Control's eShop Page Reminds Us About Harsh Realities Of A Cloud-Based Future

That’s a future I don’t want to live in. I hope it remains as an option, not the main source for games.

Meh. It's the equivalent of any online shooter. Also, there has to be a cost for this type of gaming. If we aren't going to pay for in the hardware then it will cost us somewhere else.

This is why Game Pass Ultimate is superior.
Costs way less, and you can choose to play natively on Xbox and PC, or stream the games.

If Game Pass sometime would ever end, you won't lose any money on it because of all the money you already saved on the sub.
Nintendo Online should get a premium tier which includes streaming games instead.

Also. I hope this single game cloud system won't be a standard for Switch, making developers put up games for streaming instead of porting them.
Vote with your wallets!

See? That's why I had what someone referred to as a "hissy fit" or some such in another article. This is genuine, grade-A bolsheviks. Hard, hard pass.

EDIT: I bought Panzer Dragoon Saga back in 98 for $25, and had it until 2017 when I sold it for $600. 19 years. Playable the entire time. Screw cloud gaming.

How much do they charge for this game for cloud only streaming?

I am too old for this. My brain glitch and explode by just thinking about it... but if I could buy a native version running on the hardware that can go "cloud mode" when I am on a fast enough wifi connection, then I might like it.

Yesterday NintendoLife interviewed the developers of Control where they said that working remotely was hard during Covid because cloud based streaming wasn’t good enough yet for their game testing.

It was a bit of an odd thing to say when trying to sell us a cloud based game.

Anyways, clouds are pretty things in the sky and places to store my pictures. They aren’t for gaming.

Didn't the cloud version of RE7 have a rental period or something similar instead of buying the game at full price? Seems like that may be the way to go here because this is very unappealing

People who rely on streaming services for other media have wandered into this as well. I like Netflix, Prime and Disney+ as much as the next person, but I don't like that I'm restricted to their relatively narrow selection of what's popular. I like films from different countries and genres, from across the last 100 years. Current streaming services merely scratch the surface of the huge tonnage of quality films made over the last 100 years. Not selling my dvd and blu ray collections anytime soon, and it's becoming increasingly difficult to find the films I want on physical release. Game streaming services are the same if they become the main way of playing at some point in the future, you're allowing companies to choose what you're able to play rather than building up a library of titles which reflect your own tastes.

I tried playing the demo again (to try the graphics mode), and was put in a queue. Had to wait 10 minutes just to be allowed to play. Imagine 'buying' the game to then be locked out as their servers are jammed? No thanks.

Honestly, this streaming thing is a joke and I hope it fails hard.

Well, then, guess I'm getting Remedy's magnum opus on Xbox. Screw this.

If they intend to pull the game after people have spent good, hard earned money on it that can't be accessed in the future then we should at least obtain a partial refund from the company involved.

You purchase a digital copy of a game, you're purchasing a licence to use said game at any time you see fit. Companies cannot, and should not be allowed to move the goal posts like this.

I'm pleased this has been highlighted as I didn't know about it prior and why I'm not going to use this cloud version and yet another reason why I'm against an all digital future.

Meh. I give €40 for games I only play once. Actually, I rarely replay games even when they cost €60 so I don't really see the difference.

I'll never support game streaming this way.

If Nintendo adds a streaming service akin to XCloud/PSNow/Stadia, I'd be tempted to try it out if reasonably priced.

I have XCloud since its now included with GamePass, which I have for another year or two because of the $1 upgrade deal from around a year ago. I honestly rarely use it, but it works surprisingly well on my internet service. I get download speeds over 100mb/s but horrible upload speeds with Xfinity.

I signed up for the free Stadia trial just to try the Immortals Phoenix Rising demo, and it worked just as well, and I enjoyed the game.

Streaming has its pros and cons, but as long as its only an additional option, I'm ok. I never want an all streaming future of games.

The biggest benefit of a Netflix of gaming on any platform is the ability to play games one would otherwise ignore. I know for certain I've played games on GamePass I never would have taken a chance on otherwise. Not only that, but the service acts as a great way to demo a game before you decide to purchase it. I've sorely missed game demos, so thats a big plus for me.

I've used GamePass to demo some great games I ended up buying on Switch.

1. As long as there are other options and the terms are clear, I am fine with it though I suspect this 1 off cloud approach won’t work long term. I see Control on Switch as an experiment that won’t scale.
2. There are going to be tradeoffs with cloud streaming. It’s not the best of all worlds. The gaming press should get ahead of it and start talking to other industries and analysts to help gamers think through what is about to happen and the consequences. I wonder how cloud streaming will affect game development. Will console games become shorter in length? (parallel with how Netflix isn’t make 7 season long series anymore — they want us captive to their platform not a particular show). Etc.

