Microsoft recently announced Project xCloud as the next big thing in gaming and it has generated a lot of buzzes since. It’s all about streaming video games over the internet, which is quite different from playing directly from a console or PC.
I can't say I'm particularly excited about streaming games and I have near flawless internet
What I'm wondering is what this will do to Console Gamings Market share if its a success.
Streaming will NEVER beat direct play. i will always want to play the best visual and audio experience, streaming just can't handle it, it will always be be several steps behind.
@Prettygoodgamer 2 decades is a long time. I am reluctant to think that far out as 2 decades ago I was just getting cable internet at 512 kbps. Fast forward to today and I can get 1 Gbps fiber. 5G networking's low latency may open up new possibilities. That said, I am not terribly interested in game streaming. I think it could be a generational thing. Kinds just born or not born yet today may like game streaming. But older gamers like me probably not so much.
I can't say I know anyone who wants to break away from traditional gaming.
I have PSNow and it works fine, but I fully agree with you I don't want a 100% streaming always online future AT ALL. It's nice to have a subscription with a bunch of games, but buying and owning games is still by far my prefered method. I like to know that if in 10 years I want to play my favorite games they will be there for me to play with out any fees or hoops.
Latency will make or break this.
It will make this. That's why X Cloud is 2.5 times more efficient at only 10mbps vs. Google's 25mbps minimum requirements.
I'm hoping. The thought of playing on any device sounds awesome.
It sounds interesting. it's the next to best option. make any junk cheap device able to play your favorite games. I still prefer owning the hardware though. there should also be an incentive for those that buy the retail version of games, get the stream-able version for free. some Blu-ray movies were like this a long while back.
And how does it achieve such a remarkable feat? I'm dying to know. I'm really curious how ms will deliver better quality at a lower bandwidth, because that seems intimately more valuable as a product than a streaming service, and would have ramifications across a number of it industries.
@ Rain I'd like to know how too. If I had to guess though, it's via something called Statistical Inference. MS was doing research on this during their "Project Irides Cloud VR" experiments, where they reduced latency by roughly 90%. This short video talked about it during a demonstration: https://www.youtube.com/wat...
"With that in mind, it should have come as no surprise when we realize that the search giant is actually working on a video game streaming service, and unlike Project xCloud, it’s already in beta. Sony has been active for quite some time with PSNow, and Nintendo is testing its own streaming option in Japan today." Interesting times in gaming indeed. More than obvious that Nintendo, MS and Sony are definitely preparing for a console less future.
Do you prefer that future considering the current ISPs tendencies to throttle or cap our connections and generally control how and when internet access is provided to us? What will happen when everything is digital and bandwidth cant keep up? Everyone knows digital is the future, but I'm afraid we are rushing into it unprepared.
Then ISPs will have to adapt, plenty of places already have no data caps like here in Boston.
What? You seriously expect these Companies to adapt to our needs in our favor? Jesus H Christ....
@CrimsonPheonix no you dont have a cap yet. Indianapolis didnt have one either until 2yrs ago now there is a 1 tb cap and as I stream everything and game I had to choose between stream movies and music and playing games it sucked and the only ISP that provides a no cap plan is the smallest in Indianapolis, unless I wanted to add another 50$ to my already 100$ a month Xfinity plan for 75mbps, and the smallest dont provide service to my area. The ISPs are pushing for no net neutrality so they can milk customers they arent going to adapt to plans that make them less money. Just because, they dont want net neutrality because they want and all streaming digital future which is stupid.
Doesn't what I prefer, it's happening whether we prefer it or not.
Lol @ crimson thinking isps will adapt. Since net neutrality had been repealed, their adaption will be charging more to content providers to prioritize their traffic. Isps haven't cared much for the consumers interest for a couple decades now.
It's cringy seeing people predict what the outcome of trends will be just because other media has followed a certain pattern that doesn't mean video games will follow suit specially when latency is still a huge problem no matter who the provider is. Unless this major problem get's addressed there is no way gamers will adopt it over the traditional way of consuming video games. People are really dumb when they don't even know how the recent ICANN changes will affect gaming in the future just saying.
It's even more cringy to see people still believe latency is that big of an issue or will continue to be in the near future. PSnow as of late has been greatly improved. A lot of areas are about to adopt a 5G network and then who knows where we'll be by the time the next gen of consoles starts to fade. If latency was truly such a big deal do you actually believe Google, Nintendo, Sony, MS and countless other multi billion dollar, world wide companies would be investing so heavily in it? Or do you have more insight and knowledge of this situation then these companies?
