They have mostly old stuff that already run it's course years ago on other platforms. Barely any newer games and no exclusive content whatsoever. This is not going to convince the masses to jump in.
-
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.
Engadget: Xbox is fighting Google, not Playstation
- Thread starter 12Danny123
- Start date
Biggest in what sense? The games with the greatest sales, obviously, are not free to play.
What metrics are you using to justify this statement? Plenty of people who like owning physical media also use Game Pass, since it services a separate purpose.
I think the analogy works because Game Pass and Google Glass are both luxuries. In their respective markets, they aren't filling a necessary demand, providing alternatives for those willing to spend more money.
Xbox is very much "fighting" Sony though. They're fighting for screen time and each ecosystem is a barrier to reach a consumer for them. That's why they don't really care for Nintendo. They don't really have an ecosystem locking consumers in. Playstation does, with it's bigger userbase, PS+ and game purchased in this generation.
Right now they're trying to lower the bar of entry with all of their services initiative because their ecosystem was not strong enough to warrant the purchase of a console and reach a big enough audience.
You honestly think most gamers are using digital services to procure their titles?
Actually Sony is the only one doing it currently, and while they have the market to themselves, we've all seen the quality in comparison to local hardware.
Stadia and xcloud are the ones touting it will be as good as local hardware. At 4K 60 no less.
To me, this sounds more like a dream than reality. At least for the majority of gamers.
I'm afraid you couldn't be more wrong. Young kids coming into the gaming industry have none of the attachment to hardware we do and the second AAA streaming is easily available with a control delay that's unnoticeable to the laymen, it's going to explode.
Consoles aren't going anywhere for a long time but they arent going to be the most common way of playing games either.
I thought the video is pretty reasonable.
Personally, I am most excited for the prospect of Gamepass with xCloud included as a service. If MS can offer that for $15/month (without requiring an Xbox), I can see it being a really good alternative to Stadia. For next gen though, I feel that hardware is still a necessity for many people.
But I don't agree that Sony is at a major disadvantage. Content is king and I think Sony still has a big lead over MS and Google. MS is clearly not interested in the console wars as well since it is presumably partnering with Sony for their streaming service's backend. Even if Sony launches a more successful streaming service than MS or Google, MS will profit from it. In the end, it's all about the bottomline. MS seems well prepared for whatever future scenarios besides the one in which Google dominates.
Personally, I am most excited for the prospect of Gamepass with xCloud included as a service. If MS can offer that for $15/month (without requiring an Xbox), I can see it being a really good alternative to Stadia. For next gen though, I feel that hardware is still a necessity for many people.
But I don't agree that Sony is at a major disadvantage. Content is king and I think Sony still has a big lead over MS and Google. MS is clearly not interested in the console wars as well since it is presumably partnering with Sony for their streaming service's backend. Even if Sony launches a more successful streaming service than MS or Google, MS will profit from it. In the end, it's all about the bottomline. MS seems well prepared for whatever future scenarios besides the one in which Google dominates.
Sure but PSNow is offering at most 720p while we know and heard already that Stadia looks quite good in comparison and from E3 impressions the image quality of xCloud also impressed some people.
Do they actually do that?
Of course streaming will never be the same, it cannot and enthusiast gamers who are in technical details know about it. This applies to image quality and lag. Average Joe might be fine with it, though, Sony already has people who use PSNow although their offering leaves a lot to improve.
They most probably will in the beginning anyway because they already have customers on it. I also see it hard to compare in the end when PSNow and gamepass subscriptions not only contain streaming but also the ability to download games but it will be worth several threads on Era with hundreds of posts, for sure.
Game Pass is a "killer app," but sales of the Xbox continue to be anemic. If services like this are how Microsoft envision the resurgence of the Xbox brand occurring, they're in for a rude awakening.
Didn't google say 60 hours at 4k will use over 1TB in data?
Seems your just using more data over a longer period compared to doing it all up front.
Phil Spencer, Xbox head, is literally on record as saying for at least the next few years xcloud will not compare to local hardware.
The question is whether the Xbox One brand is hurt that much since years that gamepass is not exactly a system seller but has a high adoption rate within the existing user base. This would indicate a good foundation with the next gen Xbox's as gamepass proves to be an attractive service for people who own a console.
