue for Microsoft and be of - I don't know, interest, concern, whatever - to the other streaming services owned by game companies (so not just PS Now, but also EA Access), then I don't know what to tell you. We're just going to have to absolutely disagree on this one.

Some of you (I said "you," and you've mentioned it here a bit, but I don't mean just you personally) are so fixated on "but who will win the console war," and there really isn't an argument that GP access on Switch will somehow sell more Switches than PS5s or Xboxes than PS5s or whatever. I think that Microsoft would love to win that competition, mind you, but they've never been able to beat Sony worldwide, even when they were at their best and Sony was at its worst, and they never will. But we're entering a phase where Microsoft really just wants its services in as many places as possible and in which GP very arguably represents the best value in streaming services owned by the companies.

The idea that Sony wouldn't give a fuck about GP on Switch because it won't lose them the console sales wars? Yeah, sure, I'm on board with that.

The idea that Sony wouldn't see GP on Switch as a threat to the viability or attractiveness of PSNow? I don't see how you could possibly believe that. I'm sorry, I just can't see a strong argument that Sony won't care about this. There certainly could be one! I'm not seeing that argument so far.

 

[mael]

How do we know their game streaming service will just leapfrog Sony's? And Sony doesn't need to own the infrastructure to use it. They can host PSNow on whatever servers they want and these other companies won't deny them because they already offer services to competing platforms/services. PSN I believe is already hosted by Amazon servers.

And how many people do you think will be game streaming in these markets that PSNow isn't already available in which consists mostly of 3rd world countries that don't have a good network infrastructure to begin with?

What do you mean by more interesting? Playstation has the best game library that they can utilize if that's what you mean.

Game streaming isn't feasible in "all markets" so it doesn't even matter and I didn't say PSNow is a given on the Switch I just said they have the ability to do so.

Click to shrink...

At the moment, everywhere MSFT can just leverage Azure for this service.
Sony is paying Amazon for the service which isn't the same as when the guy providing the infrastructure is doing the service, which is also why I fully expect Amazon's solution to be vastly better than Sony's or even MSFT if there is one.

And by service I mean service not just the games.
Stuffs like voice chat, achievement and all kind of supplemental services that would go along with such a service.
We also do know that MSFT and Nintendo are currently talking, THAT is why xCloud on Switch can even be a thing.
Sony doesn't even allow software on Switch to interact with games on their service, what makes you think they would want to provide PSNow on Switch or that Nintendo would be interested at all?
There is no indication of anyone being interested in PSNow on Switch from Sony or Nintendo and you assume that it could be provided in a timely manner for it to be an alternative to MSFT's solution? Why?

 

[Rndom Grenadez]

You guys are so delusional.

You're acting like the Switch getting gamepass means that some wealth of games will be uncovered and the platform will prosper.

But game pass doesn't have any games that are better than Sony's offerings. Xbox doesn't have any games that are better than Sony's offerings. Offering game pass across as many platforms as possible won't change the fact Xbox simply doesn't have the weight to toss around in the arena with Sony.

Click to shrink...

You sound like a fanboy. You realize that Gamepass ALREADY has a shit ton of amazing content, including some great 3rd party materials.

You also realize that the report isn't just about Gamepass, but also Xcloud, which would in essence even the playing field when it comes to 3rd party software.

People are really acting like this isn't a big deal (if it turns out to be true), but it is.

 

[Malek]

Nothing really, Microsoft bringing xCloud to Phones and Tvs and expanding gamepass to Pc and switch won't do anything beside kill any value that xbox has left (I think the next xbox would be lucky to even reach Wii U numbers imo) and leave the whole console market for Sony and Nintendo to dominate, while MS will turn into a solely service provider only

all Sony has to do is continue making great games and they will be fine

 

[12Danny123]

Nothing really, Microsoft bringing xCloud to Phones and Tvs and expanding gamepass to Pc and switch won't do anything beside kill any value that xbox has left (I think the next xbox would be lucky to even reach Wii U numbers imo) and leave the whole console market for Sony and Nintendo to dominate, while MS will turn into a solely service provider only

all Sony has to do is continue making great games and they will be fine

Click to shrink...

depends if Streaming erodes the console market, the Eastern Markets, people have been moving away from Consoles. Xbox as a platform will likely thrive with potentially more users than the whole PS platform in the long term future.

