Support NeoGAF

[SlimySnake]

Of course he is correct when looking at the long game, which companies the size of Microsoft have to do. They be sometimes looking and planning 20 - 50 years ahead and trying to predict / guide where technology goes.

If technology can get latency down to unnoticeable for real time apps like games, then that will be the obvious way to go. Time will tell. But from their position they have already laid the global foundations, which smaller companies like Nintendo and Sony can’t really do in house.

The issue I have with cloud gaming is that unlike movies and tv shows, they need to invest in EXPENSIVE CPU and GPU chips, expensive RAM chips, expensive SSDs in the cloud. That's a huge investment. Movies they can just store on traditional azure servers with fancy CPUs, but games they NEED tens of millions of instances at once if they want to go all digital. Right now, we pay Microsoft for every single console purchase. Assuming they will sell 30 million in the first two years. $500 * 30 million = $15 Billion dollars. How are they gonna make that back from 30 million gamepass subs at $10 a month or $120 a year? That's $3.6 billion a year. $7.2 billion in two years. Less than half of their initial investment. Which means they will need 60 million users in two years just to break even.

The costs are way too high for cloud gaming and they will always be high because graphics cards.

 

[ResilientBanana]

“As we’ve said many times, with PlayStation 5 it’s a brand new generation, and we believe in generations. So we want to evolve every part of the experience. ”

- PlayStation global marketing head Eric Lempel talks generational jumps with Geoff Keighley.

 

[Dee Dah Dave]

The issue I have with cloud gaming is that unlike movies and tv shows, they need to invest in EXPENSIVE CPU and GPU chips, expensive RAM chips, expensive SSDs in the cloud. That's a huge investment. Movies they can just store on traditional azure servers with fancy CPUs, but games they NEED tens of millions of instances at once if they want to go all digital. Right now, we pay Microsoft for every single console purchase. Assuming they will sell 30 million in the first two years. $500 * 30 million = $15 Billion dollars. How are they gonna make that back from 30 million gamepass subs at $10 a month or $120 a year? That's $3.6 billion a year. $7.2 billion in two years. Less than half of their initial investment. Which means they will need 60 million users in two years just to break even.

The costs are way too high for cloud gaming and they will always be high because graphics cards.

Well I would guess 1x server racked Series X is significantly cheaper than a retail version. Then things like gamepass needs greater numbers of users, plus an eventual price increase. Once all that comes together then I don’t see why it can’t be profitable.

The end game is clearly - have any screen plus an internet connection, then you can play any game instantly hassle free, from anywhere. But like I said latency needs to be mastered before everyone is willing to drop local hardware. But I believe it can and will be eventually.

Faster hardware
Faster internet connections (plus closer and closer to the client)
Potential other advancements such as predictive input using AI. Another latency saver / masker.
Who knows what else?!

It can be done, especially when looking ahead 20+ years.

 

[alabtrosMyster]

With xCloud and Gamepass, Microsoft have basically destroyed anyone's ability to come in to the game's industry streaming space with a small offering, like Stadia, and build up a streaming product/service slowly. Now, from day one, competitors will need to compete with Gamepass' deep line up of titles across multiple generations of games on a service that offers the best value in gaming. It's a hell of a pre-emptive strike.

GamePass has anything but a "deep lineup" it's about 200 (maybe 300 now) games on a rotation schedule. I have been gaming for a long time, my personal collection has much more depth across more "generations" than whatever GamePass has on offer any given month.

Pay forever, never be sure you get the game(s) you actually want.

 

[mckmas8808]

Nintendo has strong enough IP to easily survive as an old school gaming company. They're already proving it with being stuck in 2010 with both their hardware and online capabilities, and yet being the most profitable gaming company.

Think about what you are considering an "old school gaming company" though. Just read what you're writing man. The truth is the Nintendo Switch is not old hardware. It's the only hardware on Earth that can do true console gaming on the go. And it can plug into the TV effortlessly.

Yeah their online infrastructure is old and behind, but lets not act as if Nintendo is some old school company. They are still on the bleeding edge of different technologies.

 

[Bogroll]

GamePass has anything but a "deep lineup" it's about 200 (maybe 300 now) games on a rotation schedule. I have been gaming for a long time, my personal collection has much more depth across more "generations" than whatever GamePass has on offer any given month.

Pay forever, never be sure you get the game(s) you actually want.

Shit have they shut down the Microsoft store and I knew I should have checked the small print of GP, I didn't know I had signed up until my death.
Too many Drama Queens on here.

 

[ZehDon]

GamePass has anything but a "deep lineup" it's about 200 (maybe 300 now) games on a rotation schedule. I have been gaming for a long time, my personal collection has much more depth across more "generations" than whatever GamePass has on offer any given month.

Pay forever, never be sure you get the game(s) you actually want.

What a pathetic post. You need to be more subtle when you're running this type of warrior non-sense - if its too obvious no one takes the bait. Better luck next time.