Yep. If nothing else, with the huge file sizes of many games, people having data caps (ours is 1TB) etc. streaming would be great for demoing games for a bit to decide if you want to use the time, data and storage to download it.
-
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.
GI.Biz: Streaming could be key to Xbox reclaiming the lead from Playstation
- Thread starter nightstalker962
- Start date
Yep. If nothing else, with the huge file sizes of many games, people having data caps (ours is 1TB) etc. streaming would be great for demoing games for a bit to decide if you want to use the time, data and storage to download it.
Care to elaborate? I'm just throwing my opinion down. I have gamepass up right now, I don't see a ton of new games, or games that interest me at all, so..
As far as my other statement, he (someone did) said MS were experts in cloud computing, streaming tech, VR and so forth. They haven't showed up for any of it so far. The only thing they are experts in is selling dreams.
What you quoted is the kind of response you get when you are speechless.
Ok, and nothing is stopping PSNow from doing that as well. Hell, we just had a thread about a screenshot that supposedly had a 'download game' option pop up.
But my comment was for the quality of the tech, which is what I was assuming his was as well.
^ Exactly. For some reason Sony can't tweak the service and still be ahead of the game, for reasons.
Read that, think about the services Sony already offers, and see why some of us thinks this article is weird.
Your could apply that logic in reverse to Sony and it would still apply.
lol.
So all Sony would have to do is add more games. And allow downloads.
It's mind boggling what I'm reading in this thread, lol.
Read that, think about the services Sony already offers, and see why some of us thinks this article is weird.
Your could apply that logic in reverse to Sony and it would still apply.
lol.
So all Sony would have to do is add more games. And allow downloads.
It's mind boggling what I'm reading in this thread, lol.
Last edited:
I think opinions like that come from isolated pockets of the world where internet speeds are amazing and broadband is cheap and data is unlimited.
Last year the UK's average broadband speed was 16.51 mbps. Meaning 50% of broadband speeds in the U.K. were lower than that. We are definitely not at a place where the majority of people can stream games here, and in many, many other places.
Last year the UK's average broadband speed was 16.51 mbps. Meaning 50% of broadband speeds in the U.K. were lower than that. We are definitely not at a place where the majority of people can stream games here, and in many, many other places.
For reference, if you wanted Netflix quality 4k/HDR at 60Hz, you'd need around 60 mbps, and obviously, it can never dip.
Streaming is going to be even worse than it is now when things require 4k. Not to mention net neutrality and bandwidth caps.
Hence why people seeing that download option for psnow as a possible game changer for the service.
Hence why people seeing that download option for psnow as a possible game changer for the service.
In that sense MS does have the upper hand. They already have the superior service - the streaming thing is actually pretty empty and it's surprising people think it's a game changer. Sony removing the option to stream altogether and just making games downloadable would improve ps now considerably.
There are first-party PS4 games on PS Now. They just happen to be older titles such as Killzone Shadow Fall, Knack, Beyond: Two Souls, God of War III Remastered. They're not likely to put most of their new or recent heavy hitters (like Uncharted, Horizon, the new GoW, etc.) up there on launch day, especially when they've proven they can easily sell millions upon millions. When those games' sales taper off at retail, then you might see them on the service.
Microsoft's strategy is different because most of their newer games have a different scope and business model, as others have already explained earlier in this thread.
Microsoft's strategy is different because most of their newer games have a different scope and business model, as others have already explained earlier in this thread.
How would completely removing it make things better? They could just add the ability to download as an option and the two could co-exist.
Streaming is not the future; it's going to be a failure. Only the hardcore will have internet connections good enough for it and they still won't be happy with it due to latency, casuals will not have good enough internet and will not be happy with the absolute crappyness they experience.
Beyond that nobody has proven it's even economically viable for the streaming provider.
I think MS by far has the best chance since they have Azure behind them and already have a ton of GPU virtualization tech there and loads of experience, but it's just not gonna work IMO.
That's been my opinion since seeing OnLive so long ago; it IS impressive as hell what is possible, but you aren't going to solve latency. Everyone focuses on bandwidth and it's just one piece of the puzzle; honestly it's the less important piece.
Beyond that nobody has proven it's even economically viable for the streaming provider.
I think MS by far has the best chance since they have Azure behind them and already have a ton of GPU virtualization tech there and loads of experience, but it's just not gonna work IMO.
That's been my opinion since seeing OnLive so long ago; it IS impressive as hell what is possible, but you aren't going to solve latency. Everyone focuses on bandwidth and it's just one piece of the puzzle; honestly it's the less important piece.
Adding it would be even better. I'm saying being able to download games is better than streaming them. But yeah doing both is better than just streaming too.