 

[Eggman]

At the moment, everywhere MSFT can just leverage Azure for this service.
Sony is paying Amazon for the service which isn't the same as when the guy providing the infrastructure is doing the service, which is also why I fully expect Amazon's solution to be vastly better than Sony's or even MSFT if there is one.

And by service I mean service not just the games.
Stuffs like voice chat, achievement and all kind of supplemental services that would go along with such a service.
We also do know that MSFT and Nintendo are currently talking, THAT is why xCloud on Switch can even be a thing.
Sony doesn't even allow software on Switch to interact with games on their service, what makes you think they would want to provide PSNow on Switch or that Nintendo would be interested at all?
There is no indication of anyone being interested in PSNow on Switch from Sony or Nintendo and you assume that it could be provided in a timely manner for it to be an alternative to MSFT's solution? Why?

Click to shrink...

You're ignoring that Sony has already been doing game streaming for years and succeeding at it with their current infrastructure with it being the most popular by far. There isn't much room for improvement to begin with. I was stating that those are options if they really need it but they are doing great without it.

This is all with PSNow getting next to no marketing as well. If Sony wanted to they could market the hell out of PSNow but they haven't because they know it isn't going to be nearly as popular in the near future like people in here are trying to make it seem. And I trust Sony being the market leader by a large margin to know better than random people on the internet and even the Xbox division. Microsoft has already been marketing the hell out of Gamepass and it is still only a fraction as popular as PSNow.

The only reason Microsoft is doing any of this is because they know they can't compete in hardware sales. Sony has proven multiple times they are capable of adapting as well. They are literally the biggest name in gaming and that can give them a lot of leverage if they wanted to use it.

And yes porting the client to play PSNow games is likely pretty easy for them as they have already done it for multiple devices. I dont see the Switch being more complicated, it's just another piece of hardware. And like I said if they felt the need to so they could.

 

[12Danny123]

You're ignoring that Sony has already been doing game streaming for years and succeeding at it with their current infrastructure with it being the most popular by far. There isn't much room for improvement to begin with. I was stating that those are options if they really need it but they are doing great without it.

This is all with PSNow getting next to no marketing as well. If Sony wanted to they could market the hell out of PSNow but they haven't because they know it isn't going to be nearly as popular in the near future like people in here are trying to make it seem. And I trust Sony being the market leader by a large margin to know better than random people on the internet and even the Xbox division. Microsoft has already been marketing the hell out of Gamepass and it is still only a fraction as popular as PSNow.

The only reason Microsoft is doing any of this is because they know they can't compete in hardware sales. Sony has proven multiple times they are capable of adapting as well. They are literally the biggest name in gaming and that can give them a lot of leverage if they wanted to use it.

And yes porting the client to play PSNow games is likely pretty easy for them as they have already done it for multiple devices. I dont see the Switch being more complicated, it's just another piece of hardware. And like I said if they felt the need to so they could.

Click to shrink...

Sony has not proven at all that they can adapt, their stock price says it all. Plus being the most profitable does not mean the most popular. You can have little profit but have the most users, as Amazon and Netflix have shown.

 

[ClarkusDarkus]

Playstation is synonymous with gaming, I'm sure Sony will still be just fine going forward.

 

[mael]

You're ignoring that Sony has already been doing game streaming for years and succeeding at it with their current infrastructure with it being the most popular by far. There isn't much room for improvement to begin with. I was stating that those are options if they really need it but they are doing great without it.

This is all with PSNow getting next to no marketing as well. If Sony wanted to they could market the hell out of PSNow but they haven't because they know it isn't going to be nearly as popular in the near future like people in here are trying to make it seem. And I trust Sony being the market leader by a large margin to know better than random people on the internet and even the Xbox division. Microsoft has already been marketing the hell out of Gamepass and it is still only a fraction as popular as PSNow.

The only reason Microsoft is doing any of this is because they know they can't compete in hardware sales. Sony has proven multiple times they are capable of adapting as well. They are literally the biggest name in gaming and that can give them a lot of leverage if they wanted to use it.

