eva01beserk said:
superchunk said:
Why?
1. All of us already pay a fee to use a console. (well Nintendo's fee will be soon)
2. How many people use Gamestop's (or other retailers) resell offers as they buy and finish games quickly?
The way I see it, IF
1. Fee is a nominal amount.
2. You get full access to all past and new games at same time. Games = all the normal console AAA and other games, not just the current mobile-esque titles. i.e. there has to be near parity with current consoles as far as selection goes.
3. Video and gameplay quality is stable.
THEN, I don't see why it wouldn't appeal to a large group of gamers.
|
bonzobanana said:
I don't see the problem. A relatively cheap set top box with decent controller that allows me to play my play store games at very high quality settings and also stream high quality pc games relatively cheaply.
Maybe the hardware will be stronger than we think so can actually deliver more performance than the Switch in a set top box for low money. $100 or so. They throw in a 100hrs of game access. It's also fully integrated with your android phone you can share game saves between both devices so can play the same games at home or on the go.
Lots of ways they can make it into a compelling package. What if its $8 a month for a low cost package with older movies and tv and some games and tiered levels offering better movies and games at higher prices.
Whatever it will be interesting to see what they come up with. Their problem is more likely to be compelling content rather than the hardware. |
Both of you share the same problem. If MS lackluster lineup is on offer for $10 a month + online cost, How much do you guys think adding the rest of all multiplats and probably original content and as one of you said movies and music? This kind of service will be costing like $50 a month for a bunch of things most people wont even want all of it. it will be the same issue that cable had and why is going down the drain.
|
Google are rich and may play the long game, subsidised hardware and service costs at the beginning so that they are the major player left in 5-10 years when they can truly profit from that monopoly. Again without knowing the full details we can only speculate but I would not at this point count them out of the race but compelling content is still their biggest challenge. People really need to want a google box under their tv and that needs compelling content that works flawlessly. It might be like cable boxes where only large cities with fast broadband connections will have reason enough to buy. If your out in the stix with rubbish broadband you might as well forget it. Those people may have to wait years before they can benefit from a google gaming box.
