5 ms·

Cloud gaming is solution looking for a problem. It's not customer demand driven. Nobody want's cloud gaming (at least not yet). They haven't shown anything com

by juancn 7y ago

Cloud gaming is solution looking for a problem. It's not customer demand driven. Nobody want's cloud gaming (at least not yet). They haven't shown anything compelling why this would be a game changer for end users. The games are not more fun or unique than on any other platforms. Any of the cloud arguments also hold for consoles or PCs on internet connected games. I think the site may be a bit optimistic.

davidcbc 7y ago
Every time someone posts "Nobody wants cloud gaming" half a dozen people come in and say "Actually, I want cloud gaming" Don't mistake the fact that you don't want cloud gaming for nobody wanting cloud gaming
- wccrawford 7y ago
  Not only that, but the pre-orders for Stadia were so intense that they couldn't hit day 1 deliveries with orders that were placed within hours of going on sale. So clearly there are plenty of people who want this and are even willing to risk it being total crap at $130 each.
  - sipos 7y ago
    Were there lots of pre-ordered, or are they just launching slowly? The fact that pre-order customers can not invite friends immediately, who do not need hardware, suggests it is about limiting users to avoid overloading servers/support/ops.
- Mindwipe 7y ago
  > Don't mistake the fact that you don't want cloud gaming for nobody wanting cloud gaming Also don't mistake half a dozen people on a tech forum as being indicative of a mass audience that's commercially sustainable for something. Especially given HN is rather prone to imagine a product as turning out in a utopian perfect way rather than the more realistic "compromised by the requirement to be economically plausible" one.
danielbln 7y ago
I want it, but I want the Netflix model. What I don't want is to buy games fullprice on their platform. Let me pay 10 bucks a month for a rich gaming catalog that I can play on anything from Mac, to phone to tablet and I'm going to use it.
- arcadethen 7y ago
  So Apple Arcade, then? It's only $5.00/mo, but seems to meet the criteria you've set. For me, I prefer something like Apple Arcade because it downloads the game to my system. I'm not sending commands over a network connection that might flake out at a critical moment. I also don't care about playing with others, usually, though.
  - danielbln 7y ago
    Apple Arcade is great, it cuts through the skinner box horrors that the mobile gaming market has devolved into. However, nothing that runs on my phone will come close to the graphical fidelity and depth that a full blown AAA console/PC title can reach.
- hwbehrens 7y ago
  I think it will take some time for an effective business model to evolve that works for games. Games don't exactly follow the lump-sum, zero maintenance model of movies, but they also don't work well with the SaaS treadmill either. Some games lock players in and absorb their time continuously (e.g. Overwatch, PUBG, WoW, etc), while others package a digestible block of content that can be consumed in 10, 20, 50 hours, and then it's done. Subscription payouts based on proportional screen time would drastically favor the former over the latter, while lump-sum compensation flips the tables since it doesn't consider ongoing server and infrastructure costs needed to make multiplayer work. I think this "Buy your games, and subscribe to them too" model that Stadia is using is how they're trying to split that baby, but given that nearly every other service is either subscription or one-time purchase, I have a hard time seeing it stick around long-term. Then again, some console systems also function that way, so I might be wrong.
mrtksn 7y ago
What if they could give away the underpowered devices and sell subscriptions or ad-supported games?
SmirkingRevenge 7y ago
> They haven't shown anything compelling why this would be a game changer for end users. I don't get this view. They really did show compelling, game-changing features for the end-user, if you watched their talks and demos. They showed lots of potentially game-changing features for developers too, which impact the products, which impact the users. Most of it is vaporware at this point though, and what we have in Stadia today is basically an early MVP.
- ben_jones 7y ago
  I disagree. There's a lot of shilling in the games industry and if you pull back even the first layer you'll see a lot of discrepancies crop up. The tear down of the controller, the fact that they didn't allow internet speed tests during live demos, and a lot of videos on youtube showing game-breaking latencies. I think it's still new and you may be proven right, that these are early quirks that are fixable. But I don't think they will be outside of ideal internet connections and very specific games.
  - SmirkingRevenge 7y ago
    I have the founders edition, cable with 200 Mbps down/35 up, which is pretty meh compared to many markets, and it works great.
gwbas1c 7y ago
I want cloud gaming! Why? I don't play video games that often. Usually, when I play a newer game, it's because I happen to have new hardware that's capable of playing the game. Otherwise, I just sit on the sidelines when there's new games that come out because I don't want to shell out $BIG_BUCKS for some shiny new console or new PC that I'll only use for 20-40 hours total. But, assuming I could stream a game with hardware I already have, or very inexpensive hardware, I'd probably play more games. Not nearly as much as active gamers willing to play $BIG_BUCKS for a shiny new console, but probably 1-4 hours a month. And, yes, I understand that the speed of light introduces fundamental latency problems with streaming. It means that these systems only really work well in dense population centers. It's not like I live out in the boonies where this won't work for me. I think the point of game streaming is to remove the high cost of entry of a console or PC. At some point, these services can be integrated into smart TVs, and all you need to play a game is a generic USB or bluetooth controller. Everyone wins, especially in a market where consoles were historically sold at a loss.
v7p1Qbt1im 7y ago
IMO it will be the only thing people use one day. I‘m thinking ready player one. For now. I think it‘s a good solution for certain people. I have gigabit fiber, but no interest to buy a gaming pc atm. So what if I quickly want to look into a game without spending thousands? Could be an OK solution.

