March Climber
Member
This thread went south the minute someone presented a meme image to use as a strong argument.
All stars are aligned now. Nintendo, Sony, and MS are all working at 95% perfection at the moment.
xCloud has been out for some time already included with Gamepass Ultimate as well, all over the world. Works on any mobile, browser or PC and even on Xbox One. I'm surprised you don't know that, this reminds me of Stadia where the people that were most exited about it were the people that knew the least about the details of the service.They don't currently care about the product because it's behind a $500 paywall called "buying a dedicated console". Eliminate that paywall and many more people suddenly become interested.
Wait, I DO NOT WANT IT and would wish this insanity would end now rather then waiting for people finally realizing how fucked up it's going to be. But companies want it, that was my point.
The part that Sony is missing is that gamepass and studio competition together will erode thier user base over time. This won't happen overnight, it will happen over a decade.
They have to be afraid that Sony will expose the limitations of the Gamepass business model. That or they want to see Sony try it and fail miserably and ruin what they have going on right now.I'm wondering why the Xbox fans here want Sony to change its model? If you prefer MS products you'd be happy that Sony is failing.
xCloud has been out for some time already included with Gamepass Ultimate as well, all over the world. Works on any mobile, browser or PC and even on Xbox One. I'm surprised you don't know that, this reminds me of Stadia where the people that were most exited about it were the people that knew the least about the details of the service.
They don't currently care about the product because it's behind a $500 paywall called "buying a dedicated console". Eliminate that paywall and many more people suddenly become interested.
I'm wondering why the Xbox fans here want Sony to change its model? If you prefer MS products you'd be happy that Sony is failing.
This is an exaggeration on multiple fronts.. xCloud is neither available worldwide nor is it truly a standalone service. It's still built around being tied to a sub someone buys because they own an Xbox (or maybe a PC, but it is more console centric.)xCloud has been out for some time already included with Gamepass Ultimate as well, all over the world. Works on any mobile, browser or PC and even on Xbox One. I'm surprised you don't know that, this reminds me of Stadia where the people that were most exited about it were the people that knew the least about the details of the service.
Not sure I'm following this. Neither Game Pass or xCloud require a dedicated console.
That's the point. Without a $500 barrier to entry, more people can try out and become fans of games that were previously only known to console players.Not sure I'm following this. Neither Game Pass or xCloud require a dedicated console.
Nintendo as I was saying is just hard to include in the picture. They ditched home console gaming for a mobile device w/ a dock... it's a niche they've carved out and they are selling loads of units and games, but it's replacing a business that used to sell both a mobile console and a home console.. and we never considered "Gameboy"s as part of a console generation.. so IMO hard to consider Switch really a part of them... they also aren't releasing devices to compete w/ each other nearly launch aligned like MS/Sony are.
How is xCloud not availaible world wide? 26 countries already, including all the major markets.This is an exaggeration on multiple fronts.. xCloud is neither available worldwide nor is it truly a standalone service. It's still built around being tied to a sub someone buys because they own an Xbox (or maybe a PC, but it is more console centric.)
If you don't own an Xbox? You can't actually buy games.. if you buy MTX for a gamepass game, good luck w/ throwing that money down the drain once the game leaves gamepass.
I was more or less poking fun of the PlayStations fans saying that without hardware the Xbox brand has no meaning.This you?
This is an exaggeration on multiple fronts.. xCloud is neither available worldwide nor is it truly a standalone service. It's still built around being tied to a sub someone buys because they own an Xbox (or maybe a PC, but it is more console centric.)
If you don't own an Xbox? You can't actually buy games (well you can.. via the web interface.. and then.. not play them if they aren't earmarked for the cloud and part of GPU).. if you buy MTX for a gamepass game, good luck w/ throwing that money down the drain once the game leaves gamepass.
Despite both Sony and MS having cloud services for years.. we are pretty far from them actually being a standalone offering that provides a "console in the cloud."
