Former Nintendo Of America President Reggie Says The Future Of Games Is In The Cloud

As long as there is still some way for me to be able to play the game physically or at least have ownership of the game I'm fine with this future; provided my internet providers don't jack up the prices.

"Do you think the future of gaming is in the cloud?"

My answer : HELL NO !!

My body is not ready for cloud-based gaming.

Definitely a future but I don't want it to be THE future, and I don't think it will ever become that for enthusiasts. I mean, physical music and movies and books are still a thing, even if they shrunk in relevance.

Not as long as data caps and input lag are still issues for large swaths of the population trying to stream their games.

Fine as an option, no thanks as the only option.

Dont want to rain on his parade but gaming is in trouble if it is.

With how hard it seems Stadia flopped and how little it delivered on what it promised (4K 60fps) on most games, it looks to me that the entire gaming landscape being cloud-focused is something we won’t see for many years to come

Plot twist: Reggie went to join the dark side and became a representative of Google Stadia.

Even if download and streaming speeds get to a point of somehow eliminating lag, I doubt connections will ever be 100% stable. Also, imagine the processing power needed to stream all these games across millions of gamers; that level of power can't be good for the environment unless we somehow find 100% clean energy that can be effective on this level. Also, and I know this might sound petty, I doubt I'm the only one who doesn't like the idea of having to pay monthly subscriptions to play the software I bought. Yes, there are monthly electricity bills and shelter expenses, but already having to pay for stuff doesn't mean you're going to be fine paying for more stuff that you didn't used to have to pay for.

I don’t like it and I don’t want it, but he’s probably right. Given enough time and how business works, it’s probably likely to happen. All it’ll take is for one to do it successfully. Look at paid online service, paid dlc, microtransactions. Music and tv/movies are just the start, over time video games will be the next victim. Hell, Nintendo’s already doing it with NES and SNES online.

The future? Just like how we thought mobile gaming back then was so innovate only to be swarmed by millions of the same free-to-play money grabbing pieces of trash? Please.

Maybe it can be the future, but only if it's done right. That might just be wishful thinking, however.

@DrDaisy
No, you are most certainly not the only one

As another option it’s great

It’ll be great for big companies but I don’t see how it’s going to be great for consumers especially if companies are allowed to produce games and host them. There’s a reason why Hollywood studios aren’t allowed to own theaters

The technology and capabilities are already there, but we need quite some time before it's a smooth and consistent experience.

But when considering that download speeds can vary greatly depending on the country and their respective laws and infrastructure, there's no way we can expect a level playing field.

And with net neutrality being pushed aside here in the US, having each gaming platform function better using one specific internet company over another is a very real threat.

Cloud gaming is inevitable in certain ways, and I doubt they will wait for the technology to catch up to the concept.

I’ve gamed and been a computer nerd for over 30 years, my father longer than that. We both foresaw the cloud long ago, so yeah it’s the future. Not one I, or others exactly want, but unfortunately it’s the best business sense. Companies will always go the route that provides them the most revenue.

That said, I’d be willing to accept it if all devices were Switch-like in design, and the cloud provided ways to game at high end rez and frame rate while online. But also offer a low rez option should the internet go down, or you don’t have access to a local wifi.

This would mean all systems have at least a cpu/gpu capable of low-mid level output, as well as an SSD/Flash cart capable of storing multiple games. This I could accept, and a contract that guarantees I have access to the games I buy for a very long time.

Only if we can defy the laws of physics - otherwise there will always be input lag.

Personally, I like being able to play on the bus, planes, and when I’m overseas - that doesn’t sound doable with cloud streaming

Reggie's body got corrupted by Google Stadia.

Ok boomer!

Yeah, it’s a part of the future for sure. Just like e-books vs physical, there will be users of one and users of the other. I guess it just depends which side you fall down on but I don’t think either method will disappear.

Thanks, but, NO Thanks!

I know that in a "business" way, streaming can be simpler, "cheap" and also have more control of the game (no hacks, no piracy probably), however, a game that can only be played when needed Internet connection and that the server of that game is available really will not be "eternal" and therefore, those games will probably be "disposable games", without value and without being able to play to future generations because very likely, each game, after certain years, this will be eliminated when the server is turned off, and it is hard to believe that companies will keep a game for several years; really we already live it with some games that are simply unplayable, because even if we have the game installed on the device / console, if its server is turned off, it is not possible to play it forever.
That's why, in my opinion, I don't like the idea

I know that the advantages would no longer consume physical space (cartridge, cards, CDs), or virtual space (memory in hard drive), no more discarded plastic and a game without hacker problems, but, how I mentioned, because the truth, I would like to have the game with me and play it without the need of so many "access doors"

@tseliot how about you shut up with that irritating overused insult?

we will just see what happens.

I always have time for Reggie.
Current technology is not yet ready for most of us to genuinely enjoy cloud gaming.
But I believe one day it will happen and will become the norm. Either that or engineers will finally figure out how to shrink high-end GPUs enough to fit into a phone.

Cloud gaming most certainly is the future. I've been doing it for my PC with Shadow and it's fabulous. It's nice not having to stress over needing to upgrade parts or parts going bad.

I don't think it needs to replace physical gaming though, both can coexist.

You will give up retail box for streaming eventually no matter how much you reject it now.

Just like DVD/Blu-ray, books, music CD, they are all dinosaurs.

I don't think local media is going anywhere, but once the availability of the tech expands a bit, I definitely think cloud gaming is going to have a massive impact on the market. Launch foibles notwithstanding, Stadia works and works really well, and other services like the XCloud Beta or PS Now or the Shadow.tech cloud PC's have also proven that the capability is there for users who have the connection and the bandwidth.

I love my Switch - probably my favorite console of all time - but I took my Stadia controller and Chromecast 450 miles this week and plugged it into a TV in the house I'm staying in, got it on their WiFi and was playing AC: Odyssey in 10 minutes and it was barely different from playing it locally. That's gonna be more than good enough for a LOT of people, especially once Stadia's 1080p "just buy the games" free tier launches next year.

Convenience counts for a lot, and the notion of "don't buy a PS5 or a Xbox X or a new PC, just click here to own the game and play it right now" is gonna hook a whole lot of people.

Because we all can afford to blow our data caps in one sitting of 4k gaming, while never being able to have privacy, or personal ownership!

Wrong the future is digital. But not in cloud processing.

