-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
EA exec: infrastructure barrier for cloud gaming shrinking "very rapidly"
- Thread starter chadskin
- Start date
FinalStageBoss
Banned
No thanks EA
"We." On a miracle day I can run 480p streams without stuttering, and 360p is normally the max. Anything higher is impossible.
McStickenstein
Member
Is there a list of major publishers who are pushing cloud hard? Or is it safe to just assume it's all of them?
I imagine indie devs and publishers won't be going this route for the time being.
I imagine indie devs and publishers won't be going this route for the time being.
entremet
Member
Do you think it will happen 100 percent? Boxed products will still exist for a long time.
zenosparadox
Member
I can barely stream 720p video in a major city. And things like video/music communicate data in one direction. When interaction is involved, the problem only gets worse.
I think that the faming industry is going to head into some really dark places if/when this hapoens. It is unfortunate that EA and others want it to happen so desperately.
I think that the faming industry is going to head into some really dark places if/when this hapoens. It is unfortunate that EA and others want it to happen so desperately.
EA has probably been the biggest player in the gaming industry pushing this in public since the Xbone cloud debacle while Playstation Now feels like a footnote in Sony's playbook.
The Xbox Game Pass is a better solution to the issue of latency in certain games, yes.
G-Bus
Banned
Probably be a while before we see good high-speed internet with few data restrictions where streaming games would be practical.
PS Now was kind of cool when I tested out the free trial they had. It shit all over my data cap and a lot of the more hi-end type games did not stream well. Internet just couldn't keep up.
I like the idea and could definitely see the industry heading in that direction at some point.
PS Now was kind of cool when I tested out the free trial they had. It shit all over my data cap and a lot of the more hi-end type games did not stream well. Internet just couldn't keep up.
I like the idea and could definitely see the industry heading in that direction at some point.
BigEmil
Junior Member
While also cancelling out potential lost sales from used copies or rented etc. This benefits them greatly. Heck if it means no more microtransactions and DLC im for it, but if not then sod off
thelatestmodel
Junior, please.
Until there is absolutely zero input lag, I am not interested.
I wonder if there's some middle ground where you download the engine - but the assets such as textures/audio are streamed. Could be the best of both worlds where it feels responsive in gameplay - but the download is small/time to start.
Most games already stream that stuff as you play - just from the disc/hdd.
(this is of course assuming a fairly beefy connection)
Most games already stream that stuff as you play - just from the disc/hdd.
(this is of course assuming a fairly beefy connection)
It'll be a good alternative for some people, but never as good as the real thing. Especially for consumer rights.
loooooooooooooooooooooooooooool
loooooooooooooooooooooooooooool
Plague Doctor
Member
Nah, their wet dream is to make it where saving in Single Player games requires MT tokens.
But.. it's all optional... saving your game. You can play the entire thing in one sitting for free.
And if that ridiculous hyperbolic practice ever happened, mark my words... we would see a defense force for it on this forum. That's the saddest fact.
ExtinctionEvent
Banned
Lol, yeah good luck with that.
andthebeatgoeson
Junior Member
I'm glad PC is an untamed beast and Nintendo is a big fuck you and the internet capacity in America is a disaster. I expect level 5 autonomous car driving before you can replicate a console with playing over the web.
But then again, Irma just waltzed thru and turned off the lights and internet and my phone company slows me down after 18 GB of data. Get your people, EA. Comcast and Verizon and all will not go along unless they can charge us for reasons.
Didn't they just limit videos on verizon to 720p or something terrible?
How you gonna get everyone worked up over 4K just to talk about cloud computing. Stream 4K video and get lag down over magic wires? Can't even get Google to announce my neighborhood. Fuck you and fuck the internet in America.
But then again, Irma just waltzed thru and turned off the lights and internet and my phone company slows me down after 18 GB of data. Get your people, EA. Comcast and Verizon and all will not go along unless they can charge us for reasons.
Didn't they just limit videos on verizon to 720p or something terrible?
How you gonna get everyone worked up over 4K just to talk about cloud computing. Stream 4K video and get lag down over magic wires? Can't even get Google to announce my neighborhood. Fuck you and fuck the internet in America.
This will a lot of people, myself included.
Fuck games as a service model if it's the only model for "buying" games.
Well, I like this idea, not as a replacement but as a complimentary service. There are several console exclusives I'd like to play but not bad enough to actually buy the console. Streaming the game would be a great solution to this.
Of course it depends on your internet, but I have no data caps and a stable 200Mbit+ line, so Playstation now, for example, works pretty good here. I understand that's not the case everywhere in the world.
It also depends on the game imo, there are plenty of games I want to mod or tinker with, so streaming is not an option there. Same for competitive multiplayer, you don't want to be at a disadvantage due to even the slightest lag.
Still, I'm open to it and I'm certain it will happen in the future. I'll happily stream certain games that I otherwise would not get to play.
Of course it depends on your internet, but I have no data caps and a stable 200Mbit+ line, so Playstation now, for example, works pretty good here. I understand that's not the case everywhere in the world.
It also depends on the game imo, there are plenty of games I want to mod or tinker with, so streaming is not an option there. Same for competitive multiplayer, you don't want to be at a disadvantage due to even the slightest lag.
Still, I'm open to it and I'm certain it will happen in the future. I'll happily stream certain games that I otherwise would not get to play.
bobbychalkers
Member
The tech is there but not with my ISP and data caps
You basically have better internet than 99% of the people in the United States so you might understand why your situation at a functional level doesn't matter. You don't represent the type of mainstream that would be required for game streaming to be a wide-reaching success.