And yes porting the client to play PSNow games is likely pretty easy for them as they have already done it for multiple devices. I dont see the Switch being more complicated, it's just another piece of hardware. And like I said if they felt the need to so they could.

Click to shrink...

You're vastly overinflating PSNow importance and undervaluing MSFT's importance in Cloud computing.
PSNow being the biggest fish in town without qualifiers is about as impressive as saying Switch is the biggest handheld on the market right now.
Like what other competing services on that magnitude are there anyway?
Sony is on a path of irrelevancy in its home market (let's face it they're not going to do anything spectacular in Japan without a handheld option).
MSFT has never done well outside of its core market (and I'll argue they never even tried anyway) and the lecture of the market through console war is vastly outdated with current MSFT anyway.
There's a reason they cared more about expanding their IPs like Minecraft than gatekeeping their customers to their console (also why they're releasing everything on multiple platform these days too).
MSFT with xCloud is going to be very competitive very quickly, everything we've seen from Azure points to that already.
Again on Switch, it won't be a close thing. You act like PSNow on Switch is something for Sony alone to decide.
That is absolutely not the case and there is an incentive for Nintendo to block PSNow on Switch while they have an incentive to help MSFT synergize with their platform.

The issue is not technical, the issue is strategic.
Sony is not in a good position to put PSNow on Switch and we have nothing that points to Sony being willing to do it or Nintendo to even think of allowing it either.

 

[Outrun]

Xbox is shooting itself in the foot in the console sales and helping Nintendo to catch up with PS4 in the software space.

So...Sony should do nothing imo?, because it won't affect them either in software or console sales.

Click to shrink...

Software is the key driver of profits. Now it will be subscriptions that will generate revenue.

MS does not care if you play on Switch, PC, Xbox, or even PS. As long as you subscribe to Gamepass, they are OK.

 

[jrDev]

This. Sony is successful because of stuff that neither MS or Nintendo can compete at.

Click to shrink...

Weird choice of words...

 

[mael]

Weird choice of words...

Click to shrink...

It's also very funny because Sony's success is mostly about 3rd party softwares.
Considering MSFT is getting 3rd party without any problem but can't seem to get any success out of US/UK while Nintendo issues come from 3rd party software skipping their platform.
This literally solve the problems of both competitors.

 

[Sangetsu-II]

Software is the key driver of profits. Now it will be subscriptions that will generate revenue.

MS does not care if you play on Switch, PC, Xbox, or even PS. As long as you subscribe to Gamepass, they are OK.

Click to shrink...

Again what does MS making money mean to Sony's success?

MS is still shooting itself in the foot giving Sony their Userbase. There is nothing holding Xbox fans from getting a PS4 now.

So Sony should do nothing because these moves don't affect them, it actually benefits them.

 

[Crayon]

Fuckin Fan Fiction Factory

 

[Marcus Brutalius]

1. Approach one of the other big guys to expand the infrastructure and release a PS4 streaming handheld= get Japan back
2. Make good friends at retail, coz they will start to hate MS for sure = fortify Europe and rest of the world
3. Release a few games on Steam/ Epic Store just to retaliate

There will be more unexpected alliances that's for sure, because what MS is doing is an obvious move to take it all.

 

[N.Domixis]

*apart from PlayStation

MS are not going to do something which loses them money.

If they are going to have all there games natively on Playstation, they will not make consoles because that would lose them money.

Click to shrink...

No, today these rumors have completely changed my mind on how MS will approach this. They would definitely put this on playstation if Sony would let them, by letting GP on playstation xbox games would sell to an audience that not even nintendo switch could reach. Microsoft wants game pass on everything no matter what it is. Switch, IOS, android, PC, and even playstation.

Stream option available aon everything. But the local game play remains exclusive to their hardware.

 

[Sonicfan059]

Sony has not proven at all that they can adapt, their stock price says it all. Plus being the most profitable does not mean the most popular. You can have little profit but have the most users, as Amazon and Netflix have shown.

Click to shrink...

Sony owns a crap ton of patents for streaming technology due to their purchase of Gaikai so most likely they will be getting royalties from these companies.

 

[TheRulingRing]

Really the only option they have is to leave the industry before Amazon embarrassingly boots them out.