The cringier thing is people ignoring what has happened in those other mediums, and even if they assume it follows the same path, they ignore the part where those other mediums haven't had their physical counterparts completely eradicated by the advent of streaming. @Gangsta Unless there is a major change in the way networks work, latency will be a thing. Wether its an issue is dependent on the ISP's, and what a person is willing to pay for their connection, among hundreds of other factors. Don't mistake that latency not being enough of an issue for enough people to make a service like this viable to those who wish to use it, as latency soon to be a thing of the past. I've noticed this trend that a lot of people seem to think that new tech somehow means that it will take over of the old tech, or a mass exodus of a consumer base to the new tech. But when you look at all these things, it's usually just some people maybe moving, and new customers buying in. And that's where streaming services lie for the near future...as something aimed at a different market, with gradual pushes towards trying to make a connected future for these publishers and console makers to control their content, and remove ownership. Good times huh?
Microsoft: The Reactive Company Never the risk taker. They only announced x cloud because Google went ahead and did it with assassin's creed over a Web browser. Google entered their space. They weren't so much worried about Sony with Remote Play and PS now because Sony's idea was relegated to console as you needed the console to stream. And PS Now isn't something Sony is pushing hard on anywhere else. They leave it as an optional way to play just like VR. It's an option. But Google entering the Web browser space is a direct threat to Microsoft and their Web browser and services. If Apple joins in and starts a gaming service with their phones, tablets and browser,that's another threat to them. Amazon as well. So, they reacted quickly and announced to everyone as to not be left behind. They might even had inside information that Google was gunning for them with a gaming streaming service. If they were more an "active" company instead of "reactive," they would be the innovator instead of always the follower. We could go over the usual about data caps, intermittent Internet speeds and the like, but we've all been over that topic. And the topic of "Now that Microsoft is doing it, now it's amazing and the future."
React? MS has been working on this since before Sony aquired Gaikai.
It's a reaction. All the news was talking about the Google streaming service. Even my local news covered it. That's big news and a lot of mindshare google is looking for. Streaming over a browser to Windows devices, macOS, Linux, and ChromeOS is a direct threat to Microsoft. That's Microsoft's own backyard. If google's project stream catches on, that hurts Microsoft directly. Tim, you need to start thinking beyond what you see in these threads about Sony, nintendo and Microsoft. There's more going on that's above your xbox achievement level. Yes, Sony is their competitor. But in the console space. Google is already on multiple platforms and are streaming over a browser. That's a direct shot across Microsoft's bow. They reacted as they didn't announce first. Disagree if you like. Doesn't matter how it looks to the public. Google was first in their eyes before Microsoft reacted.
What you just said is just blatantly untrue. Yes, Microsoft had Azure, but it hasn't in anyway shape or form been used for game streaming until now. Microsoft is not the leader here, this market has existed for years and Sony was clearly the first company to offer console games a streaming service.
I know it may be hard for some to accept, but Google, IBM, and Oracle/Sun are bigger threats to MS market share and revenue stream than Sony will ever be. Those three companies directly compete against MS biggest money makers, and in many ways, they're taking significant market share away from MS. Google alone has hurt the Windows platform more than anyone has ever hurt MS before, and the massive shift from Windows OS devices and PC's, to iOS and Droid have set MS back much further than they've been set back in the console space by MS poor policies at the start of this gen. I know some people like to think that the console space is really a cornerstone of MS long term plans, but it really isn't. Even assuming that they had 100% of the console market, it wouldn't make as much money as it's commercial and enterprise solutions. Maybe if they also owned most of the PC gaming market, they'd take it more seriously, but they're very late to that party.
Interesting. I first heard about Microsoft building a "world class" streaming service at E3, earlier this year...months before Google announced their play tests for their browser streaming service... However, Microsoft has been working on a streaming service for YEARS now. We can go back to Halo 4 being streamed to a Windows Phone https://vrzone.com/articles... Just because you don't know what they are working on doesn't mean they aren't working on it...
Which e3 cause google announced it at least 2 years ago in stock market meeting,
@Black That maybe true...I don't know without some kind of proof. However, the OP was talking about Microsoft reacting to Google's RECENT announcement of doing these play test in their Chrome browser that just kicked off. The question Im going to ask you is how can it be a reaction to that, when Microsoft already announced a streaming service back at E3 earlier this year??? And you said this Google announcement happened 2 years ago? Well OK...the link I provided clearly shows Microsoft working on a streaming service over FIVE years ago...so how can that be a reaction to Google two years back???