Stadia will be another catastrophic failure.

The internet is riddled with corruption and price gouging and monopoly and CENSORSHIP.

No way will we trust companies to "do the right thing." Nor should we.

Like people keep saying millions of times: Cloud gaming should just be A future. Not THE future.

We still have cable and satellite tv

It's going to be a very long time before it's part of my future, I have my current gen consoles and so I'll have a PS5 or X series which will last for the best part of a decade and I doubt the Switch is the last console Nintendo will release. So I'm going to be playing games natively for quite a long time to come and I can't think of any benefits for cloud based gaming for my needs and wants

I'm sorry Reggie but I highly & seriously disagree with that opinion, streaming does not sound nor feel like the right path to take for future gaming...

"we don't have unlimited resources" my BUTT!! (sorry, I'm still salty about that)

So many people saying it's not the future but probably have never actually tried it. I played the entirety of Arkham Knight on my 2012 macbook thanks to cloud streaming. Even with the amount of rain in that game it handled pretty damn well indeed. I know it seems like it can't possibly be without input lag but you guys really need to try it to believe it. I dare say that cloud streaming on my mac had better latency than that of a HD TV.

Despite all this though... I do think stadia looks like a total failure. I've been using the nvidia geforce now beta and it's amazing, and you can actually play games you ALREADY own.

I don’t think physical media will go anywhere. If anything there might be a silver lining to this. Look at vinyl record shops nowadays full of new and used records going for affordable prices. It’s there because the market still demands it.

I imagine that is the future of physical video games media, because there will always be a market for it. Grandmas and grandpas who grew up with their games will be selling them off, and perhaps even companies like Capcom or Nintendo (whatever they will be in 20-30 years) making new physical copies of older games. You also have to consider the all “clone” consoles like the Analogue Nt and Retron 5 and how well they’ve done. You won’t need the original hardware because there will be new duplicate consoles that can play the games.

This is an optimistic outlook but I think it’s a distinct possibility.

There will always be an aficionado/ collector scene for video games, just as there is one for music and movies.

If so is the case, i wil no longer be a gamecollector.....

I love Reggie, and he’s right, but not now. I suppose that’s why he didn’t say any time soon. I don’t see digital only for at least 5yrs more minimum.

I get it. Why would dev’s pay for a disc or cartridge if they don’t have to, but that time isn’t here yet. Thank god. I’m a physical disc/cartridge junkie. I hope it’s longer, but I know it’s coming. I can admit discs and cartridges are wasted materials in the future dare I say. It’s true.

A future I have no interest in. Reggie can have it.

Same thing we been doing with RainWay and SteamLink. And they hit or miss depending on Wifi or LTE strength.

Using Microsoft Xcloud on and off on my commute/travels. And it lets me sync FORZA to my local home machine so I can play local maxed when home.

That "combo" approach for now is the right idea.

I believe the future of gaming is digital and cloud, which includes VR. There will be streaming subscriptions that you will pay on top of buying access to play a game. Might be cheaper to stream it vs like buying digital via xbox, switch etc and installing it. I don't see how streaming will be the only thing available, especially, how people like playing games on vacation, riding the train etc. Like phones for example, I wonder if cell towers could keep up with streaming with a ton of people streaming games. Via wireless, there would be input lag for sure for phones. There's no buffering with real-time in games because it's like live. Also, my biggest pet peeve with digital and streaming is if that company goes bankrupt or shuts down, then all that stuff you bought is gone.

I feel like as tech moves farther forward, the main obstacle to porting a game to a handheld device, a mobile phone, or even a Smart TV will be a lack of optimization. Heck, you can even see it now with games like WWE 2k 18 on Switch where they made most of the wrong choices (like keeping the large crowds of 3D people) on a rushed port.

If the planetwide low-orbit satellite internet, or the quantum internet, is completed relatively soon.

And if people accept the removal of the word 'personal' from 'Personal Computer'.

Then sure, cloud based gaming will be a thing.

Cloud gaming allows games companies to cut out the middleman, the production, the unsold inventory, the delivery of product, repairs to faulty consoles, allows them to never have a shortage of copies, and to keep control of the sale price. OF COURSE they want it to be the future.

But I think it’ll have a hard time convincing my generation to give up whole bunch of our consumer rights, so 10 years is a big ask.

this is the writing on the wall.. it’s been for a while now.. Nintendo fans out of all game fans seem to be the most stubborn when it comes to this

@MrGawain you are absolutely correct. All companies have been looking to cut those costs.

And this generation of gamers isn’t the future.

And our physical games will eventually be unusable. Either rot or deterioration, leaky capacitors, dead batteries, dead lasers, etc.

Don’t get me wrong, I have hundreds of game carts/cards and hundreds of game/movie/music discs. I avidly collect audio cassettes, LPs, and my favorite: minidiscs. But I also have hundreds of legitimate digital purchases, stream music and movies to my phone and tvs. My brand new car doesn’t have a cd player (only streaming, sirius xm, downloaded to phone and Blutooth/USB connection).

We aren’t the future.

Just no.
This is not Netflix. The user base is different, the costs are different, the issues are different.

Why centralise gaming? It makes no sense. Hardware isn't that expensive ... And as we see on mobile, the public are happy to "game" ... As long as it's completely free, and completely dumbed down. But even those games run on the devices.

When will we see mobile games running via the cloud? ... Never. Because it doesn't make sense. And it makes less sense for gaming.

Cloud gaming is a future where gaming is dead

I love owning and collecting hardware and games.
Goodbye to that hobby if everything goes cloud service...

It probably is the future, but only because the modern industry has become corporate, sloppy and takes greedy short cuts. I will always prefer to own a game complete on a cart.

Just like most people have to pay rent instead of owning a house,
and just like most people have to pay a monthly electricity bill instead of having their own self-sustainable power generator,
this is another step forward in taking away something from the masses in favor of a draining subscription. To hell with that!

Stop moving the industry forwards and the consumers backwards with your business drivel, Reggie Kong, or I demand forever that you produce us all a physical translated copy of MOTHER 3 for free!

My test for game streaming will always be Thumper. Once that game is playable via stream, I'll know the tech is ready!

@PBandSmelly “What a horrible night to have a curse... “

I'd of said he was right until not long ago, I've now tried xcloud and nvidias streaming service and latency is a real thing. It might work in urban settings where buildings are closer to their cabinets but in more only semi-rural environments, or suburbs, as those lines get longer the service gets worse. Maybe 5G will make the difference, but I've scene that fiber connections that can handle multiple 4k streams can't do game streaming of this nature.

