Support NeoGAF

[Thirty7ven]

Apparently this is what a big part of the gaming audience wants, which shouldn’t be a surprise since a big part of our species are pure bread mouth breathers.

 

[Heisenberg007]

At the end of the day, the customers decide.

Microsoft tried to force their garbage DRM onto the world with the Xbone. It wasn't just about preventing piracy, it was about killing used game sales, game trading, game lending - all entirely valid, legally protected uses of ones owned games. Microsoft wanted control. Its approach took so much, and gave so little. And it was wholesale rejected, causing untold damage to Xbox that can be seen to this day. Consumers didn't want it, so it died. The same thing applies to subscription services.

Focusing on Game Pass as the example, it takes very little - just a monthly subscription and internet access - and yet it offers a lot. As long as the value proposition remains, it'll continue to be the best deal in gaming. However, if it shifts, and the value proposition disappears, then people will stop subscribing. The onus is on Microsoft to continue to pack their subscription with titles worth subscribing for. Their recent investments - Zenimax Media and Activision Blizzard - suggest they have a decent understanding of this, and are making sure they have enough first party big hitters to keep the service attractive year-round. In this form, the service works for me.

For me, as long as I have the ability to purchase games I like, I'm a big fan of Game Pass. I've discovered several games that I really enjoyed, and I bought them because I don't want to lose them. If Microsoft starts making titles exclusive to Game Pass, with no option to buy the title outright, then I'm done with the service. That models works for Microsoft, but it doesn't work for me. That's the line for me. But, for others who say "no subscription service ever", that's a fair approach too. In the end, the customers decide.

You're totally right. But the other part of this equation is how MS has been hoarding popular IPs and its impact.

In 2013, when people disagreed with Xbox and its policies, they decided not to buy Xbox One. Now, if someone has to play Elder Scrolls or COD on a gaming console, they might very well not have another option.

That's why this whole thing is so bad.

But I do agree with you; there will be a noticeable impact regardless of that. But at the same time, a lot of the people will be stuck because their fav games (which used to be independent and multiplatform) are now not available other than on Xbox

 

[GHG]

There is plenty of demand for consoles and the console experience. Heck, manufactures still make DVD players to this day, what makes you think consoles will completely disappear?

Margins on DVD players etc are still favourable, there is nowhere near the same level of complexity to get those electronics to market. What's in a DVD player is just a single component of what goes into a video games console.

Consoles are resource intensive to conduct R&D and manufacture, hence the margins are thin or negative in many cases, and that's even with economies of scale. Remove economies of scale, add in the fact that most of your audience are now gaming via cloud servers and it then becomes even more difficult to make a business case for it than it already is today.

 

[Fbh]

The future of gaming:
Pay a subscription to stream microtransaction infested GaaS.

Thankfully the infrastructure isn't quite there yet so we should still have some years of normal games to build a nice backlog.

Streaming music over radiowaves into every house and car for free for decades didnt kill the record, cassette or cd. It helped grow the music industry.

Because radio came with a lot of inconveniences like constant ads and not being able to listed to what you want on demand.
Paid online streaming has solved those issues and physical media sales are now but a fraction of what they were 15 years ago.

 

[jhjfss]

Margins on DVD players etc are still favourable, there is nowhere near the same level of complexity to get those electronics to market. What's in a DVD player is just a single component of what goes into a video games console.

Consoles are resource intensive to conduct R&D and manufacture, hence the margins are thin or negative in many cases, and that's even with economies of scale. Remove economies of scale, add in the fact that most of your audience are now gaming via cloud servers and it then becomes even more difficult to make a business case for it than it already is today.

I still think there will be enough demand for them to keep making consoles. Besides, why are we even talking about this today? This gen will last until 2028, and then new consoles will launch (wont be streaming only as its too soon) which will last until 2036. Then add 2-3 years of cross-gen on top of that. Now you are in 2038-2040 before this thing actually starts becoming a concern. Why worry about shit that may not happen until 15-18 years from now?