Just like all those other games rendered useless because the games aren't complete on the game card.

I've been saying it for quite a long time that this is exactly what game companies are pushing towards.

I always try to get a physical copy of a game if it's available, even at an increased price. These stream only games I think I will not be getting at all, even if it was the newest brightest flashest Zelda game.

They've already decided we shouldn't have physical games, so we can't resell them.

Now they get the power to take the game away and resell it to you at a later moment! Gamepasses, online play... All the same thing!

And this is why I am against this type of cloud gaming where you pay full price for a game that you don't own and can disappear at any time. It is totally different from a subscription like game pass.

I really hope all those cloud services asking to pay for games individually (this, stadia, etc.) fail so hard, it will put off every single publisher/dev for at least 20 years.

@ritouf
I think it gets repetitive much sooner than that, the wacky death/checkpoint system along with the health system forces you into having to play it safe by taking pot shots from behind cover and spamming throw. When you get to the first big mini gun dude who is a bullet sponge that can murder you from any range you know you’re in for a well designed game. The outdated cryptic Lost/Fringe style storytelling felt repetitive the first minute in, this might have been cool in 2010 before the mystery box trope was exposed for what it is, oh look old fashioned tapes of a scientist man talking in vague terms about something ominous but also nonchalantly never seen that before.
@ LordGeovanni5
Yes this is the end goal of game pass.

Cool, they will tell you at least 6 months in advance if the servers will shut down...the problem is that if you want to play that game in 5/10 years again you're not sure if you will be able to. Of course "Control" is available on other platforms, so in this case you will be able to play it on a PC, PS4 or Xbox One, but what if some games will be available only on cloud?

access is $40?! NO THANK YOU. This is why cloud gaming won't replace anything.

@Ventilator $39.99

I will never view cloud-based games as anything but a workaround, and I am not going to pay full price for a workaround, especially one that a) has additional prerequisites, and b) is temporary by definition.

@tka060681 Thanks. At least not full price.

It would make sense of this cloud version comes with a PC licence and that the app will support streaming from your own pc. Then I might buy into it. Otherwise: hell no!

We're transitioning to a non-ownership period in media, a both scary and intriguing possibility. Streaming for movies/music and streaming for games are two very different things though.

The first time I couldn't game bc the 360 servers were down taught me cloud gaming is just another moving part that has a chance of breaking. After that I chose to remove that chance and buy a physical copy whenever possible.

Buying digital games makes sense, paying a subscription makes sense but buying a cloud game doesn't make any sense in my opinion. Get a Series S/X to play them instead.

cartridges forever

I do wonder if this is the pathway to a much more capable new Switch? You get Control cloud version if you have og switch but Switch Pro can play the localised version? Looking at Control and Hitman 3 I don’t see games that differ a huge amount from Witcher 3, but this gives devs an option to take an easier route I suppose.

@FixLagBrosLag I try to buy physical where possible, but we’re getting to a point where that stops being viable. It seems more and more games are download only, an empty box with a code, a disc with a licence and no game or at best a massive download on day one that renders it useless once the servers get switched off.

Cloud gaming for me would only work in some sort of 'rental' type of purchase.
So, you don't charge a full price and offer a limited time for the game to be available (ie. 10€ for one week rental, after that the game is locked again).
That, in my view, would make this service more acceptable.

The only current real pros of all this digital stuff are convenience, and not essential convenience at that, but there are sooo many cons that come with it.

This is the perfect workaround for a console like the Switch. Give people the option to play the game in some form rather than not at all.
As for the 6 month warning, servers cost money. The main campaign is about 10-12 hours with little to no replay value. If you can't complete it in that space of time then don't buy the game.

I feel like people think cloud gaming will replace physical / digital gaming. It'll be an option.
It's like movies and music, physical copies are still being sold. Yet netflix and other streaming services are at almost everyone's home.
Physical goodies will always happen because that is what sells. Look at the Fire Emblem releasing. Look at call of duty with their $$$ physical limited edition stuff.
And by the time the service is done on switch, who's to say that they just won't have it available on next gen nintendo consoles?

If you're planning to play the game and finish within a year or two of purchase, then it's absolutely stupid to value holding on to a thing for all eternity over actually getting to play and experience a game at all. So what if you can't "own" it till you die? You're paying for the experience of playing and enjoying the game. Why isn't that worth $40?

@chrisprattisfat The gaming industry needs to sort out its problems with licensing. You never have to worry about a movie becoming unavailable. It might not be on your streaming service but you’ll be able to rent or buy it digitally somewhere. We don’t see movies pulled over a licensed soundtrack, but it happens all the time with games. They need to set these deals up like movies do without expiration dates.

