Gaming subscription services "boost monetisation" and streaming to "become ubiquitous, replace consoles, and be the primary means" of accessing games

Is this the future you want for gaming?

  • Bring it on!

  • Don't care

  • Not sure/it depends

  • No thanks

  • Backlog for life

Results are only viewable after voting.
GHG said:
The statements in the title are in accordance with internal documents shared with the CMA from Activision Blizzard.

On monetisation see 216.a:

screenshot_20221014_1doda7.jpg


And regarding intentions for cloud gaming 244.c:

screenshot_20221014_19mfhg.jpg



Original source:


Long live the technical limitations I say.
Click to expand...
Can't wait to play Temple Run and Subway Surfers type "AAA" games on Cloud in the future. Yo, so hyped!
 
Topher said:
lol.....that's quite a span of time there.
Click to expand...

It depends, we used to have 4~5 year generations not too long ago. It's only in the last 1, 2 gens that it's become a damn near 10 year cycle.

I'd say by the end of the 2020's or even before that, Streaming would have reached a point where it becomes indistinguishable from native play.
 
At the end of the day, the customers decide.

Microsoft tried to force their garbage DRM onto the world with the Xbone. It wasn't just about preventing piracy, it was about killing used game sales, game trading, game lending - all entirely valid, legally protected uses of ones owned games. Microsoft wanted control. Its approach took so much, and gave so little. And it was wholesale rejected, causing untold damage to Xbox that can be seen to this day. Consumers didn't want it, so it died. The same thing applies to subscription services.

Focusing on Game Pass as the example, it takes very little - just a monthly subscription and internet access - and yet it offers a lot. As long as the value proposition remains, it'll continue to be the best deal in gaming. However, if it shifts, and the value proposition disappears, then people will stop subscribing. The onus is on Microsoft to continue to pack their subscription with titles worth subscribing for. Their recent investments - Zenimax Media and Activision Blizzard - suggest they have a decent understanding of this, and are making sure they have enough first party big hitters to keep the service attractive year-round. In this form, the service works for me.

For me, as long as I have the ability to purchase games I like, I'm a big fan of Game Pass. I've discovered several games that I really enjoyed, and I bought them because I don't want to lose them. If Microsoft starts making titles exclusive to Game Pass, with no option to buy the title outright, then I'm done with the service. That models works for Microsoft, but it doesn't work for me. That's the line for me. But, for others who say "no subscription service ever", that's a fair approach too. In the end, the customers decide.
 
Topher said:
But continued existence is what I'm talking about. Obviously profits are good enough for all those products you mentioned and they remain a viable business.
Click to expand...

I can't disagree but I can't look forward to a future where hardcore games are further relegated to the back of the short bus.
 
adamsapple said:
It depends, we used to have 4~5 year generations not too long ago. It's only in the last 1, 2 gens that it's become a damn near 10 year cycle.

I'd say by the end of the 2020's or even before that, Streaming would have reached a point where it becomes indistinguishable from native play.
Click to expand...
It depends on the game. Simple games yes, AAA twitch fps shooters? It's impossible.
 
adamsapple said:
It depends, we used to have 4~5 year generations not too long ago. It's only in the last 1, 2 gens that it's become a damn near 10 year cycle.

I'd say by the end of the 2020's or even before that, Streaming would have reached a point where it becomes indistinguishable from native play.
Click to expand...

It is going to be a lot more than a couple of years before streaming makes any real headway. I'd say by the beginning of the next generation, at the earliest, it could have a few points marketshare.

I think your projections on streaming equating to local gaming by the end of the 2020s is highly optimistic. Avatar bet? :messenger_beaming:
 
Topher said:
It is going to be a lot more than a couple of years before streaming makes any real headway. I'd say by the beginning of the next generation, at the earliest, it could have a few points marketshare.

I think your projections on streaming equating to local gaming by the end of the 2020s is highly optimistic. Avatar bet? :messenger_beaming:
Click to expand...

Sure but the cut off date is December 31st 2029 :messenger_grinning_sweat:
 
01011001 said:
Streaming will never become the standard. by the time the infrastructure is there we will have phones in our pockets that can play RTX3080ti levels of games, and at that point, why bother with streaming?
Click to expand...
Space, I guess... I'll be one still developing my personal projects for local execution so there will always be people making games for offline gameplay
 
rodrigolfp said:
PC forever...
Click to expand...

