You do understand that sony was 3 party titles rigth? And that companys like ea, activison and ubisoft ( the 3 largest plubisher) release ther games on ps?
-
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.
-
We have made minor adjustments to how the search bar works on ResetEra. You can read about the changes here.
It's clear that Microsoft is preparing for the arrival of Amazon and Google into gaming
- Thread starter 12Danny123
- Start date
You do understand that sony was 3 party titles rigth? And that companys like ea, activison and ubisoft ( the 3 largest plubisher) release ther games on ps?
Because it eliminates the hardware used to render games? All you need is a controller and a screen.
I think whats OP trying to say is that the gaming industry will transform into something like "live tv" streaming where everyone gets the same channel content. Next, the big players will join (Amazon, Google, etc) because of the ease and lack of a needed home console. Finally, it turns into a huge arms race with Microsoft the winner due to their early foresight of studio acquisitions and gamepass. Microsoft becomes the Netflix of games and everything ends happily ever after.
I dont agree I might add.
You are spot-on with this analysis OP. The current incarnation of Microsoft is a software and cloud services company.
And yet, you still have people making statements like "Sony will beat MS next gen", when Sony and Microsoft are not even playing the same game anymore. It's so prevalent a misunderstanding that I was tempted to make a whole thread similar to what you have done here.
Between MS/Google/Amazon/Apple I would bet in Apple tbh. And it would suck because their products are really expensive
It doesn't eliminate hardware. It adds a streaming box and relocates the gpus (and a subscription model ;))
Yes, I'm predicting that in the not too distant future, UPlay will be the only way to buy a Ubisoft title because Ubisoft will realize they can get away with it (and the other AAA publishers too).
edit: And I think Sony is absolutely big enough to become a platform in its own right too, but right now their market actions are that of the biggest fish in the existing pond, rather than one of the bigger fish in what is about to be a huge pond (cross play being the biggest example). I predict the next console cycle to have Sony playing some catch up on that end, similar to how in the PS3 era they caught up in the online department.
Last edited:
I think this is unnecessarily colored by old console wars sentiments that aren't really going to apply going forward.
I think Microsoft is at the point Apple was in the late 1990s, when they realized they shouldn't be trying to compete the same way they once were. So they're pivoting to services and leveraging MAUs, which is what justifies the Xbox in the wider shift Microsoft has taken with all their products away from Windows and Office.
Basically: Microsoft is trying to build for the future where it wins even if Sony does too.
you are putting alot of hope into absolutely nothing.
slapping a bunch of people together in one studio does not guarantee a hit factory. very far from it.
I've said it before and I'll say it again, if and when everything is streamed or riddled with MTs I'll just start working on my backlog. Which stretches over 6 generations and probably hundreds of games.
Apple is doing mobile games for now the others have the cloud infrastructure already established which would take Apple time to catch up
Apple is way too into proprietary hardware for them to succeed here. You'd likely only be able to use their game service on a Mac, iPhone, iPad, or Apple TV, whereas competitors would likely work to make their services as ubiquitous as Netflix.
Sony may have had a cloud gaming service first but Microsoft is ridiculously far ahead of them on cloud in general. Azure is their bread and butter these days.
Why Apple? They don't have the infrastructure for a game streaming service.
it took Nintendo 35 years and Sony 20 years to make their hardware businesses relatively safe by the strength of having must-have software.
Microsoft was on to something during the 360 years but then decided "fuck exclusives, we are ok with monthly payments from live/gold/Gamepass" and well... now here we are.
no IPs they can capitalize on
Microsoft was on to something during the 360 years but then decided "fuck exclusives, we are ok with monthly payments from live/gold/Gamepass" and well... now here we are.
no IPs they can capitalize on
Yeah, I get what's being said.
To explain my post - console wars are effectively just indirect status wars. And the psyche of status domination says that even if you're not necessarily winning, you'll feel better if your 'competitor' is losing.
Ironically these scenarios that seek to write Sony out of the picture only highlight Sony as the prime competitor in the space. I don't mean to have a go at the OP specifically, I think I've just been reading too much Seth Godin lately...