At this stage it isn't disruptive because internet infrastructure is not a the point where streaming can replace dedicated hardware. Microsoft doesn't currently market cloud gaming as a replacement to console gaming, they market it as a supplemental feature. However, once latency becomes a none issue in the years to come, the way it's marketed will change.How is xCloud not availaible world wide?
![]()
Xbox Supported Countries & Regions | Xbox
Find a list of countries and regions where Xbox consoles, games, and services are supported.www.xbox.com
Why do people that don't know the most basic stuff keep quoting me?
You argument makes no sense, it's tied to a sub someone buy because they play on Xbox? So what you are saying is that xCloud ain't worth $15 to people yet it's somehow still so disruptive it will change everything?
Come on... did you try it? It works already, well enough at least. Very few people care, usually people from places where hardware and game prices are fucked up like Brazil.At this stage it isn't disruptive because internet infrastructure is not a the point where streaming can replace dedicated hardware. Microsoft doesn't currently market cloud gaming as a replacement to console gaming, they market it as a supplemental feature. However, once latency becomes a none issue in the years to come, the way it's marketed will change.
None of that is any sort of knock on Nintendo at all.. there is zero negativity in those statements... there is no second class citizen.. if anything they have a huge benefit w/ what they do.I don't think this is fair to do to Nintendo. It's kinda foul actually. Their business model should still be compared to the other big two. Just because they found a way to be a hybrid shouldn't mean we treat them like some 2nd class citizen.
Are you saying average internet speed and quality has not improved in the past 20 years? Do you believe progress in this regard will remain stagnant for the next 20 years?Come on...
Regarding to the costs of a AAA game, that money you mention of 150, 200, 300M or so is their development budget. You have also to double it because they typically spend around the same money on marketing, PR and communications. Plus post launch content and so on.Indeed they do cost more and take longer to make. But, then the cost is spread out. I saw a lot of "sonys games cost 150m to make". If said 150m game takes three years to make, then it is costing 50m per year, or just over 4m per month. It is not 150m plus the 3yrs of studio running costs on top. The studios running costs are included in the cost and probably account for north of 80% of the price of said 150m game. Even if we added 100m on top for marketing taking the price tag to 250m, then it becomes 83.3m per year or 6.9m per month.
![]()
PlayStation Studios | PlayStation
PlayStation Studios est à l'avant-garde de l'industrie des jeux vidéo depuis des générations. Notre collectif de studios et d'équipes s'étend à travers le monde. Ensemble, nous faisons progresser le domaine du jeu vidéo et nous impactons vos vies d'une manière positive.www.playstation.com
Looking at that link they have 18 studios, if we said that every studio was the same size and followed the example above (obviously that is not the case but for ease I will run with it), then we would get the following.
18 x 250m = 4.5bn. = 1.5bn per year or 125m per month. Not all studios or games are equal. Some games cost less to make and some more. Like I said, I went with the top end for every studio to get pretty big numbers. I have seen people writing that Sonys subs revenue (PS+ plus Now) was generating over 2bn per year. Even if they used half of that revenue to pay towards their content in this example, it would drastically cut their outlay (I'll let you or one of the laughing emojis do the maths on the rest). As they are still selling the games, then they would undoutedly be making bank from their games. With lost sales from subscribers being almost balanced out by said subcribers who have been helping to pay for these games to be made.
Halo infinite (lol I will use in this case) despite being game pass still debuted at #2 on NPD in December 2021 https://venturebeat.com/2022/01/18/...nfinite-has-strong-debut-on-the-sales-charts/
Sony has every right to do whatever the fuck they want and to defend their position with the wording of their choice. But I don't really believe that they would have to cut budgets if their games were available day one on their service if they had one premium priced tier.
Oh yeah, most of this post wasn't really directed at you or do I expect you to be my sparring partner here lol. You just got caught up in my take for this thread.
Nowyurinka I know that you have all of the revenue figures wrote down ready for your posts, so would you like to post them please? We know that you know just how succesful sonys sub services are.
