Ubisoft CEO Yves Guillemot Pictures the Future of Games.

IbizaPocholo

NeoGAFs Kent Brockman
Dec 1, 2014
10,883
5,995
795
ibiza
http://www.ign.com/articles/2018/08/28/ubisoft-ceo-yves-guillemot-pictures-the-future-of-games-a-gamescom-2018

Guillemot described a vision he’s laid out many times in the past: that the future of home gaming will arrive via streaming:

“Technology is actually going in that direction. The machines will be more powerful and the system to transfer data will be more efficient, so at one point, we will have a better experience streaming something than having to buy a machine and change the machine regularly,” Guillemot told IGN.

“I think it's difficult to say today, but what we see is there's a trend,” he explained. “Before, it was not necessary to be connected. Today, as games [evolve] over time, 95 percent or even 98 percent of the people that play our games are constantly taking the free maps or the new events, the updates we do on a regular basis.”

As for pricing, Guillemot thinks there will be various options for people to pick up new games. “We'll have different models. Everyone will be able to choose the model that fits for the type of amount he or she wants to invest,” he said. “What I'd like is the diversity of models. I don't like one specific way to participate. I’d like to keep different types of approaches so that anyone can play with each other.”

“[In the future], games are going to be really huge worlds. It will be really good to have more creators being able to create environments that will be completely different from what only a team [of developers], even if it's 500 people, can imagine.”

“It's not that far away. Things move faster [now],” he said. “We've seen so many changes in the last five years that we know we have to anticipate what it's going to become so that we can start building our engines. We can start anticipating what players will want to play. That's why we speak a lot about what we see. That is what is going to create the Ubisoft of 10 years from now.

“In adopting technology early, we will be able to be part of the guys that will be there at the end. If you start the race early, you have a chance to be there at the end. If you start too late, you have to run a lot faster and you get tired.”
 

Pheace

Member
Jul 18, 2015
502
61
250
Tech's no doubt headed that way in the long run but implementation, particularly on a global scale is going to take much longer. Even now there's still a large population of gamers with low/bad internet connections, let alone the infrastructure that would be necessary for this kind of future. It would also mean you'd have a huge demographic go into continuous high data use, same as Streaming services the like of Netflix have been gobbling up the internet's Bandwidth.

It's interesting but I doubt it'll happen within the next 20-30 years, and even then probably only richer densely populated areas long before rural areas will ever be able to.
 

Eteric Rice

Member
Jan 13, 2007
16,575
123
1,145
I guess by the time this comes around I'll be leaving gaming. Not being able to own my own copy of a game (leaving me to a publisher's/developer's whims) is not a place I want to go. It's just to easy to abuse consumers with this kind of model.
 
Jul 25, 2014
2,197
472
365
Tech's no doubt headed that way in the long run but implementation, particularly on a global scale is going to take much longer. Even now there's still a large population of gamers with low/bad internet connections, let alone the infrastructure that would be necessary for this kind of future. It would also mean you'd have a huge demographic go into continuous high data use, same as Streaming services the like of Netflix have been gobbling up the internet's Bandwidth.

It's interesting but I doubt it'll happen within the next 20-30 years, and even then probably only richer densely populated areas long before rural areas will ever be able to.
Nvidia's streaming solution is already viable at 2560x1440 output/60FPS/high-max settings and games that require precision input (Fortnite/Dark Souls 3/Kingdom Come Deliverance) were all playable on a 20mbit connection no problem. If this is what exists now, I can't imagine how good it'll be in 5-10 years.

Even the pricing is really good. One of Nvidia's competitors was selling 100 hours of gameplay for $30.
https://blog.liquidsky.tv/2018/05/25/new-pricing-plans/

I guess by the time this comes around I'll be leaving gaming. Not being able to own my own copy of a game (leaving me to a publisher's/developer's whims) is not a place I want to go. It's just to easy to abuse consumers with this kind of model.
I doubt purchasing a game outright will ever go away as long as people are interested in PC gaming. Don't know how much longer consoles will stick around since consoles are all about accessibility and what's more accessible than the equivalent of Netflix being built into every device?.... But PC gaming is safe.
 