Our bodies are not ready for streaming services in this lifetime

@Kriven They'll never get total control, and it'll take another 15-20 years before they get close. I'll be 60+ by that time and will just stick with my rebuilt up physical library of Nintendo and backed up PC games.

@SKTTR "Just like most people have to pay rent instead of owning a house"

That's not true in the UK.

Xbox is doing quite well with their streaming business I think. Some people might not like it, but the pendulum sure is swinging that way.

Stop saying what you want as if it's what we want, industry. Especially when your main product is mostly successful due to portability, and what you want is dependent on stable wireless connection everywhere. And fun in games shouldn't be, nor should anyone have control over pushing addictive time-based systems -including but not limited to subscriptions- on an already susceptible "consumer base". "Anytime, anywhere", remember? Not only where headache inducing wireless connections are more readily available than oxygen, and real connection is a conspiracy theory.

Remember when VR was going to take over gaming?

It was going to be huge....they were so wrong.

@NoTinderLife
I have a lot of physical games in retail boxes.
I'm so proud to get those items with my own money.
I'm dinosaur but a smart dinosaur.

He is absolutely right though. But this future won't be for at least 10-20 years. Right now games still fit a single Blu-Ray disc. But that will change. By then you are going to have to stream them.

I think the PS5 and XBOX Series X will be the last disc based console generation. Nintendo might still have a future in the memory card based consoles (like the Switch) but if 5G is out globally and is stable and fast enough, you will get game streaming directly to your Switch (or what it will be called)

@GamerDad66 VR is still going to be huge, as soon as the headset requirement is dropped.

It will happen eventually, but I doubt anytime soon. Older generations die out, younger ones who don’t have the attachments to the physical aspects will take their place.

Well you'd think nintendo would have a easier time delivering streaming services. Their users are satisfied with 900p 60fps games. That's got to be easier to stream than 4k 60fps. But what do I know.

It's obviously the future, but not until after physical is dead.

Due to physical contraints real-time online games will never work in the cloud.

@AnnoyingFrenzy But it won't, if these companies manages to make cloud gaming a success where the majority use them to play games, the physical editions will just be a memory. And we will be left in the dust, companies benefit way more from cloud gaming then people buying physicall edition. And after that I would just give it some time until we all are accepting policies that basically say we don't own any it and have no rights. Then suddenly you get the EA state where the companies can remove your license if its inactive over a certain period of time. If you give them a hand they will take the whole damn arm.

@sanderev If 5G becomes a trend then there won't be much of a world to use it in considering its been proven that 5G network disrupts the bees and birds brain signals causing them to die, same with whales which is why we have so many incidents now of sea animals stranding. 5G will be the death of us.

Little Correction:

"The Future of the Company which works in videogame is in the cloud, cause we need to make more money selling at the same price and without any physical production".

No way for me. Sorry.

@DrDaisy Scientists have already come to the conclusion that the G network like 5G is really bad for certain animals' habitats. Though politicians overruled this and say there was nothing to it. There were an event where several hundred, I think even thousands of scientists signed a letter of warning to the UN. Warning about the dangers of the 5G network. So it's definitely real no matter how much people want to dig their head in the sand.

The future of gaming is in my hands, where I can hold it, mould it, own it, and not have it disappear or taken away from me on someone else's say-so.

@TAndvig
Wow.
Is 5G network so dangerous for certain animals and us ?

@retro_player_22 Wareggie

Google Stadia's disastrous launch isn't doing game streaming any favors.

Please no. What if cloud servers go out? You'll never be able to play those games again at that point. I want to be able to own my games, thank you very much.

It's always scary to go to something new. It's moreso with cloud gaming because of the disappearance of physical media that many of us have been used to. I'm not a fan of losing my discs and cartridges, but I do believe it's the future, and I do believe it'll be forced on all of us eventually.

The thought of not being able to own cartridges is sad. Unfortunately, the new generation of gamers would rather own digital and not have to switch out a cart or disc. As they get older (and get corporate jobs at gaming companies), companies with probably phase out physical to save money.

@AnnoyingFrenzy I guess if I could down load the game onto a memory card of some sort, own it, and be able to put that card into anyone else's Switch (for example), then that's like owning the cartridge, (minus the pretty box)….then I guess that's something...

@Sebatrox I'd buy a VCR today and VHS tapes if I could.

Complete, full games made to be sold for a fixed price is an absolute requirement for me. Should gaming evolve into a "service," I'll likely just turn into an old system collector and "retro" gamer.

@tseliot Oh, so one bad statement automatically invalidates ALL the good will he's had over the years?

Please, get a life. You disagree with Reggie and that's perfectly fine.. but let's try to move beyond ad nominee attacks, mmkay?

I mean... he's still a businessman. Streaming allows publishers to control most of the revenue stream AND eliminate piracy. I don't like it - and don't it'll take off unless MS can prove that XCloud actually works first - but the logic is at least sound.

@westman98 xCloud with Game Pass, buddy. Stadia was always going to die a horrible death... let's wait to see how an ACTUAL Netflix for games does first.

Translation: you’ll never own another game ever again.

Part me hopes not because that means we'll likely always get a little bit of lag (even a bigger issue in VR, which is all I really passionately care about right now to be honest), we'll ultimately have basically no ownership of our games at all (very worrying to me that companies can just take away what we've already paid for as they see fit--and we'll all have legally agreed to it just to play the games in the first place), we'll have to sign up to insidious user accounts and EULAs and so on, and just a bunch of other things I don't like about digital and beyond.

As another option, fine, but only as another option.

For cloud gaming to truly take off, data caps need to be removed by ISPs, server farms need to be established all around the country (at least in US) to minimize input latency, owner ship rights and processes clearly defined and are consumer friendly. Lastly, infrastructure needs to be in place to get this experience to homes in rural places not just the urban/suburban/metropolitan areas. So I give it another 30 years at least for the states.

@Kriven Corporations need customers, so if the customers don't put up with their crap and speak with their wallets, then the corporations are left out in the desert, or down the drain, so the corporations definitely do not always get what they want by default.