The marketing for the new console(s) and gamepass will be a lot different than it is now. When it comes to strengthen the Xbox brand as a whole MS already did quite a lot of moves and we will see how their first party output in combination with their games launching on gamepass will improve both gamepass subscriptions and convincing people to buy into the Xbox ecosystem.
No, getting great exclusives is key.
I will play the system that has the next God of War or Horizon, not the one that has "an ecosystem on iOS and Android". If streaming allows for incredible games not possible with traditional delivery methods and this leads to Microsoft and Google having better games than Sony or Nintendo - than I can see these two being in trouble.
Football manager 2020
Watch dogs
Doom
Avengers
Destiny 2 shadow keep
Plus two smaller exclusive games
Get packed
Gylt
Plus more to be announced. Yeah but they are old games and fun there course. It will be the features which will be game changing and give new life into games but I'm assuming you havent watched the presentation on all that works though
This.
And I get the feeling 5 years from now, we'll look back at this thread after Sony is approaching 80 million+ sales of PS5 and the competition's streaming subscriptions cant match their projected targets or isn't sustainable anywhere outside of the 1st world (when places like India, China it would probably be impossible to stream and play anything competitive for a very long time, thats nearly 1/3 of earths population right there+Africa, the entire continent. ),
I live in South Africa and have a Fibre internet line with 100MB download and 100MB upload and streaming for me is impossible at this point.
One day I think we'll look back at this and say. "man, this is the same doom gloom we heard in 2011/2012 for the PS4" with how Samsung /Apple were eating into console sales because their THE platforms to have your games on.
Honestly, I dont even understand whats the hype for streaming. If you create servers like MS housing Xbox One hardware, playing Xbox One games, dont graphics get stagnant? I mean they wont get better unless you upgrade your servers with new hardware. Which is not going to happen as fast as 5-6 year console gen refreshs. I mean these companies have to invest in newer tech then upgrade them by hundreds of thousands servers at a time. Right? Are they honestly even going to do that every 5-6 years?
I seriously see streaming as a stumbling block for the betterment of graphics/graphical fidelity. No way they can upgrade their servers as fast as tech improves.
Last edited:
The console market has become consolidated. Short of huge mistakes, marketshare in the console market will probably remain stable. I'd venture to say that the 'console wars' are over - and MS did not win.
For growth opportunities in gaming, MS can't bet on an upending of the console market. It has to look at other vectors, and clearly it is. Its strategy is blurring away from a focus on console. PC, console, streaming. For Microsoft it's now about picking up revenue in a flat competitive landscape rather than trying to own the landscape itself via a console.
Of the new competitors in these other vectors, Google is perhaps the biggest, but is bigger on B2B than direct-to-consumer potential IMO. Sony and MS are likely to be cooperative B2B in streaming, but will compete DTC, and I think Sony is the bigger potential DTC competitor than Google. If MS and Sony are B2B cooperative in streaming, however, then I can see how MS becomes more agnostic about 'fighting' Sony in this arena, and there is less risk for MS in the potential success of Sony here than the potential success of Google.
For growth opportunities in gaming, MS can't bet on an upending of the console market. It has to look at other vectors, and clearly it is. Its strategy is blurring away from a focus on console. PC, console, streaming. For Microsoft it's now about picking up revenue in a flat competitive landscape rather than trying to own the landscape itself via a console.
Of the new competitors in these other vectors, Google is perhaps the biggest, but is bigger on B2B than direct-to-consumer potential IMO. Sony and MS are likely to be cooperative B2B in streaming, but will compete DTC, and I think Sony is the bigger potential DTC competitor than Google. If MS and Sony are B2B cooperative in streaming, however, then I can see how MS becomes more agnostic about 'fighting' Sony in this arena, and there is less risk for MS in the potential success of Sony here than the potential success of Google.
People still have to buy those games, the "sub" is only for old games
Yes? the most popular games today aren't released physically (Fortnite, DOTA, LoL, CS...)
If they improve the catalog and the streaming tech they might have a good chance of being number 1, the games alone will ensure that.
Though the reason I'm more interested in stadia over the other two is that they're not tied to a specific machine. Also the controller connecting to the wi-fi to improve input lag seems like a good idea (needs to be tested though).
Next-gen is going to be fun for sure.
The physical console market is small potatoes for MS.
They have a great chance to turn Gamer Pass + xCloud into the Netflix of gaming if they play their cards right.
They have a great chance to turn Gamer Pass + xCloud into the Netflix of gaming if they play their cards right.
Popular by what metric?