 

[Three]

this will depend on how fast we get to a point where we have low power consumption hardware that give developers virtually limitless possibilities at a cheap price.

and we will eventually reach that point.

and once that point is reached game streaming will make no sense anymore.
there's a game streaming service (not sure if it still exists) that streams 8bit retro games... sounds stupid right? every cheap as fuck hardware can emulate these games locally and the size per game is less than the bandwidth needed to steam even 1 second of gameplay of the game.
so this makes zero sense to stream instead of playing it locally.
eventually the same will be true for basically all games imo

Not sure I agree with this idea. Cloud would always have the storage and compute advantage. The issue is cost and good ideas for actually going through with that cost.

There are several advantages that cloud gaming has that to this day hasn't been utilised properly.

1) split screen with literally no distinguishable difference to online support. Imagine every single online game offering split screen by having 2-4 streams at a time from a thin client. Now whether the cost of running 4 blades for 1 paying thin client is a good idea I don't know.

2) huge detailed worlds that would be terabytes in size locally. FS2020 might be a candidate for this but imagine other games like GTA. Imagine a GTA world. That kind of game size would not be viable locally. Would a GTA world take decades to create and maybe end up not being fun? Maybe.

 

[BusierDonkey]

Casual gamers will always gravitate towards what's easiest.

Launching a game directly from search results on your phone/tablet/laptop/tv seems like the easiest thing in the world so that's probably going to be where casual gaming goes.

Even PC isn't safe from this future. I suspect I'll be dead by the time local gaming is dead, and I'll never accept the limitations of cloud gaming (no mods or ability to file-dive for one). I don't think there's any way to stop this train though as companies don't go after a hardcore audience anymore, they always chase the audience that they could have.

 

[6502]

Because radio came with a lot of inconveniences like constant ads and not being able to listed to what you want on demand.

Limited selection due to competing services and introduction of ads is probably where streaming services will eventually get to (after streaming tv / movies do it first).

Game sales maybe down, I know I am buying less since I got gamepass, but gaming has a lot more demographics and territories to reach ; in a generation or two I believe it can level out. At any rate we wont see the end of the console and disc / cart / card.

 

[MatrixReloaded101]

The most popular video games are usually online based. Casuals are not going to want to play Fornite, Roblox or COD MP with a streaming service.

 

[rodrigolfp]

There is plenty of demand for consoles and the console experience. Heck, manufactures still make DVD players to this day, what makes you think consoles will completely disappear?

There was plenty of demand for free online on consoles too, but as we are "slaves" of the will of the manufacturers, if they decide not having a physical console anymore to sell, what can we do except accept?

 

[reinking]

Honestly I think that's all that will be left once all is said and done. The console manufacturers will go full streaming and due to decreasing sales of consoles the decreased margins will make it prohibitively expensive for them to conduct the necessary R&D and manufacturing. This is the dirty little secret of why both Sony and Microsoft are now releasing their games on PC - it's preparing for a future where they don't make consoles anymore and will instead run their games via cloud PC's instead of consoles attached to the cloud.

So for gamers who want local hardware it will leave one option - build or buy a PC. Someone else mentioned vinyls in this thread and I think that's what the gaming PC will eventually be seen like.

Will it though? If consoles go belly up why are publishers going to bother with a local copy? PC will be setup to stream just like consoles.


What bothers me is we are going to lose the traditional "backlog" option in the future as games get pulled from services. You can also forget emulators since everything will be streaming. It's crazy for me to think that this future isn't that far away when you consider the age of the video game market. It's also crazy to me that some people seem to want this.

 

[Bojanglez]

Will it though? If consoles go belly up why are publishers going to bother with a local copy? PC will be setup to stream just like consoles.


What bothers me is we are going to lose the traditional "backlog" option in the future as games get pulled from services. You can also forget emulators since everything will be streaming. It's crazy for me to think that this future isn't that far away when you consider the age of the video game market. It's also crazy to me that some people seem to want this.