Having said that, the younger gamer crowd is unfortunately less and less attached to physical media, and have no idea about ownership rights or longevity of their gaming catalog, which is a really sad thing, because ultimately, it'll be them that will decide this bleak future.

I guess we experienced gamers need to educate them concerning the crucial importance of several of these things...

No!!!!!! Subscription services and cloud based models are bad for consumers. “Give us your money for access to content.” Once you stop you have nothing to show for the money you’ve spent. Its a power-play by corporations to force consumers to rent instead of buying.

I get it. Its their content. They have every right to do what they want and decide what access they grant to the content they own. But its not good for the consumer, or creating great experiences for the gamer. Its a consolidation of power and a fleecing of consumers.

There’s my doom and gloom forecast for the day!

I personally feel something like game pass will be the future... sure you might have your big AAA titles like Mario and Zelda but as far as virtual console and things, a game pass will be it. 10 bucks for all the SNES and N64 and GameCube titles? I’d be okay with that

@TurboTEF HaHA! Yes! This makes me feel alright about my backlog.

I mean, as a PS4 owner mainly due to Remote Play alone, I'd be a hypocrite to scoff at game streaming. But it equally helps keep your head out of the, ahem, clouds. I certainly see cloud gaming becoming more topical in future, but I estimate it as a rather distant future. Especially being a citizen of a second world country which got 4G in 2016. No part of the necessary infrastructure will become easily accessible and easily affordable all across the board overnight. And that will take even longer if the industry wants its posterior covering both of the chairs that are "cloud gaming" and "4/8/16K".

As an advocate of PlayStation now, this can only be a good thing. Technology develops so quickly that it may seem impossible now but we'll get there quicker than you think. If you told me I'd be able to play a game of the scale of breath of the wild back when I was still playing on a Gameboy I'd call you crazy...but that's where we're at now. Game streaming will continue to be refined and, will become a very compelling option that the majority of gamers will come to accept.

Your kids will probably look at a memory card or a physical game the same way you look at a floppy disk or a VHS.

He does have a point really how cloud gaming will likely become bigger in the future but right now the technology just isn't there at the moment especially in places like America where alot of people's internet isn't exactly what you would call gaming friendly

With Sony and MS using PS Now and Xcloud, respectively, I'm inclined to agree with Reggie.

@Anti-Matter I mean who wants to own their games, and without the need of internet/severs to play them?

also speaking of which why even bother making hardware that can run high graphical games, when you can use any old phone or something wi fi and just stream it from some high tech computer/console in some factory or wherever they keep them

all I want is something like the Switch or Vita but with more power and the option to plug it into a TV when needed

@NoTinderLife Last I checked DVD/Blu-ray was still a thing

That's fine if it's cloud based but I'm only staying on Nintendo to play whatever future system cloud based system Nintendo has.

@nessisonett Really good point.

Cloud gaming is beneficial to game companies as it stops piracy, the second hand market and people lending friends games etc instead of them buying them. You can see why they’re forcing this route...

Question is what really are the benefits to the consumer? I can’t think of many.

@Anti-Matter Yes, please read about this. https://www.globalresearch.ca/5g-wireless-technology-is-war-against-humanity/5679372 This is one article, there are others better ones. But this should give you some sort of idea about the dangers of 5G.

Sorry big Reg but you are wrong. There will be streaming but it is not the future, it will simply be a section of overall gaming. It will be more than a decade before technological issues get resolved such as Internet speeds, hardware compatibility and preventing hacks.

A person I casually know within ATT which owns a good portion of the supporting backbone says junctions are now failing for copper and they are changing over to fiber as they go but the internal estimate is closer to 30 years to get 80-85% complete changeover.

@TAndvig wtf dude this looks like fake news, I searched about the author's name and only weird blogs showed up
Also turns out globalresearch is blacklisted on wikipedia

• Cloud(server farms)
  Controls your data, Sells your data
  Can Bann you at will
  ISP Throttle or CAPs
  Data Privacy Issues
  HUGE Lags-they haven't fixed this and never will
  Go OverSeas and what now?????
  No deletion of your DATA they own and use it at their pleasure.
  NOT Everyone can afford Internet-they come in pricey Packages and they know it. ****HINT HINT*****
  Update: you pay ISP and Streaming subscription two payments not one.
  Anyone paying for my subscription then I am game. **hint**
• vs Physical
  Your ownership
  Play when, wherever or what Country your in
  Sell or give away
  Expensive to buy but you Own it
  Only DLC and updates on MicroSD storage
  requires Internet for updates
  Room need for the Game Carts storage
• vs Digital
  Tied to your Digital Account
  No Sharing nor Giving away
  Cheap but you don't own the game
  aka Nicalis has showed it can remove a Digital Game without warning......
  No Physical game but takes alot precious MicroSD storage
  requires internet for updates

NEED I say more about Cloud.....

Say that when my IS went down the other night.

Not an outcome I'd want but I think Reggie is probably right here, mainly because of xCloud. Microsoft isn't rushing xCloud to launch but instead allowing people to sign up for beta testing and a result lots of people will be able to give their feedback so the finished product is better quality.

I wouldn't particularly be surprised if Switch gets xCloud to make up for not being able to run PS5/Xbox Series X multiplatform games.

I think the people who are complaining about a digital future are as pathetic as the people clamoring for a pro console. Just be happy Nintendo is even willing to sell you anything. They are doing you a favour.

@MarioFan02
Oh, I have no doubt that XCloud will be successful (or at least far more successful than Stadia).

But it's telling that game streaming may only find success when paired with a subscription service that offers a ton of old games, rather than selling itself off of its ability to play brand new titles.

@ToonStuff
It's way to early to say that Stadia flopped. It certainly didn't have a successful launch, but Google knows that Stadia is a long term investment.

Every company that is doing game streaming services, knows that this isn't quite ready for prime time yet. So many people do not have access to the proper internet infrastructure yet, so game streaming is a long term investment for the next decade.

But I actually bought Stadia founders edition, because I have a super fast fiber connection, without any data caps. That is actually quite common here in northern Europe.

So there are some areas of the world that are ready for game streaming already. Northern Europe, Japan and South Korea. Most of the US isn't ready yet, but eventually they will get there.

I am actually quite impressed with the technical side of Stadia. So are most Stadia customers I have talked with.

Under the right conditions, the games are running smooth like on console with no feeling of input lag at all. Google solved the biggest issue about game streaming.