Honestly I think that's all that will be left once all is said and done. The console manufacturers will go full streaming and due to decreasing sales of consoles the decreased margins will make it prohibitively expensive for them to conduct the necessary R&D and manufacturing. This is the dirty little secret of why both Sony and Microsoft are now releasing their games on PC - it's preparing for a future where they don't make consoles anymore and will instead run their games via cloud PC's instead of consoles attached to the cloud.

So for gamers who want local hardware it will leave one option - build or buy a PC. Someone else mentioned vinyls in this thread and I think that's what the gaming PC will eventually be seen like.
 
Last edited:
As long as I get quality games idc. Gamepass has been a net positive for me personally so if each developer goes the service route and I can pick and choose who and when to subscribe getting their whole catalogue I wouldn't mind that. I subscribed to ps+ to replay through death stranding DC and stray. I like the ability to jump in and out when I see smth I like.
 
GHG said:
Honestly I think that's all that will be left once all is said and done. The console manufacturers will go full streaming and due to decreasing sales of consoles the decreased margins will make it prohibitively expensive for them to conduct the necessary R&D and manufacturing. This is the dirty little secret of why both Sony and Microsoft are now releasing their games on PC - it's preparing for a future where they don't make consoles anymore and will instead run their games via cloud PC's instead of consoles attached to the cloud.

So for gamers who want local hardware it will leave one option - build or buy a PC. Someone else mentioned vinyls in this thread and I think that's what the gaming PC will eventually be seen like.
Click to expand...
You are forgetting VR; the one thing you can't do without local hardware. And why Sony is investing in it.
 
Nothing to even consider worrying about yet. The traditional console aint going anywhere anytime soon and streaming is as dead today as it always has been. Google just pulled the plug. Sony made it an afterthought and Nintendo can barely pull off basic online functions. It'll be 100 years before they change from traditions. In other words, nobody cares about streaming!
 
Last edited:
SmokedMeat said:
I can see a future where streaming takes over. Especially as the younger generation weened on microtransactions and mobile games, grows.

Owning a collection of games probably means little to them.
Click to expand...
It's like this with movies and music already. I think gaming is a bit different but I do see streaming becoming even more relevant as time goes on with younger generations. Once we stream games at higher resolution a few games I would love to just play via cloud suck as hades, cult of lamb, rumbleverse etc...small games i play for 30 minutes at a time instead of having them all stored to local hardrive...but the resolution is currently why I dont.
 
Of course these companies and majority of the industry want a streaming and subscription only future filled with microtransactions. It's so they have more control and we still spend our money owning nothing in the end. Sadly, most of the young generation will probably be fine with that. I don't mind having those as an option, but with as expensive as gaming is, mandatory subscription, microtransactions everywhere and streaming services would be terrible. This type of future is probably quite a ways off, but I'm pretty sure they are planning this. I would probably just go retro at that point especially with the unfortunate direction gaming is going in.
 
Last edited:
I quite like the status quo with PS4 and PS5.

Make and sell console. Make and sell game, download and play, repeat.

The corporations will follow the money since they're obsessed with growth.

Hopefully the model that produces the games I like remains forever, but change is inevitable.
 
01011001 said:
Streaming will never become the standard. by the time the infrastructure is there we will have phones in our pockets that can play RTX3080ti levels of games, and at that point, why bother with streaming?
Click to expand...
Closed mindds have said this about all sorts of venture... why bother. If we ran with that logic we'd still be swinging from the trees.
 
jhjfss said:
They need to do it anyway, how else are xbox blades gonna go in data centers?
Click to expand...

Do Nvidia use Xbox blades for GeForce Now? Or do they use standard PC's? Same goes for literally every other cloud gaming service that isn't attached to a console brand.
 
Streaming may be the future, but in the far far far future.
We cannot have a pixels arms race with 4k or even 8k and up to 120hz, when we have internet connections where people even struggle to get xCloud working properly without lags and/or video compression.

As long consoles and and PCs have a significant advantage (especially in picture quality and lag) over streaming and we still have a lot of slow or bad internet, it will not replace consoles.
 
Last edited:
Topher said:
It is going to be a lot more than a couple of years before streaming makes any real headway. I'd say by the beginning of the next generation, at the earliest, it could have a few points marketshare.

I think your projections on streaming equating to local gaming by the end of the 2020s is highly optimistic. Avatar bet? :messenger_beaming:
Click to expand...