Maybe they want it when it favours their chosen platform. I remember people being up in arms about MS trying to kill off the after-market for physical games. This is still their goal (and probably most people's goal in the industry) they are just going about it in a way that is giving the illusion of 'choice'.

 

[Ezekiel_]

There's too much incentives from the platform holders perspective to not try to push the industry into a cloud/streaming digital rental only future.

MS tried with Xbone, and the market pushed back. I think if they get smart in how to push it, the market might not resist enough next time.

It's entirely possible we are looking at the last generation with physical media consoles. That's the first thing they will phase out.

Then, it'll be all about how you don't really need powerful local hardware. So a streaming box or a HDMI streaming stick + a controller.

Then, the tech will just be straight up included in TVs, or any screen, so they'll only sell a controller + subscription plan bundle. A controller is the bare minimum hardware needed for gaming, after all.

The thing is, that last step is already here, and there's no significant market for it.

So how do you force people to migrate to cloud/streaming? Easy, you slowly start removing features and games that run locally. Eventually, when everything is only available through streaming, where else are you going to play?

 

[01011001]

Not sure I agree with this idea. Cloud would always have the storage and compute advantage. The issue is cost and good ideas for actually going through with that cost.

There are several advantages that cloud gaming has that to this day hasn't been utilised properly.

1) split screen with literally no distinguishable difference to online support. Imagine every single online game offering split screen by having 2-4 streams at a time from a thin client. Now whether the cost of running 4 blades for 1 paying thin client is a good idea I don't know.

2) huge detailed worlds that would be terabytes in size locally. FS2020 might be a candidate for this but imagine other games like GTA. Imagine a GTA world. That kind of game size would not be viable locally. Would a GTA world take decades to create and maybe end up not being fun? Maybe.

game developers are already limited by manpower, time and budget available to them.

add 5x or even 10x more horsepower to this already happening reality and no server in the world will be able to push beyond local hardware, simply because there's no dev team in the world that could actually saturate the hardware so to speak.

we are at a point where games made by long established publishers look no better than early Xbox One games even tho the hardware we now have is 10x more powerful.

like I said before, diminishing returns.

budgets, manpower, hardware power.
these 3 things slowly but surely are getting to a point where the hardware power is less and less the limiting factor, and the other 2 are limiting a game's scope and fidelity.

we have games releasing today that look less impressive than Crysis, a game from 2007...

this did not happen in the past... no Xbox 360 game came out and looked like a PS1 era game (unless on purpose), yet here we are seeing games releasing looking like Xbox 360 era titles because the developers simply couldn't push beyond that.

now add 10 years and even 10x bigger GPU and CPU budgets to what we have now and it's not crazy to think that the biggest AAA studios will hit a limit that's not the hardware anymore but other factors.

 

[rodrigolfp]

we have games releasing today that look less impressive than Crysis, a game from 2007...

Examples of AAA games looking worse, pls.

 

[jhjfss]

There was plenty of demand for free online on consoles too, but as we are "slaves" of the will of the manufacturers, if they decide not having a physical console anymore to sell, what can we do except accept?

see my post 105

 

[Bojanglez]

There's too much incentives from the platform holders perspective to not try to push the industry into a cloud/streaming digital rental only future.

MS tried with Xbone, and the market pushed back. I think if they get smart in how to push it, the market might not resist enough next time.

It's entirely possible we are looking at the last generation with physical media consoles. That's the first thing they will phase out.

Then, it'll be all about how you don't really need powerful local hardware. So a streaming box or a HDMI streaming stick + a controller.

Then, the tech will just be straight up included in TVs, or any screen, so they'll only sell a controller + subscription plan bundle. A controller is the bare minimum hardware needed for gaming, after all.

The thing is, that last step is already here, and there's no significant market for it.

So how do you force people to migrate to cloud/streaming? Easy, you slowly start removing features and games that run locally. Eventually, when everything is only available through streaming, where else are you going to play?

Agreed.

A great way to achieve this is to buy publishers with money from your parent company, put all the content on a streaming service that is bankrolled by your parent company for a fee that many laymen feel is 'the best deal in gaming'.

