Forums - Gaming Discussion - Do gamers really want Cloud gaming?

konnichiwa said:
S.Peelman said:

 If they don't game because they don't have the money they'll also won't have any money for a monthly subscription and whatever device they'll need (you'll need something) and worse pay full price for rentals on top. If they don't play it because they don't have the infrastructure then they'll need to call their governments first to improve the country they're living in, and that'll take awhile. If they don't game because they don't like it, which will by far be most people out there, then not even shoving tons of free stuff in their faces will get these people to play a video game.

That's a silly condescending tone, because they don't have a gaming pc/console they don't have money?  Most gamers today are mobile gamers. They not only outpace PC/Console gamers in numbers but aswell in revenue. Subscription services are no issue, the prices are adjustable in every region and like many gamestores they can give free games away.

Nice to know you read my post.



Around the Network
goopy20 said:

With MS's new strategy of focusing on XCloud with a subscription service, instead of just launching a traditional next gen console. I'm just wondering what your thoughts on this are. Of course it pretty cool if you can stream Series-X games on a Xone or mobiles, but is that really what gamers want, instead of a more traditional console? People won't need to fork out $599 for a Series X, which is obviously great and GP does offer great value. However, if you want to play the big AAA games like GTA6 asap, which I'm sure won't launch on GP from day one. You will still need to buy them for $60 just so you can play the cloud version. It didn't really work out well for Stadia, so why would MS go down this same road? 

With Sony's strategy of not ditching PSNow with a subscription service they are clearly not focusing on their next gen console. I'm just wondering what your thoughts on this are. Of course it pretty cool if you can stream PlayStation games on a PlayStation, PC or mobiles, but is that really what gamers want, instead of a more traditional console?



Bandorr said:
I don't quite "get" cloud gaming. It requires a constant internet connection (a good one), and little to no interruption - no matter the game?
That sounds god awful.

You need a good internet connection. No data caps. And you also need no one else needing to use the internet.

Can you even stream these intense AAA games while someone else wants to watch youtube or netflix?

Good internet is getting more common. I finally got rid of data caps last year and there's no turning back.

My kids can both be watching you tube, downloading patches, streaming music, party chat, while I'm racing online or watching Netflix, all on a 80 mbps connection. You don't have to stream in 4K, that's simply the top tier. For streaming to your phone at home, using it as a switch, much less bandwidth is needed.

It won't be as good as console or PC quality, well perhaps better than the average PC or console, but top end hardware will always beat it. As for latency, if the data center is close enough it can actually be the same as on console since the server has the ability to cut update and render time down considerably to compensate for transmission time. The main problem is stability, but the main advantages are faster loading times, resume play anywhere, no install time, always patched to the latest version. (When it all works, we're not there yet)



SvennoJ said:
Bandorr said:
I don't quite "get" cloud gaming. It requires a constant internet connection (a good one), and little to no interruption - no matter the game?
That sounds god awful.

You need a good internet connection. No data caps. And you also need no one else needing to use the internet.

Can you even stream these intense AAA games while someone else wants to watch youtube or netflix?

Good internet is getting more common. I finally got rid of data caps last year and there's no turning back.

My kids can both be watching you tube, downloading patches, streaming music, party chat, while I'm racing online or watching Netflix, all on a 80 mbps connection. You don't have to stream in 4K, that's simply the top tier. For streaming to your phone at home, using it as a switch, much less bandwidth is needed.

It won't be as good as console or PC quality, well perhaps better than the average PC or console, but top end hardware will always beat it. As for latency, if the data center is close enough it can actually be the same as on console since the server has the ability to cut update and render time down considerably to compensate for transmission time. The main problem is stability, but the main advantages are faster loading times, resume play anywhere, no install time, always patched to the latest version. (When it all works, we're not there yet)

I just wasn't sure how much data streaming a day would use.  Even 1080p I thought would be a lot. How does a game in data compare to Netflix?

I got rid of data caps a couple of years ago - very glad for that. Always made me paranoid and that was with me not downloading 100+ gig games.



  • Deadliest mass shooting by an individual in US history (10/01/2017)
  • Deadliest high school shooting in US history (02/14/2018)
  • Deadliest massacre of Jews in US history (10/27/2018)
  • Political assassination attempt of TWO former presidents(and 10+ other people)  (10/23/2018 - and beyond)
Bandorr said:
SvennoJ said:

Good internet is getting more common. I finally got rid of data caps last year and there's no turning back.

My kids can both be watching you tube, downloading patches, streaming music, party chat, while I'm racing online or watching Netflix, all on a 80 mbps connection. You don't have to stream in 4K, that's simply the top tier. For streaming to your phone at home, using it as a switch, much less bandwidth is needed.

It won't be as good as console or PC quality, well perhaps better than the average PC or console, but top end hardware will always beat it. As for latency, if the data center is close enough it can actually be the same as on console since the server has the ability to cut update and render time down considerably to compensate for transmission time. The main problem is stability, but the main advantages are faster loading times, resume play anywhere, no install time, always patched to the latest version. (When it all works, we're not there yet)

I just wasn't sure how much data streaming a day would use.  Even 1080p I thought would be a lot. How does a game in data compare to Netflix?

