Game Streaming Platforms and Technology (xCloud, PSNow, GeforceNow, Luna) (Rip: Stadia)

[BillSpencer]

The PC version is in internal testing circles.

iOS also right?

 

[BRiT]

iOS also right?

iOS was in testing earlier in the year but they opted not to release it because of the Apple restrictions. Microsoft is now pivoting to using the Amazon Luna approach (PWA - progressive web app) for the Apple eccosystem.

 

[cwjs]

Latency is term coined by enthusiasts/technical specialists - average user don't even know the resolution of the game (hell, even experts sometimes not sure what resolution of the game), much less latency at all. For bunch of people latency is the speed of Word loading, and I am not joking. On gaming boards you will have tons of people discussing stuff but most of the people - in the world - use their fingers because they are playing mobile games.

I challenge you to find somebody who wouldn't notice the 100s of ms of latency when performance dips on xcloud. Unlike resolution dips, latency spikes have a uniform impact on every part of your experience.

I am pretty sure it is below 1 million; MS would be congratulating themselves publicly if it passed 1million. Instead they are offering 1 dollar upgrades?
Not that it matters; you can only use gamepass on Android

Microsoft is a publicly traded company -- do you really think they're committing fraud when they announce 15 million gamepass subs? Of course they're giving it away for $1 -- netflix has 200 million. 15 is absolutely nothing, and 2 million isn't even worth mentioning.

Edit: I re-read your posts and realize you meant DAUs of xcloud, vs subs to gamepass -- I was confused because you compared it to 2 mil psnow subs.

I think i agree with your assumption that psnow has more daily active users than xcloud right now, but two things complicate that:
1- we only have psnow subscription numbers for the mixed service (streaming + downloads), whereas we have an outdated just xcloud usage number, AND a whole gamepass subs number. Obviously the subs arent close, but what % of psnow subs use streaming, and what % of g amepass subs use streaming? I assume its a much larger percentage on psnow side.
2- psnow streaming is featured on the main platform for the subscription (ps4), and on pc. Xcloud is only availible on android, and most gamepass subs are probably playing on xbox and pc primarily, so at the moment xcloud can only hope to attract a small set of users.

that will no longer be the case in 12 months.

 

[BillSpencer]

I challenge you to find somebody who wouldn't notice the 100s of ms of latency when performance dips on xcloud. Unlike resolution dips, latency spikes have a uniform impact on every part of your experience.



Microsoft is a publicly traded company -- do you really think they're committing fraud when they announce 15 million gamepass subs? Of course they're giving it away for $1 -- netflix has 200 million. 15 is absolutely nothing, and 2 million isn't even worth mentioning.

I was referring to the gamepass ultimate; which is the only option to use xcloud these days

 

[cwjs]

I was referring to the gamepass ultimate; which is the only option to use xcloud these days

Edited my above post -- also, I think its fair to assume at least half of gamepass subs are gpu (its by far the best deal if youre an xbox owner, and its actually in practice cheaper if youre taking advantage of the $1 deals microsoft is investing so heavily in)

 

[ChuckeRearmed]

I challenge you to find somebody who wouldn't notice the 100s of ms of latency when performance dips on xcloud. Unlike resolution dips, latency spikes have a uniform impact on every part of your experience.

People are able to deal with high ping in online games - like World of Tanks - just fine and it never stopped them. 100 ms of latency? Is it playing from Chinese server in Europe? Coverage is the issue, but not the streaming gaming itself.

All in all, nobody seriously tried streaming yet. So claims that it doesn't work is premature - not to mention all the tests of streaming service from XCloud to Switch Cloud gaming and GeforceNow showed that people are content with the results and even were surprised how good it worked. Simple as that.

Basically what game streaming lacks is exposure (people still think it has second or something delays) and server coverage (regions).

that will no longer be the case in 12 months.

Exactly. As I said before, nobody has tried game streaming seriously yet.

Edited my above post -- also, I think its fair to assume at least half of gamepass subs are gpu (its by far the best deal if youre an xbox owner, and its actually in practice cheaper if youre taking advantage of the $1 deals microsoft is investing so heavily in)

Also using rewards is nice. I use neither because it is a bother - just pay 14 euro and I believe a lot of people are like that too.

 

[cwjs]

People are able to deal with high ping in online games - like World of Tanks - just fine and it never stopped them.

100% of players know there is lag in games like world of tanks though, and that the experience isn't the same as offline games.