Sure they under delivered on the 4K/60fps thing, but the games still run really well and looks great. I am certain that they will deliver 4k/60fps doing the next year or so. But the biggest problem like input latency and stuttering, they actually solved.

Stadia is still missing so many features yet, and has under 30 games to buy and play. So it really feels like a beta product for people with good internet connection.

For me it's clear, that Google is handling this as a long term investment. They are just trying to get a foot into the game industry, and wants to build their service up slowly over the next year's, while the world is getting ready for game streaming.

Right now they are under heavy fire from all sides. All gamer fanboys just hate them, and they don't really have a platform in the industry. It's a shame, because the technology behind Stadia is quite impressive.

I am also looking forward to see how well xCloud is going to be when it really launces. It's not running as well as Stadia yet, but it could get there. MS has a better platform in the game industry, than Google. It could be their advantage, but I wouldn't rule out Google and Stadia yet. I just think they take it slowly.

@westman98 @MarioFan02
I think it's to early to rule out Stadia yet.

On the technical side, they are ahead of xCloud in the moment, and I have tried both. I have no input latency on Stadia that I can sense, but I do have a little on xCloud. But eventually MS will probably get there.

Right now Stadia feel like an early access beta product. They have under 30 high profile games on there service, but this could change fast.

If Stadia gets to much competition from xCloud regarding a subscription service that gives access to a big catalogue of old games, I could imagine that Google would try to do the same. I do not think it would be so defficult for them to launch 200 old games in the cloud for such a service.

Right now it seems that Google is just taking it slowly, and are trying with a different model. They can't do much else with there current limited catalogue of games. But all this can change really fast.

In the end, xCloud and Stadia will push each other, and this will benefit consumers.

What's the benefit for the customer? Giving companies even more power over when and where and how they can play games they paid for? Lowest common denominator gaming because everything has to run on every device? Even if we manage to make the technology available everywhere some day, that's hardly what I would call quality entertainment.

It does seem to be the case that the industry is pushing this to be the case. I do not agree with it, nor do I like it, but this is most cost effective - for the industry, not the player.

The industry saves millions of dollars on packaging, shipping, physical disks and cartridges, and hardware will be phased out. At most you buy a controller and sync it up with a device of your choice that supports the streaming service you choose.

You own nothing, you need to be online at all times, you need a high speed ISP, a streaming subscription, and either unlimited, or a massive data cap. Game devs save money, but you will have to pay monthly if you want to play 2 hours a week, or 5 hours a day.

They can hold your save data at ransom too, if you want to unsubscribe for a month because real life will make it impossible to game for a while, and you want to save money, who knows if they will keep your data?

@sanderev I don't think it'll overtake physical and digital though.
At the very least, streaming is going to coexist with both physical and digital.

@Heavyarms55
You are only talking about the negatives, and you are certainly right about some of those.

But there are also some benefits for the player, even if you do not want to recognize those.

With a pure streaming service, you really do not need think about buying new hardware after you boght the initial setup like a controller. A streaming service will get upgraded continually, without you paying more.

You can also play all your games on all kind of devices, and you are not locked to specific hardware or a console.

With a service like Stadia, you actually do not need a subscription. There will be a free version, were you just buy your games, and can play them instantly in 1080p. Other game streaming services will require a subscription, but not all.

You also do not need to think about storage anymore, long download times and install processes. You just play your games instantly.

Google has promised, that you always will have access and can play the games you bought on Stadia previously. So no problems anymore with consoles that aren't backwards compatible, like PS3 to PS4.

These are some of the benefits for the consumers, if they are going to use a service like Stadia.

The way companies are allowed to divide up areas and throttle connection speeds in the US, not soon in my opinion. Not as the only way. There are evenings I can't get my laptop to connect to my PS4 via Remote Play. Imagine if streaming was the only option.

@TAndvig well that escalated quickly

Not sure if that's a elaborate troll or not, but that site has like conspiracies about vaccines, global warming and stuff

When it comes to 5g, that site swings from 'nobody knows its actual effects' to 'I had bad health for half a year, definitely it was the 5g'

P.s.: I hope we and the whales and the birds will survive lol, I get where you're coming from, this is the same to pesticide stuff isn't it, I didn't think much about it, just was suspicious of the over-the-top text
But yeah, taking a look, even 3g has negative effects, that's... worrying

@ToonStuff not just that, but onlive flopped as well. We got games in an unlimited packages these days. Save Nintendo who's usually behind on the curve yet is still innovative somehow. Software dumb but hardware genius I guess. Though I'm glad Nintendo has tons of digital sales these days; I just got jamestown, gekido and exorder for like $20+ tax. Just wish platinum points were useful for the switch, but I enjoy the 3ds themes.

At a low price, I don't really mind the whole licensing/digital stuff. I just have to own physical stuff at a certain price range, like when I pre-ordered Dragon ball z kakarot. No way I'm paying $50+ for digital.

I'm also not really into paying online for multiplayer or to merely get super Mario maker 2 levels (which at $20 I prefer the 3ds version though you can only share locally). That would've been a cool use to make like 500 platinum points per month for switch online.

Lmao hes just positioning for a job at Google, gamers don’t see streaming as meaningful maybe that’s why he uses the more vague term of “player”. As someone who boosts about having a bit SNES library you’d think he’d understand but he also probably didn’t care to lift a finger when NOJ decided to kill Wii’s eshop.

A lot of people aren't ready for a future either that is completely digital or even streaming based in regards to gaming

But I actually have to agree with Reggie on this one
I do have a feeling that future won't come for a long time based on all three console manufacturers' dedication to traditional console gaming

Hell Microsoft is kind of pulling off the best of both worlds with Xbox Series X and its ability to be xCloud ready from day one, and services like Game Pass are honestly really cool ways to handle subscription based gaming

@dres I'm not going to claim there are zero benefits for the player, but they don't come close to the negatives. The simple fact that you no longer own your games is enough to make it a bad deal. I can still plug my N64 back in and play some Mario 64 no problem and I haven't paid a single cent to keep it all these years. But if you want to go back and revisit a game you streamed years ago, you just gotta hope that the service still has it. And it's the same service you're still using. People like to compare this to Netflix all the time. But Netflix takes down shows and movies all the time. They lose the rights, or just take things down for unknown reasons. Imagine being in the middle of some 200 hour long massive JRPG and it gets taken down. How soul crushing would that be? Maybe you can find it on another service and start over, if you're lucky. You no longer even own hardware, you can't just run to the store and buy a new copy of the game yourself.