Last edited:
I've been hearing about Amazon's looking takeover of gaming for almost a decade now. What has changed?
I think these posts answer each other.
Unless game Streaming somehow advances miraculously in the next few years, I don't see it happening. US is one of the biggest markets for gaming and the internet is very bad here. Many locations don't get fast internet and those that do often have small data caps (1 TB in a 4k world and 100+ GB games) which I'm sure will get even worse with the end of net neutrality. I'm already close to my data cap every month with 3 people streaming 4k content and only 1 of us games (me).
Until I get super low latency fibre into my home, I'm not switching to streaming. Currently streaming isn't targeted at core gamers, because traditional console / PC hardware is just better. It's being targeted at the billions of people who don't own dedicated gaming devices. For those people streaming is probably good enough in some cases.
And still the majority don't have the Internet to make streaming better than a native console, and likely won't for at least 10 years. Good Internet infrastructure takes time and streaming games is hugely more bandwidth demanding than movies.
I definitely agree. It's been a real surprise to have Microsoft titles show up more on PC, and even Switch no less.
With Minecraft and Hellblade getting Switch releases, a part of me hopes that eventually Microsoft will be comfortable with bringing some of Rare's older titles over as well.
With Minecraft and Hellblade getting Switch releases, a part of me hopes that eventually Microsoft will be comfortable with bringing some of Rare's older titles over as well.
They do own Twitch, which has substantially changed gaming consumption habits and marketing, so there's that. I expect them to heavily leverage Twitch when they start pushing services and games, perhaps turning Twitch into their gaming platform.
Exactly.
I'm starting to give up at this point, lol.
Somehow PSNow doesn't count for reasons. It being on PC right now doesn't count.
The changes they've made recently don't count for reasons.
...PSNow doesn't need Plus for online MP...maybe they should stop that so they don't get left behind...
If I have to pay $60 to buy a 3rd party game on a console, or get it as part of a $10/month subscription plan, I'm going with the latter.
It's the way the industry is going, it seems. And MS is smart enough out of the existing three to begin shoring up content and service platforms for it.
I don't think it's realistic to expect Sony to stay out of it either, they won't remain the way they are in that same time frame. Streaming/catalogs of content are going to be the new wave.
I don't think it's realistic to expect Sony to stay out of it either, they won't remain the way they are in that same time frame. Streaming/catalogs of content are going to be the new wave.
Cloud in general, yes. But unless I'm mistaken we don't have much info on how big a rollout MS is planning for xCloud and what their time table on it is. And we have yet to see real world examples of MS's cloud gaming implementation outside of MS's own controlled showings. How quick will their expansion be worldwide vs. their core countries?
So far Sony's got PS Now streaming available in 12 countries with a beta in 7 more but I would imagine it will grow as we approach next gen. The theory I subscribe to is that they're waiting for PS5 hardware to be available to put into servers to do a larger scale rollout of PS Now. And if some theories are to be believed Sony might also look to integrate their music, movie and TV show arms with gaming to make a more appealing online service. This would help to give them another advantage.
Anyways, all I'm saying is that Sony can not be counted out in this sort of discussion.
Yep. Even Sony Santa Monica had a huge failure/cancelled game that led to many layoffs, but bounced back with God of War, a game that revived the franchise, met critical acclaim, and won tons of GOTY awards.
Producing hits is hard, and continuing to make hits is also very challenging.
I can't understand why people believe Sony will be left behind when their service is the biggest and most popular one.
I mean, they have half the gaming streaming market already with PS Now.
I mean, they have half the gaming streaming market already with PS Now.
It's almost like some people are pushing the narrative that MS doesn't need to compete with Sony and Nintendo in their "little" console bubble because they've got their eye on a bigger prize and aim to be operating on a whole next level. Well yeah that's good and all, but Sony's aiming to do that too. We're going to be seeing PS Now on consoles, TVs, PC, phones, tablets and whatever else just the same. It's one of the reasons I think they've been keeping Sony Mobile going despite its losses. That division will basically be in-house R&D as Sony pushes into the 5G spectrum for streaming games. Even if the division on its own doesn't turn a profit it can still be very valuable to Sony's other divisions.
