Ostriig on 29/11/2009 at 13:42
I think we treaded on the likely implications in the Onlive thread a while ago.
Quote Posted by demagogue
Not exactly the glorious renaissance of the PC and fall of the console-era I was hoping for. :erg:
Not at all, from bad to worse, more likely. If the two foremost advantages of the PC platform over consoles are controls and moddability, the Onlive-style model that Wada's pitching to the press won't feature either - to maximise accessibility, these new streamed games will keep targetting the client's livingroom couch and TV (i.e. no mouse and keyboard as primary input scheme when designing the games), and the limitations to modding support come without saying.
The more severe setback, however, is likely to appear in the form of the financial model. I think it's fair to expect clients will have to either pay per hour played, or take up a periodical subscription from tiered offers. If you've ever bought "x hours internet cards" back in the day, you can probably picture the former, and for the latter think along the various TV subscriptions and their bundled channels. And you can be certain that, if offered at all, the pay-per-play model will be intentionally disadvantageous in some ways compared to the subscription models, so as to serve as incentive to turn to their more stable income system.
The only advantage I can see it might have over the current console platforms (though not over the PC), is the possibility for quicker hardware development. Since all the hardware is distributer-side, they can afford to perform updates on it whenever they decide it's worth it, as opposed to the console market where the manufacturers need to consider the buying power of their user base and decide lifecycles accordingly, which in turn leads to there being little incentive for hardware manufacturers to produce massive technical advancements in the middle of a given console lifecyle.
Quote Posted by Phatose
If ever they have the bandwidth to not give you so much as a client, so it will be.
Absolutely, this is exactly what they're going for. A logical business decision, which will expand the market, but one that will also come with great compromises for us as consumers. Especially since, if the infrastructure permits it, it has the potential to become successful enough, from a business perspective, to lead to a massive reorientation of development groups away from the PC and console platform models.
Quote Posted by henke
Sure, but on the other hand you won't need to buy a new console/upgrade your computer every few years. And the end-user will get access to all the games, not just the ones that would've been published on his platform of choice.
With the examples of the console market today and its three main players (MS, Sony, Nintendo), and bearing in mind the, in a way, lesser effort involved with the streamed games system (server facilities only, no commercial unit manufacturing), what makes you think you won't get several provider companies competing for the market, and bringing along their own exclusivity models? Instead of buying all the console models you'll end up having to buy all the different provider subscriptions to get that unlimited access you want.
lost_soul on 29/11/2009 at 16:55
I (for one) would like to see consoles die, and here's why.
With a console game, mods/fan creations are very limited, if not completely impossible. We wouldn't have things like The Nameless Mod or The Dark Mod if there were only consoles. We would instead have Deus Ex 5, with enhanced graphics, respawning enemies, small maps, and rechargable shields.
I used to make the argument that consoles were so much cheaper than PCs. That isn't true anymore. Up until recently, the PS3 was $400. I can get a PC for that price sans monitor that will play *far more* games than a PS3 can play.
Did I mention online play that is completely in control of the game publishers? That is how it works on a console. On a PC, anyone can host a game server and give their buddies the IP to join it, even if the publisher has gone out of business or shut down the master servers. This last bit is slowly changing though. PC games will soon have as crippled online play as consoles, thanks to things like GFWL.
I recall a time when consoles were $130, and they included a game. This was the same time period in which a PC was over $1000. Times have changed, and I expect more for my money. PCs provide this, consoles do not.
Dresden on 29/11/2009 at 17:40
In before MS tries to limit Gold users to being able to download full games on the first week of release. You know this will happen if it goes digital only.
AxTng1 on 29/11/2009 at 19:14
OK, so where would the next generation of programmers & technicians come from? Enthusiasts have been powering this industry for 50 years, but even they cannot do much with a glorified thin client. It would be timeshare on university mainframes all over again.
henke on 29/11/2009 at 19:52
Quote Posted by Ostriig
what makes you think you won't get several provider companies competing for the market, and bringing along their own exclusivity models? Instead of buying all the console models you'll end up having to buy all the different provider subscriptions to get that unlimited access you want.