Do we actually have concrete numbers?
Is it a superior service?
Sounds like console wars to me
So why they are spending so much money in the box? They could just release Halo/Gears on PS and get the sales money.
There's going to be a transitionary process, besides it's not MS is short on cash. Game division is not an investment they can't afford to make, as a company they absolutely dwarf Sony, lets not forget that.
Ok but what this has to do with what I said? If they only care about software, release it everywhere
They care about getting to be the Netflix of gaming, that's not the same as saying "well we'll just put our games anywhere".
Streaming services that strip away user control and ownership of both games and hardware are clearly not the future.
People are VASTLY overestimating the value consumers will place on these technologies. They offer marginal benefits and yet such an overwhelming swathe of disadvantages that can't believe anyone with common sense would dare utter the words "streaming is the future" with a straight face... it's really baffling.
People are VASTLY overestimating the value consumers will place on these technologies. They offer marginal benefits and yet such an overwhelming swathe of disadvantages that can't believe anyone with common sense would dare utter the words "streaming is the future" with a straight face... it's really baffling.
100% agree with this. Plus the graphical stagnation imo.
Like I wrote above.
"Honestly, I dont even understand whats the hype for streaming. If you create servers like MS housing Xbox One hardware, playing Xbox One games, dont graphics get stagnant? I mean they wont get better unless you upgrade your servers with new hardware. Which is not going to happen as fast as 5-6 year console gen refreshs. I mean these companies have to invest in newer tech then upgrade them by hundreds of thousands servers at a time. Right? Are they honestly even going to do that every 5-6 years?"
Also, I live in South Africa and have 100MB fibre line with 100MB upload and 100 MB download, yet on Google testing application it says Im simply too far away from their servers to use their service.
The benefits, as with Netflix, is fast easy access to content. People didn't seem to care about losing ownership over their movies. I expect similar results here.
You mean the stadia pro sub. That's like Xbox live and PlayStation plus sub. It's to get 4K 60fps and cheaper games to buy and a game or two a month like PlayStation plus
I think PS Now couldn't handle many people before, and also isn't available in many countries. But Jim Ryan just took the lead and is changing things: https://www.ft.com/content/87f6a3e6-86b2-11e9-a028-86cea8523dc2
Going to be really interesting to come back to threads like these in <10 years (perhaps even 5) when Gaming Subscription Services and Cloud Streaming have mass-adoption.
Netflix's primary benfit isn't convenience AT ALL.... it's cost.
The service offers so much TV and movie content at a mere fraction of thw cost of traditional TV services.
E.g. here in the UK if you want Satelite TV you have Sky at around £40 for the basic package. Then if you want movies its an extra £10, HD channels an extra £10 on top... so it's a no brainer that Netflix wins out when they charge essentially £7 per month for everything.
Game Streaming services will charge you a sub for the privilege of using your own internet connection and then you'll need to buy each game for $60, with no access to a used games market to pressure pubs into reducing game prices over time.
To equate game streaming to Netflix is to demonstrate a complete lack of understanding as to why Netflix is so successful in the first place.
That must be why they doubled down on there first party studios . To compete with a third party streaming box with no exclusives .
Edit : they are basically trying to appeal with everyone and they are doing pretty well
- first party exclusives
- gamepass netflix
- streaming
Like with most things they will throw everything out there and see what sticks. They have a good chance of toppling stadia with all its other offerings and the azure networks.
Exciting times ahead for all types of gamers
Edit : they are basically trying to appeal with everyone and they are doing pretty well
- first party exclusives
- gamepass netflix
- streaming
Like with most things they will throw everything out there and see what sticks. They have a good chance of toppling stadia with all its other offerings and the azure networks.
Exciting times ahead for all types of gamers
Last edited:
I think it will be more, a streaming sub & a few other subs which covers off 90% of the games coming out (which you can cancel if certain subs don't have new content out for a few months and you've completed the other games). Googles initial pricing I agree is awful, but this is only the start.
Netflix is a secondary outlet. Movies and TV are broadcast/shown in theaters first. Netflix replaces DVDs, not first run movies. Xcloud and stadia are talking about replacing the whole piece from day one. Thats where the value prop breaks down.
Where do you get your catalog content? Someone has to buy that $60 game for the publisher to make their money, and then put it on streaming 6 months later for incremental revenue. If everything goes streaming then where is that upfront revenue? Without that you start to develop solely for the (likely lower) income stream from streaming, which to me sounds like a mobile-style race to the bottom in terms of cost, with GaaS style stickiness, microtransactions, moving things from the core game to paid for DLC to try and monetise further.