This is the future for the Switch if people want to play 3rd party games. The Switch just isn't powerful enough to play games like Control. It's a slide show on the PS4.

Apparently, I hit a nerve yesterday when I said either don’t port it, or do it properly. But this is precisely why I want no part of a cloud gaming future.

The major gaming companies would love nothing more than to just drop a game on a server, charge you for it, then pull the plug whenever they feel like it. It is a further erosion of customer control. At least with a digital game, you likely have a couple of years to redownload it, so long as there’s an active digital shop.

The article yesterday said “this is the only way to get Control on Switch”, and while that may be true; a probable, more truthful answer to that is likely, “we won’t spend the time and resources to port it on a console that won’t sell as well.”

It’s not even all that cheap either, it’s $40 for a long term rental, I dunno, I just feel like that’s pretty expensive for something you can’t even keep.

I really hope these cloud games doesn't mean nintendo seriously won't upgrade the switchs hardware soon.

Even if I was interested in cloud gaming my internet drops out as soon as I get even remotely bad weather. And that's after changing provider 3 times. Hardware is still so much more reliable.

I hope to see a streaming service come to switch and then I can subscribe to that and it means I dont have to buy new games to play every month.

@Ventilator Yup. Even Stadia is superior to a Switch cloud service. I'd rather have it on my phone or other devices. Switch takes away most of the few advantages of cloud services.

Cloud gaming will turn the Switch into a non-Switch which I hate so I'm not for it. Say how much the Switch isn't powerful in running Control, not everyone would care. If you couldn't provide the actual game then give us an original one like what Capcom is doing, Monster Hunter World can't be done on Switch but that doesn't mean they can't give us an original title like Monster Hunter Rise.

Anyone paying for this is a moron.

Online-only is the main reason I don't buy games like Overwatch, Destiny, or that other game I can't think of right now. Input delay is also an issue for me, especially when reaction time is a factor. I might consider a subscription with a bunch of games, but this right here isn't for me.

Cloud gaming is the death of gaming as we know it. I will not be supporting it.

Cloud games on the Switch simply don't exist for me. If they want my money, they will release it physically. Simple as that.

If the games were fairly priced based off of the fact that you can lose it at any point and it’s not a definitive experience that would solve the problem.

There are a lot of people in here pretty shocked about the possible death of something that's already dead.

The number of people who care about - or even are aware of - the distinction between 'owning' a game and simply paying for access to it, has been declining for well over a decade, and keeps going down all the time, just as it does with literally every other form of media. Physical sales are down across the board, and anything delivered digitally - Kindle books, Prime videos, Steam games, iTunes music, whatever - is legally exactly the same as this is, you're paying for a license and they can take that license away. They probably won't, but they absolutely can.

That in some cases you have the ability to download a copy of those things and hack whatever system into still letting you use the thing 20 years from now if you want with non-cloud solutions is a meaningful distinction, but it is one fewer and fewer people will care about over time, because that's exactly the transition that's occurred in - again - every other form of media. The market picks convenience and options now over permanence and stability later.

And that's probably fine. The games that are great, somebody will make sure to preserve, legitimately or not. What an experience is worth to you today is the value proposition being offered, and obviously we can all take it or leave it as we wish, but pretending this is (a) new or (b) doomed are both really silly positions. This is the model more people very clearly prefer, when it reliably works, which these services are all getting to the level of.

@Gwynbleidd

Lol, exactly what I was thinking actually.

Thank you for this article, Nintendolife. It's exactly what I've been saying. If the game was cheaper, i would probably think about it as i did with PSNow, XCloud and Stadia, but at this price, in this day and age, this is not a viable option. And for those saying that its a viable option for the people who don't own another system, i ask: the Switch is costing 279£ new, 240£ used. The Ps4 is costing 249£ new and 185£ used, and we didn't pay this much money to have an overside tablet to play cloud games. If the games doesn't run natively, don't put it on the system. Pc is full of games that will never see a release on consoles and you don't see them puting those on the cloud, because no one in their right minds its going to pay full price for something they don't own. And if you are, there is a serious need of revaluation of where are you spending your money. I bought Control on Ps4 for 10£ and didn't finished it due to how boring it is, i cannot see myself paying more than that for something i won't own.

I think it is nice to have the option to play this on the Switch, as the developers clearly have no interest in trying to port this. I appreciate that a lot of people don't want this and it is clear that if you have the option to get it for the PS4 or Xbox, that is much better and probably cheaper. However, to hold this up as the beginning of the end, that seems a bit over the top.