 

[Anthony Hopkins]

No, today these rumors have completely changed my mind on how MS will approach this. They would definitely put this on playstation if Sony would let them, by letting GP on playstation xbox games would sell to an audience that not even nintendo switch could reach. Microsoft wants game pass on everything no matter what it is. Switch, IOS, android, PC, and even playstation.

Click to shrink...

Yes but if they would not release new xbox hardware, because there would be no point.

 

[N.Domixis]

Yes but if they would not release new xbox hardware, because there would be no point.

Click to shrink...

I am thinking about the far future. I don't think sony will be able to compete with PS now and will eventually have to give in. Gamepass would be the obvious choice. MS, SONY and Nintedo fighting off Google and Amazon would be how these three would survive in a future where physical hardware is a thing of the past. I hope this future is far away though. I prefer actual harware.

 

[Anthony Hopkins]

I am thinking about the far future. I don't think sony will be able to compete with PS now and will eventually have to give in. Gamepass would be the obvious choice. MS, SONY and Nintedo fighting off Google and Amazon would be how these three would survive in a future where physical hardware is a thing of the past. I hope this future is far away though. I prefer actual harware.

Click to shrink...

Far into the future Sony won't do hardware to, so they will be competing with gamepass/xcloud.

 

[N.Domixis]

Far into the future Sony won't do hardware to, so they will be competing with gamepass/xcloud.

Click to shrink...

I guess it all depends if Sony takes serious steps to improve it.

 

[Eggman]

You're vastly overinflating PSNow importance and undervaluing MSFT's importance in Cloud computing.
PSNow being the biggest fish in town without qualifiers is about as impressive as saying Switch is the biggest handheld on the market right now.
Like what other competing services on that magnitude are there anyway?
Sony is on a path of irrelevancy in its home market (let's face it they're not going to do anything spectacular in Japan without a handheld option).
MSFT has never done well outside of its core market (and I'll argue they never even tried anyway) and the lecture of the market through console war is vastly outdated with current MSFT anyway.
There's a reason they cared more about expanding their IPs like Minecraft than gatekeeping their customers to their console (also why they're releasing everything on multiple platform these days too).
MSFT with xCloud is going to be very competitive very quickly, everything we've seen from Azure points to that already.
Again on Switch, it won't be a close thing. You act like PSNow on Switch is something for Sony alone to decide.
That is absolutely not the case and there is an incentive for Nintendo to block PSNow on Switch while they have an incentive to help MSFT synergize with their platform.

The issue is not technical, the issue is strategic.
Sony is not in a good position to put PSNow on Switch and we have nothing that points to Sony being willing to do it or Nintendo to even think of allowing it either.

Click to shrink...

I am not vastly over inflating PSNow, like I said it is currently the most popular subscription service. It is currently competing and beating Gamepass and EA Acces by a significant amount. While they aren't streaming services (which some would say playing games natively is better) it is impressive that it is doing so much better (especially since it was mainly a streaming service). I think you vastly undervalue how much it means to already have such a larger number of subscribers and to think that another competing service will all of a sudden take over.

You are also over inflating how many people even care about game streaming at all in the near future, especially in most markets.

I haven't seen anyting that suggests that xCloud will be very competitive very quickly. Them putting their games on other platforms isn't going to make more people want to use xCloud more than PSnow. Especially when you can already use PSNow on other platforms. In fact if they port their games to more platforms than even less people will decide to stream them rather than play them natively.

I never said any of those other things you mentioned, I said Sony is capable of doing it if they need or want to. You are right they aren't in a good position to put PSNow on Switch, they are in a better position because they don't need to as they are currently dominating in both hardware or game streaming. If that is threatened they can adapt. Also you think Nintendo wouldn't want Playstation exclusives on Switch over Microsoft's? That isn't even a question, Sony's games would do much better and I think if Nintendo had an option they would for sure choose Playstation over Xbox.

 

[melodiousmowl]

Nintendo is even less likely to get out of hardware now.

Click to shrink...

making hardware and keeping supply chains is rough, and there's probably not a coincidence their hardware is always years behind a reasonable curve. that + that quote from a nintendo exec that was probably out of context about hardware + getting ms to realize their visions and put it through their supply chain...

farrrr fetched but i for one would love something nintendo touched that wasn't already ancient when it hit the shelves

 

[Eggman]

Sony has not proven at all that they can adapt, their stock price says it all. Plus being the most profitable does not mean the most popular. You can have little profit but have the most users, as Amazon and Netflix have shown.

