CEO Massimo Guarini on preparing for the horizontal expansion of the industry, and the Italian studio's pivot into indie AAA.
Game streaming is still a pipe dream that marketing people like to mention once in a while to build empty hype. It'll never work unless it can stream a full-resolution game at 60 fps and the input latency (ping) never ever goes over 16 miliseconds. Or at least that's for our current, outdated standards. Soon enough our standards will evolve to see 120 fps as the new standard, so input latency will need to be 8 miliseconds. Typical pings to streaming platforms right now are usually between the 40-80 miliseconds range if the server is near you. The way forward for the industry is much higher resolutions, framerates, and input responsiveness. Streaming goes exactly in the opposite direction. It can work for games like Life is Strange where input responsiveness doesn't matter, but not for "realtime-controlled" ; ; games
Wish I could upvote this twice. Once for your informative post, and twice for the TimeSplitter reference of your name. In response to your post, though, it seems streaming games won't be an option until broadband speeds are ten times faster. Well... That's going to take a while.
Gamers should be extremely wary of this future streaming thing. Streaming takes ownership of games away, and only puts money in the pocket of developers. Not a bad thing considering their hard work and investment, however from a gamer point of view, this is potentially the end of an era. In a bad way. Imagine saying: Remember when you could actually own games?
I see the point, however buying a disc with content on it doesn't mean you own the content. What you have is a license. Which is no different from digital and is only differs in duration with a subscription.
That's a weak spin and you know it.
Bullshit. You own the disc and the copy of the media that's on it. They can't show up on your doorstep one day and just demand it be given back because they no longer have any right to it after they sell it.
BS, any product you buy with your money it’s officially yours, that includes games ofc...basic logic.
Thats the thing, if I wanted to play this game 2 years from the time I bought it or wanted to sell it I could. With digital, you can't play it later without monthly fee, and you can't sell it cause it isn't a physical copy. Options make digital and physical copies of games way different from each other. Physical is way more advantageous then digital no matter how you try to spin the license argument.
Bull. "you don't own the content". What the hell is that like I don't own the code and IP? Maybe not but I do own that copy of the game. This means I have total control of what I do with it. This means I can play on any system at any time with out having to go online to ask permission, I can sell it, trade it, lend it, play it again in 5 years etc. With streaming and digital everything is a rental the only difference is how long the rental lasts.
OK, I see the point. Let's just say I get a digital copy. Store it on a hard drive. Is there any difference now?
Tell you what bud. Once the internet runs on tachyons, and I have 0ms latency to my input? I still wouldn't accept "streaming" or "Netflix-like" style of business. I'm sure I'm not alone, so, good luck with that. Maybe the moronic "mobile crowd" will bite on this garbage.
Internet still sucks in too many places and then there are data limits. This won't happen for a long time if ever.
Especially now that Trump ended net neutrality. Now if you want the good speed prices will be going up.
The easier something is to attain, the less valuable it becomes. Don't know why these people are in such a rush to devalue their own industry.
N4G is a community of gamers posting and discussing the latest game news. It’s part of NewsBoiler, a network of social news sites covering today’s pop culture.