All in all, nobody seriously tried streaming yet. So claims that it doesn't work is premature - not to mention all the tests of streaming service from XCloud to Switch Cloud gaming and GeforceNow showed that people are content with the results and even surprised how good it worked. Simple as that.

There have been plenty of serious attempts at streaming -- for one, we're in the midst of one. Also PSnow's tech came from the gaika acquisiton back in 2012, right? All of the local services (steam link, xbox local streaming) still suffer from occasional lag issues and interence over wifi. There will probably be innovations in doing more prediction and interaction on the local device that will eventually close the gap, but its definitely not the case that streaming is the same experience as playing locally to an everyday user.

 

[ChuckeRearmed]

There have been plenty of serious attempts at streaming -- for one, we're in the midst of one.

And it shows spectacular results - a lot of people were pleasantly surprised by Control using Switch Cloud.

All of the local services (steam link, xbox local streaming) still suffer from occasional lag issues and interence over wifi.

That's a separate matter. I believe local streaming has its own challenges. Like walls for example - hell, my WIFI sometimes does not work properly on the third floor of the house. Or some technical issues on the local machines.

Also PSnow's tech came from the gaika acquisiton back in 2012, right?

I have a feeling that Sony did not improve Gaikai after acquisition. Just like with PS Vita - it had a device, that could challenge Switch years before yet it for some reason dropped the ball. I wonder if they regret it - like Microsoft that missed mobile services train - or not.

but its definitely not the case that streaming is the same experience as playing locally to an everyday user.

Everyday user cannot see frame drops even so...For a regular user - average quality is good enough. And I would argue that current streaming service are better than average. My experience with XCloud in the Netherlands was really good - I have never had issues with that.

 

[Johnny Awesome]

XCloud will do better as the tech improves over time. It's more of a long term play IMO.

MS wants to go this route because selling hardware every 7 years is a pain in the ass.

 

[cheapchips]

MS wants to go this route because selling hardware every 7 years is a pain in the ass.

They want to go this route they think it will allow them to expand the market of potential customers. If MS threw all their resources at the console business it's still just squabbling over 200m potential users. Streaming has almost unlimited growth potential. In the minds of execs at least.

 

[BillSpencer]

MS thinking they can own the streaming market because they have money is the same as MS thinking they can own the console market because they have money, MS thinking they can own the smartphone market because they have money, or MS thinking they can own the tablet market because they have money.

They can and might very well be profitable, but to become a market leader, like Netflix or Sony, or Apple, they need award winning content and products. Contrary to metacritic or GOTY-awards, their fans believe MS already has award winning content. The general market does not really think so. With people usually boasting how cheap MS content is with their 1 dollar gamepass subscription schemes, and not how great the actual content is, aside from maybe a Forza Horizon title here or a once in a 15 year flight simulator there.

If they can produce great content though, then they might very well become the market leader in streaming. But in that case they would become the market leader in consoles as well. Like in the early 360 days when they went all in on games.

 

[eastmen]

MS thinking they can own the streaming market because they have money is the same as MS thinking they can own the console market because they have money, MS thinking they can own the smartphone market because they have money, or MS thinking they can own the tablet market because they have money.

They can and might very well be profitable, but to become a market leader, like Netflix or Sony, or Apple, they need award winning content and products. Contrary to metacritic or GOTY-awards, their fans believe MS already has award winning content. The general market does not really think so. With people usually boasting how cheap MS content is with their 1 dollar gamepass subscription schemes, and not how great the actual content is, aside from maybe a Forza Horizon title here or a once in a 15 year flight simulator there.

If they can produce great content though, then they might very well become the market leader in streaming. But in that case they would become the market leader in consoles as well. Like in the early 360 days when they went all in on games.

1) MS thinks they can move into the game streaming market because they have A) an extremely successful cloud platform in azure and B) has a successful almost 20 year old brand in xbox

2) MS has award winning content and products and they continue to buy companies that make award winning content and products. You site some companies that have all taken different strategies to get where they are. Apple is using their war chest to create content for apple tv but just like with apple music the main way it will be successful is because of Apples base. Sony over the course of time has bought studios like MGM and tons of music companies to strengthen their own portfolio . Netflix a new comer to the scene choose to mostly use other peoples content at the start while building up their own library of netflix produced content. Other companies are now pulling content from Netflix at a quicker pace. I believe Friends , The office , parks and rec were amongst the most consistently streamed content on the website and they famously paid out the nose to keep them a bit longer but I know Friends is gone and I think the end of this month the Office is gone.