I played the New World alpha test - it's atrocious. That said, I consider it pre-alpha since it was abundantly clear that it wasn't feature-complete.
I don't feel confident that Google/Amazon are bringing a passion for gaming to the table like the Big 3.
If anything, it feels like they're gonna follow a similar moneyhatting corporate tactic like Epic.
This isn't the future for gaming I was hoping for but oh well, the other ones aren't going away anytime soon.
If anything, it feels like they're gonna follow a similar moneyhatting corporate tactic like Epic.
This isn't the future for gaming I was hoping for but oh well, the other ones aren't going away anytime soon.
Agreed, people act like because Sony is not making too much noise about it, it's doing nothing at all.
It's almost like companies didn't keep what they're doing to themselves, right?
WTF seem disconnected from reality. Phil has turned the business around for Xbox, and has been given more power then any other leader of Xbox. They're going to be in a strong position next gen, much more then they were first party wise.
Looking forward to the battle of the 7 kingdoms. Devs will grow. More new IPs will be born in the next 5 years than the past 15. Don't give a fuck which platform I have to launch to play the game. Whatever the inconvenience, it'll be worth it long run.
I have my predictions but beyond my predictions, next 5 years gonna be fun.
I have my predictions but beyond my predictions, next 5 years gonna be fun.
How good is PS Now er now.?
I remember it had a reputation for lag awhile agoes so not sure if they improved. Google cloud with AC seemed to be almost without lag and high quality does ps now compete er now?
I remember it had a reputation for lag awhile agoes so not sure if they improved. Google cloud with AC seemed to be almost without lag and high quality does ps now compete er now?
Largely to do with MS being a provider of cloud services, they have access to the backend, have knowledge and infrastructure that they can expand and optimise, have thier Azure team steer their tech, this combined with their experience with online gaming they're in a good position, more so then others. You see what they've done to console online, backwards compatibility, the X, they offer the gold standard when it comes these areas, so I'd expect the same for streaming.
https://shadow.tech/usen/applications
Between this, the Nividia streaming offer or the PSNow, what lacks in streaming isn't technology but customers.
Between this, the Nividia streaming offer or the PSNow, what lacks in streaming isn't technology but customers.
Last edited:
Or they'll make a console/platform that's kind of neat and then abandon it shortly after
Like Google Allo or Google Glass or Google Inbox or Google Spaces or...
And how do you know Sony is not doing any of those things? Do you have any inside info on the matter?
Afraid I can't give any first hand impressions but I do plan to try the free 7 day trial soon as I free up some time. Just going by peoples impressions though it seems like a mixed bag. Some say they don't notice any lag, some say they do. I suppose there's so many variables involved (distance to server, internet speed, wired or wireless, local network load...) that it's hard to say it's either good or bad. Although I suppose the fact that some people are having good experiences says something about the service. For those having bad experiences, well there's a laundry list of things that would probably have to be examined to figure out what's causing the bad experience.
It's like with PSN downloads, some people have bad experiences, while others like me are downloading at 30 or 40 megabytes/second just hunky dory.
Nearly everything cited there is either irrelevant to streaming or a transient/transferable advantage.
Microsoft was supposed to be poised to have the most powerful console last gen, the best dev environment, the best placed to build a network... sony trumped them on all of these things (i.e. wound up with the powerful machine, the better dev environment, the larger network). What were often presented as 'natural advantages' on the part of MS proved to be transferable, commodity competencies.
I won't pretend Azure doesn't give MS a headstart access to more existing datacenter locations today, but this again looks like a transferable/transient advantage, not one that's permanently defensible or one where the difference might be permanently relevant to any significant degree. 'The backend' Prine refers to - datacenter infrastructure - is a largely third party infrastructure that anyone can lease into. Sony has been building its streaming network in a way that should be scalable where dc infrastructure is on tap.
Last edited: