/v/ - Video Games

>stream vidya

>doesnt work because 99% of all people have shit tier internet with data caps

aint gonna work you homo

What is this? Some retarded publisher's board room?

Nobody is going to play streamed video games. Netflix may be popular now but its treading in thin waters.

>>15490948

So is steam.

>>15490898

>Cloud gaming is the future.

I hate this idea, but I'm afraid you're most likely right, the future is a slot machine in your living room

Unlike the other forms of media, games are interactive. They require minimal latency to properly engage the user.

Not only is it bad that cloud gaming adds a little bit of latency, it is horrendous when you account for a lot of modern games having abysmal latency on inputs to begin with.

On top of that, spotty internet connections causing input drops are also a big issue. No big deal if your internet connection is good. But casuals will always have a shitty wifi and a shitty ISP because they don't know any better, and they're the idiots you would be targeting.

>>15491428

If the future is a slot machine in your living room, then that's an improvement over the present's slot machine in your pocket.

How underage are you that you're not aware of how many services have tried this and failed?

>>15491437

So which companies seriously have?

>>15491435

This will probably take off in south korea first. Their internet is great yet they typically don't have powerful machines. That's why internet cafes are so popular there.

>>15490898

There is a difference between streaming static media and streaming video games.

Remember Onlive? This shit just doesn't work.

>>15491455

>Implying korean peer2peer grindan games that are doing their best to avoid server costs as much as possible will ever invest in expensive streaming servers

Also, regardless of whether internet is fast or slow, you'll always add a few frames of latency because of a whole bunch of technical details. (vsync, input handling, server ticks)

>>15491435

>Unlike the other forms of media, games are interactive. They require minimal latency to properly engage the user.

All this means is that games in the future will be even easier with extremely lenient input timings. I agree that cloud gaming is the future, but only in the sense that increased censorship is the future. They're going to push it through no matter how bad it is and the average retard will eventually accept it, or even support and defend it from the get-go.

>but latency

Yes, but lowering standards is what this industry has been doing for decades. Normalfags will accept or even celebrate it with some marketing.

>>15491478

>implying that normalfags care about shitty input

>>15491489

Hey I never said it was good, I only said it was the future

>>15491491

There's a point where the game becomes flat-out unplayable. At that point, not even Normalfags will touch it.

The bigger the input lagg, the harder the game becomes to play. The opposite of what you want.

The cloud is just borrowing pieces of other people's computers, it's not some infinite magical ether outside of computers that bypasses all network protocols and the speed of light.

It's very useful, and I have no doubt it will be used more and more, but I can't see it making video games better in any dramatic way.

Games that are massively multiplayer online only can already be considered 'cloud gaming'. They can shut down their servers because a newer version is out and they want everybody to upgrade, we've seen Microsoft do it with Halo 2.

The transition to cloud gaming has happened years ago and most people ignored it because of their preconceived notions that it would be some streaming service where the consumer had access to a dumb terminal that only sent out game input and received rendered frames with considerable lag going each way.

Why would gaming companies waste money on such a setup? The way it is now the consumer pays for the hardware and internet access as well as a subscription to the a gaming service if they're using a console. By using the 'cloud' for saved games or other mandatory gaming functions they get the same DRM benefits as using the streaming model with none of the complexity.

>>15490898

Moving towards a digital only platform locked onto one account would also allow the various companies to start dishing out severe draconian rules and "laws" otherwise the account gets banned and access to those games in a "legitimate" manner are cut off.

Think for a moment about the article where a man was accused for rape for just looking in the UK.

Now bring yourself back with looking at the possibility of a "digital only service" and see where the dystopia possibilities begin.

>>15491645

>Why would gaming companies waste money on such a setup?

Pirates, their greatest bogeyman. Any DRM can be cracked. But game streaming means that only the company has access to those game files, not the consumer. You can't crack a game you don't have.

>>15491447

So you're underage, then.

>>15490898

Cloud gaming will never be viable until we fix latency, which will never happen until a technology breakthrough AND the destruction of all Western telecoms.

Niggercattle doesn't like owning shit

And I'm being completely serious

The only reason people put up with Anal Seepage quality Netflix/Crunchyroll/Hulu/Spotify/Digimusic stream is because it is the veritable transition from piracy to slightly more moral faggy, without actually committing to a real product.

>>15492050

I bet most normalfags don't even know that piracy exists.

>>15492131

They do retard, that's why streaming caught on.

>>15490898

Except streaming video games is far more bandwidth intensive and requires faster internet speeds than the average good goy gamer has. Not to mention the input latency would render it useless for genres that demand quick and precise inputs like twitch shooters, ASSFAGGOTS and fighting games.

Streaming a game with a strong enough bitrate to prevent awful artifacting for an hour at 1080p60fps would use a good chunk more data than watching an hour long jewtube video at 1080p60fps. Which that jewtube video uses a lot more data to watch than a 3 minute song on Spotify does. So that comparison has just been rendered moot.

It's application with the current internet infrastructure of North America (the biggest market for games, China doesn't count because they just play at internet cafes) would be disastrous for anything that isn't a slow-paced singleplayer game like RPGs, casual platformers and "cinematic experiences" like God of Soy.

The internet to facilitate good performance and responsive inputs simply is not here and with the ISPs in North America being the way that they are, that level of internet is at least 25 years off. This is not even to mention that people like to buy and download the files for their stuff. itunes may not be the mega giant it once was but people still use it. People still buy music to have on file because it's easier to slap your music onto a microsd card for your phone than it is to have to worry about if the place your going has good cell coverage (Not to mention it's easier on their data caps).

If companies try to push for this, like Ubisoft has outright said they're going to and there's rumors aplenty about the next generation Xbox going to have it's hardware built to support games streaming. It's going to end up the same way as Mircosoft pushing for the Xbone to require daily server calls to keep operating and locking game serial numbers to the machine. It's gonna be a heavy blowback because consumers don't want that. A lot of consumers like to know that the game is running on their machine and a smaller subsection of those consumers like to know that no one can take their physical copy and that the game will be on that disc until it's shelf-life expires.

>>15492322

tl;dr for retarded faggots like OP - The internet infrastructure is not there for this to become a reality for several decades. Even then, people prefer to have the disc or files running off a machine they own.

Polite sage for double posting

>>15491745

I remember back at the beginning when the xbone was launching they threw a lot marketing power behind the notion that 'cloud computing' would enhance their games;

https://www.pcworld.com/article/2039745/microsoft-explains-the-xbox-ones-cloud-enhanced-graphics.html

https://www.pocket-lint.com/games/news/xbox/123141-xbox-one-cloud-computing-features-limited-by-users-broadband-speeds-says-forza-5-s-dan-greenawalt

This is their unbreakable DRM branded as a value added feature. It requires little to no bandwidth or processing power on their end, it could all be done locally on the console yet the game won't work without it being done remotely by design. Good luck cracking this as it's baked in to the OS and engines the games use.

>>15492322

They can let consumers keep physical copies but make it such a pain to use with constant updates that take hours for each game and fill up their tiny expensive built in hard drives with gigs of worthless crap that streaming will seem to be an incredible improvement. And I mean streaming in the sense that they'll transfer the game data over to your console through P2P and you won't own the games you bought.

This is already how it works on iTunes.

https://www.theregister.co.uk/2018/09/12/apple_film_rights/

>>15490898

Because Netflix and Spotify aren't reliant on low latency inputs and absolutely consistent connections.