Once they are all hooked, and much of the competition in traditional markets are diminished, you take away their physical media, then local downloads and soon you have what you originally wanted. You're now in a position where much of the competition is gone, you can do what the fuck you want with the market.

 

[Three]

game developers are already limited by manpower, time and budget available to them.

add 5x or even 10x more horsepower to this already happening reality and no server in the world will be able to push beyond local hardware, simply because there's no dev team in the world that could actually saturate the hardware so to speak.

we are at a point where games made by long established publishers look no better than early Xbox One games even tho the hardware we now have is 10x more powerful.

like I said before, diminishing returns.

budgets, manpower, hardware power.
these 3 things slowly but surely are getting to a point where the hardware power is less and less the limiting factor, and the other 2 are limiting a game's scope and fidelity.

we have games releasing today that look less impressive than Crysis, a game from 2007...

this did not happen in the past... no Xbox 360 game came out and looked like a PS1 era game (unless on purpose), yet here we are seeing games releasing looking like Xbox 360 era titles because the developers simply couldn't push beyond that.

now add 10 years and even 10x bigger GPU and CPU budgets to what we have now and it's not crazy to think that the biggest AAA studios will hit a limit that's not the hardware anymore but other factors.

You're right about budget and manpower. I think in terms of tech in games and where the money is we have kind of regressed. Spending on premium games has declined and we've gone back to what would be considered flash games back in the day making the most money on mobile. It just doesn't make sense to make a milllions of dollars (in the hundreds) next gen only technical showpiece and be outdone by somebody who released a mobile and cross-gen game with a lower budget.

 

[Ezekiel_]

Agreed.

A great way to achieve this is to buy publishers with money from your parent company, put all the content on a streaming service that is bankrolled by your parent company for a fee that many laymen feel is 'the best deal in gaming'.

Once they are all hooked, and much of the competition in traditional markets are diminished, you take away their physical media, then local downloads and soon you have what you originally wanted. You're now in a position where much of the competition is gone, you can do what the fuck you want with the market.

I'll be dressing up as Phil Spencer for Halloween

 

[rodrigolfp]

see my post 105

I think there is a demand for a Apple console too.

 

[Tams]

 

[Deleted member 471617]

Game streaming is at least 20 years or so away so this is a moot point right now. As an additional option right now, it's fine for those who want to play games on the go.

Game subscriptions like Game Pass, im 100% all for. Give me more. Which reminds me, where the fuck is my Ubisoft+ you damn Ubi??? It's only been 9 months since you announced it was coming to Xbox consoles. Let's go!!!

 

[jhjfss]

I think there is a demand for a Apple console too.

You also seemed to have ignore the other half of my statement.

 

[GHG]

Will it though? If consoles go belly up why are publishers going to bother with a local copy? PC will be setup to stream just like consoles.

This is literally a nightmare end-game scenario but I wouldn't be too surprised to see it happen. The reception the first bunch of cloud streaming only games get will determine whether or not we go in that direction or not.

I still think there will be enough demand for them to keep making consoles. Besides, why are we even talking about this today? This gen will last until 2028, and then new consoles will launch (wont be streaming only as its too soon) which will last until 2036. Then add 2-3 years of cross-gen on top of that. Now you are in 2038-2040 before this thing actually starts becoming a concern. Why worry about shit that may not happen until 15-18 years from now?

We are talking about it today because it's what the industry are talking about. They are actively promoting what they see as the future right now. What are we supposed to do, ignore it and sing kumbaya?

 

[SportsFan581]

Clearly when you read the experts the biggest thing that stands out

Once you figure that and it's easy to



Seriously, it's premature to say x will or won't happen. I remember when everyone thought consoles would be dead by now, yet they are selling faster than ever.

Streaming will find some footing, it's a bit extreme to be 100% sold on it more than that at this moment.

 

[Putonahappyface]

 

[rodrigolfp]

You also seemed to have ignore the other half of my statement.

The discussion is about the future. So, what is your point?

 

[jhjfss]

What are we supposed to do, ignore it and sing kumbaya?

