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

Forums - Gaming Discussion - If Hardware Becomes Irrelevant, and Digital Distribution Takes Over

shio on 27 December 2009
Distant Star said:
Consoles as we know will eventueally disappear, because TVs with 3D cameras (motion), Wifi (connection), USB (charging)& Bluetooth Wireless controls will be standard. PC and Console gaming will blend together. Hosting capacity, quality IPs, exclusive controllers and beyond gaming will determine a userbase for network owners.

Hosting is a money issue. Can hosting be funded by advertising? Or will developers pay a fee to outsource hosting for X amount of years per game? Independent devs and publishers will support both sorts of networks to reach a massive target group. Network owners will be competitive in price tagging their fees (third party support is still important).

IP depends on first party. Will great developers (2nd party) stick with network owners? Their game will be exclusive, also less marketing expenses. They will give away their freedom, total amount spend on project and rushing release dates. Going independent will give them freedom, risk is higher due to marketing expenses.

Exclusive controllers depend on R&D. Logitech, Madcatz, Nyko, Total Immersion need to focus on R&D. Will third party devs support their hardware? Natal, Wand and Wii-mote are patent-free by that time. However controllers will be so important that Nintendo, Microsoft and Sony will never license their hardware (controllers) to support an other network. Problem for them patents expire. Retro hardware revised (wireless) will become a hype. Imagine a wireless NES controller. Hardware will become a console, however it will always be a niche.

Beyond Gaming: Social Networks and non-gamer friend-lists important? Will Facebook rule casual gaming? Will they buy Spil Games for example? Community is a very powerful weapon these days. Video and Music are obvious. All-in-one account is preferable for most users.

Just because consoles will eventually disappear hardware is still needed. Nintendo will pioneer and exploit their IPs to prove their hardware.

Exactly. Great post. Hardware will become pointless, and Digital Services will take over. The problem with Xbox Live and PSN is that when it happens they will have to deal with powerhouses like Steam and probably Battle.net.



http://i48.tinypic.com/120qaon.jpg
Around the Network
mrstickball on 27 December 2009

Distant Star said:
Consoles as we know will eventueally disappear, because TVs with 3D cameras (motion), Wifi (connection), USB (charging)& Bluetooth Wireless controls will be standard. PC and Console gaming will blend together. Hosting capacity, quality IPs, exclusive controllers and beyond gaming will determine a userbase for network owners.

And what kind of cost will this ad to TVs? What kind of install base will adopt these technologies?

Hosting is a money issue. Can hosting be funded by advertising? Or will developers pay a fee to outsource hosting for X amount of years per game? Independent devs and publishers will support both sorts of networks to reach a massive target group. Network owners will be competitive in price tagging their fees (third party support is still important).

If we're talking about OnLive-esque streaming via cloud computing, the costs are going to be very, very prohibitive for the next few decades. These costs cannot be offset without costly monthly subscriptions to whatever service offers the technology. Hosting most likely cannot be offset with advertising unless:

  1. eCPM rises by a significant amount (probably double to what it is now, and assuming that you could have a high number of deliverables for video ads, which are the only way adveritising could offset hosting costs in any way).
  2. The ad threshold is so high, it would equate to similar inconvienieces that we see with broadcast and cable TV (that is, 5 forced ads every ~15 minutes of gameplay)

Beyond Gaming: Social Networks and non-gamer friend-lists important? Will Facebook rule casual gaming? Will they buy Spil Games for example? Community is a very powerful weapon these days. Video and Music are obvious. All-in-one account is preferable for most users.

Why in the world would Facebook buy Spil Games? Facebook already has their hands full with their rapidly-growing gaming section - they've grown far faster than Spil has for gaming. I agree that all-in-one accounts are very preferable, but I don't think Spil has the kind of technology that will define future gaming.

I would also note that there was a discussion on a major game developers group (on LinkedIn) recently, asking the question about the future of consoles & handhelds. The overwhelming consensus is that consoles will continue to exist as stand-alone devices for a very long time (20 years+). Mobile gaming will evolve as content becomes focused on multi-function devices such as mobile phones (e.g. the iPhone), as it is a much more viable platform for mobile gaming.

And having said that, any discussion about cloud rendering is a very one-sided argument. The cost for bandwidth and hardware to render syncronous gameplay to a console is very expensive, and will be for a very long time - so much so, I don't think its worth arguing the implications of hardware for another 20 years. At that point, we may want to discuss it, but why argue about something that may change drastically in the future?

 

*edit*

I would also point toward the discussion (about dominant DD services staying at the top): it really comes down to blue ocean strategies toward the DD model. Steam may be considered #1, but that really isn't quite true. Facebook most likely generates more revenue as a content delivery service than Steam does - Zynga has a userbase of 233 million MAU's. At $0.50 a month, that is $116 million in revenue generation a month - which is about what the DD market makes between Steam and D2D. Goes to prove that emergent gaming technology can supercede market leaders if the right technology is leveraged properly.



Back from the dead, I'm afraid.

Domicinator on 27 December 2009

I couldn't care less as long as there are games to play. Digital distribution doesn't bother me as long as I can download the game as many times as I want without being treated like a criminal. The hardware vs. cloud thing is a different debate though.

Can our current internet connections handle services like OnLive without any hiccups? That's a big question. In general, I don't think we're ready for it yet. It would be great if we were, as it could turn any PC or TV with an internet connection into a gaming setup. However, the connection would have to be absolutely flawless. I have a wireless N network in my house that is absolutely lightening fast. I can stream HD video no problem Xbox Live's instant on 1080p streaming service works absolutely flawlessly even though my Xbox 360 is using a wireless connection with a wireless G receiver. But I still don't feel like I would want to rely entirely on my network to deliver my game content. If I don't have internet access on my PC, 360, or PS3, I can still play my games offline. If I am running all my games off of remote servers and lose my internet even for a couple of seconds, I am screwed.