Go and do your Cloud crap elswhere! I don't want to see this on a Nintendo Console.

For me, depends entirely on the price. If it's like a fiver or ten euros and I get a couple of good hours out of it, but then loose the game two years down the road. OK. I got my money worth.

If I fork over 40+ euros for it, I'd be annoyed. I'm still playing Doom on my Switch that I got when it launched.

Doesn’t bother me. I don’t need to own every game I ever play until the end of time. I honestly think it’s kinda weird that so many people make such a big deal out of it. No, it’s not ideal, but how is it different than going to a movie, concert or sporting event? Actually, cloud games last way longer. How is it different than getting an online multiplayer game that goes away when the server goes down? I wouldn’t want every game to be a cloud game, and I hope this is reserved for only games that truly would not be port-able, but I don’t think it’s so bad getting some of the more demanding games this way.

I don’t know, this game ownership thing...I don’t quite get it. I replay a bunch of old games, but if I no longer have access to one, I repurchase it, get it on new hardware or forget about it. Far from the end of the world. We’re talking about $50 or so video games, not $100k houses. It’s ok if you only have several years to play some of your games. I really don’t see why this is taken so seriously.

I’m on board, especially as the other consoles move in to the next generation. I’d certainly rather spend $500 on ten next gen games on the cloud than on a PS5 without any games. But that’s me-I don’t care about Sony/MS exclusives, and clearly I care less about game ownership than others.

Imo there should be some sort of backup if you're buying cloud games a la carte. You should have access to what you bought in some way (pc version, other version, SOME version). If you're paying for a Netflix type service I don't see the problem. You're paying for access to whatever library that service offers.

Also, 6 months’ notice is way better than I expected. Out of curiosity, what happens if things go south for the company fast and we don’t get 6 months?

I find it hilarious that people still use the word "future" in conjunction with game streaming.

It's a technology that has existed for a full decade, and it's not about to replace local computing any time soon.

For 20 dollars I'll buy it..since I know I won't have it forever....that's easy to swallow. ......but 40 is too much just for the privilege of playing it

Just like every other GaaS. You know what you are paying for, access to play on a system that can’t run it. This is not some foreboding nightmare scenario. Use (or don’t) the service for what it was intended but don’t complain that it isn’t something else. (And don’t complain about not getting games on Switch when you refuse certain options).

@Ventilator it's the full price of the ultimate edition 40€

I mean, this is the exact same issue that every online game will face in the future, especially the online-only GAAS shooters like Destiny 2 or Fortnite.

This is why I’ll only ever pay a limited amount for such a game (£5 - £10 max) as in my eyes it will be more of a rental than a purchase.

I'm not interested in single purchase streaming games.
I am interested in streaming services. In a service things will get added and removed all the time, like Netflix does with moves and shows. And that'd be fine. If one game goes, there's always another taking its place.

I really don't get the hate. "You're paying for something you don't own forever". Okay....this same thing applies to movies at the theater, Netflix, Spotify, concerts, sporting events, conventions, and a plethora of other things. It's the experience that matters to many, not the acquisition of something for life.

This thing ran flawlessly with no lag for me. Incredibly smooth and the visuals... I think this could be worth it... as a subscription model situation, like Stadia.

Amazon currently has a law suit stating the same thing about digital purchases of movies and shows on your account. You don't own them you are only getting a license to watch them for a limited time.

@Moon once you pay you bypass these wait periods.

Anyone getting the que message, once you pay you bypass it. I was really amazed by how well this worked. I played for four hours now and you can barely tell it's being streamed and the graphics are crazy good. Screen space reflections are amazing to look at and the detail in the textures is mind blowing (for the switch). I play mainly handheld and it looks gorgeous. I paid the $40 it costs for Control as I knew what I was getting into and I wanted to test it fully (plus I ONLY own the switch and I always miss out of big name releases). I'm mighty impressed I must say. I would love for them to do borderlands 3 or red dead redemption 2 with mutliplayer support.

This is how Nintendo competes vs Xbox series x and PS5. With this they can do graphic intensive games that look as good as a series x or ps5 but still run on the switch hardware. I'm going to check my router logs to see how much data is being used though as that could be an issue in an all streaming video game future. But either way I'm interested...

This is why Switch needs Xcloud Game Pass. Because Microsoft/Xbox will still be around in 20 years.

I do wonder how many of the people moaning about cloud gaming are going to be watching a horror film tonight on Netflix? Look i wouldn't want this to be the only option in the future but as something to along side "normal" gaming i'm all for it, more options are a good thing especially when the Switch has no chance of ever running Control by itself.

