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. |
Not everyone pays for a service on ps4/xb1, alot of them dont actually. Id be surrpised if even 1/3rd do, I think its less than that.
I also think the vast majoiry of people that buy games, dont just resell them after beating them.
So basically point 1) and 2) are moot.
Also the price of a streaming video game service is :
lag (if your net isnt fast, if someone in your house is downloading, if servers are stressed ect ect) (vs physical = it just works)
+ input delay(when you push button to action happends ingame)
+ tons of bandwitch used (which is pricy if you pay for usage)
+ compression quality (you wont get same picture quality as with physical hardware).
its "alot" of negatives to put up with, just to not have physical hardware able to do gameing.
Why? the hardware costs are put on the service perviders, but its still there. Maybe its slighly less than avg it out and makeing consumers pay for it, but these services will find other ways to recoupe that, so I doubt in the long run it ll be any cheaper for a consumer.
There are really no upsides to streaming video games as a service.
apart from the first time investment, but that ll be nickle and dimed back by the pervider over time.
I think its a sad future.
Last edited by JRPGfan - on 07 February 2018