3) I don't really think any xbox fan is going around bosting about game pass being $1 since its actually not $1 just like Netflix isn't free. MS has an introductory price of $1 a month and is doing a promotion where it will convert your xbox gold or regular game pass to game pass ultimate. But both offers are one time options. After that your stuck paying regular price or sale price for game pass / game pass ultimate / xbox live

The content on there ranges from great first party titles like Gears 5 , gears tactics , sea of thieves , flight simulator , wasteland 3 and others as well as third party titles like metro exodus , star wars fallen order and so on.

If you hear xbox fans talk about the value of game pass in conjunction to the quality of the games. This year I could have bought 4 games that were on game pass for $240 but instead putting that money into a subscription i'd have been able to play those games and so many more.

I will say that on my end I have played more new to me games than at any point since i was a kid and i was allowed to use my allowance to rent genesis and super nes games

I believe the issue with game pass is that its a new thing in the game world . Netflix didn't have a 100m streaming users in 2007 when it launched. Game pass only launched in the middle of 2017 and will continue to grow as it moves foward into the future

 

[BillSpencer]

1) MS thinks they can move into the game streaming market because they have A) an extremely successful cloud platform in azure and B) has a successful almost 20 year old brand in xbox

2) MS has award winning content and products and they continue to buy companies that make award winning content and products. You site some companies that have all taken different strategies to get where they are. Apple is using their war chest to create content for apple tv but just like with apple music the main way it will be successful is because of Apples base. Sony over the course of time has bought studios like MGM and tons of music companies to strengthen their own portfolio . Netflix a new comer to the scene choose to mostly use other peoples content at the start while building up their own library of netflix produced content. Other companies are now pulling content from Netflix at a quicker pace. I believe Friends , The office , parks and rec were amongst the most consistently streamed content on the website and they famously paid out the nose to keep them a bit longer but I know Friends is gone and I think the end of this month the Office is gone.

3) I don't really think any xbox fan is going around bosting about game pass being $1 since its actually not $1 just like Netflix isn't free. MS has an introductory price of $1 a month and is doing a promotion where it will convert your xbox gold or regular game pass to game pass ultimate. But both offers are one time options. After that your stuck paying regular price or sale price for game pass / game pass ultimate / xbox live

The content on there ranges from great first party titles like Gears 5 , gears tactics , sea of thieves , flight simulator , wasteland 3 and others as well as third party titles like metro exodus , star wars fallen order and so on.

If you hear xbox fans talk about the value of game pass in conjunction to the quality of the games. This year I could have bought 4 games that were on game pass for $240 but instead putting that money into a subscription i'd have been able to play those games and so many more.

I will say that on my end I have played more new to me games than at any point since i was a kid and i was allowed to use my allowance to rent genesis and super nes games

I believe the issue with game pass is that its a new thing in the game world . Netflix didn't have a 100m streaming users in 2007 when it launched. Game pass only launched in the middle of 2017 and will continue to grow as it moves foward into the future

PSnow already exists, and the only thing stopping it from becoming gamepass ultimate is the Sony games being too financially successful.
For gamepass ultimate to become market leader in streaming games, MS needs to rely on Sony continuing to produce hit after hit.

 

[cheapchips]

PSnow already exists, and the only thing stopping it from becoming gamepass ultimate is the Sony games being too financially successful.
For gamepass ultimate to become market leader in streaming games, MS needs to rely on Sony continuing to produce hit after hit.

Sony do not have a monthly release of "ooo, I really want to try that!" content from first party alone. PSNow is as dependant on 3rd party content as Gamepass is to keep people thinking their monthly sub is great value. First party titles as of now are boosters. MS's acquisitions are shifting that picture a little. Bethesda titles have been "this month's must try thing" on both services for instance.

 

[BillSpencer]

Sony do not have a monthly release of "ooo, I really want to try that!" content from first party alone. PSNow is as dependant on 3rd party content as Gamepass is to keep people thinking their monthly sub is great value. First party titles as of now are boosters. MS's acquisitions are shifting that picture a little. Bethesda titles have been "this month's must try thing" on both services for instance.

A cinema analogy would be in order; "ooo, I really want to try that!" is kind of like a Netflix movie or serie.
Whereas a PS game is people actually going to the cinema. Paying several months worth of Netflix just to watch a single movie.

edit: both have value, make no mistake.