Click to shrink...

When I say Sony I mean the Playstation division who have been the leader in gaming for a very long time and have dominated 3 out of the last 4 generations. The rest of Sony and their affect on Sony's stock is irrelevent. And leading by such a larger margin in revenue does mean it is more popular. The difference is huge.

 

[konoka]

Software is the key driver of profits. Now it will be subscriptions that will generate revenue.

MS does not care if you play on Switch, PC, Xbox, or even PS. As long as you subscribe to Gamepass, they are OK.

Click to shrink...

but third parties care if putting games on game pass are profitable for them not just MS.

 

[mael]

I am not vastly over inflating PSNow, like I said it is currently the most popular subscription service. It is currently competing and beating Gamepass and EA Acces by a significant amount. While they aren't streaming services (which some would say playing games natively is better) it is impressive that it is doing so much better (especially since it was mainly a streaming service). I think you vastly undervalue how much it means to already have such a larger number of subscribers and to think that another competing service will all of a sudden take over.

You are also over inflating how many people even care about game streaming at all in the near future, especially in most markets.

I haven't seen anyting that suggests that xCloud will be very competitive very quickly. Them putting their games on other platforms isn't going to make more people want to use xCloud more than PSnow. Especially when you can already use PSNow on other platforms. In fact if they port their games to more platforms than even less people will decide to stream them rather than play them natively.

Click to shrink...

People will care about Streaming if it allow them to get software they have no chance of getting otherwise.
It's also why MSFT went on a shopping spree lately.
Both platform offer what people actually want from Sony or MSFT : 3rd parties
So in that regard xCloud become really interesting if the perfs are up to snuff because again MSFT has the infrastructure to make it competitive.

I never said any of those other things you mentioned, I said Sony is capable of doing it if they need or want to. You are right they aren't in a good position to put PSNow on Switch, they are in a better position because they don't need to as they are currently dominating in both hardware or game streaming. If that is threatened they can adapt. Also you think Nintendo wouldn't want Playstation exclusives on Switch over Microsoft's? That isn't even a question, Sony's games would do much better and I think if Nintendo had an option they would for sure choose Playsation over Xbox.

Click to shrink...

You're delusional if you think Nintendo care about Sony or MSFT software per se.
They care about 3rd parties 1st and foremost.
MSFT complement Nintendo offering much better than Sony's.
If MSFT have 3rd party games available through GP, Sony's proposition become moot already.
Sony's offering may be better than MSFT but it can't hold a candle to 3rd party presence on Xbox.
R* alone would overshadow anything from Sony.

And again, THEY ARE NOT TALKING TO EACH OTHER AND ARE ACTUALLY COMPETING WHERE NINTENDO ACTUALLY CARES.
If Nintendo is petty enough to block a remake of an old game they had the rights, what makes you think they have any reason to ever care about Sony's offering.
Keep in mind that once MSFT provide AAA 3rd party presence on Switch, they don't really need or care about Sony's presence at all.
Strategically they don't have to care and it makes no sense for them to care.
Sony is absolutely in the worst position to put its streaming service on Switch.
I'll argue even worse than Google currently is.

 

[dlauv]

I'm thinking Gamepass is going to end up on PS5.

I just wonder what exactly MS' new console is going to bring to the table. Sure, less input latency, but that can't be all. Maybe hardware-supported BC with OGXbox, 360, and X1?

 

[Anthony Hopkins]

I guess it all depends if Sony takes serious steps to improve it.

Click to shrink...

Well to be fair to Sony they are more far along at game streaming then MS.

 

[AmFreak]

Without knowing details I don't see how. People will still want and buy their games.

It makes power less relevant and guanratees future of devices like Switch

we alreaddy know Nvidia sees its work with Nintendo as lasting decades and this was before it became clear just how big the Switch has become in the past year.

Click to shrink...

If streaming is the future there will be only 2 kinds of companies, those with a streaming service and those delivering games to them.
This puts Nintendo in the latter, while at the same time helping streaming becoming the future.
If you want to stream games you don't need a $350 device, all you need is a SoC for a few bucks.
I can't see this move ever happen under Iwata (or Yamauchi).

