True, it is some FUD, some legitimate concern, but born in knowing that platform holders and publishers would want nothing more than less control and various options for the customer/end user, and all the control for them.
You never know. Just like Netflix and tv/movie streaming maybe gaming will go full swing into game streaming.
It all comes down to what people want.
PC gamers switched to digital downloads instead of hardboxed gaming. When was the last time PC gamers complained about lack of box and disc? Never. So that's why PC gaming is all digital. PC gamers didn't support boxed copies anymore.
Tons of people stream movies. If people don't want to buy DVDs and BR discs at $20 each (which just about every half decent budget movie still sells on Amazon) and want to go full streaming, that's the trend.
Video game streaming services are at it's infacy. If gamers love it that much, it goes to show all the anti-streaming posts aren't so influencial after all. No different than gamers going apeshit at digital downloads. Years back people hated it. Now it seems tons of people do it (even me who was a disc supporter).
If game streaming is too costly and sucks with shitty laggy gameplay, gamers will balk and prefer full digital downloads and discs. And if the streaming service allows gamers to download a local copy (no more lag), but the value isn't there, then gamers will balk again, then these streaming services will stagnate or disappear.
It all comes down to how much gamers embrace it.
It's like microtrans. How can it be that 99% of gamers on forums say microtrans are a poison to gaming, yet every publisher brags about record digital DLC fees? Well, someone is lying. And it's not the publisher lying about revenue. That got the money to prove it.
There's tons of anti-microtrans people on forums. So where's all the microtrans supporters saying they love buying weapon skins and hats for $2 each?