Everybody on N4G is just mad its Microsoft, they know PSNow is str8 garbage and remote play isn't even the same thing. It's going to be a sad day when MS catches thier precious Sony.
next thing you say Google and Amazon are reacting to Ms servers
I'm not for this "new era," but you silly as hell if you think Microsoft just up and announced an entire ecosystem just because Google made a move. Microsoft has one of the largest cloud compute business infrastructures in the world, and they been working on this for quite some time. They even laid the groundwork when they tried to get away with their original vision for Xbox One. And there's already been several rumors of a separate streaming next gen Xbox for months.
😄😄😄 Wow. Now you're going to attempt to tell me about Google and Amazon? You are a funny guy indeed. But let's stick to the topic shall we? The FIRST time the PUBLIC heard about Microsoft building a game's streaming service: The Verge https://www.theverge.com/20... Business Insider https://www.businessinsider... BGR https://www.bgr.in/gaming/e... IGN https://www.ign.com/article... CNET https://www.cnet.com/news/m... I can keep going if you want. Don't tell me the public heard about Google's first...they didn't. The question still stands...how can Microsoft be reacting to Google when Microsoft announced first? Please answer.
Bro it doesnt matter... Im not getting into googles gaming business in any way or form. The first and foremost patent that this company has is on ads. People who are now embracing google and talking about MTs or ads should absolutely focus on what googles business model is before embracing its technology. Forget microsoft if its reacting or acting.... Keep your eyes on what this company is about to bring upon us... I seriously do not want zynga/candy crush games upon me.
@Shiva I couldn't agree more! These fanboys will hop from topic to topic if you let them. I just wanted to establish his whole purpose of making his post as false before moving on. But you're right. I find it hilarious that a ad company with no gaming experience, talent, studios or even IPs is suppose to be considered some kind of threat. The only thing they can offer me are mobile and 3rd party games...games I already get through the big 3 anyway. They are notorious for selling companies your information and these are the guys he feels we should be worried about? Why should they even deserve to be successful in this space...fanboy wars is why. When I go to stream my games to my phone or tablet, it won't be through Scroogle, I can promise you that.
They're a reactionary company. They didn't lead in the mobile phone space, they reacted to others like Google, apple and Sony in that space. They failed with windows mobile phone. They reacted to apples ipod after the fact. They failed with that with zune. They reacted to Sony owning the living room with PS2 and not some computer in the back room and they created xbox. And have failed 3 times against them. And was overtaken by nintendo and Sony on the fourth. They reacted to the wii and Sony's ps move motion control with kinect. As Sony was working with the company that created kinect on PS2 way before Microsoft swooped in and bought them underneath Sony. Kinect failed. Move lives on with VR. They reacted to Sony destroying them in 2013 by trying to seem gamer friendly and dropped all their DRM. They are being destroyed by Sony again. https://www.google.com/amp/... https://www.google.com/amp/... That's February of this year where we knew about project yeti. Microsoft then announced their game streaming plans in June. Which company has streamed their first game as a test to the public? Not Microsoft. Google and ubisoft. That halo test was not known by the public or was even news worthy to the masses. But Google got all the notoriety and made huge news. Which made Microsoft react again like they always do. All your links are in june. Mine is in February. One comes first over all your June links. And that's heard about. Google was working on a gaming platform back in 2013 as well. No one knew what it was until now.
@Apocalypse How many times are you going to repackage the same BS under a different post?!?! You fanboys love to change the conversation depending on what you feel you can make stick. Please for once just stick to the topic. Who the first one was with a public playtest is neither here nor there in the context of this conversation. That doesn't matter because I didn't take issue with who's playtest came first, I took issue with you saying Microsoft reacted to Google's RECENT announcement. The two links from February that you posted was about RUMORS that Google was making a streaming service, that wasn't an OFFICIAL announcement from Google. Nor did those news stories hit the masses. Your links confirm this! Here are quotes from both your links: "Google may be making its first serious attempts at taking on the likes of Nvidia's GeForce Now and Sony's PS Now with its own game streaming service. Details are scant but it's codename is Yeti and could include a controller and console." "It isn’t yet clear if Google’s gaming contraption will be a high-powered console like a PS4 or Xbox One, or if it’ll be a low-end device meant exclusively to facilitate streaming." "Google is keeping mum about this right now, but if it’s building something like Yeti, it seems like it’d make sense to go with the latter type of product." Ya see, back in February, Google didn't announce anything! They were only rumors of what they COULD be working on. Again, that was February of THIS YEAR. They didn't ANNOUNCE anything until just recently...AFTER Microsoft announced their service at E3. Stop beating me over my head with the BS buddy, Im too nice for that. It was Google who reacted to Microsoft's initial announcement at E3 that they were making one. You say Google has been working on Yeti since 2013, yet your link is a no show...typical. I have and can post multiple links that Microsoft was working on a streaming service back in 2013. You want to bring up Zunes and Moves and Wiis...anything and everything you can think of because this is what you fanboys do when called out on false information. I said nothing about anything of those, and you have provided ZERO conformation that Microsoft's ANNOUNCEMENT of their streaming service came not only after Google's, but was a reaction to it...