Well the technical boundaries keeping the player from having access to all the games will be gone. Of course, as you say, they could still put up artificial boundaries in the way of exclusive titles on subsciption services.
Quote Posted by AxTng1
but even they cannot do much with a glorified thin client.
Uh, except running applications
through the client? At the animation studio I work we already do this. We can have a computer in a different city and we just log in through Remote Desktop and start up the application. Very useful if you need something changed quickly. Doing a lot of work this way though is a drag because there is a bit of lag. But if they can get this technology perfected I think it could be great.
I do not believe that this technology will change how we use our computers/consoles much at all or hinder the development of mods and so forth. I know that the default stance of any self-respecting gamer to news like this should be
oh my god they are trying to fuck us IN THE ASS! But you'll have to excuse me, I'm gonna be cautiously optimistic about this.
june gloom on 29/11/2009 at 19:56
Quote Posted by lost_soul
I (for one) would like to see consoles die, and here's why.
With a console game, mods/fan creations are very limited, if not completely impossible. We wouldn't have things like The Nameless Mod or The Dark Mod if there were only consoles. We would instead have Deus Ex 5, with enhanced graphics, respawning enemies, small maps, and rechargable shields.
I used to make the argument that consoles were so much cheaper than PCs. That isn't true anymore. Up until recently, the PS3 was $400. I can get a PC for that price sans monitor that will play *far more* games than a PS3 can play.
Did I mention online play that is completely in control of the game publishers? That is how it works on a console. On a PC, anyone can host a game server and give their buddies the IP to join it, even if the publisher has gone out of business or shut down the master servers. This last bit is slowly changing though. PC games will soon have as crippled online play as consoles, thanks to things like GFWL.
I recall a time when consoles were $130, and they included a game. This was the same time period in which a PC was over $1000. Times have changed, and I expect more for my money. PCs provide this, consoles do not.
Just FYI your position wouldn't be as untenable if you weren't the idiot who said he wasn't joining his nation's armed forces because of the DMCA. Actually it's still untenable either way because some of your arguments are fucking stupid. Deus Ex 5? Seriously? You really think that would happen?
lost_soul on 29/11/2009 at 20:24
Quote Posted by dethtoll
Just FYI your position wouldn't be as untenable if you weren't the idiot who said he wasn't joining his nation's armed forces because of the DMCA. Actually it's still untenable either way because some of your arguments are fucking stupid. Deus Ex 5? Seriously? You really think that would happen?
Yes, I am an idiot for standing up for what I believe in and not wanting to serve as a corporate pawn (but that is off-topic here).
Back on topic:
I do believe that if consoles were the only game in town, Deus Ex would be in it's fifth incarnation by now with such crazy mechanics. One need only look at what happened to Invisible War when it went to the XBOX. Universal ammo and small maps spring to mind. :)
I am not saying that all console games are watered down (or bad). GTA San Andreas was the last console game I spent more than 100 hours playing and truly enjoyed. I also thought Deus Ex for the PS2 was pretty good because the maps were redesigned. As someone who first played it on the PC, it was (somewhat) a new experience on the PS2.
Ulukai on 29/11/2009 at 20:27
Quote Posted by lost_soul
I (for one) would like to see consoles die, and here's why.
Do you really believe the replacement is going to be the take up of a newly popular mod-friendly PC?
It's all headed towards that oh-so-annoying cloud, which I'm predicting is going to be even less friendly to mod teams than the situation we have now.
lost_soul on 29/11/2009 at 21:07
Quote Posted by Ulukai
Do you really believe the replacement is going to be the take up of a newly popular mod-friendly PC?
It's all headed towards that oh-so-annoying cloud, which I'm predicting is going to be even less friendly to mod teams than the situation we have now.
Nah. I would love to see it, but I know it won't happen any time soon. Most casual players don't value the modding community enough to make any kind of stand against a completely closed platform. The future is probably paid DLC.
june gloom on 29/11/2009 at 21:11
Quote Posted by lost_soul
Yes, I am an idiot for standing up for what I believe in and not wanting to serve as a corporate pawn (but that is off-topic here).
So when do you graduate high school?