Last edited:

ultrazilla

Member
Sep 17, 2011
3,161
375
630
www.scifijapan.com
If developers and publishers do away with physical ownership of games, I'm done with "modern gaming". I'll go back to an older system that I can put a physical game in, play and not worry
about whether or not servers are disabled for it, etc.

I'll say it until I can't pick up a controller anymore(I'm still young at 46) but fellow gamers really need to PUSH BACK HARD on this "streaming only", "no physical games console" talk.
Trust me, it's not something you want to "embrace" or "wish for". You'll be buying glorified "rental machines" and never really own the full price "digital only AAA" games.

Please, please, please do not embrace this. PUSH BACK HARD. It'll ruin gaming. All this talk of "well, there will be bigger worlds, graphics, etc" is pure PR BULLSHIT. The PS4/Pro, Xbox One/X
and hell, even the Nintendo Switch(Zelda) can do massive open worlds with nice graphical fidelity. So don't believe the "cloud computing", "streaming will make a better game" nonsense.

This is the future DEVELOPERS AND PUBLISHERS WANT. That should be enough of a red flag. Please. Push back hard on this.
 

CeeJay

Member
Mar 9, 2014
356
202
320
“[In the future], games are going to be really huge worlds. It will be really good to have more creators being able to create environments that will be completely different from what only a team [of developers], even if it's 500 people, can imagine.”
This is an interesting concept with only really Minecraft as a point of reference for me. I am sure there are other games that have user created content integrated into the wider game world but Minecraft is a good example of where this is currently in effect. Currently you have all the different mod servers with custom game modes and then the realms with standard user created shared worlds. Its not a huge stretch to see one big world where all these could sit side by side in the same space. It's purely down to the user created content that has given Minecraft its really long legs and I am sure that other developers would love to tap into that kind of concept. I think developers themselves though would need to approach a game differently if they want to make this possible and give the users the flexible tools they need and to a large extent release some of the proprietary control they have over their own games. They would need to put a lot of trust in the hands of the userbase and essentially set their games free without any guarantees or control over what it will become.
 

Boss Mog

Member
Dec 12, 2013
4,255
2,834
540
He is dead wrong about gaming moving exclusively to streaming.
 
Last edited:

Louis Cyphre

Banned
Jun 5, 2011
5,321
818
470
If developers and publishers do away with physical ownership of games, I'm done with "modern gaming". I'll go back to an older system that I can put a physical game in, play and not worry
about whether or not servers are disabled for it, etc.

I'll say it until I can't pick up a controller anymore(I'm still young at 46) but fellow gamers really need to PUSH BACK HARD on this "streaming only", "no physical games console" talk.
Trust me, it's not something you want to "embrace" or "wish for". You'll be buying glorified "rental machines" and never really own the full price "digital only AAA" games.

Please, please, please do not embrace this. PUSH BACK HARD. It'll ruin gaming. All this talk of "well, there will be bigger worlds, graphics, etc" is pure PR BULLSHIT. The PS4/Pro, Xbox One/X
and hell, even the Nintendo Switch(Zelda) can do massive open worlds with nice graphical fidelity. So don't believe the "cloud computing", "streaming will make a better game" nonsense.

This is the future DEVELOPERS AND PUBLISHERS WANT. That should be enough of a red flag. Please. Push back hard on this.
We will slowly graduate away from $60 purchases. That is why so many are desperately trying to hold onto ownership, its because games are expensive. However once they figure a Netflix style of gaming it's going to be hard to go back. I bet a lot of movie buyers back in the day now adopt a rental model or subscribe to Netflix. The hard sell will be streaming only if those games are $60 a pop. You look at Ubisoft and their games and how they have managed to keep games active years after release. that's the way forward. How old is PUBG, DOTA, Fortnite and Minecraft now and how many millions still play it? Publishers also want more control, like crossplay and cross progression. That means the actual hardware will become less and less of importance.
 