 

[melodiousmowl]

Well to be fair to Sony they are more far along at game streaming then MS.

Click to shrink...

i think it depends on if they are willing to reinvent to compete or just sit on it or give it just piecemeal updates - there's tons of wiggle room for any of those options and honestly sony's past performance says piecemeal or sit on it.

 

[Nuclear Muffin]

If this is true; then it would be the greatest paradigm shift that the industry has seen since the death of SEGA and the introduction of the original Xbox.

Only thing that compares is the introduction of the Apple App Store.

Sony would have to start reconsidering their entire business model if this move turned out to be true; as it would be a big step towards the commoditisation of traditional (i.e non-Nintendo/specialist) console gaming. And a big step away from traditional console gaming being driven by new and shiny hardware.

Game Pass would become Sony's biggest enemy, not retail games. They would have to triple down on PS Now and position it as their prime offering if they wanted to compete in the same space.

Make no mistake, this would be a truly disruptive innovation if true!

 

[giallo]

As long as they stay the course, and offer backwards compatibility with the PS4 (this is very, very important), they'll be fine.

 

[Eggman]

People will care about Streaming if it allow them to get software they have no chance of getting otherwise.
It's also why MSFT went on a shopping spree lately.
Both platform offer what people actually want from Sony or MSFT : 3rd parties
So in that regard xCloud become really interesting if the perfs are up to snuff because again MSFT has the infrastructure to make it competitive.


You're delusional if you think Nintendo care about Sony or MSFT software per se.
They care about 3rd parties 1st and foremost.
MSFT complement Nintendo offering much better than Sony's.
If MSFT have 3rd party games available through GP, Sony's proposition become moot already.
Sony's offering may be better than MSFT but it can't hold a candle to 3rd party presence on Xbox.
R* alone would overshadow anything from Sony.

And again, THEY ARE NOT TALKING TO EACH OTHER AND ARE ACTUALLY COMPETING WHERE NINTENDO ACTUALLY CARES.
If Nintendo is petty enough to block a remake of an old game they had the rights, what makes you think they have any reason to ever care about Sony's offering.
Keep in mind that once MSFT provide AAA 3rd party presence on Switch, they don't really need or care about Sony's presence at all.
Strategically they don't have to care and it makes no sense for them to care.
Sony is absolutely in the worst position to put its streaming service on Switch.
I'll argue even worse than Google currently is.

Click to shrink...

People can get most software very easily without streaming and will be able to for a very long time. And people will continue to prefer playing games natively over streaming for many more years for many reasons. And no it has proven that many people want Playstation for their first party as well as third party games. Playstation currently has the best balance of both and it is one of the main reasons why the PS4 has been so dominant.

If Nintendo actually cared so much about third party they wouldn't rely on Xbox at all. They would invest more time in getting game to play natively on their hardware instead of settling for streaming it through xCloud. They know most people buy their platform for their great first party games. Not many people will buy a Switch to stream Xbox games and it has been proven that most people that buy the Switch already own a PS4 or Xbox.

How does Xbox complement Nintendo's offering much better than Sony's? That doesn't make any sense and you didn't explain why. Like I said the Playsation has more and better first, second and third party games than Xbox. Playstation's library would compliment any platform more than Xbox's. And the combination of Sony's first party and third party blows anything Microsoft offers out of the water.

If Sony offered their stellar library to Nintendo than yes Nintendo would definitely take the offer. It would only mean great things for Nintendo. You are fooling yourself if anyone would take Xbox's library over Sony's.

"what makes you think they have any reason to ever care about Sony's offering"
The answer is Sony's unmatched game library like I said. They would be fools not to.

 

[bananas]

Well to be fair to Sony they are more far along at game streaming then MS.

Click to shrink...

Microsoft was more far along at smartphones then Apple was.

It doesn't matter if it's a subpar product that you don't put focus on.

Microsoft has made it clear that they are going all-in on game streaming, in a way that Sony hasn't been comfortable to.