Not even the Regginator can make me consider a move to streaming games is a good thing. If it becomes the norm, and hardware fades away, then I'm probably just done. I will switch over to the homebrew crowd, hack my Switch and start loading up the emulators. Something I refuse to do right now, I will be all over if the time comes I can no longer own my own copies of games.

@Heavyarms55
If one day no longer physical games, i will keep busy with my old video games and pretend the streaming games are never exist.
I'm 35 on this year and assume after 30 years later (I will be 65 years old LOL, a Grandpa gamer) if streaming games become a norm, at least i still can continue my gaming hobby from my old console / handhelds (if they are still live longer).

I like a lot of stuff that Nintendo does, but if their "cloud streaming gaming service" somewhere in the future would exist then I hope it is better that their current Online service and it's "not all games support cloud saves" issue.

Dear Nintendo being unique is a good thing, but sometimes look at what the other 2 gaming companies do, because they do it fine too.

We already have problems with how much bandwidth netflix takes up already, and gaming requires more than that for the same resolution, by at least an order of magnitude. Unless they want to pay for a server close to me(not likely) and pay my ISP for a bigger line or whatever to take all the traffic an all cloud future will bring(impossible) then even if cloud gaming is the future it's going to be very short lived.

Some people live in rural areas where phone signal is an issue, let alone good internet.
Cloud based or streaming is only good if the entire world is coated in strong internet.

NO NO NO NO NO!! I knew I hated Reggie for a reason, this just put the nail in his coffin for me.

Sorry Reggie, but you're wrong on this one. We won't have world-encompassing amazing internet infrastructure within the next 50+ years for sure. The future of games is, as it always has been, in them being directly on your device, whether physical or digital. Never cloud.

@User199x For the time being. But with most game stores either closing or in financial trouble because of download purchases. And a still very limited amount of storage on a console. 1TB even 2TB fills up really quickly. You can see why publishers are moving to something that doesn't require a physical store or decentralised storage on a consumer device.

Also streaming lowers the costs of manufacturing very expensive graphics hardware and lowers the initial cost of the console.

Meaning it's easier to get more people with less money spent. But it also gives them more money because of subscription services and (if Stadia is an example for what's to come) game purchases.

There are three problems with cloud gaming:
1. Latency. This will always be an issue, but it can and will be reduced by improving the infrastructure and processing power on the server.
2. Price. Cloud gaming will never be free. Which would stop some people from signing up. You don't want to have to rely on cloud gaming just to play a single player game.
3. "Not owning the game". This will be an issue to about 0,01% of all players. But seeing how popular services as Netflix, Disney+, Apple TV+ / Music, Spotify are...

This is not going to happen in the next 4-6 years. But it will.

Cloud is good as a complement like on Xbox Series X. Games will run on the cloud until you have downloaded them but won't replace physical and downloads. Xbox Cloud for phones and tablets would be great on Switch too because of the physical buttons. Perhaps Nintendo agrees if they get a commission. That way third-party games would run and look better on Switch.

Not sure how I have only just seen this, but Reggie, that'd be some dangerous stuff you're spouting.

Cloud can possibly be a compliment to traditional gaming, but it should never replace traditional gaming. There is too much we as the consumer would lose if games relied on the cloud. (Ownership, decent quality, ability to play etc.)

Being in my late 30's I'm losing interest in gaming as is (and other forms of entertainment too) but the moment we're streaming only, Im gone. I'm so over the annual hype for certain releases, the vomit-clot of poorly produced TV-shows in quick succession, shat onto streaming platforms and other mind numbing, money making garbage. Luckily I got my MacGyver Collection to dive into, reminiscent about times long gone and read up upon hundreds of years of a literature-backlog.

Entertainment is dying.

@Heavyarms55

The concerns you are describing there are legit. But you are actually not talking about streaming, but a specific business model that is common with many streaming services. But it doesn't have to be that way with all services.

You are talking about the Netflix model, were you "rent" a big catalogue of content, and don't have any rights about that content. PS-Now is currently following this business model as well, but Google Stadia doesn't, and we do not know what model xCloud will use yet.

On Stadia, you buy your individual games, like any other digital store. And Google made it clear, that you will always have access to the games you bought previously. No matter if they remove those games from their store later, they will always be part of your collection, and you can play them. This is how Stadia works right now, and it's a completely different business model compared to Netlfix or PS-Now.

With Stadia, I should be able to play the games I just bought on the service in 10-20 years. At least that what they are promising.

So there are already different approaches to the game streaming model from current providers, and you do not have to use the model you do not like.

@dres As a wise mass murderer once said "You're far too trusting."

You seem to have an almost blind faith in these companies. Go ahead and use them if you like. Nothing you've said has absolved any of my concerns.

Streaming is not good for gamers, I've made it clear why. But to each their own.

That’s disturbing. I’m thankful I’ve amassed nearly 1000 physical games to keep me entertained when the entire video game industry collapses from this ridiculous move to cloud and digital only. Young people may laugh that off now, but you’ll see. It’s already killed major game stores (such as GameStop who is on the brink of going out of business) because there are so few physical games to sell. It’s only the beginning.

I love Reggie, but nah....

"Reggie's former employer Nintendo, is yet to fully embrace cloud gaming like Google Stadia and Microsoft's Project xCloud."

Hell, they can't even get cloud game saves down right. Let's crawl before we walk.

It would be pretty neat for a series of interviews be done on top Ex-Nintendo employees regarding some of the baffling things Nintendo does and have them speak candidly on them once and for all.

It's not my future.

I still don't understand the disconnect between entertainment industry current/former executives and reality. They're in the business. How do they not see the complete disconnection with reality of their statements? The lag and other problems are related to real world physics, not "waiting for technology to catch up", and the larger breadth of problems is related to the problem of the telecom companies themselves, their policies, their pricing, and their maintenance (or lack thereof.) Of the major fiber carriers Verizon is famous for cherrypicking only affluent areas to roll out service, and leave less affluent areas on ancient tech, and when they do roll it out, rolling it out in incomplete states, lengthy delays and downtimes, and unreliable conditions. And now they're banking entirely on wireless.