Also anyone trying to downplay Hitman 3 and Control and compare to TW3 really need to leave their Switch bubble and realize how weak the Switch is next to PS4/X1. Control is a very demanding game and does way more in its "small" world then TW3 does in its massive world, nearly everything in Control can be interacted with and destroyed in realistic ways, you also have some really advanced lighting what can be manipulated by the player at times. TW3 biggest issue for Switch would have been its world size and how dense it is, if you get round that its only really a case of downgrading everything something what can't be done for Control because the demanding aspects are needed for gameplay as they play a big part, also removing its amazing lighting would kill a lot of the immersion in its world.

Here in the west, it seems cloud gaming is now a thing on Nintendo's hybrid device.
I don't know you but Cloud gaming isn't a thing when you own nothing and pay them to Cloud game rental. That's what this is Rental you have no ownership or say in it. I rather get it Digital download and play where/whenever as last resort if I really want but sooner or late it becomes Physical as I have seen for some of my previously only Digital downloads. Don't need ISP attachment just to play a game. And not everyone in NA has free Public Wifi that would let you just do that. Some require a Brower interface to accept the WiFi usage and since Switch doesn't have a Browser consider that a null from the start. And for others xbox/psx are weak compare to a PC Gaming Desktop with SLI/CF running or able to run at True 4K@60fps so stop talking about power when those two are upscaling and not really true 4K. Want True 4K@60fps Get a fully rigged PC Gaming Desktop at SLI/CF to push those pixels. WiFi is only as good as their location setup are - too many using it for Games and Streaming and guess what happens. Also Streaming Movies are weak in demands to Gaming Streaming that requires alot of CPU/GPU from the Cloud to push that out. Also 4K movies are only good as your bandwidth allows and not many can afford Fiber or Dedicate connections.

I understand the concerns here for the future of gaming but at the same time its a natural progression. The problem is that people are so emotionally and financially invested in physical hardware and software that they can’t let go of it. Cloud gaming makes so much sense on so many levels. The more availability games have, the better. Also, physical objects create tons and tons of waste. Sure you can “recycle” games but people throwing games away is a thing. I have Google Stadia and I love it. 10 dollars a month and I get free games every month with it. I don’t have to worry about hardware at all as I can stream it on any kind of device. It’s super nice and I’m excited to see what the future holds.

From reading some of the comments, I am surprised more people didn't think about the fact you are paying for something that you will never have in your possession. Probably explains why some people thought others were overracting about cloud gaming.

Cloud gaming, as something that could possibly coexist, is not necessarily a bad thing. However, given trends with music, tv, and films with streaming services, I cannot see cloud coexisting. Developers can, and will, try to move to cloud if they think there is more profit in it.

Hopefully it stays the case that cloud gaming is ultimately just a small part of the gaming industry.

Oh, the irony of not being able to control how long you keep the game!

You can easily buy the full game on PC via GOG with no DRM whatsoever and keep the game forever or you can pay for a temporary license to play it on Switch, and without the convenience of being able to play the game offline (and isn't that the whole point). I couldn't even play the game for a few minutes without being constantly nagged with connection warnings (even though it played fine otherwise). The compression artefacts of the visuals also made the game look unnecessarily ugly. I'd rather have a downgraded port that maintains some semblance of consistency in the visuals than watching what looks like a low quality YouTube stream.

There is such a vast quantity of quality games nowadays that it's absolutely idiotic to support something like this.

@BenAV I think it seems likely that the cloud will win in the future. Just like with music and movies. I have some concerns about it too, though

I think the infrastructure and technology just isn’t quite ready for cloud gaming yet.

I really don't care if games go off of the servers because once I complete a game I'm finished with it and trust me a lot of people is just like me. I don't plan to buy a game and own it for the rest of my life because I know once I complete a game I'm not going to play it anymore because way too many games are released each and every month for me to be wanting to go back in time to play old games. So for me this does not matter. And it doesn't take me too long to finish a game. Usually it only takes me me about a year to finish a game at the most

The value of this streaming product is not comparable to owning a physical game. For me control would be a more appealing offer if it was free with Nintendo online service or cost a set price for 1 year of access, something like the price of a coffee. If the game is good, then some people will pay for several years or buy the full game on another platform, on top of having paid to stream it first.

The fact that people still want to actually own games is the reason why cloud gaming is simply never going to be a mainline medium for video games.

However, that still brings up the whole dilemma of which option being worse. Going for a port that's water-downed and runs at sub-par quality is going to be the expected case and it's going to gain some backlash. So is going for a cloud version that would only run for a limited time. Basically, the developers have to pick their poison.

This isn't really shocking news, is it? Nothing last forever. Not even your consoles or old physical media. And the whole Switch E-shop will also shut down one day.

