He is probably still in denial about everything Gamepass-related.What services costs $1 a year?
I could see them being on PS5 as full-priced SKUs. The icing on the cake would be MS commenting on that decision: "we don't perceive Sony as a real competitor"Now I'm even more confident those Bethesda titles will be Microsoft ecosystem exclusive.
this will go the way of their phone.
What’s most interesting about this service is that it can be accessed via web-browser—even on iOS. A move that completely circumvents Apple’s walled garden policies. I wonder if subsequent providers will follow the same route.
Cloud gaming is the next level in mobile gaming... Or mobile gaming evolved.
Combine it with a subscription service, and having a shed load of your own content for it, is a recipe for big bucks. That is why new players are entering the fray.
Yeah I agree that not everything will be suited for cloud gaming. I was not thinking straight when I wrote that.I'm not sure if the notion of streaming games should be specifically aimed at mobile gaming. You can't simply transport any old PC/console game onto a mobile phone and say "that'll work".
There will always be some overlap between PC/console "big screen" games and portable games, but not every game is suited for every device. Developers sometimes need to tailor their games to the device itself. This isn't an automatic process.
So without reading trough this entire thread, how did they get approved be Apple to release this on iOS?
They didn't, they are using a "Progressive Web App", basically a browser-based solution.
So they allow this, which basically achieves the same goal?
So they allow this, which basically achieves the same goal?
There is latency in local games too, especially with many of them having online components. The holy grail for game streaming is to minimalize the local factors on the datacenter end so that it ends up being a wash as far as latency is concerned.Aggressive pricing, I'm skeptical they can do better than Stadia w/latency and the latency there isn't acceptable for a lot of games.
Stadia's model is likely a stopgap. They simply don't have the volume to be subscription only. Microsoft has the GamePass audience to feed off. Amazon just has money and the infrastructure costs them nothing.I’m actually looking forward to the day when there’s no need to buy expensive hardware and you can just concentrate on which games to play.
I also like the idea of publisher channels like TV packages. You don’t have to subscribe to them all at once but change them about each month or two
It’s the Google Stadia model o don’t like where you have to buy games at full price.
Stadia's model is likely a stopgap. They simply don't have the volume to be subscription only. Microsoft has the GamePass audience to feed off. Amazon just has money and the infrastructure costs them nothing.
They'll probably buy CDPR.
How can they hold developers and publishers ransom?I actually think they’re more likely to follow the same model they did with ebooks... which is to absolutely own the technology and hardware for product delivery, and hold publishers/developers to ransom. They’ll also probably start an indie development arm like Amazon KDP to get small developers on board.
How can they hold developers and publishers ransom?
Yeah I could see them beating MS for the streaming service and Sony and Nintendo just sticking to consoles.With the Kindle, they basically took over the ebook market. They killed off the Kobo and all the other ebook devices (equivalent of Stadia and Xcloud) and then dictated terms to the book publishers.
Publishers then tried to circumvent Amazon by colluding with Apple, and got hauled over the coals for it. Basically, Amazon won by taking over the market, by offering a better service to customers than anyone else.
I can see exactly the same potentially happening with Luna. They’ll do it bigger and better than the competitors, and become the market leaders.
This really is the biggest piece of news in gaming for a long time. The Bethesda buy out pales into comparison.
Yeah I could see them beating MS for the streaming service and Sony and Nintendo just sticking to consoles.
Yeah, I thought the Luna pricepoint was very aggressive and similar to when Netflix started, without even considering inflation etc.Precisely.
I don’t think Amazon care what Sony and Nintendo are up to. Console manufacture is obviously too much of a ball ache for them (although they did consider it at one point) and why bother, when you can own the streaming model with less R&D because you already own the most robust cloud service?
This is why Microsoft bought Bethesda. They’re very worried about Amazon walking all over their subscription games services - because Amazon have precedent for entering developing business models and technological advances, and owning them completely.
Yeah, I thought the Luna pricepoint was very aggressive and similar to when Netflix started, without even considering inflation etc.
I really think Stadia is dead....YouTube never did get Stadia integration, did it? If Amazon beat them to it with Twitch it's another blow to Stadia.
I don't understand this strange (albeit seemingly popular on this forum) sentiment. People on here rail on and on about "owning" games and the need for physical media (despite EULA's making this an utter fallacy), and then suddenly on a streaming service, people would rather "rent" an unstable list of games that might not even appeal to them? I much prefer the base Stadia model, free unlimited streaming, buy only the games that you want. I guess I am old school, as GamePass does not appeal to me in the slightest either, despite being deeply entrenched in the Xbox ecosystem. If I weren't so loyal to Xbox, I would consider Stadia as an option. Do people really fear Stadia's supposed shutdown so much? Google has enough money and Stadia costs them almost nothing, considering it is simply based on their servers, that Stadia will continue for years.Stadia went the wrong way, people want a sub model for streaming. Maybe they will try again and alter there business model mid stream.
Thank god they didn't buy Bethesda..
I don't understand this strange (albeit seemingly popular on this forum) sentiment. People on here rail on and on about "owning" games and the need for physical media (despite EULA's making this an utter fallacy), and then suddenly on a streaming service, people would rather "rent" an unstable list of games that might not even appeal to them? I much prefer the base Stadia model, free unlimited streaming, buy only the games that you want. I guess I am old school, as GamePass does not appeal to me in the slightest either, despite being deeply entrenched in the Xbox ecosystem. If I weren't so loyal to Xbox, I would consider Stadia as an option. Do people really fear Stadia's supposed shutdown so much? Google has enough money and Stadia costs them almost nothing, considering it is simply based on their servers, that Stadia will continue for years.
It's only a matter of time before they purchase a developer of note though. It's not going to be pleasant.
Important to distinguish between publishers and developers when it comes to who Amazon may or may not buy or want to get involved with.
Believe me when I say, Amazon don't give a fuck about publishers. They just see them as unnecessary middle men. They'll probably never buy a video games publisher, unless it's for a song.
They will however strongly encourage developers to put their games on Luna. They will make it as easy and convenient for them to do so as they possibly can. They'll also make it incredibly profitable for them. Developers won't be able to resist coming to make games for Amazon, because they'll get paid more, and have a better time doing it. This is how Amazon operates. Just watch.