What the public knew about is rather irrelevant to who's working on it first. Plus, on here, it's not like we hear about a lot of things outside the console space. I knew google's been working on something for at least a year now, since they did invest in some Chinese game streaming company. never really thought about it much, and don't really care who's reacting to who, or who was first, or any of the other nonsense that goes around about it. All of that just ends up becoming console war fodder, and with that, you get a lot of this, "MS is going to do it best" mentality which is completely unfounded. I also knew MS was working on something since before this gen started. I recall some comment in an interview with Mattrick where he said something along the lines of how they looked into cloud streaming games....in response to PSNow....and how they had been working on something, but the market wasn't ready for it and there were too many things that would hold it back at that time. I'd actually like to find it, but like with many of these things, searching for these things tend to become difficult when new things crop up around it. Reality is, is that most of these companies know what the others are working on. These companies know where things are headed, and what they should get in on. The reality is is that if they wanted to be in this space, they probably all have been working on it for a while, because you don't just up and start a cloud streaming service. Even Sony was looking into it before they brought Gakai, and they brought that company for their patents and technology, not for their servers like some people seem to think.
@rainslacker "Reality is, is that most of these companies know what the others are working on." That's pretty interesting you would say this when we were just having a conversation not long ago about motion controls and how you said Sony was supposedly first working on it only because they had a YouTube video out. But glad to see common sense, all of a sudden rear its head when convenient. All these companies have a good idea where the market trends and tech are heading. Being first out doesn't particularly mean they were the first to do this. And being first on the market doesn't necessarily mean it's better.
Doubtful but only time will tell.
What happened to cloud service?
a new era of gaming starting
No it won't. The guy in last place is never the trend setter.
say that to apple they used to be in last place.
Huawei says hi to apple.
In the PC space, not in the Phone space. And Apple is still basically in last in PC.
Sony has had Remote play since Vita. Switch solves the issue with it just being hardware that can go anywhere. They are not changing anything.
I've played assassins creed odyssey via googles project stream on an old MacBook Pro. it surprisingly ran great but it's a single player game, i can't imagine anyone playing MP games. but I can't knock it for working while not everyone has great connection we can't blame them for they aren't isp providers. those with great connection will benefit from this if the bussiness model is great for the consumer.
Help usher in a previous gen with a subscription to match.
...that who asked for, is what I'm curious about.
Back to always online situation ms
Ooooh wait... Is there a streaming service from sony, nintendo, google, amazon or apple which works offline. Damn they are genious to do so if thats real. By the way you get more options from sony/microsoft/nintendo any day than who are trying to get into this industry. Steam tried and failed with their console.... Who's next
?? You can play Xbox Game Pass games offline for upto 30 days
This article isn't about game pass. Streaming is always online.
I think this Tech is very cool I can't wait to try it out!
I've spent lots of time using remote play on my ps4 and Xperia it's fundamentally the same thing as this console gaming on a phone with the caveat of a WiFi network and local console is required but ultimately it's not great in terms of playability the games texts are always to small to see and the screen often looks weird and feels wrong to have the title condensed into a 5 inh screen
I've come to like using remote play on the PC at work. Of course, I have a rather large screen.:) On the Vita, there are some games which work and look great on it, but I will agree that some games aren't built to work well on the small screen.
"Project xCloud as the next big thing in gaming" Well, no. The next big thing in gaming will be the next big mind blowing AAA game. Gamers are actually simple folk with complicated minds meaning that we want challenges from our games but dont want to over think things, just give us games that we can pop in and play. Now I know some of you are going to say "but streaming is the way of the future", well yes it is but the very very distant future whereas streaming now complicates things again. Firstly you need a good line and even then it has its problems, secondly and most importantly most gamers do not have internet access. So while these features are great and all I think most gamers want it kept simple by simply just giving us games.