It's good that they tell you this before purchasing the game, but it's quite obvious.

I can't really see the big problem, either. Cloud gaming is just another option for us gamers. Take it or leave it.

Buying a pure cloud game, isn't really that different to how games are distributed digital today anyway.

With digital distribution, you buy a license to play and download the game, and it can altered anytime in the future by the publisher. So basically they can remove your license, and you would be playing a pirated version.

We just recently saw how publishers could alter digital licenses, buy removing the opportunity to play you own Steam games over GeForce Now. So what do we actually own these days anyway?

When servers of online games is shut down, you also "lose" your game.

When the Wii e-shop was shut down, I lost some games.

Similar will happen when the 3DS / Switch E-shop or PS3/PS4 Store is shut down. I do not have the storage space available to save it all locally.

And what about the distribution of game cartridges with only half of the game on it? And download codes in a box?
If the server is shut down that contains this content, the games are worthless.

So it is a illusion that we own our games today anyway. Cloud games will not change anything regarding that.

I have been using Stadia, Game Pass and GeForce Now for a while now. And they all work very well.

Stadia is the most impressive service technically right now, with streams up to 4K and no noticeable latency to me. While Game Pass is offering the most impressive library, but only works on Android devices at the moment.

You can also buy individual games on Stadia, and these games you own. You can stream them up to 1080p without any extra costs or subscriptions.

Even if Stadia looses the right to sell the games you own, you will still have access to them in your library. Google made that clear. It's yours to keep as long as the service is running.

I would rather trust Microsoft, Google or Amazon to have such a demanding service running for as long as possible. They have the cloud capacity to make it run as smoothly as possible, and the financial capacity to keep it alive.

Another take on cloud gaming could be game rentals. Why not give access for a day for 1$ and a week for 5$?. Cloud gaming would be perfect for that, because it's almost impossible to pirate it, and many more people would use cloud gaming as a rental service.

On a more positive note, it's good to know that they will warn you 6 months before the servers go down. That isn't a given, so it's good to know they won't just pull the plug suddenly.

Anyway, I've heard good things about Control. Haven't played it myself, but the Cloud version seemed to work surprisingly well on Switch (only played the trial though). The game is quite heavy on any machine, so this is likely the only way the game could ever exist on Switch. While I'm not sold on cloud gaming yet as a whole, I'm glad to see this game on Switch in some form at least.

@Kienda testing games for PC/console and playing on the switch are two different things.

@Mfreddy22 Game Pass is the only service that would be suitable on Switch.

@nathatruc Thanks. Too much considering you have 0% ownership of the game. It's basically 40 Euro to rent the game for streaming only.

@Ventilator
Why would Game Pass be the only service suitable for the Switch? Luna and Stadia would fit just as well.

@dres well said.

@Coxula so screw the rest of us who do want it? Ya that seems fair.

Thats why they should sell it for cheaper, they dont give you the game, we only borrowing it for a period of time, online play, they should not ask the price they are asking...dont buy or take the s@it what it comes with it...

If, out of the blue, Rockstar ever decided to bring GTA V - or any other - to the Switch via cloud, I will be extremely disappointed.

thats a lot of money to rent a game. especially when 10 months later were not selling any new copies ah well turn it off.

Let's be honest, how often are you going into your retro games and playing them? And how many are you playing per year?

Whilst the very insignificant small percentage of games get pulled on Steam, I still have games I used my cdkey from back in the day to register my games. I can still play them now...but you know 16 years later and I'm a time poor adult... So I dont

I struggle with the idea of game streaming at the best of times. The Switch is a hybrid portable, so it's a safe bet you won't be streaming on the move. Even with 5g, you're at the mercy of phone coverage.

On a home system, you need enough bandwidth for gaming and whatever media streaming someone else is doing. That means a high speed connection, which isn't necessarily cheap

I could see an argument that it lets you have a cheap system for the kids, but does it? A last gen console or a download only console would make more sense there when you factor in the fibre upgrade.

With so many uninspired AAA games lately and for the past while, shady moves by publishers (this being one of them), I'm just happy I have such a massive backlog of unplayed games on my PC still. The way the gaming industry has been going, they've actually been saving me a lot of money by simply not buying games anymore (well, with the exception of old classics on GOG)

Also how are people comparing a subscription service like Netflix, where it's less than $15/month for hundreds of movies or tv shows...to paying for a SINGLE game like this? Compare Netflix to Game Pass or EA's service, where you are getting MULTIPLE games for your monthly subscription.

@Ventilator Indeed, and when a game gets removed from GamePass they always offer you a discounted price to buy the game.

