Will Wright: Cloud Gaming is Definitely The Future

[svdb]

I wish AT&T (the only option in my area) was delivering all the bandwidth I'm paying for. I theoretically got 12Mbps, in reality only 6-7ish and Onlive tells me it's not enough and refuses to connect... No cloud based games for me, I guess.
Related to that, did you noticed how 18 months ago "Streaming SD Video" was checked OK in their 6Mbps "Elite" offering and now they recommend at least 18Mpbs for it? Hmmm...

 

[Filiprino]

Cloud gaming is the shit. I can tolerate cloud backups for your saves and characters. But I can't stand having the whole thing on the cloudy sky. I prefer the greener ground, where my feet stand.

Also, some cloud services like Steam vulnerate some customer rights like the possibility to return the product if you find that it doesn't work on your machine or doesn't work as expected. That's at least in my country.

 

[LightningStryk17]

F2P is fine if done right (look at League of Legends, or Tribes Ascent). You get everything for free, just need to play the game to unlock it. You can easily play these games for hundreds of hours, never spend a dime, and not be at a disadvantage to people who pay (As a lot of the pay things are skins).

 

[Bloob]

Personally, I believe asynchronous gaming, with cloud based saving / save synchronizing, would be more likely. Playing the "same" game different ways based on your platform, and having it all enhance each other could be nice.

 

[d_kuhn]

My take:

Cloud shares for savegames... heck yea.

Intranet distribution/authentication for single player games (Steam recipe)... quickly becomeing (or has become) the primary distribution method for PC games, like it or not. I tend to like it in general with a few annoyances.

Cloud hosted multiplayer/mmo rich client games... been doing that for a decade.

Cloud hosted single player rich client games (Diable III recipe)... we may get it jammed down our throats but it will create a LOT of player anger and may cause titles to fail that otherwise would have succeeded.

Cloud/Server hosted thin client games (game runs on the cloud and you get a render via the web... onlive)... IMO will never provide a compelling experience for anything beyond simple/low quality games.

 

[eddieroolz]

Just focus on the next SimCity, please.

 

[RADIO_ACTIVE]

With data caps and such don't think it will work

 

[mortsmi7]

I think the nationwide infrastructure has a long way to go, before major cloud usage is viable.

My internet went down for a few hours the other day. Most of my games are on steam or online. Steam refused to enter off-line mode. I was rather bored for a while.

 

[dgingeri]

ug, NO! Maybe for idiot console players. (That meaning console players who are idiots, not all console players are idiots.) They can go play cloud style Angry Birds and have the frustration that goes with network latency. (If you've played Diablo III and been walking along and suddenly jump backwards from where you were walking, or click a potion three times only to die before it actually triggers, you know what I mean.) Cloud gaming is a HORRIBLE IDEA!

 

[zybch]

[citation][nom]Marcus52[/nom]2) I could care less about playing games on anything but my computers.[/citation]
You mean you "couldn't care less" right?

 

[alidan]

[citation][nom]hoofhearted[/nom]This guy is an idiot! All cloud based gaming equals is online always DRM like Diablo 3. I want to purchase my game and play as I want without having to worry about my savefiles going away if the company gets hacked. These games won't stand the test of time either. Once interest and support has feigned, the game goes away.Then this F2P crap is just that, crap! Games that nickel and dime you to death for virtual stuff. I like to pay for a game and know that I have a "complete" game. Even if the F2p title starts out as not pay-to-win, as interest declines, it will eventually end up as pay-to-win.[/citation]

not really, everquest, f2p mmo now, gives you the first 60 levels for free, the first 75 levels for 5$ a month, and full game for 10 or 15 a month.

all other things about it are cosmetic.

f2p can be done right, and many do, like tribes, i dont like that style of gameplay, but its great without paying.

 

[tomfreak]

until they can gurranty me 99% server uptime, the technology for Internet ping are almost instant as local LAN, ISP can have 99% internet uptime on every where on earth. I will not bother cloud gaming. I'll like to have an option to play my games in some rural area.

 

[svdb]

[citation][nom]alidan[/nom]...the first 75 levels for 5$ a month, and full game for 10 or 15 a month...[/citation] So if I want the full game, which is what I'd get on a DVD or via Steam, it'd already cost me anywhere between $40 and $60 after 4 months worth of subscription, whereas otherwise the DVD or Steam version would be mine forever for the same price. So what is this cloud business model really for? For short lived throw-away games? Or to suck the live$ out of ya?

 

[azxcvbnm321]

Forgive me but does Cloud based gaming include services like Steam? I only buy games off of Steam and similar services because it beats having to put in a CD disk and then losing or scratching that disk. Steam makes it very easy and it's good for developers too as it guarantees my game is legit.

Despite all the talk about DRM, I've never had an issue, I think most of it is in the minds of pirates who are afraid of not being able to steal anymore. There have been some legit issues over how many times you can install a game and what counts as an install, but that was limited to one publisher and one game as far as i know.

Free to play seems to only work for massive multiplayer of which isn't my type of game. Will Wright is wrong, people will pay $60 for a good game, but they won't blindly pay $60. They'll wait for reviews and feedback first so that they can reasonably be sure that they'll enjoy the game.