That doesn't mean Sony can't change that, but they seem more content with the traditional model of selling a box and releasing games exclusively for that box. And it's making them a shit-ton of money right now (in fact, the poor sales of the Xbox One prompted Microsoft into thinking about other ways outside of the traditional box model), but the best selling platforms of all time have a ceiling of around 150 million units. If it's true that Microsoft is looking to put Game Pass on everything from mobile phones to Smart TVs, then that's a way higher ceiling.

 

[Castia]

Full PS1-PS4 backwards compatibility on PS5.

Click to shrink...

This is such a strong opinion on this site but I just don't get it.

I've been gaming for over 25 years and owned every PS to date spending thousands on consoles and games in the process but I've got zero intention of playing PS1 games in this day and age, it doesn't interest me one bit.

 

[Rndom Grenadez]

making hardware and keeping supply chains is rough, and there's probably not a coincidence their hardware is always years behind a reasonable curve. that + that quote from a nintendo exec that was probably out of context about hardware + getting ms to realize their visions and put it through their supply chain...

farrrr fetched but i for one would love something nintendo touched that wasn't already ancient when it hit the shelves

Click to shrink...

Name another handheld device, that is in the price range of the Switch, that can do what the Switch does?

 

[12Danny123]

People can get most software very easily without streaming and will be able to for a very long time. And people will continue to prefer playing games natively over streaming for many more years for many reasons. And no it has proven that many people want Playstation for their first party as well as third party games. Playstation currently has the best balance of both and it is one of the main reasons why the PS4 has been so dominant.

If Nintendo actually cared so much about third party they wouldn't rely on Xbox at all. They would invest more time in getting game to play natively on their hardware instead of settling for streaming it through xCloud. They know most people buy their platform for their great first party games. Not many people will buy a Switch to stream Xbox games and it has been proven that most people that buy the Switch already own a PS4 or Xbox.

How does Xbox complement Nintendo's offering much better than Sony's? That doesn't make any sense and you didn't explain why. Like I said the Playsation has more and better first, second and third party games than Xbox. Playstation's library would compliment any platform more than Xbox's. And the combination of Sony's first party and third party blows anything Microsoft offers out of the water.

If Sony offered their stellar library to Nintendo than yes Nintendo would definitely take the offer. It would only mean great things for Nintendo. You are fooling yourself if anyone would take Xbox's library over Sony's.

"what makes you think they have any reason to ever care about Sony's offering"
The answer is Sony's unmatched game library like I said. They would be fools not to.

Click to shrink...

Unfortunately for Sony, they seem to be conceding A LOT of potential new users to the Xbox Platform, if those 2-4 Billion users are Xbox users, then what's the point in purchasing Sony's services? There is none, especially if Sony doesn't allow XCloud/GP on PS5. Whether third party developers will continue to publish their games onto consoles is a different question entirely.

It seems like Sony is taking an isolationist approach to gaming, the exact opposite of the industry.

 

[melodiousmowl]

Name another handheld device, that is in the price range of the Switch, that can do what the Switch does?

Click to shrink...

years old portable tegras? old iphones? it's a shame no-one really wanted to step out and make (compelling) gaming only hardware from their existing products, but then again no one else is nintendo with a huge development push to make a product people would want.

admittedly this means no good products at good prices, but it could have been done

apple was in a good position years ago imo, but that ship is probably well past the horizon

 

[Dr Richard Kimble]

I think the question we, and Sony, must ask ourselves is: In 10 years will consoles be needed to play a triple A video game with top end graphic fidelity and performance?

I think all signs point to Microsoft believing that we won't need consoles to play cutting edge games anymore. The console part of the Xbox business will be like the disc part of the Netflix business. Eventually no one gets the movies on disc anymore ......even though Netflix gave the option......eventually all went to streaming. Xbox will give the console option, but they believe that sooner rather then later the vast majority will stream games.....and they will eventually stop making consoles.

I think most of us agree that hardware under your tv will be replaced with streaming and cloud technologies......but the point of contention is WHEN will the infrastructure to adequately support streaming (to the standard of the core gamer) be ready?

This is a pivotal moment in video game history.........we are seeing history taking place here......take it in.....it's grest to be alive.

 

[Eggman]

Unfortunately for Sony, they seem to be conceding A LOT of potential new users to the Xbox Platform, if those 2-4 Billion users are Xbox users, then what's the point in purchasing Sony's services? There is none, especially if Sony doesn't allow XCloud/GP on PS5. Whether third party developers will continue to publish their games onto consoles is a different question entirely.