No, But we also dont have to panic and act like the sky is falling everyday.

 

[GHG]

No, But we also dont have to panic and act like the sky is falling everyday.

My guy, if that's your feeling nobody is forcing you to take part in this discussion.

 

[jhjfss]

My guy, if that's your feeling nobody is forcing you to take part in this discussion.

I mean, if you only want to have conversations with people who validate what you already believe in, than you are right, maybe I should no longer be part of this discussion and let you be with like-minded individuals. Anyway, I've already made the point that this this is 15-20 years away, and even then I see consoles being made for the people who are interested in it.

 

[yurinka]

Streaming will never become the standard. by the time the infrastructure is there we will have phones in our pockets that can play RTX3080ti levels of games, and at that point, why bother with streaming?

First because of catalog, and second because once that happens and phones will have these GPUs the PCs and consoles will have way more powerful stuff even if the distance will become closer to a point that several years later than having 3080tis on phones, the consoles, PC and smartphones will share basically the same hardware and the horsepower will be so high that will achieve photorealistic stuff and won't make more sense to continue pushing more the visuals.

 

[DeepEnigma]

My guy, if that's your feeling nobody is forcing you to take part in this discussion.

There will always be people that tell you not to push back and not to worry, until it's already too late.

 

[jhjfss]

I'll be dressing up as Phil Spencer for Halloween

Dont forget to bring a placard that says "gamepass".

 

[GHG]

I mean, if you only want to have conversations with people who validate what you already believe in, than you are right, maybe I should no longer be part of this discussion and let you be with like-minded individuals. Anyway, I've already made the point that this this is 15-20 years away, and even then I see consoles being made for the people who are interested in it.

Nope, if that were the case then I wouldn't have bothered to engage with you at all.

You're still yet to explain to me why there's a business case for low/negative margin consoles to still be built in a world where the demand for them is dramatically cut due to streaming being the primary method of content delivery. They can develop games on PC, not have to worry about losing money on R&D, manufacturing, logistics, etc and for the few who still want local hardware they can sort themselves out via Nvidia/AMD/Intel.

It's not a question of whether you want them to continue to build consoles in this kind of future, it's more a case of why should they?

I'm happy to hear what you have to say, but if all you want to do is attempt to deflect and derail then I'm not interested in the slightest.

There will always be people that tell you not to push back and not to worry, until it's already too late.

Yep, same old shit happened with horse armour and look at where we are now. It just boils down to this:

 

[Trazyn the Infinite]

This is fucking retarded and anyone who thinks this is a good idea needs to get their head examined.

 

[jhjfss]

Nope, if that were the case then I wouldn't have bothered to engage with you at all.

You're still yet to explain to me why there's a business case for low/negative margin consoles to still be built in a world where the demand for them is dramatically cut due to streaming being the primary method of content delivery. They can develop games on PC, not have to worry about losing money on R&D, manufacturing, logistics, etc and for the few who still want local hardware they can sort themselves out via Nvidia/AMD/Intel.

It's not a question of whether you want them to continue to build consoles in this kind of future, it's more a case of why should they?

Whats the business case for MS operating xbox at a loss for 20 years, burning billions on a uproven/unprofitable/unsustainable business model? while still choosing to be in the gaming business? Clearly the reasons are more complicated than your post makes it seem. They spent 80 billion on something no one knows will work, but you think somehow that they would be unwilling to spend money to make consoles for 10's of millions of users?
IF your concern is a dislike of streaming and a preference for native hardware, PC will always exist and you can connect it to your TV. So what exactly is your issue?

 

[StreetsofBeige]

Personally, I have no problem with sub plans. They are great value, dirt cheap and have tons of games.

But I dont want to go the streaming route or have no consoles. I've never streaming, but I'll assume everyone is right and that streaming leads to shitty laggy gameplay. And I want consoles since I'm not interested in spending a lot of money on a PC rig playing games at a desk. I only buy laptops too which makes good gaming even harder and more costly. I use my TV for console games and watching tv/movies, not for PC usage.