I got rid of data caps a couple of years ago - very glad for that. Always made me paranoid and that was with me not downloading 100+ gig games.

Stadia uses these amounts


Netflix uses:
SD, 1 GB per hour = 2.3 mbps
HD, 3 GB per hour = 7 mbps
4K, 7 GB per hour = 16.3 mbps (18 mbps with HDR)

So yes, Stadia at 1080p60 with HDR is about 3 times Netflix 1080p.

Stadia per hour would be
720p 10 mbps = 4.4 GB per hour
1080p 20 mbps = 8.8 GB per hour
4K max 35 mbps = 15.4 GB per hour

It still takes over 7 hours of playing Stadia at 4K max to download GT Sport! But yep it's a lot of data.



Around the Network
d21lewis said:
Me? No.

But then I didn't want digital downloads and now that's all I want. What I'm saying is that current gamers, including myself don't want it. We want to collect our games (even a digital collection, in my case). But, just like movies, there will come a time where streaming is the majority.

At 43 years old, I've seen so many things come and go that I thought would be here forever. I don't count anything out anymore.

I can whole heartedly agree with this statement in full.  I love my digital downloads on my Switch.  The fact that I can flip on the fly between 5 or 6 games that I'm playing at any given time is just so appealing and freeing.  And likewise I wouldn't have ever wanted such a thing in previous generations.

Also...when do you turn 44?  We're just about the same age.



SvennoJ said:
Bandorr said:

I just wasn't sure how much data streaming a day would use.  Even 1080p I thought would be a lot. How does a game in data compare to Netflix?

I got rid of data caps a couple of years ago - very glad for that. Always made me paranoid and that was with me not downloading 100+ gig games.

Stadia uses these amounts


Netflix uses:
SD, 1 GB per hour = 2.3 mbps
HD, 3 GB per hour = 7 mbps
4K, 7 GB per hour = 16.3 mbps (18 mbps with HDR)

So yes, Stadia at 1080p60 with HDR is about 3 times Netflix 1080p.

Stadia per hour would be
720p 10 mbps = 4.4 GB per hour
1080p 20 mbps = 8.8 GB per hour
4K max 35 mbps = 15.4 GB per hour

It still takes over 7 hours of playing Stadia at 4K max to download GT Sport! But yep it's a lot of data.

Not as data thirsty as I thought.  Still nervous about an "always on while playing" requirement. Could be worse though.



  • Deadliest mass shooting by an individual in US history (10/01/2017)
  • Deadliest high school shooting in US history (02/14/2018)
  • Deadliest massacre of Jews in US history (10/27/2018)
  • Political assassination attempt of TWO former presidents(and 10+ other people)  (10/23/2018 - and beyond)

Most of the complaints I see are related to the execution, which is besides the point.

IF it could be done right, I would absolutely want Cloud gaming. It would enable me to try games with far less risk, play "exclusive" games without necessarily needing the hardware, and depending on the cost, could be less money for more games.



LudicrousSpeed said:
goopy20 said:

I already told you. IT's not a traditional console in the sense that they're not pushing next gen tech and try get to people to migrate asap. Instead they're making all their exclusives cross-gen for 2 years, effectively creating less incentive to leap in the next gen until the big 3rd party titles come out a couple years later. They know this isn't a good way to sell a ton of Series X's and push next gen gaming forward. But they don't care because they're aiming to reach 8 billion non-gamers through Xcloud on a ton of different devices. They're basically saying we don't need next gen consoles or pc anymore when we got the Cloud.

Neither Google nor Amazon has publicly announced plans to launch a game console, but both are positioned to compete directly with Microsoft’s Xbox when it comes to what Spencer sees as the next great expansion in gaming.

“Amazon and Google are focusing on how to get gaming to 7 billion people around the world,” Spencer told Protocol. “Ultimately, that’s the goal.”

"Though game consoles like Xbox One and PlayStation 4 sell in the tens or, in the case of PS4, hundreds of millions, the real potential market for gaming, Spencer believes, is in the billions of people on Earth who don’t – or can’t – own a game console. "

https://www.businessinsider.nl/xbox-boss-says-xbox-now-competes-with-google-and-amazon-2020-2?international=true&r=US

Your delusions regarding how MS is prioritizing xCloud versus local hardware doesn’t magically make the XSX a non-traditional console. We should have contained this nonsense to one thread 😬

I honestly dont know how he is able to keep going on with his nonsense for so long and now in 2 threads without a mod doing something.

This is madness i dont care i know for a fact if it was an MS fan trolling Sony fans in not one but 2 threads with stuff they know isnt true or just plain made up stuff they would be giving a warning and then a ban.

CGI gave you? i think a warning for just comparing Forza and GT sport, but never gave this user a warning once. Thats total bullshit but then it doesnt surprise me at all..

PM sent ~ CGI

Last edited by CGI-Quality - on 26 February 2020

I hate cloud gaming and I always will.