By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close

Forums - Gaming Discussion - Why is Sony being left out of the Streaming Future Conversation? Why are we even having it?

Qwark said:
Because PS NOW sucks hard, simple is that

This.

The current implementation is utter crap as the games run from a Playstation somewhere in the world, and if none is ready then you can't play at all. Add to this the gray and brown of last gen with bad compression on a non-consistent connection, making them blocky as a PS1 game and huge lags if the console is far away. If you're idle, the service will disconnect you to make room on the server, so save before going to the bathroom. Random disconnections are rampant, just as lost cloudsaves are (and no, you can't save them locally either). Oh, and if you don't have a PS4 controller, you will be fucked in any game that needs motion controls at any point of the game. Finally, while the yearly subscription is okay in price (99$), the monthly is 14.99$, so 12 months will add up to almost double that price.



Around the Network
Bofferbrauer2 said:
Qwark said:
Because PS NOW sucks hard, simple is that

This.

The current implementation is utter crap as the games run from a Playstation somewhere in the world, and if none is ready then you can't play at all. Add to this the gray and brown of last gen with bad compression on a non-consistent connection, making them blocky as a PS1 game and huge lags if the console is far away. If you're idle, the service will disconnect you to make room on the server, so save before going to the bathroom. Random disconnections are rampant, just as lost cloudsaves are (and no, you can't save them locally either). Oh, and if you don't have a PS4 controller, you will be fucked in any game that needs motion controls at any point of the game. Finally, while the yearly subscription is okay in price (99$), the monthly is 14.99$, so 12 months will add up to almost double that price.

"The current implementation is utter crap as the games run from a Playstation somewhere in the world, and if none is ready then you can't play at all."

 

Which is exactly what Xcloud does. 

 

"Add to this the gray and brown of last gen with bad compression on a non-consistent connection, making them blocky as a PS1 game and huge lags if the console is far away. If you're idle, the service will disconnect you to make room on the server, so save before going to the bathroom."

 

Those are problems with all streaming services. Obviously PS3 games aren't going to look good but streaming at 720p and 30 fps requires less data. PS Now can also stream PS4 games.

 

Streaming games at 1080p or 4k requires a faster internet connection with more data. People complain about the quality of PS3 games on PS Now but then they complain about the data requirements. Sometimes I can't tell if people are really this dumb or they're just hating.




For the most part probably because now Sony treats PSNow as their answer to Microsoft B/C program - a way to play old PS3 titles with some early PS4 titles. Microsoft and Google seem to offer a solution to access newly released games, as an alternative to traditional way to access these games by playing them on dedicated hardware. As it is now, we haven't heard anything that would suggest that Sony will release new titles on PSNow at launch day or not.
Enemy said: 

Microsoft is losing badly and I'm sure there are many people in those news outlets out there who don't like. this because they're loyal to Microsoft. Gaming journalism has become a dumpster fire of click-bait and writers who let their bias influence their coverage. They have clever ways of writing their articles and presenting false narratives as objective reporting. Journalism is corrupted by money and personal, hidden agendas of the writers pretending to be journalists.

I can't really quite remember journalists cheering for Microsoft this gen at all.They supported Sony way more. Almost every thing Microsoft did this gen until release of Xbox One X was downplayed by gaming press like something insignificant.

Enemy said: 

When Microsoft announced streaming from Xbox to PC over home connections, journalists acted like it was the second coming. Some ignored the fact that it was Microsoft attempting to answer Remote Play. Other journalists actually stated it was superior to Remote Play. Streaming over a home connection only is better than streaming anywhere?

Sony should have made possible to stream Remote Play by local network. At least it really seems that it can't do that from my experience. With all the latencies and poor image quality that Remote Play gives you when you use it at home, it really looks like they still use their servers to stream for some reason. So, yeah, if we talk about streaming to home PC, Microsoft solution works better. The concept of Remote Play is way better though. Sony should just add the possibility to stream locally. I also like that Remote Play is on macOS as well unlike Microsoft streaming which is Win10 only.