I'm sure streaming will have it's place. Just like most new techs. I recall fondly when motion controls were the next big thing, because people were buying up the Wii in droves. just became a footnote and an option as time went on. Giving people new ways to access content is fine. It gives potential for more people to play, which builds new markets. Sometimes, new tech can make old methods dwindle or die, but I don't see that happening with streaming anytime soon. This isn't like the shift to digital, where your games played the same way, and mostly, wasn't as restricted, but rather, one that is reliant on several different factors to make it accessible, and functional. What annoys me the most is that for years now, PS gamers have had to hear how streaming wasn't the future. How PSNow sucked. Now, within a few months, without a single shred of proof, MS is apparently ushering in the future, without having given any indication how they're apparently going to achieve the impossible. Likely, their service will run just as well as Sony's, and people will say MS achieved the impossible, because they don't even know that Sony's solution works fine. As of now, some MS gamers seem more excited for MS promised streaming service, than I've seen any PS gamer excited for PSNow. Even those PS gamers around here that use it aren't talking it up as the next big thing, and readily admit that it isn't a perfect solution. I've seen people act like MS is going to achieve amazing results on 40% of the bandwidth, and I can't help but be incredulous at people's stupidity. The fact that they think a marginal service of game streaming will somehow be worth more than the tech that could allow a higher quality stream over half the bandwidth, and that MS would not already be selling that product for huge amounts of money, because it would be worth a fortune. I can understand the misconceptions about how networks work, or how MS can't actually fix lag, but not about people's complete and misguided notion that MS is so invested in gaming, that they would forgo a hugely profitable venture of data compression for real time use which is significantly better than anything out there. I'm not talking about a slight increase in compression techniques, but a major jump in compression algorithms, which shouldn't even be possible, which would be applicable to a wide variety of applications, and could significantly reduce the amount of network traffic on the internet, and if it can be used in real time, it can be used across many ISP's transfers that could significantly reduce overall internet bandwidth, meaning ISP's saving hundreds of billions of dollars over the next 20 years. So, Not just in streaming, something as significant as a 50% reduction in bandwidth would end up being worth more than all of MS company as it is now. Significantly more. Yet, MS is going to use it for game streaming? Sure....that makes sense. People really have no clue about what MS does outside of gaming, and barely have any cursory knowledge of the tech world that exists around them.
Psnow and other services getting ignored as per usual
If XCloud is as tepid as PSnow when it launches then this hype definitely won't be warranted.
Wow, psnow downplayed for years but now that microsoft is going to do something similar its a new era?? Please just show, dont talk, or use hype videos, just show the actual service working ms, sick of the broken promises tbh. And no i do not like streaming games, the latency on racing games is criminal.
Is horoizon zero dawn on ps now. Before this generation ends if it does then bring on your agenda to this topic.... As this topic is more on streaming current games as well and not generation old or selective games... On PSNOW a game like horoizon zero dawn will not be released... You know why... Servers arent enough.
And what if Sony makes those games available on PSNow for a fee? That seems to be a logical extension to the service, and one that many thought Sony would take early on. They may not make it available on the subscription service, but those games for rent are still an option on PSNow. First run games on streaming services is going to be very limited, and over time, the games that are offered aren't going to be as high profile as you see now. We get that now with Game Pass, and likely MS streaming service when it launches, because MS wants to promote these services. But thats not a sustainable future, and it is no coincidence that MS is aiming more for GaaS, while they have other recurring revenue services are also ramping up.
Lol theres no agenda at all, when sony brought psnow out there was nothing but bad things said, but now micro is doing it its so amazing and its going to usher in a new era??? Get real, streaming games is crap full stop, new or old game makes no difference, the latency is horrible. As for your point about what type of games get streamed, thing is sony has the service up and running, while micro does not, so really you dont know what their service is going to involve, so far its just talk, like hololens, vr, cloud power, more first party support ect, i just dont buy their pr anymore, sorry if thats an agenda to you, but to me thats called learning a lesson.
PSNow is a trash service and I know in today's gaming climate Sony can do no wrong, but they don't have the infrastructure for a quality streaming service.
You say its crap because thats what you got... Was there any improvement to that crap.... Ya more crap probably.... When its already proven crap then why are other gaints getting into it? There can only be two reasons 1) that crap is being sold like no other right now so everybody wants a peice 2) they really know how to do it than selling crap. Either way we will know about it in our era... Theres still long way bro and by then we can expect 5g services on our mobiles.... 5g wont be crap though.