> Smartphones were a new market. New-ness doesn't matter. What matters is perf/features and audience. The web has traditionally been held back by the former.

> Smartphones were a new market. New-ness doesn't matter. What matters is perf/features and audience. The web has traditionally been held back by the former. > And AAA smartphone games are also non-existent anyway. I'm talking about big-budget games that push the limits of the devices they run on, and there are lots of them on mobile. > > Asset streaming. It's the web. > Hahahahaha this is a bad joke, right? It's not a bad joke. This sort of condescension does not help persuade people. In fact it probably hurts your case because it's what people do when they're scraping the bottom of their argument barrel. > Even fiber would struggle 1 Gbit plans just launched one suburb over from me. They're getting speeds of 100 MB/s. That's a 4GB level download in 40 seconds - easily hidden by an intro video/cut-scene. But again, the studios will be happy to make some trade-offs here, so expect asset sizes to be smaller (akin to big smartphone). > And if networks are that robust, then why wouldn't we just all jump on game streaming instead and embrace the thin client life? Yep, agreed here. I was going to mention this at the end of my comment but it was getting too long. This definitely could be the "dark horse" which makes AAA web-platform gaming irrelevant. Although, from the consumer's point of view, they'll still end up accessing it from the web.