 

 

"For the most part probably because now Sony treats PSNow as their answer to Microsoft B/C program"

 

I think you have your timeline mixed up. PS Now was created to preserve the PS3 legacy software since the cell processor made it difficult to emulate. The PS2 and PS3 were both backwards compatible but the changes in technology, business models, and the cell made it difficult for the PS4 to run PS3 games including the PS2 classics purchased on the PS3 store. PS2 was a disk only console. PS Now was Sony's way of future proofing as well as offering a Netflix style rental service. Sony was going to evolve the PS Now service over time. They were always going to add PS4 games because PS3 games are not enough to keep the service growing.

 

Xbox One was not backwards compatible with Xbox 360 in the beginning and Microsoft had no intentions of adding the feature. It wasn't until PS Now launched and Xbox One started losing in sales that Microsoft started working on Xbox 360 BC.

 

"I can't really quite remember journalists cheering for Microsoft this gen at all.They supported Sony way more."

 

Well, I don't know what to tell you because that is not the history I've seen. Journalists have been defending the Xbox One since it launched. For the most part they give Microsoft a pass on most things other than the things that they can't hide such as the exclusives issue. They hype up almost everything Microsoft does. The last year has basically been an anti-Sony campaign because Sony didn't want to open the gates to Nintendo and Microsoft. Microsoft received passes over the past 13 years for blocking cross play with PC.

 

News journalists are not the reason why the PS4 is winning or the reason why Microsoft is making changes. Many journalists owned both since the beginning of the generation. The reason why the PS4 is so far ahead and why Microsoft is making changes is because of the general consumer (majority of gamers) who purchase PS4's but refuse to purchase Xbox Ones. I think if the journalists had their way and if their narratives started influencing the general consumer the Xbox One would've sold better, Microsoft would have never changed, and we would be in trouble.

 

"Sony should have made possible to stream Remote Play by local network. At least it really seems that it can't do that from my experience."

 

You can already do that with Remote Play. 

 

"With all the latencies and poor image quality that Remote Play gives you when you use it at home, it really looks like they still use their servers to stream for some reason. So, yeah, if we talk about streaming to home PC, Microsoft solution works better."

 

That has not been my experience. Many Xbox One games are only 900p or 720p. The image quality varries based on your home connection, what device you use, streaming resolution, and other factors.

 

 


Last edited by Enemy - on 14 October 2018

Enemy said:
Bofferbrauer2 said:

This.

The current implementation is utter crap as the games run from a Playstation somewhere in the world, and if none is ready then you can't play at all. Add to this the gray and brown of last gen with bad compression on a non-consistent connection, making them blocky as a PS1 game and huge lags if the console is far away. If you're idle, the service will disconnect you to make room on the server, so save before going to the bathroom. Random disconnections are rampant, just as lost cloudsaves are (and no, you can't save them locally either). Oh, and if you don't have a PS4 controller, you will be fucked in any game that needs motion controls at any point of the game. Finally, while the yearly subscription is okay in price (99$), the monthly is 14.99$, so 12 months will add up to almost double that price.

"The current implementation is utter crap as the games run from a Playstation somewhere in the world, and if none is ready then you can't play at all."

 

Which is exactly what Xcloud does. 

 

"Add to this the gray and brown of last gen with bad compression on a non-consistent connection, making them blocky as a PS1 game and huge lags if the console is far away. If you're idle, the service will disconnect you to make room on the server, so save before going to the bathroom."

 

Those are problems with all streaming services. Obviously PS3 games aren't going to look good but streaming at 720p and 30 fps requires less data. PS Now can also stream PS4 games.

 

Streaming games at 1080p or 4k requires a faster internet connection with more data. People complain about the quality of PS3 games on PS Now but then they complain about the data requirements. Sometimes I can't tell if people are really this dumb or they're just hating.

Never had anything to do XCloud, so I wasn't aware of this.

I helped out a friend since he thought he botched up something when buying into the service, but it became apparent it was none of his fault.

Sony says the minimum internet connection speed should be 5Mbit, but these problems came with stable 16Mbit, and he still reported those problems almost a year later after he upgraded to 50Mbit, though the graphics looked much closer to the PS3 original by then. I think instead of 5Mbit, 25Mbit would be more realistic.



Around the Network
Enemy said: 

1. Xbox One was not backwards compatible with Xbox 360 in the beginning and Microsoft had no intentions of adding the feature. It wasn't until PS Now launched and Xbox One started losing in sales that Microsoft started working on Xbox 360 BC.