5G should make cloud streaming easy no?

They should have never brought this to the west.

It worked in Japan because Japanese people can look at reality and say "This isn't prefect, but compromise is part of life and I can make an educated decision on if it's right for me"

In the US, people just scream "I AM ENTITLED TO EVERYTHING ALWAYS BEING ABOUT ME AND BEING EXACTLY THE WAY I WANT! DANM THIS PEOPLE FOR SUGGESTING I NEED TO GIVE AND TAKE. TAKE. TAKE. ALWAYS TAKE, ONLY TAKE"

There are already so many amazing features and games they keep in JP because of this, not sure why they didn't think it would apply here.

I already own the game on the Xbox One X. Not interested in a Switch cloud version that I can't play ANY time and ANYWHERE🤷🏾‍♂️ It is a great game though.

y'all can thank nintendo for releasing a console not even as powerful as a base console from 2013 (xbo and ps4). that's their fault if third party publishers have to make use of cloud gaming because the hardware is too much behind to properly run the games.

Not sure why they're even bothering with this, judging by the negative feedback, it doesn't seem like the right market for this game.

Just from a business point of view, I'd like to know who suggested this would be a good fit for a portable gaming device.

The way this game is offered (via the cloud) essentially works counterintuitive to the way the Switch is used by 50-60% of it's user base.

When you also factor in that most actual gamers will use the Switch as a second device and wouldn't purchase this game on the Switch as portability is hardly an option, you're basically thinning your target right down to families, who also won't purchase this game because it isn't the target market at all.

From a business point of view I genuinely see no reason for this game to even be released. It has no market on the Switch.

Not to be picky but if you read any game manual when you buy a game it clearly says you do not "own" the game. Merely a license to play it via it's media delivery method, be this floppy disc, cassette tape, cartridge, CD, DVD or digitally. They used to have a clause that allowed the owner to make "a back up" for protection of the delivery media and personal use only (in other words don't copy and sell or distribute it, hence piracy). The principal complaint about Streaming games is actually the inconsistency of "delivery" due to the volitile nature of the internet. This in my eyes warrants a cheaper price or even the ability to "rent" the license at a much reduced cost. Not the full priced baloney we'll actually end up with.

I feel like Cloud gaming should be A future of gaming not THE future of gaming

@Trajan they are both just streaming data though.

I know from remote working for years that there is always a delay. No matter if it is simply typing or playing a game. You can’t eliminate it.

Cloud based gaming is a crock of crap. I will never invest in such an invasive and unreliable technology. Physical media will never be bettered; this is why I still collect books, Blu Rays and Discs.

@dres Stadia barely includes any games at same price as Game Pass, and we don't know how Luna is yet vs pricing.

@dres can’t you still download games you bought from the Wii’s eshop?

@Kienda I’m saying testing a game to the standards of a natively run game can’t be done through streaming due to those issues.

Yes the issues exist, but I assume it was viewed as good enough for the switch.

@Krambo42
You are right. I was not aware of this.
You can still download your purchased content at the moment. But you can't buy anything. At a later date the Wii Shop will shut down completely, though. That was in the support page I found.

@Ventilator
Game Pass is currently the better deal, for sure. Luna and Stadia Pro could be just as promising in the future.

Stadia Pro for 10$ gives you access to 31 games right now, and the library is growing fast. Also, you claim your pro games, so that they will not get removed from your library at a later date. It's more like PS+ in that regard. I have been Pro member a year now, and have claimed 52 games for my library.

Stadia also gives your more options, like individual game purchasing without a subscription needed. And the service also runs better than xCloud at the moment, with faster load times and better image quality.

Luna is going to offer a great deal as well. So I think all services could be great on Switch. They all offer big AAA titles that can't run natively on Switch.

@Kienda
I have been playing on several streaming services, and the input lag on something like Stadia is not something I can sense at all. It's that good. Especially with their own wifi controller.

Sure, the input lag can be measured, but I can't feel any difference. So who cares.

It would have to be quite cheap for me to invest in it then. I want the freedom to be able to play any time I choose, even if it is in the distant future. I would say this sucks eveb though i am trying to keep open minded about cloud

They tell you 6 months in advance that you are goint to lose your game?

Wow thanks, its like a tech shop telling you they are going to take back your TV in the next month after you have bought it from them.

@Bunkerneath
Or simply just like when servers of an pure online game is shut down. They also tell you months in advance.

What if Nintendo shut down the servers of Splatoon 2? This will also happen one day. There isn't much else to this game besides online multiplayer. But people have no problem paying full price for Splatoon 2.

And what if Fortnite servers was shut down? With all the money kids are poring into that game. It could be gone tomorrow.