Minecraft and the success of low budget games just shows that gameplay is still what makes a game great, not graphics. Too many developers focus on graphics and so forth and wonder why their broken game with poor gameplay isn't selling. Focus on the gameplay first. Off the top of my head, I can think of Sim City 4 as an example. After how many years and a few tries, no one still has been able to come up with a city builder game as good. Sim City 4 was somewhat flawed in itself, but had enough good gameplay that it was very enjoyable. Yet the new citybuilder games focus on graphics and have been largely disappointments despite having a base of citybuilder fans that obviously want a Sim City 4 type game without the minor flaws and improved graphics. You don't need to reinvent the wheel with a game, just make it better version.

 

[svdb]

[citation][nom]azxcvbnm321[/nom]Forgive me but does Cloud based gaming include services like Steam? [/citation] Steam isn't cloud based (yet). Cloud based games are the same as any cloud based software: they physically reside on the cloud provider's servers and they execute and run there, they are never installed or run locally on your machine. You might have to install a "client" software which acts as a remote viewer or console to whatever the game is doing on the server, or your browser might have a plugin which serves the same purpose. For now with Steam you have to physically download the game and install it on your rig.

 

[alidan]

[citation][nom]svdb[/nom]So if I want the full game, which is what I'd get on a DVD or via Steam, it'd already cost me anywhere between $40 and $60 after 4 months worth of subscription, whereas otherwise the DVD or Steam version would be mine forever for the same price. So what is this cloud business model really for? For short lived throw-away games? Or to suck the live$ out of ya?[/citation]

no, you dont pay for the game at all anymore, with everquest its hard to explain unless you played it.

they lock higher end content from you, on a free you can go up to level 90, but the character would be useless, and on 5$ a month, you can go to 75, but again further than that you would be useless.

with tribes, you can, i believe, unlock everything in game, and untill you really start getting good at the game, most of the extras dont matter, but once you get good, you can either pay to unlock a class you want, or earn it in game, and the way that game is balanced it isnt a pay to win type of game, along with blacklight retribution, because almost everything you want can be unlocked in game.

now lets go at it another way, free to play means that someone will always be playing it unless you totally screw up, ever play blacklight tango down? at the time it was released, i considered it among, if not the best fps i ever played, but because it was 15 or 20$, and a fps, no one played it. you were lucky if you didn't have to wait 4 hours to play the game. most non big name fps games are like this, where the servers are dead after a month, f2p guarantees that you always have someone to play with.

i wont say that free to play doenst have flaws, and cant be pay to win, but you take the good with the bad, and in almost every free to play i have played, so long as you dont royally suck, its never a pay to win.

 

[alidan]

[citation][nom]svdb[/nom]So if I want the full game, which is what I'd get on a DVD or via Steam, it'd already cost me anywhere between $40 and $60 after 4 months worth of subscription, whereas otherwise the DVD or Steam version would be mine forever for the same price. So what is this cloud business model really for? For short lived throw-away games? Or to suck the live$ out of ya?[/citation]

one last thing, because i dont think i made it clear.

everquest has what, 16 or 17 expansions, so you could have payed 560$ just for the game, and not the monthly bill of 10-15$ a month, so from beginning to now, you could have payed 2000$ for the game. untill recently, EQ wanst a free to play, and even than, level 1-60, what they give you for free, is some of the best that game has to offer, hands down.

 

[svdb]

[citation][nom]alidan[/nom]one last thing, ...[/citation]Thanks for clarifying. That puts things in perspective indeed. In a way it feels a little bit like back in the days of share-ware when you could get a bunch of disquettes for free in your mailbox with the option to buy the game if you liked it. Only now you'd rent it to get to the next level. You can still play cult games like Commander Keen, today but as game publishers become mega corporations and business models shift, I wonder if that will still be the case for future cult games...

 

[alidan]

[citation][nom]svdb[/nom]Thanks for clarifying. That puts things in perspective indeed. In a way it feels a little bit like back in the days of share-ware when you could get a bunch of disquettes for free in your mailbox with the option to buy the game if you liked it. Only now you'd rent it to get to the next level. You can still play cult games like Commander Keen, today but as game publishers become mega corporations and business models shift, I wonder if that will still be the case for future cult games...[/citation]

games designed around single player will never work in a free to play model, so you got no worries there.

games that are designed around multiplayer, thats where you will see the f2p shift happen, mainly because the games are built for multiplayer, but if they arent a call of duty, or some other insanely popular game (cant think of pc fps games) the multiplayer end of it effectivly dies, i know some games are really old and are still being played today, but usualy just by the higher end players, and even than a small number.

f2p when designed right isnt pay to win, but you will get pay to will till they figure their crap out. right now, tribes, and blacklight retribution arent pay to win exactly, but they do give some perks to the impatient, most of the pay elements are for people who don't play long, or want cosmetic changes, many mmos that go f2p have shifted from a monthly fee over to cosmetic changes, the only ones that have monthly fees attached to them are ones that were designed without f2p in mind at all and needed a shift to f2p to live.

personally i want multiplayer to go f2p for every game, if you buy the game, you get everything, if you f2p it, you pay for things that come with the game. that way the multiplayer is for everyone, and servers stay full longer.

 

[s997863]

the end times. dark clouds in my future ...

it may be the way things are going but I don't have to like it.