And I'm sure you could argue this sample is skewed by the fact that some internet users may not even know what Speedtest is.
hanspampel
Banned
you can subscribe to HBO now or Starz
or you can get a package with all channels
similar will happen for gaming
Digital0Reality
Neo Member
Comcast will offer this as a service themselves. EA will partner directly with ISPs to reach a broader audience and not be reliant on console manufacturers.
I genuinely think we are decades away from the majority of the games market having the internet infrastructure to stream games and have as good an experience as they would when playing it locally on a console.
Data caps are a huge thing, internet infrastructure in general is utter shit in many parts of the world. Take the UK for example. A huge gaming market and a well developed, western country. Fibre to the home (as opposed to fibre to the cabinet and then copper wires into the home) is available to less than 1 million homes. There are over 60 million people living in this country. The last Fibre to the Home (gigabit fibre capable) rankings for Europe were published in 2016 and the UK didn't even feature on the list.
Like I said, it could be decades before internet infrastructure catches up. Even streaming games in 1080p requires a very powerful internet connection, but now we're moving to 4k! The net requirements for simple movies at 4k is pretty high (I live in the middle of a town of 46k people, have 20 megabits down, barely 1 megabit up and can't stream in 4k without buffering first), for games? Off the scale. Then TV companies are starting to think about moving to 8k.
It's all very well for these corporate execs, probably living in fancy houses in extremely affluent areas with excellent infrastructure. I'm sure their internet is utterly fabulous. It ain't in the real world though guys. When are these people, who you would hope are vaguely technologically literate, going to realise that streaming games is VASTLY more complex than streaming movies in terms of the bandwidth required? I mean you shouldn't even compare the two.
Data caps are a huge thing, internet infrastructure in general is utter shit in many parts of the world. Take the UK for example. A huge gaming market and a well developed, western country. Fibre to the home (as opposed to fibre to the cabinet and then copper wires into the home) is available to less than 1 million homes. There are over 60 million people living in this country. The last Fibre to the Home (gigabit fibre capable) rankings for Europe were published in 2016 and the UK didn't even feature on the list.
Like I said, it could be decades before internet infrastructure catches up. Even streaming games in 1080p requires a very powerful internet connection, but now we're moving to 4k! The net requirements for simple movies at 4k is pretty high (I live in the middle of a town of 46k people, have 20 megabits down, barely 1 megabit up and can't stream in 4k without buffering first), for games? Off the scale. Then TV companies are starting to think about moving to 8k.
It's all very well for these corporate execs, probably living in fancy houses in extremely affluent areas with excellent infrastructure. I'm sure their internet is utterly fabulous. It ain't in the real world though guys. When are these people, who you would hope are vaguely technologically literate, going to realise that streaming games is VASTLY more complex than streaming movies in terms of the bandwidth required? I mean you shouldn't even compare the two.
Yup. The US household average across is well below 64 Mbps, I guarantee it. We are so damn behind the rest of the developed world when it comes to national network infrastructure sadly. And greedy ass ISPs. :/
I'd imagine that will be the day when reasonable people would quit gaming as a hobby.
This is, of course, absolutely not possible.
hikarutilmitt
Member
Stop being reasonable and start reacting off the cuff! There's no room for being sensible, here!
But, yes, this is how it will likely play out. Physical play isn't going anywhere.
Chozo_Lord
Member
I could see this backfiring with multiplayer games. For instance, I bought BF1 at launch for $60 but quickly lost interest. At $9.99 per month, they would've only got probably $20 from me instead of the $60. Though I guess it would even out by people that wouldn't of paid $60 but would be interested to try it for only $9.99 a month.
Enter The 36 Chambers
Member
People said this about Spotify and netflix when the ideas were new as well.
Empty threats all around
The implication that people who are illustrating obvious barriers to why game streaming as a standard has a long, uphill climb aren't being reasonable is some bullshit and you know it. Please inform us your "sensible" solution for raising the average speed of internet in the United States, how you would deal with data caps or the rise of paid internet fast lanes for certain media services.
Skellig Gra
Member
talk to comcast and verizon about my data caps and then I might be interested.
The game industry is puny compared to the clout of internet and telecommunication companies so how do you suppose that will work?
Yeah you're right. I dunno. Verizons revenue alone is bigger than the entire industry.
When they look at what Adobe has forced on its users with the creative cloud subscriptions and how Microsoft will soon remove the ability to pay for a license that doesn't require a monthly fee, you can see why other companies want in on the action. It works for Adobe and Microsoft because people just don't have a true alternative so you're forced to pay what they want every month year after year. What company wouldn't love to do that?
supernormal
Member
I wouldn't mind such a service existing alongside what we have right now. For me my biggest issue right now is downloading games these huge ass games. Sometimes I wanna try out a game I already own on my PC, just to be immediately let down by this 70gb download that I need to make time and space for.
Everyone has different use cases, and of course this being the only model available would be horrible, but I do see a lot of value in having nearly instant access to hundreds or thousands of games at a time.
Everyone has different use cases, and of course this being the only model available would be horrible, but I do see a lot of value in having nearly instant access to hundreds or thousands of games at a time.
exactly, this is where disney is missing the understanding with video streaming
malboroking
Banned
People complain about the latency of wireless controllers. I don't see how adding another 60ms delay on top of that is going to be workable. Even streaming my PS4 to my Vita over a gigabit router there was noticeable lag on controller inputs. That's going to be as big an issue as the data caps.
Yep, it can only reduce the quality of the experience from both a gameplay and service perspective.
Similar threads
- Locked