 

[Zok310]

I can pretty much guarantee you the next batch of consoles will be digital only

People been saying the same shit for like 2 decades now…..

 

[IntentionalPun]

Industries can be wrong about shit like this, and as far as streaming games goes.. I think they are.

Sub plans? Obviously here to stay... but only MS is going to do "day one" and that experiment is because MS thinks game streaming will greatly expand the gaming market.. and if it doesn't... yeah not gonna continue IMO.

I find the "game streaming currently has cost issues" thing hilarious though... the economics just don't make a lick of sense is more like it.

 

[Adam_802]

Streaming/services will be ON consoles. Not replace them.

 

[MikeM]

This is why I’m hesitant to invest and buy games on the Xbox platform. I know they want to get out of hardware and likely force subs a la Stadia at some point. They want subs for everything.

I don’t want that and is why PC is looking very appealing.

 

[NomenNescio]

I can pretty much guarantee you the next batch of consoles will be digital only

I thought the same way, until the leaks about the PS5 with detachable disc drive came out. I bet that's the route they will take next gen. The base console will be, indeed, digital only, but with the option to buy a detachable disc drive as an accessory, or the bundle with both the console and the drive.

I don't think they will have the balls to launch entirely digital consoles, because it will cause such a huge backlash and negativity.

 

[GHG]

Whats the business case for MS operating xbox at a loss for 20 years, burning billions on a uproven/unprofitable/unsustainable business model? while still choosing to be in the gaming business? Clearly the reasons are more complicated than your post makes it seem. They spent 80 billion on something no one knows will work, but you think somehow that they would be unwilling to spend money to make consoles for 10's of millions of users?

Their business case for sticking with it despite the losses incurred has shifted over time. At first it was because they wanted presence in the living room and now its shifted towards a strategy that is built around the idea of them being the dominant force in videogames streaming.

There is no guarantee they will want to continue to incur losses indefinitely, especially not if they start seeing competitors in the space being successful without selling hardware directly to consumers.

IF your concern is a dislike of streaming and a preference for native hardware, PC will always exist and you can connect it to your TV. So what exactly is your issue?

I literally brought forth the fact that PC will always be an option in this very thread. In fact that was the first post of mine which you responded to - where you spoke about about Xbox blades, which will have no relevance or use should such a scenario arise.

 

[jufonuk]

Fuck this no. If they go this way. I bet nintendo will be the last to fall.

 

[laynelane]

I was thinking how, over the years, the many different ways "the end of consoles" was supposed to happen. I imagine it really frustrates the corpo types when people just keep buying them. If only we knew what was good for us sort of thing.

 

[mckmas8808]

Streaming will never become the standard. by the time the infrastructure is there we will have phones in our pockets that can play RTX3080ti levels of games, and at that point, why bother with streaming?

I've never agreed with you more. MS or any other company can piss in the wind if this is their true intentions of cloud gaming!

 

[mckmas8808]

I can see a future where streaming takes over. Especially as the younger generation weened on microtransactions and mobile games, grows.

Owning a collection of games probably means little to them.

What will that generation gain from "NEVER" owning a video game? That's the part MS will need to explain and demonstrate before the bolded becomes the future.

 

[Comandr]

The only way I would accept a streaming only future is if it was 1) accessible on any device I own and 2) objectively indistinguishable from the physical/local copy. I also don’t want to have to re buy my games on this magic service. I have over 900 games on steam alone. You can forget about me giving that up.

 

[Three]

I also don’t want to have to re buy my games on this magic service. I have over 900 games on steam alone. You can forget about me giving that up.

You wouldn't need to buy anything at all but you will not own anything either. Just whatever is available that month.

 

[Comandr]

You wouldn't need to buy anything at all but you will not own anything either. Just whatever is available that month.

That approach would never work because if your audience doesn’t want to play what’s on tap then no one uses your service. That’s not a viable strategy in this scenario. It would have to somehow link with existing stores and allow you to play anything you own on any platform from anywhere. That would have my attention.