ROMhack

Gold Member
Jul 14, 2018
1,225
956
360
As for pricing, Guillemot thinks there will be various options for people to pick up new games. “We'll have different models. Everyone will be able to choose the model that fits for the type of amount he or she wants to invest,” he said. “What I'd like is the diversity of models. I don't like one specific way to participate. I’d like to keep different types of approaches so that anyone can play with each other.”

I think this is interesting. We've seen a shift recently in F2P games using additional content to earn revenue. I think that approach will eventual move into story-driven games too. Something like this:

Base edition (low cost) - Base game, with less features. Like a free trial, but you can actually finish the game.
Full edition (mid cost) - Basically what we regard as full games now.
Special edition (high cost) - All the DLC bought ahead of time. Again, basically what we see now.
SUPER DUPER edition (HIGHER cost) - All DLC, future buy-ins to betas, earnable points, monthly rewards. A kind of loyalty program to the company.

It's not a million miles away from what we have now.
 
Last edited:
Jun 25, 2018
393
255
350
For streaming to be valid they need to figure out a way to give control to their consumers, However i do not wish for this sort of future where only 2 games are being made worked by 20.000 people each to give there insane Worlds. Thats not a future i want to live.
 

Daymos

Member
Jul 26, 2013
274
156
330
I know this comment is cynical and partially inaccurate but all I read is: "I want all our games to stream or at least require an internet connection so that WE are in complete control of YOUR games. We can then charge whatever we want and take away your access to the games at any point in time without prior warning. "

I know that's not completely true. It's just my fear since I have a slow internet connection (live in the woods, it's not changing anytime soon) and there's no way I can stream games. Plus I love to build physical collections of games that I completely own myself for life. It irks me because my internet is just fine for downloading game patches/dlc and surfing the web, i just can't stream video/etc. I'm fine as long as things don't have to be always connected.

So I'll do what little I can to fight this concept. Which is buy complete editions of games with all patches and dlc on the disk (very rare) and support portable gaming (which I guess is only the switch at the moment) because I figure you can't require streaming on a portable device until the US has 100% wireless internet coverage everywhere. Beyond that I'll also try to support small teams of indie developers, provided their games are of the highest quality possible.
 
Last edited:

Louis Cyphre

Banned
Jun 5, 2011
5,321
818
470
I know this comment is cynical and partially inaccurate but all I read is: "I want all our games to stream or at least require an internet connection so that WE are in complete control of YOUR games. We can then charge whatever we want and take away your access to the games at any point in time without prior warning. "

I know that's not completely true. It's just my fear since I have a slow internet connection (live in the woods, it's not changing anytime soon) and there's no way I can stream games. Plus I love to build physical collections of games that I completely own myself for life. It irks me because my internet is just fine for downloading game patches/dlc and surfing the web, i just can't stream video/etc. I'm fine as long as things don't have to be always connected.

So I'll do what little I can to fight this concept. Which is buy complete editions of games with all patches and dlc on the disk (very rare) and support portable gaming (which I guess is only the switch at the moment) because I figure you can't require streaming on a portable device until the US has 100% wireless internet coverage everywhere. Beyond that I'll also try to support small teams of indie developers, provided their games are of the highest quality possible.
We shouldn't really be trying to blame them or them trying to force us. I'm a firm believer that there will always be a model that fits the current demographic. If physical game sales are still strong why would they stop? Places like Best Buy stop storing CD's on the shelf likely because people stopped buying them. Same with Blockbuster video, the mainstream went digital or Netflix. Videogames will continue to offer options so frowning upon those who buy digital or want an option like streaming doesn't mean you have to be kicking and screaming in hesitation because that is very far off where we they only offer streaming, if ever.
 
Last edited:

Doom85

Member
Mar 3, 2018
521
281
240
Blockbuster thought that too...
That doesn't make any sense. Blockbuster thought that RENTING movies physically wouldn't die when faced against streaming, not owning movies. Last time I checked, tons of general stores/electronics stores sell BRs/DVDs. I know some feel super-confident the market is going to die pretty soon, but I really don't see it happening as soon as they anticipate.