It seems like Sony is taking an isolationist approach to gaming, the exact opposite of the industry.

Click to shrink...

How is Sony conceding anything? They are currently outselling the Xbox by a large margin and have the most popular streaming service like I mentioned. So people not realize how much the Playstation is currently dominating? What 2-4 billion users? What are you even talking about?

What isolation approach? PSNow is already available on multiple devices and can expand to more if they need to. Even remote play on Playstation supports more WIndows operaing systems than Xbox remote play.

Your kidding yourself if you think publishers will stop putting games on consoles anytime in the near future. People really are oversetimating how many people want to or are capable of streaming video games. They are a much different form of media than music, TV and movies.

 

[Deleted member 52190]

Unfortunately for Sony, they seem to be conceding A LOT of potential new users to the Xbox Platform, if those 2-4 Billion users are Xbox users, then what's the point in purchasing Sony's services? There is none, especially if Sony doesn't allow XCloud/GP on PS5. Whether third party developers will continue to publish their games onto consoles is a different question entirely.

It seems like Sony is taking an isolationist approach to gaming, the exact opposite of the industry.

Click to shrink...

Yah you are getting head of yourself.

 

[Dekuman]

Let me reiterate again that we don't know much outside of 'rumors' and without knowing what's actually being offered, it seems pre-mature to make any declaration and regardless converting to a streaming only or majority streaming future will be a slow process. Multi-generational.

making hardware and keeping supply chains is rough, and there's probably not a coincidence their hardware is always years behind a reasonable curve. that + that quote from a nintendo exec that was probably out of context about hardware + getting ms to realize their visions and put it through their supply chain...

farrrr fetched but i for one would love something nintendo touched that wasn't already ancient when it hit the shelves

Click to shrink...

I'm frankly not sure what you're talking about here
1) Nintendo has great supply chain /relationship with retailers
2) Switch is a mobile platform but in terms of hardware it's pretty much what Sony would want if they had thought of Switch first. I don't really see the relevance of the little knocks youve made about hardware curve.

Suffice to say, in a future where Nintendo has access to a streaming platform and tech, power will be a lot less relevant. And in the short term that "appears" to be the aim. Switch will continue to deliver local experiences via digital/retail that are high quality /exclusives, augmented by offering some other titles on a streaming service. I mean they've already tested RE7 and ACO in Japan on Switch.

If streaming is the future there will be only 2 kinds of companies, those with a streaming service and those delivering games to them.
This puts Nintendo in the latter, while at the same time helping streaming becoming the future.
If you want to stream games you don't need a $350 device, all you need is a SoC for a few bucks.
I can't see this move ever happen under Iwata (or Yamauchi).

Click to shrink...

Maybe in 2030-2040 that will be the case but in that scenario, Microsoft /Sony likely will be out of the hardware business as well outside of maybe a flagship device they build themselves with everything being dummy terminals.... or the future could be different and hardware still matters but in a different way(my view)

There's simply not enough information to know where this is heading outside of the fact that in the short term, Switch will likely see a successor and having that streaming component probably won't hurt it.

I mean even streaming services recently just discovered people actually want to download their movies to watch offline. There will continue to be demand to play games on a non-streaming set-up and with a hybrid device like the Switch and its potential succesors, playing games on the go means being able to play them offline as well.

And without knowing what is actually true/rumoured/not true, that's all I can honestly say in a general fashion.

Essentially though, its fair to assume both Nintendo and MS will pursue strategies that benefit them and each other in this case, so going from this rumour to seeing Nintendo 'dismantling of their hardware business' is probably an overreaction. And even if that is true, that devaluation of hardware is going to hit everyone equally anyways so Nintendo isn't worse off. As a pure content company they are just fine too.

 

[Jaxar]

I think there is a very serious possibility we could have only Microsoft and Nintendo together; and google and amazon being the other two players in videogaming after this gen.

Click to shrink...

Just like that, Sony is doomed... ?

Come on now.. I agree an MS/Nintendo partnership would be something pretty spectacular, but I think as long as Sony keeps making powerful yet affordable consoles with exclusives that draw people in, they'll be just fine.