-
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.
"Sony is incapable of competing in game streaming on a global scale with Microsoft and Google" - How true is this to you?
- Thread starter vivftp
- Start date
It's just a fact. I don't mean to besmirch them though. They just aren't a cloud provider with an infrastructure so they have to buy into someone else's infrastructure. They will likely be a competitor to me and google in this space.
They go head to head against each other in the console space.
So why not go to Google or AWS?
When MS used Blu-ray they did not really have a viable alternative.
Sony has options though. I don't really care at the end of the day, it's just interesting to me.
It's kinda saying ResetEra needs to own servers to compete with NeoGaf otherwise it's at an disadvantage...
It's not they can't so much as it is a maaaaassive budget and time sink that bigger companies such as Microsoft already more or less are on the way to solving.
So long as there are no technology or intellectual property theft/leaks/etc or those things are properly protected/isolated in a deal, all that matters from Sony's end is how much they'd have to spend for those infrastructure. Who the money goes to - at that point, is negligible.
If Google and AWS offers commercially poorer deal vs MS, then going MS is a no-brainer. And if we look at the MoU that was signed between both parties, it wasn't as simple as just a "we will use Azure." deal. If everything goes smoothly, both parties benefit beyond the basic outline of the Azure.
It's really, really, not, don't be ridiculous. They can compete, I'm not fully convinced they will even try.
This article may shed some light. But it's in Japanese so you might need to use Google Translate.
Because Google's solution is completely different than what PSNow currently uses and would create issues. We don't know what Amazon has planned but it's sounding like it'll be similar to Stadia where it's PC hardware. MS Azure/xCloud using existing console hardware matches Sony's current setup and doesn't break compatibility like starting from 0 like Stadia would.
I think you are not understanding the question right. The question is can they compete on the same scale as Stadia and xCloud, not can they compete with Azure or AWS.
The company who's already had the business up and running for years, who has been making a bunch of the best games this generation, has a truly global brand, sells 80mil boxes on their worst day, a long history of general media production and distribution, and can rent the exact same technology the competitors use...
. .. can't compete because articles and social media chatter. They say there's a sucker born every minute
. .. can't compete because articles and social media chatter. They say there's a sucker born every minute
Server infrastructure is just scratching the surface, Sony may just end up partnering with a 3rd party streaming service, software is Sony's focus imo.
Sony works in silos. It's beacuse they talk to each other properly, Apple got the jump on them with itunes even though they had the technology and the music etc. Microsoft and Google's infrastucture is ingrained across their respective organisations. This will be a lot harder for Sony to pull off or have the same adoption rate the reap the cost benefits.
They don't have the cloud presence necessary on their own but they partnered with MS to provide azure as a solution to that. Other than that they don't seem to have the will to do it. They could bring their library to bear in PS Now but they seem so indifferent to it. Maybe that changes next gen but right now their deal with MS feels like a backup plan instead of a concerted effort.
This example is perfect because we can ask ourselves:
"Why Era would have to compete with Neogaf?"
Why Sony has to compete in the streaming business ?
Of course it's true, in the same way that both of those companies are incapable of competing with Sony when it comes to selling people consumer electronics and producing must-have exclusive content. Different platforms have different strengths.
Will be funny when all those services launch and we realize that sony will have the best games available.
They're going to have similar infrastructure to MS at the back end. They can definitely compete.
I don't think they will be competitive though because they will starve it of content or price themselves out of contention. That's a business decision though, not a technical inability.
I don't think they will be competitive though because they will starve it of content or price themselves out of contention. That's a business decision though, not a technical inability.
"Can" is different from "Will". i think if they decided to make it a priority and got approval for a bigger streaming budget from sony propee, anything is possible. sony may not have the built in infrastructure, but i believe they could get there. how long would that take, and how likely is it? i have no idea
The one company with a functional streaming service actually out there and available will continue to do fine. They partnered with Microsoft for their streaming solutions so it'll only get better and they have years of experience in the field.
Well they've partnered with Microsoft on it so the assumption is that even Sony doesn't believe they can.
Sony is much more experienced at making streaming game services not work in the real world. As such I believe they can continue to stay right down with everyone else not making it a reality.
OP
OP
I think there is a misunderstanding here. This thread isn't about Sony doing this independently vs the other companies. Using Azure means they have access to all the benefits that come with that platform and the reach that it does.
As some others have pointed out I think it's necessary to point out the difference between Azure and xCloud. PS now is going to be using Azure, and will be competing with xCloud
I think the MOU with MS and the likelihood Sony will be using Azure as their delivery infrastructure renders the main technological hurdle they had moot.
As to whether they can compete from a content delivery perspective, yes if they choose to do so. They have the content, and the capability to licence content.
They've also openly stated that PSNow will be getting a bigger marketing push, possibly ahead of Stadia and Xcloud launching.
As has also been discussed, it's the only service offering a 'Netflix' or Spotify experience - you can stream or download your content and it's an all-in-one subscription package.
As I posted in the last thread about this subject, IMO Sony's best bet would be to offer a tiered service with PS+ as a basic, PS+ & Now, and a premium offering and/or optional 'tent pole' release month premium that allows a D1 download and the option to buy the big FP releases.
As to whether they can compete from a content delivery perspective, yes if they choose to do so. They have the content, and the capability to licence content.
They've also openly stated that PSNow will be getting a bigger marketing push, possibly ahead of Stadia and Xcloud launching.
As has also been discussed, it's the only service offering a 'Netflix' or Spotify experience - you can stream or download your content and it's an all-in-one subscription package.
As I posted in the last thread about this subject, IMO Sony's best bet would be to offer a tiered service with PS+ as a basic, PS+ & Now, and a premium offering and/or optional 'tent pole' release month premium that allows a D1 download and the option to buy the big FP releases.
A good article that Phil Spencer linked to on LinkedIn.
It's a simple fact they don't have the infrastructure of MS or Google. Yes they can pay for that infrastructure, but it isn't theirs.
When people talk about Game Steaming at a global scale, they really need to reconsider the context of what they're saying.
There is only really a handful of territories where Game Streaming would even be meaningful, given the internet infrastructure in those countries. As such calling it a "global scale" is a bit of misnomer.
I don't care how many servers you have when most countries don't even have the broadband speeds to take advantage of the service in a meaningful way.
There is only really a handful of territories where Game Streaming would even be meaningful, given the internet infrastructure in those countries. As such calling it a "global scale" is a bit of misnomer.
I don't care how many servers you have when most countries don't even have the broadband speeds to take advantage of the service in a meaningful way.
Don't know, don't care. I hope streaming doesn't take off and I hope Sony sticks to what is best. Shame on the media and companies that want to shove streaming down our throats.
OP
OP
It doesn't have to be theirs for them to be able to compete in game streaming on a global scale.
They can compete if they use third party infrastructure for their services, such as Azure, AWS or Google Cloud. :)
User Banned (2 Weeks): Arguing in bad faith surrounding the Sony ban on problematic content, Long history of inflammatory drive-by posts, Previous severe infraction
Considering the gradual decline in their game quality and ruining games with censorship, no I do not believe they can compete. Stadia will probably bomb, but Xcloud will definitely take over.