2. Well, I don't know what to tell you because that is not the history I've seen. Journalists have been defending the Xbox One since it launched. For the most part they give Microsoft a pass on most things other than the things that they can't hide such as the exclusives issue. They hype up almost everything Microsoft does. The last year has basically been an anti-Sony campaign because Sony didn't want to open the gates to Nintendo and Microsoft. Microsoft received passes over the pass few years for blocking cross play with PC.

3. News journalists are not the reason why the PS4 is winning or the reason why Microsoft is making changes. Many journalists owned both since the beginning. The reason why the PS4 is so far ahead and why Microsoft is making changes is because of the general consumer who purchase PS4's but refuse to purchase Xbox Ones. I think if the journalists had their way and if their narratives started influencing the general consumer the Xbox One would've sold better, Microsoft would have never changed, and we would be in trouble.

4. That has not been my experience. Many Xbox One games are only 900p or 720p. The image quality varries based on your home connection, what device you use, streaming resolution, and other factors.

1. It is completely not true. You can watch DigitalFoundry video about how Xbox One does B/C. Microsoft implemented some media formats from 360 on hardware level so they worked on this feature way before release.

2. I agree that last year was anti-Sony campaign. But other than that it is hard to remember when journalists ever favored Xbox over PS4. IT ws always the other way around. Probably they defended Xbox on various matter but the most important thing about consoles is what> Of course - games. You can see the reviews of PS4 games and Xbox One games and then see which platform journalists usually favor. Crossplay also wasn't an issue until Nintendo Switch released which is a way more popular than Xbox, almost on PS4 level.

3. While I agree that journalists are not the reason why PS4 is winning, still it is hard to downplay that their articles affect consumers when they make their choice. Otherwise, journalism probably would have died as a speciality a long time ago because it would have been unneeded.

4. And so what? For the first of all, it is not true. Yes, for the most part Xbox One games are 900p, but 720p is even more rare than 1080p. PS4 limits Remote Play to 720p while Xbox doesn't do that.



 

Because PS Now is not very good and isn’t a catch all type of service. xCloud on paper should have more support and perform miles better.

Also, why would streaming kill indie developers? Idk how PS Now works in terms of the effort developers have to put in to get their games on the service, but on xCloud MS claims it requires no extra work. They can reach a broader audience. Streaming hasn’t killed smaller music artists or the indie film scene.



Because that's how it is.
Sony somehow became the crossplay villain because of Fortnite while it has been with it since last gen with FF14 (which Microsoft declined to) or even exclusive titles likes Street Fighter V which has always been crossplay.
But Microsoft and Nintendo apparently invented it together and Sony has just now come around to doing it... instead of the particular scenario now is about having to do with Microsoft trying to force live accounts on other systems, as it did with Minecraft on Switch and Sony was reluctant to be subject to it.
Or Sony is now copying Nintendo mini systems while they have been around for ages from various devs like Sega and Atari.

PSNow simply doesn't exist, get over it.

Honestly don't care, tho, I want my PS5 to play discs I own myself, and that's about it.



my experience with ps now was bad, input lag and the games look like old youtube videos even the easy allies were recently discussing how bad it is. Microsoft/Google are just huge companies so ofcourse each move gets more attention.






forevercloud3000 said:

 

 

This is not to mention that I find the Stream only future of gaming to be very alarming issue. It seemingly is centered on less of what consumers WANT gaming to be and more on how developers can alter the landscape to benefit them. Streaming has taken hold of all other media formats because they are static, non intereactive mediums (Movies, music). A video game is constantly changing and shifts depending on who is playing it. A Stream only future sounds impossible for small fledgling developers and would pretty much kill the indie scene and we are back to AAA Publisher owning everything and suffering from extreme tunnel vision.

Are any of us really thinking this through? Discuss.

That's what people said about mobile gaming and now it it's huge and millions of people are playing even games like Fortnite/PUBG on it.  Same about digital games, ten years ago MS announced their first game Tomb Raider anniversary to also be digital available and we had hundreds of disscussions that gamers don't want it and now we are used that a huge chunk of sales are digital.