And heck, renting movies didn't really die either, last time I checked Redbox was still a thing. Although I rarely use it since I got tired after it happening two times where the disc was badly scratched (and these were both relatively new releases) and the movie wouldn't fully play because some loser didn't know how to handle discs properly. Like, if it's your own personally owned BR/DVD, go nuts with it, but a rental? You treat that with respect, otherwise you're a jerk in my book for damaging something you don't own and inconveniencing other customers.

But I don't understand this mindset. How hard is it to offer a game via both streaming and download? A physical copy, sure, you've got to make the disc, box, ship it out, I can see in the FAR future that eventually dying out. But downloads? No, there will be too many people who want to make sure they OWN the game even those who would prefer physical would still take digital over nothing, not lose it at the whim of the developer or rights issues. I remember all the crying from Doctor Who fans years back when Netflix removed it, meanwhile I'm smiling contently looking at my season sets of the show.
 

Hissing Sid

Member
Feb 19, 2015
532
462
315
That’s nice Yves, everyone needs mind candy to choke the chicken to I guess.

I personally won’t be taking part in your wet dream though, as I have enough games in the vault to last me a lifetime.
 

dirthead

Prefix: dog
Jul 24, 2018
1,612
1,299
330
That’s nice Yves, everyone needs mind candy to choke the chicken to I guess.

I personally won’t be taking part in your wet dream though, as I have enough games in the vault to last me a lifetime.
Bingo. Everyone on the planet could stop making games today and I'd be fine until I die. Couldn't care less about glitchy, laggy, locked down streaming only services. It's never as good as everything being local.
 

DocONally

Member
Oct 21, 2014
1,107
601
335
Bingo. Everyone on the planet could stop making games today and I'd be fine until I die. Couldn't care less about glitchy, laggy, locked down streaming only services. It's never as good as everything being local.
Me three. My backlog is fucking huge, huge I say. Plus I have my SNES Mini just sitting there still unplayed, that's all my childhood just waiting to be re-lived. I'm gonna be dead before I finish all the games I own: happy days.

Also, did he just assume our gender?

jk, chill, fuuuuu...
 
Last edited:

Mr Nash

square pies = communism
Jun 8, 2004
4,408
429
1,515
Not owning our games is a no go for me as well. It does get me thinking how we'd pretty much have to go all the way back to the PS2/Xbox/Gamecube and earlier to truly own our games, though, as anything beyond that will become increasingly difficult to play. From the PS3/Xbox 360 onward, the consoles had consistent online connectivity, and games got patched all the time, so it's questionable how playable those will be way down the road.
 

dirthead

Prefix: dog
Jul 24, 2018
1,612
1,299
330
Not owning our games is a no go for me as well. It does get me thinking how we'd pretty much have to go all the way back to the PS2/Xbox/Gamecube and earlier to truly own our games, though, as anything beyond that will become increasingly difficult to play. From the PS3/Xbox 360 onward, the consoles had consistent online connectivity, and games got patched all the time, so it's questionable how playable those will be way down the road.
The final destination of every game is basically emulated on a PC. That's the reality of this stuff. Original hardware will all eventually break, cartridges will rot, discs will wear out. None of it's going to last.
 

Mr Nash

square pies = communism
Jun 8, 2004
4,408
429
1,515
The final destination of every game is basically emulated on a PC. That's the reality of this stuff. Original hardware will all eventually break, cartridges will rot, discs will wear out. None of it's going to last.
Basically, but I'm curious what they'll do with the 7th generation consoles and beyond. Is anyone actually archiving patches and content updates for this and subsequent generations of games? These games aren't going to be as cut and drying to get working and distribute compared to previous consoles where everything was on the disc / cart and good to go day one.
 

Ballthyrm

Member
Jun 21, 2013
343
187
330
Montpellier
Blockbuster has nothing to do with consoles though.
Convenience always win. People are lazy. Subscription models are prevalent because they are easy to sign on and then forget.