The more tech companies talk about the future being "in the cloud" the what they really mean is "we're repositioning our products to be viable only for the affluent, living in properly affluent designated areas, dependent upon the local conditions of the telco's willingness to continuously invest in the infrastructure there rather than waiting for it to get old and constantly break, like they've done for the past 100+ years, and hoping they don't price gouge, "de-prioritize traffic" while overselling capacity, continue to implement real or shadow data caps, and keep up-time without exceptionall long outages and without outages during adverse weather."

The only people who could be so obvibvious to reality are sheltered corporate executives who have never existed outside a pampered and "whatever I desire, no matter the cost" lifestyle

Reggie was winning me back, but at the end of the day, he's still a typical P&G exec.

Telcos don't work the way the entertainment industry seems to think they do. And if they're so desperate to have control over how telcos operate, they're free to buy out AT&T, Verizon, Comcast, RoadRunner, TWC, and, for that matter, T-Mobile. Then they can make the telco operate the way they want it to. Until they run out of money.

I give them 3 months.

Reggie has a point.

@Amin_Parker point is there is no point.

1. Whom pays the ISP
2. Whom pays for streaming services

Need say more.

Why is there still this aggressive push for turning gaming into a streaming service when the big Google streaming console service has been a major flop?

NO NO NO NO NO NO!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! HARD PASS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! The infrastructure isn't there yet and on top of that, not every country has great fast unlimited internet. And some that do don't offer such things affordably. Forcing us in to a streaming-only future is BAD for consumers who don't live in Los Angeles or New York. I'm Canadian, and our unlimited high speed internet is bloody expensive (because we have zero telecom competition in this country) and it's not available outside the major urban areas. Not only that, streaming requires optimal conditions to work. What if there's a major storm that knocks the internet out (hello, climate change) or there's a server failure. Well now your very expensive game system has just become a very expensive paperweight. Physical media make it possible for you to play your games to pass the time when things like this happens. Especially Nintendo Switch, with it's battery in portable/tabletop mode. In my city back in Fall 2018 we had 6 tornadoes hit on the same day that knocked out power for days. But I could at least pass the time with my Nintendo Switch and a giant portable USB battery pack. I couldn't play online but I could play offline with downloaded games & physical cartridges. If the system was limited to streaming only, it would have been useless. People don't think about that. And with climate change, power interruptions are going to happen a lot more frequently. We should never, ever, EVER go to an all-streaming future.

@DarthFoxMcCloud Streaming services are basically a no-go for travel and portables. When I was traveling around Italy last year it would have been impossible to play any games if I needed to stream everything. The few times I could get reliable internet it would be pretty slow and it usually had awkward web browser logins. Having my games installed on my handheld and being able to just play everything offline is why I was able to play them.

As for cell phones it is ridiculous trying to use much data when you are in a foreign country. The data rates are ridiculous and I had to turn off most of my phones services to avoid having to pay excessive fees. The thought of streaming anything was an absolute no go, and that is if I were lucky enough to have a good high speed connection. I could barely justify using much more than Google Maps and checking my email.

As for home use I think there is the inevitable data cap issue. Luckily I don't have to deal with that where I live but where my dad lives there is this absurd 1TB data cap implemented and it basically means you get ripped off if you use your internet too much. It makes downloading a lot of games a total pain, and streaming anything in 4k can make you hit that cap a lot faster than you would imagine. Streaming games with such an issue sounds like it would be miserable.

To be clear, when I referred to monthly subscriptions, I was talking about internet service, not just game-related subscriptions. I know a lot of us have internet services anyway, but that doesn't mean I think it should be a requirement.

@YozenFroghurt 32meg isn't really that great for a streaming only future. It's pretty much the bare minimum for 4k streaming if anything else in the home is using data, and even that is kind of low. 100Mb/s is really the minimum realistic goal. Once they start pushing 8k that's wildly insufficient.

On top of that, keep in mind that level of 4k streaming is heavily COMPRESSED 4k streaming. Not pixel-perfect like locally generated 4k output, so it's an inferior product. And when it comes to caps, in the US, Comcast is most famous with their 1TB/mo cap. (But you can pay them $50/mo on TOP of your existing $70-100/mo to remove that limit....but you're still not allowed to use "too much." )

Keep in mind Netflix says 4k streaming uses 7GB per HOUR. And that's heavily compressed 4k.

And none of this touches on the even larger issue for gaming: latency. Even a gigabit cable connection may be latent, or intermittently latent depending on the infrastructure you're going through, and on cable, who else along that pipe is using it. And in the US with the telcos looking to wireless for their future of broadband, you have the inherent latency of radio - defined by physics itself - to put between the A button and the spike trap.

In the right conditions and places it does work fine, but it's just silly for these executives to pretend the very real limitations are going to vanish in a decade just because they want it to. Even they have no sway with the big telcos. Telcos are forces of nature. They do as they please, and nobody will tell them otherwise.

@JayJ Steady, predictable quarterly earnings, elimination of retail middle-men competition and discounts, price controls, direct-sales channel, no manufacturing and distribution operation, no distributors, tariffs, warehousing, no hardware R&D and life cycle management (and distribution chains) no hardware vendors to deal with. Cut the real estate, radical reduction in staffing both direct and contracted, removal of a supply chain to manage entirely, planned obsolescence and life cycle management, continuous income from all use of your product, not just point of sale, and the ability to control prices completely. Did I mention steady revenues with all retail volatility eliminated, all at the cost of an inferior product with no consumer power whatsoever.

TL;DR Central bank investors win, consumers have no choice, it's a perfect one sided contract of top down control any business would aggressively push! I give you the final form of a free market economy: Communism!

@NEStalgia Exactly, in that future you are basically a slave to the mega-corporations.

@NEStalgia
I just wonder who asked for this stupid and ridiculous decision for streaming gaming. I guess the wannabes and the younger generations asked for and have no attachment with physical medias. We must teach them how wrong they are.

@Anti-Matter I don't think many consumers actually asked for it. Not even the younger generations. I think the companies calculated it was something that could maximize profits and they decided to start the long sales pitch of convincing everyone it's what they want. It's just working much more effectively on the young that think the internet has always been and always shall be, and don't understand the fragility of it all until it hits them.

@YozenFroghurt Actually that would go to South Korea not UK. The info provided is misleading at best.

I work at a Public Institution and when the internet goes out goes what becomes dead Weight besides those Using the Computers. The Computer and Internet. Upcoming generations talk about internet until they have no Internet and becomes unless Zombies. Can't Read or Write their own Names and I've seen it asking them to write their name and make dumbfounded looks. So tell me again how educated are they????