What Ms is trying to achieve is really different from Sony's offer
-First, he is trying to join the windows / xbox platform promising to release every console exclusive even on the w10 store
- Then release a service ala netflix where all the exclusives will be released at day one filling it with games of various genre a service on which he hopes to attract even the third parties
- then he tries to thicken their internal studios so as to have a stream of games that will allow him to attract new users
- then add to the subscription a mode of streaming where all the games on the gamepass can be played on your mobile or your tablet while you're going to work continuing to get your achievements
this is directly to tweet from Spencer
"Phil Spencer
Verified account
@ XboxP3
In reply to @BeastFireTimdog
I think we'll see the full spectrum from games that run 100% in the cloud streamed to any device to high end games that run highly responsive computing while offloading heavy latency tolerant workloads to the cloud for incredible local results"
Azure is the pivot on which all this will be played, an infrastructure advantage that brings MS ahead of the curves compared to sony (we do not need to talk about nintendo)
Now joining w10 pcs + console + mobile will bring microsoft to have a reach of users that sony can not have at least not until it decides to give up to leave its exclusives only on its console, but making it would obviously lose in one shot all its advantage.
This is the game Spencer is pursuing,a game that sees the MS, as opposed to Sony,in a winning winning situation
....unfortunately Sony is too tied to the sales of its hw and certainly can not rely on the PC platform as it can do ms.
honestly Ms i positioned much better than any other competitor (including valve)
The question here is ...they will fuck up everything as usual?
-First, he is trying to join the windows / xbox platform promising to release every console exclusive even on the w10 store
- Then release a service ala netflix where all the exclusives will be released at day one filling it with games of various genre a service on which he hopes to attract even the third parties
- then he tries to thicken their internal studios so as to have a stream of games that will allow him to attract new users
- then add to the subscription a mode of streaming where all the games on the gamepass can be played on your mobile or your tablet while you're going to work continuing to get your achievements
this is directly to tweet from Spencer
"Phil Spencer
Verified account
@ XboxP3
In reply to @BeastFireTimdog
I think we'll see the full spectrum from games that run 100% in the cloud streamed to any device to high end games that run highly responsive computing while offloading heavy latency tolerant workloads to the cloud for incredible local results"
Azure is the pivot on which all this will be played, an infrastructure advantage that brings MS ahead of the curves compared to sony (we do not need to talk about nintendo)
Now joining w10 pcs + console + mobile will bring microsoft to have a reach of users that sony can not have at least not until it decides to give up to leave its exclusives only on its console, but making it would obviously lose in one shot all its advantage.
This is the game Spencer is pursuing,a game that sees the MS, as opposed to Sony,in a winning winning situation
....unfortunately Sony is too tied to the sales of its hw and certainly can not rely on the PC platform as it can do ms.
honestly Ms i positioned much better than any other competitor (including valve)
The question here is ...they will fuck up everything as usual?
Last edited:
Shit, I didn't actually realise that! I currently pay over $50 a month for a download speed that on paper is 50 mbps but usually ends up around 37 mbps. It can also dip badly evenings and weekends. It's the best available in my area, the nearest competitor managed a hideous 13.5 mbps. Faster speeds are unreasonably expensive and not available in many places either.
If they could bring the ping down to Mixer levels then yeah, it would be a good thing. The point is that a streaming service would be optional because full downloads is a core part of game Pass.
I pay for 50, right now it's hitting 27, ping 10ms. Completely unacceptable for streaming to be in any way comparable to local rendering. Like not even close.
That was my thoughts too honestly as this article makes no sense.
Then you missed the point of the article entirely because it's not about whether Sony could do (which is entirely debatable) but whether they will, because Microsoft is clearly moving in that direction with Xbox Game Pass, having acquired new studios and debuting new first party games on the service day and date.
You think Sony is going to follow suit on that? I don't.
I'd argue that from an infrastructure perspective, Microsoft is probably in better position to launch a better service.
Keep in mind, Microsoft has been testing game streaming for the better part of 5 years or so. They didn't just start dabbling in it.
Behind closed doors many E3s ago they demoed Halo 4 being streamed to a Lumia (I'd assume locally) and it was reportedly near lag free.
I remember this story.
If it holds true, then the future of streaming games may be here sooner than we may think. Problem isn't going to be the tech though, it's gonna be ISPs.
Internet speeds gonna have to catch up.
I don't expect them to, because their earlier fuck-ups were mostly Ballmer's fault who simply wasn't a good leader.
Satya on the other hand is the complete opposite, and therefore the things he oversees will come to fruition.
I don't know whether Sony know that or not, but at the very least they have 80 million sold PS4s to lift their spirits.
Jesus dude, settle down lol
__________________________________
OT:
I really would have thought this could have sparked some interesting discussion regarding the direction MS intends to take Game Pass.
It's different from PS Now in a variety of (good) ways.
That's median you are thinking of, not average. So people with say, gigabit connections are skewing the average (or people at the very bottom could be). Very rare to have such an even distribution that average and median are the same.
I'm all for more options but I'm glad Phil Spencer clearly stated on GB that consoles aren't going away. Streaming will be this other arm.
I based my TV purchase on low latency gaming so I'm sure as shit not streaming my gaming any time soon. Maybe in 10-20 years cloud based VR worlds will be norm once they figure it all out.
I based my TV purchase on low latency gaming so I'm sure as shit not streaming my gaming any time soon. Maybe in 10-20 years cloud based VR worlds will be norm once they figure it all out.