Blockbusters may have nothing to do with console but their downfall reflect pretty well people who are attached to physical media. While blu-ray and DvD are still alive and you can buy them at the shop, people are ignoring that sales are going down YoY.
Physical media is dying. It will come to video game too.
The physical media will be transformed to a collector item and it will concern a minority of die hard supporters (see vinyl sales)

People who think streaming is evil because you don't own anything, well you never did. They always sold you a license of the game.

By trying to get everything physical, we are holding the medium back. We are saying to the devs, please be constrained by this shitty 7 year old hardware. Once we get to full streaming, it's going to open up the medium to try new things. We are never going to get the matrix running on a PS5 people.

I always picture this debate as if it was wikipedia, physical media for me is like people who want to print wikipedia to read it. It is pointless, doesn't add anything to the content and remove a bunch of usefull things too. We are stuck in the 18th century, forcing the content to adapt to our taste because paper is nice, never seeing what it could become...
 
Last edited:

DonF

Member
Jul 10, 2017
2,153
1,692
255
The minimum amount of delay, bothers me. I truly don't see this happening, specially cause I live in south america. Specially cause shitty companies think that having a data center in fucking sao paulo is enough for us. I'll hardly support it.
 

A.Romero

Member
Feb 23, 2009
1,986
668
795
Mexico
www.lavejota.com
I don't see why streaming and traditional gaming cannot coexist.

Blu-Ray discs and players are still being sold and improved upon constantly, but at the same time we have many online streaming services that offer a lower quality but more convenient experience.

Personally, I go like 5 times a year to the theater, buy around 10 - 15 Blu-ray discs a year (only movies and TV shows I really like) and consume the rest of my media through streaming. Something like that could apply to gaming where games that offer a better experience or a worthwhile experience will be acquired by people to play locally through a disc or download on a specialized machine and other games will be offered through streaming services.

Everybody wins.
 

Petrae

Gold Member
Nov 19, 2006
5,511
1,514
1,095
47
West Springfield, MA
www.youtube.com
Good luck trying to get ISPs to make exceptions to their bandwidth caps in order to make this streaming fantasy a reality. The video game biz needs ISPs, but the ISPs don’t need the video game biz— so there really isn’t any position of power for Yves and his cronies.

Streaming will be fine until the internet bill comes due and additional fees for data over the cap piss off consumers. Then the dream will abruptly end and the biz will be in damage control mode, quite possibly fighting for its life.
 

Cymendo

Neo Member
Aug 22, 2018
12
10
90
Was just talking about this with my buddy who works from home coding for some cloud service he runs or manages (kind of alludes me) and naturally hes very on board for OS/games going full stream. I don't share his enthusiasm but its interesting to see companies try and push things this way. For movies it makes sense, netflix is killing it, people love the ease, speeds are decent, I get it. But swallowing the concept that the OS on my cpu isn't even there or mine, but a streamed service I'll access (which opens all kinds of questions in my mind) and my games are physically not here or running/being processed by hardware in front of me but rather streamed to me....so many questions, so many draw backs and what exactly is the plus side for myself? /Shrug
 

A.Romero

Member
Feb 23, 2009
1,986
668
795
Mexico
www.lavejota.com
Good luck trying to get ISPs to make exceptions to their bandwidth caps in order to make this streaming fantasy a reality. The video game biz needs ISPs, but the ISPs don’t need the video game biz— so there really isn’t any position of power for Yves and his cronies.

Streaming will be fine until the internet bill comes due and additional fees for data over the cap piss off consumers. Then the dream will abruptly end and the biz will be in damage control mode, quite possibly fighting for its life.
If Netflix has been able to thrive around that, I don't see why gaming wouldn't, specially since Netflix is a direct competitor of cable companies.
 

mckmas8808

Member
May 24, 2005
40,639
3,595
1,560
Convenience always win. People are lazy. Subscription models are prevalent because they are easy to sign on and then forget.

Blockbusters may have nothing to do with console but their downfall reflect pretty well people who are attached to physical media. While blu-ray and DvD are still alive and you can buy them at the shop, people are ignoring that sales are going down YoY.
Physical media is dying. It will come to video game too.
The physical media will be transformed to a collector item and it will concern a minority of die hard supporters (see vinyl sales)

People who think streaming is evil because you don't own anything, well you never did. They always sold you a license of the game.

