Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!

Amazone is also working on a gamingstream service

2»

Comments

  • PhryPhry Member LegendaryPosts: 11,004
    As long as i have a gaming PC i don't see myself ever using a gaming stream service, i am not that patient with games that i would put up with the inherent limitations of such things, its not just about input lag although that is a significant issue in itself.
    By the same token i have absolutely no interest in mobile games, small screen fiddly control interfaces, never going to happen. :/
    delete5230
  • gervaise1gervaise1 Member EpicPosts: 6,291
    Quizzical said:
    <snip>  The cost of buying goods and services is always related to the cost of producing them:  the former can't go below the latter for long.  Delivering games via streaming is a lot more expensive than via a service like Steam.  Not a little more expensive.  A lot more expensive.

    <snip>
    Delivering is a factor yes; making not really. If it costs $125M to make a game and 125 copies are sold that is $1M a copy; with 125M though that is $1 per copy. Consequently as much or even more can be spent on marketing by large companies. Selling more copies amortizes the cost of production / development.

    As you say though streaming is a lot more expensive than simply selling. However companies like Amazon, Netflix etc. are making money out of streaming.

    And in the case of Amazon they are already in the business of streaming. Potentially they might have to stream TV 24 hours a day to all of their Prime customers - reasonable to assume that they will have "expected" demand that drives costs and hardware capabilities etc. but they already have the "basic" capability. Now for online gaming they may need to step up a gear but they could  - probably reasonably - take the view that if someone is playing a game they are not watching TV, or listening to music etc.

    And it is another reason to make Amazon peoples "one stop".

  • TorvalTorval Member LegendaryPosts: 19,660
    Quizzical said:
    Torval said:
    Sandmanjw said:
    Torval said:
    I'm basing the $20/mo ballpark figure on what Sony now charges for PSNow. It's a guesstimate, not a predictive claim. We already have streaming services live in the real world and that's about how much they charge. It could be more or less depending on other factors. I expect Microsoft to be in that ballpark. I expect Amazon to offer a cheaper base service based on Prime membership with publisher add-on packages like they do with their video service. I expect they will incorporate marketing and adverts at their base tiers and offer premium or more complete packages. I expect them to incorporate family packages or "add-on" users that will make household gaming much more manageable and possibly cheaper.

    Some MMO gamers like @Kyleran have had 6 EVE subs active at once. Will users really balk at a monthly fee for a streaming games service? A lot of people casually dismissed media streaming services like Netflix because they said no one would pay for it. I pay for Netflix, Prime (+ 3 channels), and sometimes Hulu and still get cheaper better service than comparable cable packages.
    A lot of people still do not have unlimited bandwidth to stream. Until the basic ISP situation is more somewhat standard, and available...i do not know which way everything is going to go.

    Do enough people have access to unlimited bandwidth to make a game streaming service a go? I know that movie, tv services are all over the place now...but i am not sure i see a game streaming service alone being popular enough. 

    I do believe that quite a few big players see this going the way you do. MS, Amazon, Sony ,some others, they have been moving towards the "service" type of business model. Where streaming (along with the rest of their business) is a way to go.

    Maybe some type of mergers and or other type of businesses working together  will change something to make these streaming services work together. Just think we are not quite to a point that our internet and infrastructure can handle everything being streamed. Moving that way...but think we are a ways off yet. 


    Yeah, infrastructure build out is definitely necessary. Of all the streaming media types this feels the most intensive to use, at this point. The transport and rendering mechanisms feel heavy duty, although that may change as games would be built to be delivered via streaming. I've done it a little, but only off and on a few times over the last 2 or 3 years.

    We had a telecom and internet problem in my county. We waited for big providers to do what they were subsidized and promised but ultimately failed to do, upgrade the infrastructure. Long story short, they weren't interested so we did something about it. https://www.cooperative.com/programs-services/bts/Documents/Advisories/Advisory-Broadband-Case-Study-Douglas-Fast-Net-August-2018.pdf. Now I have gigabit fiber to the door for $90/mo. It's not a "fix-all" solution but it is a big piece of the answer. The TL;DR of that is that businesses, coops, and tribal organizations are collaborating for profit and community benefit.

    Don't get your hopes up about games being optimized for streaming, at least other than by using streaming as a form of DRM.  From a performance perspective, what you can do to optimize for streaming is considerably more restrictive than what you can do to make the game run well locally on a cell phone.  Your choices are:

    1)  Make it so that enormous latency isn't a problem, so that you can compress across time and it's okay if it takes a full second for anything the user inputs to affect anything that isn't rendered locally, or
    2)  Make it so that most pixels of most frames are exactly identical to the corresponding pixel on the previous frame, so that all that you need to transmit is what changed.
    Your inability to understand a workable technical solution doesn't mean they don't exist. We've gone over this several times with real world examples (PSNow, Google with AC:O). There are multiple implementations under the name "streaming". It's highly likely that whatever works for Verizon and their mobile audience will be different than what Microsoft, Sony, or Amazon offer, but who knows, Google's AC:O demo was pretty impressive.
    Ridelynngervaise1
    take back the hobby: https://www.reddit.com/r/patientgamers/

    traveller, interloper, anomaly
    ༼ つ ◕◕ ༽つ

    It only took 3 people 8 words to rock Blizzard to its core.
  • gervaise1gervaise1 Member EpicPosts: 6,291
    The ISP could be a factor but it does depend on where you live.

    In one place I lived - in the US - the speed was dire. I think it still is. In most of Europe though whilst some rural areas still only have decently good connections most places have superfast and getting faster broadband. 

    So ISP is absolutely a factor. Amazon are a worldwide though.


    Torval
  • TheocritusTheocritus Member EpicPosts: 7,036
    Amazon owns enough of the world.
    blamo2000
Sign In or Register to comment.