But Disney+ showed that in 1 year they can be on a Netflix 'level'. In 2-4 years they could overtake them even

 

[cheapchips]

A cinema analogy would be in order; "ooo, I really want to try that!" is kind of like a Netflix movie or serie.
Whereas a PS game is people actually going to the cinema. Paying several months worth of Netflix just to watch a single movie.

edit: both have value, make no mistake.

But Disney+ showed that in 1 year they can be on a Netflix 'level'. In 2-4 years they could overtake them even

Different models is fine, as you say. If Sony want to push PSNow they need more content though. They can't do a Disney+. Sony's back catalogue is less meaningful and they've given half of it away already with the Plus Collection. They don't have the production capacity to sustain engagement that Disney does. They need third parties.

 

[ChuckeRearmed]

But Disney+ showed that in 1 year they can be on a Netflix 'level'. In 2-4 years they could overtake them even

Considering how much content Disney+ owns - by coming to the market they already had more studios than Netflix probably. Not to mention the IP that are system sellers by default like Star Wars, Marvel etc.

P.S. I do wonder how it looks like if we build the timeline of releases for Sony though.

 

[BillSpencer]

Sony could incorporate episodic gaming.
Instead of a single God of War +25 hour game, it could be 6 episodes, spread in a year for example.
Focus on smaller, easy to digest titles also. But like every company they are given by greed (profit) and they are not stupid, having been the market leader most of the time since they came to the market 26 years ago, so I am sure they have some smart people working there making calculations and whatnot.

 

[liams]

Different models is fine, as you say. If Sony want to push PSNow they need more content though. They can't do a Disney+. Sony's back catalogue is less meaningful and they've given half of it away already with the Plus Collection. They don't have the production capacity to sustain engagement that Disney does. They need third parties.

Another issue sony would have if they went full game pass is that their games are largely one and done story games. Nothing wrong with them don't get me wrong, but there is no way that anyone, sony Microsoft, amazon, google, whoever is putting out a god of war, a spiderman, a last of us every month, or every quarter. If you look at the sorts of games that Microsoft has found the most success in its things like forza horizon, which is a game as a service game, and sea of thieves, also a gaas, which are much better for subscription services because they have ongoing engagement. I think sony would have a lot more people subscribe for a month to play the next spiderman game then unsubscribe than Microsoft would have. Also if you look at where Microsoft is focussing on content, its in rpgs, Todd Howard has even said that they have changed the way they approach making rpgs at Bethesda and that they build the games so people can play them forever.

Now I'm not saying what makes a better game, just to be crystal clear, but the average Microsoft 'big' game, ala Forza, the RPGs, sea of thieves, from what we know Halo infinite, have a much longer playable time than anything sony puts out, by a long shot. Sony games, by and large-cap out at 25-30 hours and are an amazing experience, but after that you can put it away and not feel like there's anything new to go back to.

Sony has been 'Saving up' big games for this year so they could have a blowout, at least it seems that way. they had last of us, ghosts of Tsushima and spiderman, after less content-rich 2019. And that's only 3 big games! I don't think they could double that to 6 big games a year, not from a monetary standpoint but just a talent standpoint.


Offtopic but I looked into it and Sea of Thieves is doing really well for xbox, it's doing half of destiny 2 numbers in monthly active users. Not bad considering rare has 145 employees to Bungies 600.

 

[ChuckeRearmed]

Now I'm not saying what makes a better game, just to be crystal clear, but the average Microsoft 'big' game, ala Forza, the RPGs, sea of thieves, from what we know Halo infinite, have a much longer playable time than anything sony puts out, by a long shot. Sony games, by and large-cap out at 25-30 hours and are an amazing experience, but after that you can put it away and not feel like there's anything new to go back to.

Sony is more like HBO.

Sony has been 'Saving up' big games for this year so they could have a blowout, at least it seems that way. they had last of us, ghosts of Tsushima and spiderman, after less content-rich 2019. And that's only 3 big games! I don't think they could double that to 6 big games a year, not from a monetary standpoint but just a talent standpoint.

I believe they did that for PS5 release.

Offtopic but I looked into it and Sea of Thieves is doing really well for xbox, it's doing half of destiny 2 numbers in monthly active users. Not bad considering rare has 145 employees to Bungies 600.

Not to mention it is not available on PS. It seems in general Xbox has more success in service and online games. The thing is Xbox has always been PC-lite or something with the similar gaming preferences. It might help with the emergent markets though, unlike established ones.