By trying to get everything physical, we are holding the medium back. We are saying to the devs, please be constrained by this shitty 7 year old hardware. Once we get to full streaming, it's going to open up the medium to try new things. We are never going to get the matrix running on a PS5 people.

I always picture this debate as if it was wikipedia, physical media for me is like people who want to print wikipedia to read it. It is pointless, doesn't add anything to the content and remove a bunch of usefull things too. We are stuck in the 18th century, forcing the content to adapt to our taste because paper is nice, never seeing what it could become...
You are acting as if there's no difference between playing games locally running on a console and streaming that same game over the internet though. There's a huge/noticeable difference in how the game looks and feels. Netflix looks and feels the same than a DVD.
 
Last edited:

Petrae

Gold Member
Nov 19, 2006
5,511
1,514
1,095
47
West Springfield, MA
www.youtube.com
If Netflix has been able to thrive around that, I don't see why gaming wouldn't, specially since Netflix is a direct competitor of cable companies.
Consumers of video games and streaming entertainment will be forced against the cap that much faster. You only get X amount of data to use in a month— and having two major sources of streaming for entertainment is going to create some very difficult choices. Video games aren’t going to win in all of those situations.

Few people have complained about video streaming because it’s been the only dominant data-eater. That will change under Guillemot’s vision, when customers breach their caps twice as fast.
 

nkarafo

Member
Nov 30, 2012
12,538
1,515
690
Not a fan of this future. Users have already lost most control of their videogames as is. Imagine publishers having even more control and you having to depend sorely on their servers.
 
  • Like
Reactions: FatboyTim

Ballthyrm

Member
Jun 21, 2013
343
187
330
Montpellier
You are acting as if there's no difference between playing games locally running on a console and streaming that same game over the internet though. There's a huge/noticeable difference in how the game looks and feels. Netflix looks and feels the same than a DVD.
Yeah, call me an optimist, but i think in the future they won't be a difference. Netflix took off when people started to have decent enough internet. Just because Internet is shit and data-capped for a lot of Americans right now doesn't mean it will be like that forever.

Streaming works fine with 100mb/s+ , i know that most people don't have that, but it will come. Starlink, OneWeb are on the horizon. Most of Europe has already decent internet. If the West doesn't adopt the technology, China will, they don't have space for 300 games on shelves.

I don't really care what is the physical medium i get my game from, games are what's important, not consoles, PC or mobiles or whatever.
 

kaczmar

Member
Apr 3, 2016
253
86
265
I guess by the time this comes around I'll be leaving gaming. Not being able to own my own copy of a game (leaving me to a publisher's/developer's whims) is not a place I want to go. It's just to easy to abuse consumers with this kind of model.
No you won't. You will simply stay in the last generation that you enjoyed.
 

mckmas8808

Member
May 24, 2005
40,639
3,595
1,560
Yeah, call me an optimist, but i think in the future they won't be a difference. Netflix took off when people started to have decent enough internet. Just because Internet is shit and data-capped for a lot of Americans right now doesn't mean it will be like that forever.

Streaming works fine with 100mb/s+ , i know that most people don't have that, but it will come. Starlink, OneWeb are on the horizon. Most of Europe has already decent internet. If the West doesn't adopt the technology, China will, they don't have space for 300 games on shelves.

I don't really care what is the physical medium i get my game from, games are what's important, not consoles, PC or mobiles or whatever.
I can't imagine what the price of that internet connection will be lol.
 
Last edited:

DigitalScrap

Gold Member
Jan 21, 2015
1,294
526
435
That doesn't make any sense. Blockbuster thought that RENTING movies physically wouldn't die when faced against streaming, not owning movies. Last time I checked, tons of general stores/electronics stores sell BRs/DVDs.
DVD and Blu-ray sales have been on a year over year double digit decline for years now. It was over a 17% drop last year if I am remembering correctly. It is definitely happening. You may still see them, but sales are slowing. Physical retntals are down over 20%. This is why Redbox is trying to break into streaming. Physical media will be a thing of the past in the not so distant future.
 