Dude do you understand this tech? The tech is here already for basic gaming streaming, it works even on under developed countries, it will be refined but that isn't what is keeping people from jumping in, the reason people don't start playing over the cloud is because the people that care about traditional video games prefer to play on their own hardware and the people that don't care won't start caring because it's on the cloud now.Are you saying average internet speed and quality has not improved in the past 20 years? Do you believe progress in this regard will remain stagnant for the next 20 years?
You have to pay to get quality devs/artist/talent. That’s how it works. It’s not magic.I think quality depends on the devs themselves. While budget can give them the resources to make the game big. It still is possible to make smaller high quality titles with a low budget.
Who is doing that?It makes sense, there's no doubt about it. Sony can't afford to tank the production cost of their games and wait for the subs to grow.
It's rumoured that within the next 12 months Microsoft will announce the ability for gamers to play games they've purchased. So I don't think 'console in the cloud' is far away at all.
The only major barrier is licensing agreements.
That's the point they aren't doing thatWho is doing that?
It was doomed the moment it had "game pass" in the title.This thread went south the minute someone presented a meme image to use as a strong argument.
I personally don't game on the Cloud now because I don't like handheld gaming and at home nothing currently beats the quality of dedicated hardware. However, if 5 years from now streaming games was nearly imperceptible in quality to playing from a console, then I would forgo getting an Xbox or PlayStation altogether and just stream all my games.Dude do you understand this tech? The tech is here already for basic gaming streaming, it works even on under developed countries, it will be refined but that isn't what is keeping people from jumping in, the reason people don't start playing over the cloud is because the people that care about traditional video games prefer to play on their own hardware and the people that don't care won't start caring because it's on the cloud now.
Do you play over the cloud? I'm surprised by how many people are so into this cloud thing but don't actually game on it.
Not happening in 5 years or anytime soon.I personally don't game on the Cloud now because I don't like handheld gaming and at home nothing currently beats the quality of dedicated hardware. However, if 5 years from now streaming games was nearly imperceptible in quality to playing from a console, then I would forgo getting an Xbox or PlayStation altogether and just stream all my games.
That's fine, then I'll continue to game on console until it happens.Not happening in 5 years or anytime soon.
Regarding to the costs of a AAA game, that money you mention of 150, 200, 300M or so is their development budget. You have also to double it because they typically spend around the same money on marketing, PR and communications. Plus post launch content and so on.
Regarding the length of their development, they on average take from 4 to 6 years to be developed (add one more if they make a new engine for that game-as when it's the first game for a new generation-, it's a new IP, there's covid in the middle), and every generation gets longer.
You also have to remember that now at least many Sony games work in multiple games at the same time (Insomniac, ND, Guerrilla and Firesprite are working in minimum 3 games and pretty likely 4 at the same time). Remember Hermen said they had over 25 games under development at PS Studio, and that pretty likely didn't count games in preproduction, post launch support, PC ports or VR games.
I don't know what revenue figures are you talkin about, I'll post some for this FY:
-Sony game division: 2,739.8B Yen (doesn't include mobile) / $21,09B
-Sony game+addons sales: 1,424,459M Yen / $10,96B
-Sony PS subs: 409,355M Yen / $3,15B (if we divide this in 12 months would be $262.5M/month)
We also have to consider that there are also many additional costs involved, from the marketing, server and transaction/store/support related costs of the service, corportate costs, paying 3rd parties (MS recently said they paid indies $2B for that until now) for putting their games there and so on.
If they didn't have to pay cloud gaming, 3rd party games marketing for the service and their game & addon sales would drop to zero they could afford to fund around maybe 4 or 5 (6 being generous) average sized AAA games per year. PS Studios have over 25 games under development at PS Studios (not counting Bungie, they are working in Destiny 2 and minimum 2 new IPs), according to some who counted them well over 30 and if adding VR, ports/remasters/preproduction etc beyond 40.
And how current investments in AAA mean smaller and less bloated games?What indicates this?What in the world does streaming have to do with smaller projects with less bloat?