Have you played GE Force Now? I feel 3 times more lag from my mouse scrolling on a tv than I do from playing GE Force Now on a monitor. It already feels like local play. You'll lose, especially with another 7 years of progress. When GE Force Now first came out, you could play Diablo 3 on it. I felt zero difference on that service than I did on my PC when I played them back to back.
 
Bojanglez said:
Because 10 years ago people may have said the same about PS3/360 level graphics in our pockets. Yet people still want better graphics (and other benefits). I love console gaming, but there will probably be a point in time where streaming tech and infrastructure is so good that it will be the most economical way to play games and companies to make money.
Click to expand...

look at PS5 games, look at Xbox Series X games, or games on PC maxed out running on RTX4090s.
people already complain that games don't "look next gen" or don't "fully utilize next gen hardware". this never happened in any generation before that to such a degree. in reality it's just a fact that we are currently hitting a really hard point of diminishing returns.
we are already at a point where adding more polygons to objects is basically a waste of resources because you wouldn't see the difference anyway. and we are at a point where all that's left to do is to iron out the flaws remaining in game graphics, but improving what's already there will barely result in any noticeable improvements anymore unless you're playing a shooter and want to zoom into every little detail with a sniper rifle

and this is on a 4K screen in your livingroom. Phones actually pushed first for 1080p, then for 1440p, then some for 4K... only for every major company to take a step back and go back down to 1080p and 1440p.
Samsung phones will run at 1080p in their stock settings, even tho they have 1440p screens... why? because it's almost indistinguishable unless you hold that thing right up to your face.

so once we hit a level of performance on phones that's comparable to modern consoles, you will be hard pressed to improve the fidelity on such a small screen in a way to actually make obvious improvements. and just imagine what local hardware can do at that point


TheGecko said:
Closed mindds have said this about all sorts of venture... why bother. If we ran with that logic we'd still be swinging from the trees.
Click to expand...

I mean, we have seen it fail and fail time and time again. OnLive's tech wasn't too far from modern streaming tech. in fact some people back then claimed already that they barely feel the latency... 10 years later and apparently "improved" it failed again with Google Stadia being hilariously worse in many ways compared to OnLive.

the only streaming services that will survive IMO will be the companion services like xCloud and GeForce Now. a fallback option to your locally played options
 
Last edited:
Streaming as the main way to play is at least 7-10 years away.

Everyone is pulling their hair out about it like it's about to do in the whole industry tomorrow. 10 years is an eighth of your life. An eighth of your life away is a situation in entertainment you may not like.

Relax.
 
TheGodfather07 said:
Nothing to even consider worrying about yet. The traditional console aint going anywhere anytime soon and streaming is as dead today as it always has been. Google just pulled the plug. Sony made it an afterthought and Nintendo can barely pull off basic online functions. It'll be 100 years before they change from traditions. In other words, nobody cares about streaming!
Click to expand...
Have you ever been marketed to by the big green machine?

Lots of previously stubborn opinions magically changed. ;)
 
I will never pay a subscription to play games. Tired of paying in advance for services I may not use nor may not use enough to justify the cost. If you have tons of time to play games then by all indications Gamepass and others seem like a great bargain. But I dont really have the time to commit in advance to playing games, which is one way of looking at it.
 
rodrigolfp said:
Consoles are already losing in lag to GFNow. The problem is just data centers close to costumers.
Click to expand...
I know that test and I was suprised how that was possible.
Lag on consoles is always worse than on PC for some reasons.
But still multiple factors are important here.
As you mentioned you need data centers close to you. You need a good internet connections with low lag. Maybe even pray that the servers or your internet connection are not under load by other users/neighbours etc.
Even with my cable Gigabit Internet I still get some compression and lag, because I use cable/coaxial Internet and the centres are several hundred kilometers away.
 
Last edited:
DavidGzz said:
Have you played GE Force Now? I feel 3 times more lag from my mouse scrolling on a tv than I do from playing GE Force Now on a monitor. It already feels like local play. You'll lose, especially with another 7 years of progress. When GE Force Now first came out, you could play Diablo 3 on it. I felt zero difference on that service than I did on my PC when I played them back to back.
Click to expand...

Yeah, Geforce Now is definitely the best of the streaming services out there from my experiences. If one is going to prove me wrong I'd bet it would be that one. I don't think I will be though. Lag continues to vary based on proximity to a datacenter and if streaming equates to local then I should be able to get the same experience regardless of where I am. And this isn't just about lag. Image quality is not the same streaming as it is locally. Streaming has to be indistinquishable from local gaming in every single way. I don't think it will get there by the end of the decade. We will see.
 