A.Romero

Member
Feb 23, 2009
1,986
668
795
Mexico
www.lavejota.com
Consumers of video games and streaming entertainment will be forced against the cap that much faster. You only get X amount of data to use in a month— and having two major sources of streaming for entertainment is going to create some very difficult choices. Video games aren’t going to win in all of those situations.

Few people have complained about video streaming because it’s been the only dominant data-eater. That will change under Guillemot’s vision, when customers breach their caps twice as fast.
It's definitely a hurdle but I think the market will adapt.

Data caps are bound to disappear eventually.
 

nkarafo

Member
Nov 30, 2012
12,538
1,515
690
It's also a matter of how many bills you need to pay for videogames. In the old days you only needed to pay the power bill. Today many games ask you to pay for internet too. In the future you are going to need a subscription on top of that.

It's just too many dependencies to worry about. And then you got to rely on publisher's will to keep the games up. Who tells you that a game you like will be up in 10 years?
 
Last edited:

NahaNago

Member
Aug 29, 2014
2,505
455
350
http://www.ign.com/articles/2018/08/28/ubisoft-ceo-yves-guillemot-pictures-the-future-of-games-a-gamescom-2018

Guillemot described a vision he’s laid out many times in the past: that the future of home gaming will arrive via streaming:

“[In the future], games are going to be really huge worlds. It will be really good to have more creators being able to create environments that will be completely different from what only a team [of developers], even if it's 500 people, can imagine.”
“In adopting technology early, we will be able to be part of the guys that will be there at the end. If you start the race early, you have a chance to be there at the end. If you start too late, you have to run a lot faster and you get tired.”
Video games being streamed instead of relying on the hardware in the future will become mainstream but that won't probably happen for at least 10 years.

On the whole large worlds thing, I really do think that eventually that unreal and unity will create worlds and cities and folks will just build games using them. I think it would be interesting if Sony did it as well for like indie devs to mess around with. Like here is a premade continent with dozens of cities filled with people and Create! Minecraft is popular and they are still making Dreams so them making something similar wouldn't be too crazy.
 

Louis Cyphre

Banned
Jun 5, 2011
5,321
818
470
Convenience always win. People are lazy. Subscription models are prevalent because they are easy to sign on and then forget.

Blockbusters may have nothing to do with console but their downfall reflect pretty well people who are attached to physical media. While blu-ray and DvD are still alive and you can buy them at the shop, people are ignoring that sales are going down YoY.
Physical media is dying. It will come to video game too.
The physical media will be transformed to a collector item and it will concern a minority of die hard supporters (see vinyl sales)

People who think streaming is evil because you don't own anything, well you never did. They always sold you a license of the game.

By trying to get everything physical, we are holding the medium back. We are saying to the devs, please be constrained by this shitty 7 year old hardware. Once we get to full streaming, it's going to open up the medium to try new things. We are never going to get the matrix running on a PS5 people.

I always picture this debate as if it was wikipedia, physical media for me is like people who want to print wikipedia to read it. It is pointless, doesn't add anything to the content and remove a bunch of usefull things too. We are stuck in the 18th century, forcing the content to adapt to our taste because paper is nice, never seeing what it could become...
In theory you are right. Once we really get to this pie in the sky cloud venture there will be no more restrictions of what they can do. The hardware will become moot as the cloud will handle the heavy stuff and they can upgrade that whenever they like. Say goodbye to outdated consoles. I still think we are another generation away (PS6 timeline).
 
Apr 18, 2007
12,909
313
1,140
I "like" how they constantly say this is what people want or trending toward, at the same time they keep on pushing this down our throats (eventhough most don't want it).
 