While the first page is scoffing at "not another one of these articles", this is clearly the first time in a long time that there is a fight for market going on several fronts.
On hardware:
Sony are going to be squaring up against Microsoft, with Nintendo operating in the clear water they have made for themselves.
On services:
Microsoft are up against Stadia, but are also certainly looking to dominate the PC space versus Steam and Epic. It is obvious that publishers are starting to be less content to just dump their games onto a third party service, they are wanting to control their own destiny too.
On VR:
Sony are the best price solution of the moment with fantastic support, however there are offerings like Oculus Quest with its own self-contained ecosystem and Rift (and others) on the flip for the PC world.
Three fronts being competed on for the time being.
On hardware:
Sony are going to be squaring up against Microsoft, with Nintendo operating in the clear water they have made for themselves.
On services:
Microsoft are up against Stadia, but are also certainly looking to dominate the PC space versus Steam and Epic. It is obvious that publishers are starting to be less content to just dump their games onto a third party service, they are wanting to control their own destiny too.
On VR:
Sony are the best price solution of the moment with fantastic support, however there are offerings like Oculus Quest with its own self-contained ecosystem and Rift (and others) on the flip for the PC world.
Three fronts being competed on for the time being.
On a side note, some elements of the video are somewhat amusing. She said digital sales of games have outstripped disc counterparts since 2013, that simply isn't true. She also says for nearly 18 years "sometimes Xbox is on top, sometimes Playstation", but that doesn't really paint a balanced picture of the situation, since all three generations Microsoft has been in the console race, globally PlayStation has come out on top, two of those generations overwhelmingly so, and in one, barely.
Then there's the fact that the video essentially assumes PS Now will see no further improvements or changes despite the mentioned partnership with Microsoft, and is then disregarded from the conversation or competition for seemingly vague reasons.
All in all, she seems to be pushing Microsoft/Xbox in a notable way of late. It all sounds quite similar to this time last gen with American tech sites and media lol.
Microsoft was right in 2013: This is the always-on generation
Xbox is poised to dominate the next console generation
Popular as in has more subscribers. And pertinent because the video in the OP pretty much disregards PS Now, or any tangible notion that PS Now could improve, develop or compete with these other streaming services next gen.
Then there's the fact that the video essentially assumes PS Now will see no further improvements or changes despite the mentioned partnership with Microsoft, and is then disregarded from the conversation or competition for seemingly vague reasons.
All in all, she seems to be pushing Microsoft/Xbox in a notable way of late. It all sounds quite similar to this time last gen with American tech sites and media lol.
Microsoft was right in 2013: This is the always-on generation
Xbox is poised to dominate the next console generation
Popular as in has more subscribers. And pertinent because the video in the OP pretty much disregards PS Now, or any tangible notion that PS Now could improve, develop or compete with these other streaming services next gen.
Last edited:
Can you post this research? Because there was a thread over the weekend that showed over 50% of the market didn't play console games simply because they don't want to and only 10% said cost was a barrier.
Also earlier you stated you believe in Stadia and Xcloud because they had demos at E3 and Sony didn't. Why would Sony need to demo PSNow?
Right now I'd say Sony is more of a streaming competitor than Google is. Google obviously have the infra advantage, but they have no games ecosystem. Will consumers that are into gaming be more likely to start from zero with Stadia, or expand on what they already have with a combination console + streaming option?
I can see PS5 doing what xcloud is likely to do - remote play is a given as it was already on PS4 since launch. So stream all your games via your PS5, or pay a monthly fee to stream them from the cloud. Thats not PSnow - thats your personal digital library. Then PSNow as a parallel service.
Stadia will take a while (several years?) to build up a reasonable catalog of games. So I'm not sure how compelling their paid-subscription will be initially. And will Google give it the time it needs to build up a critical mass of content?
Ah the start of a new gen, we were bound to get these awful takes. Just last week a local gazette pronounced the death of the console again due to streaming. But it's amusing to see the terrible "MS is not taking on Sony" take reappear, I remember in 2013 MS was not fighting Sony but Facebook, Netflix and Amazon for people's "entertainment time".
How long until someone starts the "next gen is the same again, so boring".
How long until someone starts the "next gen is the same again, so boring".