by juancn 7y ago

davidcbc 7y ago

Every time someone posts "Nobody wants cloud gaming" half a dozen people come in and say "Actually, I want cloud gaming" Don't mistake the fact that you don't want cloud gaming for nobody wanting cloud gaming

wccrawford 7y ago
Not only that, but the pre-orders for Stadia were so intense that they couldn't hit day 1 deliveries with orders that were placed within hours of going on sale. So clearly there are plenty of people who want this and are even willing to risk it being total crap at $130 each.
- sipos 7y ago
  Were there lots of pre-ordered, or are they just launching slowly? The fact that pre-order customers can not invite friends immediately, who do not need hardware, suggests it is about limiting users to avoid overloading servers/support/ops.
Mindwipe 7y ago
> Don't mistake the fact that you don't want cloud gaming for nobody wanting cloud gaming Also don't mistake half a dozen people on a tech forum as being indicative of a mass audience that's commercially sustainable for something. Especially given HN is rather prone to imagine a product as turning out in a utopian perfect way rather than the more realistic "compromised by the requirement to be economically plausible" one.

danielbln 7y ago

I want it, but I want the Netflix model. What I don't want is to buy games fullprice on their platform. Let me pay 10 bucks a month for a rich gaming catalog that I can play on anything from Mac, to phone to tablet and I'm going to use it.

arcadethen 7y ago
So Apple Arcade, then? It's only $5.00/mo, but seems to meet the criteria you've set. For me, I prefer something like Apple Arcade because it downloads the game to my system. I'm not sending commands over a network connection that might flake out at a critical moment. I also don't care about playing with others, usually, though.
- danielbln 7y ago
  Apple Arcade is great, it cuts through the skinner box horrors that the mobile gaming market has devolved into. However, nothing that runs on my phone will come close to the graphical fidelity and depth that a full blown AAA console/PC title can reach.
hwbehrens 7y ago
I think it will take some time for an effective business model to evolve that works for games. Games don't exactly follow the lump-sum, zero maintenance model of movies, but they also don't work well with the SaaS treadmill either. Some games lock players in and absorb their time continuously (e.g. Overwatch, PUBG, WoW, etc), while others package a digestible block of content that can be consumed in 10, 20, 50 hours, and then it's done. Subscription payouts based on proportional screen time would drastically favor the former over the latter, while lump-sum compensation flips the tables since it doesn't consider ongoing server and infrastructure costs needed to make multiplayer work. I think this "Buy your games, and subscribe to them too" model that Stadia is using is how they're trying to split that baby, but given that nearly every other service is either subscription or one-time purchase, I have a hard time seeing it stick around long-term. Then again, some console systems also function that way, so I might be wrong.

mrtksn 7y ago

What if they could give away the underpowered devices and sell subscriptions or ad-supported games?

SmirkingRevenge 7y ago

> They haven't shown anything compelling why this would be a game changer for end users. I don't get this view. They really did show compelling, game-changing features for the end-user, if you watched their talks and demos. They showed lots of potentially game-changing features for developers too, which impact the products, which impact the users. Most of it is vaporware at this point though, and what we have in Stadia today is basically an early MVP.

ben_jones 7y ago
I disagree. There's a lot of shilling in the games industry and if you pull back even the first layer you'll see a lot of discrepancies crop up. The tear down of the controller, the fact that they didn't allow internet speed tests during live demos, and a lot of videos on youtube showing game-breaking latencies. I think it's still new and you may be proven right, that these are early quirks that are fixable. But I don't think they will be outside of ideal internet connections and very specific games.
- SmirkingRevenge 7y ago
  I have the founders edition, cable with 200 Mbps down/35 up, which is pretty meh compared to many markets, and it works great.

gwbas1c 7y ago

I want cloud gaming! Why? I don't play video games that often. Usually, when I play a newer game, it's because I happen to have new hardware that's capable of playing the game. Otherwise, I just sit on the sidelines when there's new games that come out because I don't want to shell out $BIG_BUCKS for some shiny new console or new PC that I'll only use for 20-40 hours total. But, assuming I could stream a game with hardware I already have, or very inexpensive hardware, I'd probably play more games. Not nearly as much as active gamers willing to play $BIG_BUCKS for a shiny new console, but probably 1-4 hours a month. And, yes, I understand that the speed of light introduces fundamental latency problems with streaming. It means that these systems only really work well in dense population centers. It's not like I live out in the boonies where this won't work for me. I think the point of game streaming is to remove the high cost of entry of a console or PC. At some point, these services can be integrated into smart TVs, and all you need to play a game is a generic USB or bluetooth controller. Everyone wins, especially in a market where consoles were historically sold at a loss.

v7p1Qbt1im 7y ago

IMO it will be the only thing people use one day. I‘m thinking ready player one. For now. I think it‘s a good solution for certain people. I have gigabit fiber, but no interest to buy a gaming pc atm. So what if I quickly want to look into a game without spending thousands? Could be an OK solution.