And yet Sony is on the open live consumer market, doing this for over 4 years, with tech that was around long before PSNow.
Some people can just never give credit, nor be willfully conscious to the fact they are just as serious, bought both large streaming services at the time (OnLive/Gaikai) which has been paying off for them with SharePlay and the like, and have just as much opportunity for refinement as well.
Local lag free, color me shocked. But anyways.
With the huge investments MS has been making in their cloud business/tech, I can see them having the best game streaming service.
Even if they make streaming 100% lag free who is going to want to play on a phone without a controller? touch screen controls are horrible and imagine trying to play a complex game using them? No one's taking an Xbox/PS controller around with them just to play on a phone/ipad randomly out in public.
PSNow is limited to select countries and if they don't use aws, they are also limited to only select data centers in the world where they probably also only have co-location. Azure is available globally and Microsoft even owns it, it's inherently better already because of this as it is better distributed, load balanced and fault tolerant.
How about we cross that bridge when we get there, since by default, their service currently doesn't exist.
People act like Sony will just be stagnant and not improve. SMH.
I could see their hw team easily release a slim controller with support for 5" to 8" phones/tablets
Meh, it's not really any more bulky that carrying a Switch or 3DS or Vita around and plenty do that.
People also play portably at home a lot when the TV is in use or wanting to watch TV in the background while gaming etc.
It's not something that would be revolutionary and create a huge new market or anything, but it would be a nice feature for some and if it doesn't require an Xbox to use (unlike remote play) that can give them access to more companies who can pay for their service by removing the $200-500 console purchase barrier (depending on model and time of generation bought).
Have you an idea of how much Investment is needed to buy something just similar to azure?
You don't need to have Azure for this tech, nor does it stop Sony in the future, contracting Azure use either if they had to, but since there is still Amazon, which Netflix uses, they will be fine.
Last edited:
Do you have any idea how much it costs to buy Montana? Because it's been about as relevant to the gaming experience so far as Azure has.
I'm honestly stunned people are falling for the exact same shit they did this generation. I look forward to the DirectX 13 threads.
MS could do streaming, they could do cloud gaming, they could do VR, they could do AAA single player focused games... Okay, I've been hearing this for five years. Show me the money. I don't care about a warchest that will hypothetically crown them the leaders of the industry, I care about the tangible results.
Phil got there and he wiped the Kinect out the box, awesome, he got the teams to make the S and the X, both fantastic pieces of the hardware, the X specifically makes the Pro look frankly amateurish, now lets so the actual goods. This is all set up, it's foreplay, and it's being going on way way too long.
They don't have to. Netflix runs off Amazon's cloud service, no reason why Sony's streaming stuff couldn't. It just means less profit.
And the new hotness is the 'Scarlet' letter, cheating on the old news X, but wait about 2 years.
Jokes aside, agreed. Less talk, more do, and these articles do not help with hypothetical head canon victory dances.
They even did it prior to the PS4 with select gsmes on the PS3. Early experimentation before developing it as standard 'flip of the switch' in the SDK on the PS4.
I agree ...in fact I didn't thinked it was so important to make a thread about it, in fact j didn't , but seen that someone else did ...is just fun to speculate ....no one have a crystal ball
By owning Azure, MS could potentially offer free streaming to all GamePass subscribers or digital games purchased on their platform, and use it as a value add to attract MAU's that are profitable elsewhere to their platform. Owning Azure could be what makes a business model like this possible.
User Warned: Baseless accusations/personal attacks.
Neither you, nor the OP has made any effort to show exactly how this is different from existing offerings from Sony, so yes, this just seems like shilling for Microsoft. Claiming that "Xbox's Game Pass is very forward thinking for capturing marketshare imo" like the OP does is being willfully blind to Sony's streaming and game share services that they've had since the PS3.
The service itself is something I welcome since it would allow me to play "console exclusives" on PC, but to claim that this is something revolutionary or forward thinking is a bit too much.
The thing with game pass, is that if they include a streaming option, users will try it out just to see what its like.
So gamepass draws people in with the value offered and the fact that the games are downloaded and played locally, PSnow does not have this incentive yet.
The streaming itself also has to be better.
So gamepass draws people in with the value offered and the fact that the games are downloaded and played locally, PSnow does not have this incentive yet.
The streaming itself also has to be better.
Huh?
MS is in a far better position to offer a good streaming service than Sony (or any company for that matter) for one simple reason. Mixer tech.
They didn't buy Mixer to compete with Twitch you know, they bought it for the near lag tech experience to apply to game streaming. MS has been heading towards a streaming service for a long time and Game Pass plays into that aswell. They're just building towards it until it's somewhat viable instead of jumping into the deep end like Sony did with PS Now. As collinwood said aswell, they had Halo 4 running on a phone in the past.
Sorry Sony dosnt have anything like gamepass...and I don't think they can actually build something exactly like gamepass+streaming without losing terrain in the gaming scene in favor of others
Basically I think that their streght is their brand recognition and the walled garden that keep their exclusives around their hw console. For this reason you see they fighting with their teeths against something like crossplay