I still say GAAS runs counter to these claims.

Single game gamers don't feel the need to have access to hundreds of games nearly as much as casual players.

The number of single game gamers is only going to increase over the next 10 years.
 
Would AMD have issue with this? Would they be set to lose out if cloud actually replaced local hardware.
 
Last edited:
GHG said:
So explain this to me then. If all of their games run on PC (which is already the case), why the need for custom hardware along with the associated cost?
Click to expand...
There is plenty of demand for consoles and the console experience. Heck, manufactures still make DVD players to this day, what makes you think consoles will completely disappear?
 
01011001 said:
look at PS5 games, look at Xbox Series X games, or games on PC maxed out running on RTX4090s.
people already complain that games don't "look next gen" or don't "fully utilize next gen hardware". this never happened in any generation before that to such a degree. in reality it's just a fact that we are currently hitting a really hard point of diminishing returns.
we are already at a point where adding more polygons to objects is basically a waste of resources because you wouldn't see the difference anyway. and we are at a point where all that's left to do is to iron out the flaws remaining in game graphics, but improving what's already there will barely result in any noticeable improvements anymore unless you're playing a shooter and want to zoom into every little detail with a sniper rifle

and this is on a 4K screen in your livingroom. Phones actually pushed first for 1080p, then for 1440p, then some for 4K... only for every major company to take a step back and go back down to 1080p and 1440p.
Samsung phones will run at 1080p in their stock settings, even tho they have 1440p screens... why? because it's almost indistinguishable unless you hold that thing right up to your face.

so once we hit a level of performance on phones that's comparable to modern consoles, you will be hard pressed to improve the fidelity on such a small screen in a way to actually make obvious improvements. and just imagine what local hardware can do at that point




I mean, we have seen it fail and fail time and time again. OnLive's tech wasn't too far from modern streaming tech. in fact some people back then claimed already that they barely feel the latency... 10 years later and apparently "improved" it failed again with Google Stadia being hilariously worse in many ways compared to OnLive.

the only streaming services that will survive IMO will be the companion services like xCloud and GeForce Now. a fallback option to your locally played options
Click to expand...
I agree on graphical diminishing returns, but in theory (although nobody has proved in a meaningful way yet) cloud can potentially offer things that may prove harder locally, such as not worrying about storage space and being less stressful on local power consumption. Even if all is equal there could be a point where (again a big if being the quality and stability is good enough) it is just more economical all around to deliver games through streaming for most people.
 
Streaming music over radiowaves into every house and car for free for decades didnt kill the record, cassette or cd. It helped grow the music industry.

Consoles and physical media will be just fine and whilst perhaps only a % of the total volume, I suspect there will be someone satisfying the demand of 100 million or so people who will want that.
 
Bojanglez said:
I agree on graphical diminishing returns, but in theory (although nobody has proved in a meaningful way yet) cloud can potentially offer things that may prove harder locally, such as not worrying about storage space and being less stressful on local power consumption. Even if all is equal there could be a point where (again a big if being the quality and stability is good enough) it is just more economical all around to deliver games through streaming for most people.
Click to expand...

this will depend on how fast we get to a point where we have low power consumption hardware that give developers virtually limitless possibilities at a cheap price.

and we will eventually reach that point.

and once that point is reached game streaming will make no sense anymore.
there's a game streaming service (not sure if it still exists) that streams 8bit retro games... sounds stupid right? every cheap as fuck hardware can emulate these games locally and the size per game is less than the bandwidth needed to steam even 1 second of gameplay of the game.
so this makes zero sense to stream instead of playing it locally.
eventually the same will be true for basically all games imo
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

[Game Developer] Shuhei Yoshida warns subscription services could become 'dangerous' for developers
2
74
1K
POKEYCLYDE replied
Will consoles eventually become a thing of the past?
2 3 4 5
205
1K
ArtHands replied
Playstation + subscription required for live service on console?
2 3
133
972
yurinka replied
Using Switch 1 and Switch 2 as primary consoles on a Nintendo Account?
3
1K
jshackles replied
$30 plastic stands sold separately. $70 and $80 games. Charging for upgrades and cloud saves. Console gaming has become a money sink
2 3 4 5
225
10K
ZehDon replied
Top Bottom