You and everyone else.That's fine, then I'll continue to game on console until it happens.
It's true it covers the main major (console) markets, but there are almost 200 countries. 26 isn't what I'd call a worldwide coverage. If other than console you also include mobile and PC there are some big markets missing there like China, Russia or India.How is xCloud not availaible world wide? 26 countries already, including all the major markets.
It should be more than enough to prove it's the future of gaming, it barely had any effect on Gamepass growth once it was released.It's true it covers the main major (console) markets, but there are almost 200 countries. 26 isn't what I'd call a worldwide coverage. If other than console you also include mobile and PC there are some big markets missing there like China, Russia or India.
Both xCloud and PS Now (they cover 30 as of now) are still far from offering worldwide support.
How is xCloud not availaible world wide? 26 countries already, including all the major markets.
Why do people that don't know the most basic stuff keep quoting me?
You argument makes no sense, it's tied to a sub someone buy because they play on Xbox? So what you are saying is that xCloud ain't worth $15 to people yet it's somehow still so disruptive it will change everything?
It just happened to be released first in the 26 countries where people don't care about cloud gaming?You serious w/ this shit? 26 countries isn't what "worldwide" means.. and either way, you can be in 26 countries all you want, you don't actually cover effectively the population of those 26 countries due to latency/distance from DCs.
Not even sure what the rest of your post is trying to say.. I never said xCloud was a disruptor, I suggested Gamepass was. Why are you combining my unrelated posts to make some weird point?
xCloud is not available to everyone who can buy a console.. it really isn't.. it is available to people in 26 countries w/ a good enough internet connection to make it feasible. And it's not a product offering meant for non-console owners at this point.
We agree that cloud gaming doesn't have a ton of demand.. so drop the childish routine. I am not ignorant on this topic.
None of that is any sort of knock on Nintendo at all.. there is zero negativity in those statements... there is no second class citizen.. if anything they have a huge benefit w/ what they do.
My point is their userbase doesn't effect Sony/MS much because of the direction they went. Really they never went any other direction than their own, meanwhile MS/Sony started trading blows out-competing each other to sell devices for people to play Call of Duty/Ass Creed/FIFA/etc. on. Those are games maybe / maybe not releases on Switch but more as an "and lets also make a few bucks over here" kinda deal not "people greatly interested in our games are going to choose the Switch" deal. Rather than take MS/Sony head on, Nintendo just created their own little market nobody is touching but them.
I personally don't game on the Cloud now because I don't like handheld gaming and at home nothing currently beats the quality of dedicated hardware. However, if 5 years from now streaming games was nearly imperceptible in quality to playing from a console, then I would forgo getting an Xbox or PlayStation altogether and just stream all my games.
xCloud offering a beta for a year and a half locked behind GPUw/ a product offering best suited for people who already own consoles is not enough to determine whether it's failure to make Gamepass subs skyrocket is an indication of a lack of demand for cloud, particularly since we aren't really there yet from a network infrastrucute.It just happened to be released first in the 26 countries where people don't care about cloud gaming?
How much you think xCloud is going to cost? Isn't $15 cheap enough?xCloud offering a beta for a year and a half locked behind GPUw/ a product offering best suited for people who already own consoles is not enough to determine whether it's failure to make Gamepass subs skyrocket is an indication of a lack of demand for cloud, particularly since we aren't really there yet from a network infrastrucute.
I can both recognize that, as well as share your opinion that cloud gaming is not going to be something that takes over the market. I don't think it will and actually think it's possible the business model w/ fail completely.
It's still way too early to tell that.
Who is asking those questions? Why would MS close revenue sources and limit their audience by going streaming only? The only way Game pass is like Netflix is that it's a subscription. Even streaming isn't available to all their customers.
Going that mode exclusively would kill their console business because you wouldn't need a console to stream. It would also kill their retail model because no software would ever be sold. No serious game fan or business person thinks MS will go streaming only it makes absolutely no sense.