Louis Cyphre

Banned
Jun 5, 2011
5,321
818
470
I "like" how they constantly say this is what people want or trending toward, at the same time they keep on pushing this down our throats (eventhough most don't want it).
They have data of what people do. You don't become profitable by pushing games down your throat when there is as many games out there per year, so obviously you are not the market they care about.
 

jshackles

Gentlemen, we can rebuild it. We have the capability to make the world's first enhanced store. Steam will be that store. Better than it was before.
Jul 2, 2013
12,433
2,554
725
Everyone complaining about streaming speeds, data caps, latency, etc: 10 years from now we'll have a huge amount of competition in the ISP space worldwide assuming everything goes according to plan with Starlink tech from SpaceX.

For those that don't know, this is a VLEO satellite system (so latency similar to terrestrial fiber) that will relay via a network of over 4,000 commercial satellites initially. In the next few years this will start being viable for poorly serviced areas of the world, and in probably 5-10 years this will start rolling out in the US (again, assuming everything goes according to plan).

As we've seen time and time again, this sort of competition in the service provider space has done wonders for getting rid of data caps, raising speeds, and lowering prices of traditional internet services where alternatives exist (see Europe, Google Fiber cities, et al). Even Facebook is looking to launch a similar competing service apparently, which will help keep other market entrants in check.
 

Louis Cyphre

Banned
Jun 5, 2011
5,321
818
470
Everyone complaining about streaming speeds, data caps, latency, etc: 10 years from now we'll have a huge amount of competition in the ISP space worldwide assuming everything goes according to plan with Starlink tech from SpaceX.

For those that don't know, this is a VLEO satellite system (so latency similar to terrestrial fiber) that will relay via a network of over 4,000 commercial satellites initially. In the next few years this will start being viable for poorly serviced areas of the world, and in probably 5-10 years this will start rolling out in the US (again, assuming everything goes according to plan).

As we've seen time and time again, this sort of competion in the service provider space has done wonders for getting rid of data caps, raising speeds, and lowering prices of traditional internet services where alternatives exist (see Europe, Google Fiber cities, et al). Even Facebook is looking to launch a similar competing service apparently, which will help keep other market entrants in check.
There is a pattern on game forums. Single player titles and physical games take precedent over everything else.
 
Last edited:

Jagz

Member
Feb 13, 2018
70
18
170
I think cloud streaming will simply be an option, not a replacement for anything, and that's fine by me. If anything, I think cloud streaming will benefit native PC gaming, because in order to stream these games, the games need to be run on some sort of PC hardware, which could potentially lead to more PC ports. I think that's why Madden finally came to PC because EA has plans to turn Madden in to a cloud streamed game soon.
 
  • Like
Reactions: StarlightLotice

Mercer_CAR

Banned
Aug 24, 2018
127
127
185
In one respect he is right, people are lazy and streaming/ digital services are a convenience a lot of people do want (see Netflix/ Spotify)
On the other hand people have every right to be concerned about not owning a physical item. What if these services go away? It is the height of arrogance for these multinational corporations to just assume “we will always be here”. Please.

Whilst I do enjoy subscription services, I always make sure I buy physical products for games I want to always own (yes I am aware that Microsoft/ Sony could always vanish rendering my physical CD void)
 

Barakov

Member
Sep 30, 2006
5,711
577
1,040
I think the streaming thing will be here eventually but it's going to be quite some time before it's feasible for the regular joe with some regular internet. Granted in ten years time we could be living in a very different space when it comes to this stuff.
 

General Lee

Member
May 4, 2014
1,176
53
340
If VR becomes more of a thing, it'll still require local processing. In the long term it might make more sense to scale hardware by streaming, if process technology slows down significantly like it has. The problem is that the costs of scaling are still there. In all likelihood the console generations will start to blur and become non-existent soon enough, with hardware mostly being smaller iterations that don't provide large performance improvements.

Streaming games might bring in more casual audience, but for gaming you're always going to need some hardware in the form of controllers for example, so it's not really something that'll ever be as ubiquitous as netflix or the like. A cheap streaming xbox is the likeliest scenario in the future, but it remains to be seen how much of an audience a device like that would have.

Maybe eventually cheap consoles will be streaming only, and high end local gaming will transition to PC only.