It all comes down to one simple "word".... PROFITs. If they really talk the talk Fiber Internet would be King now connecting World Wide.

@Anti-Matter that would be the Insulated Corporations boards CEO and Committees. They made the product and told what we want not what we should have and want.

@YozenFroghurt I don't think anyone's against having it as an option, but where you say you don't see it replacing the existing model, what Reggie and the other execs are talking about is precisely it replacing the existing model. They see the idea of buying games being retro - in the future all content is subscription delivered like cable TV (And its $100+/mo bills... or a dozen individual subscriptions.)

I think streaming is an excellent modern take on game rentals, where the tech can handle it. But it firmly needs to remain grounded in the realm of rentals, which is how you're using it, as opposed to becoming the standard distribution. In TV/film it has mostly replaced normal sales, but a passive activity like watching a 30-200 minute production doesn't have the same needs as interactive games.

He's right on both counts. Whether people like it or not, it is where mainstream gaming will end up, with physical being a niche market and far more expensive for user (like streaming music/movies VS buying physical copies of them, and also that it's not ready yet.

after how bad stadia was. i'm not sure if were ready for something like stadia again, at least for awhile.

As an option, likely yes. There are enough places in the world with good enough online infrastructure and with good enough online infrastructure, it could easily be a superior model. But I live in Michigan. There will never be good infrastructure in Michigan. Abandoning both physical and download models for only streaming means abandoning a market like Michigan where games are commonly bought but infrastructure is average. And I can't see corporations abandoning the income from every region in the world like Michigan.

@Aozz101x

Have you actually tried Stadia? I have, and it really runs well. I have no input latency, and the games runs as if I played them on console. Stadia is quite impressive, and the best game streaming service to date from a technical point of view.

Sure, they under delivered on the 4k/60fps promise. But nevertheless is it still running great. I have been playing Mortal Kombat 11 and Assassin's Creed Odyssey for several hours without any hickups whatsoever. It works fantastic under the right conditions.

@dres
"Have you actually tried Stadia?"
i haven't yet, i will likely try it after the free version is released next year. (https://www.gamespot.com/articles/google-stadia-base-the-free-non-subscription-versi/1100-6467431/) before deciding if it's something that i really need.

The day games become cloud only is the day i stop paying for games altogether.

Online only games is only acceptable if it is free, i will never pay for online only cloud based games.

I only pay for physical games, since 198X, and it is going to stay that way for as long as i live. I have never paid for online games and i have never paid for downloadable games. I buy physical and only physical games. And trust me, Nintendo is not going to survive with just free games.

@YozenFroghurt funny oh well live in one's dream world crash down eventually. No shirt off my back.

@dres "It works fantastic under the right conditions."

There's the rub. Remember those words well my padre. And whom can afford those conditions.

Your cool n all Reggie but in this case I vehemently disagree.

@ATaco Except those things were still around in the 2000s Einstein. 😒

@Tempestryke My apologies, I simply assumed that only children or younger readers wouldn't be able to see the inevitable future. Either kick and scream the whole way or just accept it, the future IS streaming games. Maybe not anytime soon but physical media will be a thing of the past. Only enthusiasts buy blue Ray's nowadays for example, most people are perfectly content streaming movies. Once technology gets to that level for everyone, physical games WILL be a thing of the past.

wrong, no AND NO, no, physical games? then you arent seeing a dime of my money end of story.

anyone being happy about this are people who love to take freedom of choice away.

@SwitchForce

Google said that the internet infrastructure in the US wasn't all ready yet for a service like Stadia, and that they hoped this would get better in the future. Stadia is an investment in the future for them.

Meanwhile the internet infrastructure in Northern Europe, Japan and South Korea are ready for game streaming now. Super fast fiber without any data caps is quite common in those areas.

I live in Denmark, and pay around 40$ a month for 200/200 Mbit/s Fiber connection without any data caps. There are actually no data caps on wired internet in most of Europe. It's mostly a US problem.

So there are plenty of people in the western world, who already have access to the "optimal conditions" for a service like Stadia. But not all are ready yet.

NA did anyone notice which country created the Internet and WWW. If Google is talking about the infrastructure then the USA is in a sorry state now.

Cloud based streaming is the future of gaming because that's what the major publishers want, and it's a future I won't be buying into. It's hard enough to find new games that interest me as it is, and I've already decided that unless something drastic convinces me otherwise, I'm not buying into the next generation. By the time everything has gone full streaming with individual subscriptions for each freaking developer, I'll still be playing my Switch, PS4, and 3DS. It's just not worth it to me to keep up with anymore.

Here's goes the muddy waters aka What is Really Stadia. Here's some other stuff they don't tell you.

1. Controller $69.00/per controller and if you buy more it cost the same aka 69x4=276+tax example. Cost like Switch Pro Controllers or Joy-Cons but then again multiple controllers up to eight per Switch-Stadia we have yet to know if this works or is possible.
2. Nothing mention about Multiple or Family accounts sharing aka Switch Mario Karts you can have up to eight on one Switch.
3. Need to pay your own ISP to have internet at home
4. Most likely have to buy a Subscription to Google Stadia to play aka Streaming Services.
5. For TV you need Chrome cast aka Google own words "If you want to use the Stadia Controller with a TV, you’ll also need a Google Chromecast Ultra (which comes bundled with Founder’s Edition)."
6. Need permission from WiFi locations - aka some are now asking you to patron their business if you want WiFi access.
7. Business WiFi isn't free and your hogging will force them to kick you off their WiFi-they don't like bandwidth hoggers.
8. Your ISP can limited or throttle or use beyond limit "Caps" pay more.

So tell me how good is Stadia now....once you start digging farther into what is really is not what they like to tell you. In the end if you live where Fiber is connected everywhere or Wifi that is 24/7 no Disruption that is great but go outside the picture and it looks very different. The Dream of Stadia doesn't work or add up once you go outside of the Box.

The moment gaming goes cloud only is the moment I'm done with contemporary gaming. If I can't truly own a game or play when and where I want because I'm tethered to the cloud, I have no use for it and I'll be retro gaming exclusively. There are so many games I haven't played that I'll be fine.

@Anti-Matter Yep. I'm not against eshop games but I'd much rather have a physical copy that has actual value.