So now here we have a big single player game, that is dependant on the cloud, and that the servers behind it will stay up. And then people have a problem with this, apparently?!? It doesn't make much sense.

I played a lot of War Hawk on the PS3 and owned a physical copy of the game. The servers have long since ended, and now this multiplayer centric game is essentially obsolete.

Now, technically I can put my War Hawk disc into the PS3 and create a local online game to play split screen 4 player still, but in reality I do not do this !

I therefore see little difference to cloud games of this type. If it's a game you know you'll play loads, then play it now and enjoy it... why worry about 5 years time when you wont be playing it anyway...?!

@dres Don't play online games so does not effect me.
First person games, like Control and Hitman 3, should not be internet dependant.
If the system cant play it, it should not be on there.
Cloud gaming is bad

@dres Yeah. I tried Stadia, XCloud and GeForceNow at the same time.
Stadia itself worked fine, but the GRID Game performed badly on Stadia. Destiny 2 and Zombie Army 4 worked fine.

Time will tell what's included on Luna. Amazon have the money to compete with Game Pass, but need to rely on paying third parties as Amazon itself don't have many studios.

GeforceNow is different than the others.
You can only stream games you purchased on random stores.
You are basically renting a Titan based PC with Ray Tracing.
If you still use a 20 year old PC useless for newest games, you can still stream them from a monster PC as long as you paid for the games.

@dres I haven’t used Stadia, but I have streamed through Nvidia, PlayStation Now and Xbox.

All three had a very minimal delay. It wasn’t unplayable by any stretch, but it was noticeable. And for me, I just didn’t want that in my head. I prefer playing the game how they were meant to be played.

There is a reason why Stadia flopped, after all.

@Rypopo Judging by your first sentence, i assume you're dismissing this as a non-issue (or not a big deal).

The problem is, online shooters are only a fraction of the entire gaming industry. But what happens when most games (or more than half, at least) rely on the cloud exclusively? Thats the whole point.

This type of thing is why Stadia is failing. Streaming isn't entirely a bad choice out there, and for Switch there's a very good reason for it to exist. But the idea of purchasing single games, even at a discount such as this, simply for a temporary access license to run it off a server, with obvious time limitations, only while it's available, is just ill conceived and not really viable.

Bundled services like GeForce Now, xCloud/XB Cloud Gaming w Game Pass, PS Now, etc, make sense, you're not subscribing to a game that may or may not go away for a retail price, you're paying for access to anything in their library for a given month, so the whole library won't be taken away from you on a whim, you didn't pay to access a specific game that will be taken away, you paid for entry to brows the halls and borrow whatever you'd like for the month.

Streaming as a subscription for library access can work. Purchasing whole games that are only available for a period of time so long as the company determines its profitable can't work.

If Nintendo wants to really proceed with a streamed content future, and for Switch, they may have no choice, they really need to be providing the server infrastructure (or renting it from MS as Sony now does) to guarantee it's part of Switch for the supported life of Switch.

Leaving it up to publishers can't work. ESPECIALLY with 505, given how they've handled Control in general on other platforms (one of the very few games other than CoD not providing the PS5/XSeX upgrade to existing customers and requiring the purchase of "Ultimate Edition" for that to be provided. 505 will do the slimiest most profitable thing with this game.

For $39.99 for this game is too much! If you don't own the game it should be priced at $1.99. When they decide to shut the servers down it won't be such a big deal. The price should cost like a rental since you don't own the game anyways.

With games being more hardware demanding than ever, cloud will be crutial as ever for acessibility, as long they put servers everywere.

I really dont understand this obsession with physical games. And a FYI, you just own a license of the game, regardless if the game is physical or digital so stop crying about that.

@dres This. People here bitch here about losing games, but yet they buy everytime some old game is re-released they ending up buying again, even if they have the game. Just look at the Super Mario 3D All Stars thing. I really doubt that these people will still play the games we have today in the future.

@diablo2 I have given this a bit more thought since I tried the demo this weekend. Not going to lie, it worked really well even on my rural internet and it was a bit uncanny to see the graphics and speed it ran at. However, seeing the $50+ (Canadian) price point, it caused me pause. I have a small collection of games and enjoy buying and selling aftermarket, this would not cater to either. I would agree with @pitchblack that it would fair better as a rental AND on a cloud-specific platform. But Jeepers, it really showed the potential of cloud gaming and to be totally honest, I would consider a purchase of an Assassin's Creed Odyssey or Vahalla cloud version if it was ever available. I'm not one to have multiple consoles, so that's my weak spot.

I, for one, will not be parting with my money for what is essentially a fart in the wind, no matter how epic that fart might be.