Most Games Will Be Streamed and Produced in the Cloud in the Next 5 to 10 Years, Ubisoft CEO Says

Tsing

The FPS Review
Staff member
Joined
May 6, 2019
Messages
12,660
Points
113
Not a fan of streaming video games over the cloud? Too bad, as that's something gamers should start getting used to, according to Yves Guillemot, Ubisoft's chief executive, who was recently interviewed by Financial Times (alternative link) and told the publication that streaming is set to transform the video games industry just like Netflix did for television and cinema. Guillemot, who helped co-found Ubisoft with his brothers way back in 1986, shared his belief that most games will be streamed and produced in the cloud within the next 5 to 10 years—an idea that has prompted Ubisoft to take on recent deals that include acquiring Activision Blizzard games for streaming on Ubisoft+ as part of an agreement with Microsoft. Assassin's Creed Mirage, Avatar: Frontiers of Pandora, and Skull and Bones are just a few of the Ubisoft games that will be available to play over the cloud, via Amazon's Luna platform.

See full article...
 
This is the truth, this is what will happen. I expect with most computing. Countries need to up their connectivity thats for sure. And they will.
Not saying I like it, but " voting with your wallet" is hogwash that will not do squat. I got out voted by trillions ? when it comes to micro transactions games.. I don't know how much money it would be after all the years I said no since they started but the current yearly amount of money in MTs is mind bending.
This will be the exact same issue, and while there will be a period of co existance, streaming will be it going forward, and only streaming. Surely it will take longer than 10 for 100℅, but 20 years we will be very close, and I think 10 years, yes it will be above 50% with multiple companies no longer offering options.
 
Pc gamig will remain a market. But as I joked in another thread instead of gpus we will just have cards that provide render scaling at some point.
 
They threatened this with a lot of things. Remember when Office and Windows were going to be entirely cloud based? You could go all the way back to the old "mainframe vs workstation" debates that existed decades ago, and we just seem to kind of oscillate between the two (you can replace "mainframe" with cloud or datacenter today, but similar concept), but neither one ever entirely wins out.

Sometimes you just can't get around the reality of physics - not everyone has high speed, low latency internet. And even those that do, there is still a significant latency issue that exists.

You ~can~ use a lot of those things in the cloud, but they still haven't abandoned the actual physical release. I think the same will stay true with gaming. I don't see any publisher going "streaming only" and staying in business too long. At least in the near future.
 
Sure mate, wasn't ubisoft just saying NFTs are the future of gaming and gamers are just too dumb to understand the benefits?

What does it even mean to produce games in the cloud? This dumbo doesn't know how games are made yet he is a CEO of a gaming company.
 
Last edited:
Uvilla said:
This is the truth, this is what will happen. I expect with most computing. Countries need to up their connectivity thats for sure. And they will.
Not saying I like it, but " voting with your wallet" is hogwash that will not do squat. I got out voted by trillions ? when it comes to micro transactions games.. I don't know how much money it would be after all the years I said no since they started but the current yearly amount of money in MTs is mind bending.
This will be the exact same issue, and while there will be a period of co existance, streaming will be it going forward, and only streaming. Surely it will take longer than 10 for 100℅, but 20 years we will be very close, and I think 10 years, yes it will be above 50% with multiple companies no longer offering options.
Click to expand...
I'd not be so sure of that. They've been saying PC gaming is dying for 25 years. And yet it is still here, not just here, but bigger than ever, and console exclusives are being released on PC with smaller and smaller delays. This would've been completely unthinkable just 5 years ago.
 
MadMummy76 said:
I'd not be so sure of that. They've been saying PC gaming is dying for 25 years. And yet it is still here, not just here, but bigger than ever, and console exclusives are being released on PC with smaller and smaller delays. This would've been completely unthinkable just 5 years ago.
Click to expand...
I don't think its s close enough comparison. Can't think of anything too close, but death of physical media might be it, though to be honest streaming of games is like a continuation of it. Its basically technology allowing for less ownership and less control, both of which companies looooove, and will take advantage of every single step
 
Uvilla said:
I don't think its s close enough comparison. Can't think of anything too close, but death of physical media might be it, though to be honest streaming of games is like a continuation of it. Its basically technology allowing for less ownership and less control, both of which companies looooove, and will take advantage of every single step
Click to expand...
Except the technology does not exist to support it, unless they secretly invented FTL communications. Especially on mobile. My downstream ping is 200ms average with highs of 600ms right now in the evening when 99% of people are at home and probably not using mobile data. And this is to the most ideal test server closest to my location, not to a random game streaming cloud server that's likely not even on the same area.

Netflix works because for streaming media buffering and response time doesn't matter. As long as the buffer is not emptied it works. For game streaming you can't even think about a buffer, it must be instantaneous. Plus imagine the extra load on ISPs it would cause. Cloud is just using someone else's computer on remote desktop. It'd not be just a bad experience, but bad for the environment as well artificially boosting bandwith demand and demand for cloud providers.
 
Well why couldn't they just stream the parts of the map your in... you know... like that great twitch game second life...
 
MadMummy76 said:
Except the technology does not exist to support it, unless they secretly invented FTL communications. Especially on mobile. My downstream ping is 200ms average with highs of 600ms right now in the evening when 99% of people are at home and probably not using mobile data. And this is to the most ideal test server closest to my location, not to a random game streaming cloud server that's likely not even on the same area.

Netflix works because for streaming media buffering and response time doesn't matter. As long as the buffer is not emptied it works. For game streaming you can't even think about a buffer, it must be instantaneous. Plus imagine the extra load on ISPs it would cause. Cloud is just using someone else's computer on remote desktop. It'd not be just a bad experience, but bad for the environment as well artificially boosting bandwith demand and demand for cloud providers.
Click to expand...
That's the thing, it does work, I have used it, on a not so great connection, and its was a good while ago too. As much as I wanted to say, ah this crap will never work, nah it worked just fine. The visuals were a little off, but thats was it.
This tech is.here, its probably being implemented significantly and I am.thinking shifts are coming, First discounts for the streaming versions of individual games, then library monthly access then then streaming exclusives be it extra content or straight up stream only version and nothing else. Another advantage ia other than a cliemt of sorts no need for different version of a game for.different console and so on
 
The advantages are many. AND this will let them charge more for those that want 'local' versions because of the 'additional' development work needed. When in reality it's just all going to be PC based and adding functionality for additional video cards.

What matters is what is being passed down. If they stop passing render data meaning you're just streaming the screen then the need for video cards disappears. Unless you're doing local development work the need for local powerful hardware just simply disappears.
 
The industry will fight with itself on this topic. The monitor makers want to sell you a 4k or an 8k monitor, and that isn't compatible with everyone streaming. Growth of eSports where latency is king is also at conflict with everything moving to the cloud.
 
Lets see... if we go streaming.... what do we loose the need for.

1. High refresh rate monitors. Twitch gaming and 'smooth' performance are important but ultra high rate refresh rates simply stop being a thing.
2. Local 3d accelerating video cards of high power. The low end will be all people need to stream. Even if streaming is a 16k or whatever bullshit number they decide to throw out.
3. Local storage. no need to have storage on your local system. Just enough for a base OS and some cached data the rest is streamed.
4. High power CPU's. That 15 year old 4 core should be fine for streaming really. Maybe a bit more if you want to have discord open as well. Unless discord is your streaming client. Who knows... maybe?

So everyone can transition to a tablet or laptop of less than what we would consider moderate spec. 8 gig of ram. 4 cores, some trash tier video card, and a nice display. Everything else is in the cloud and a monthly service fee... that is probably lower than the yearly spend people like members of this forum do on their own personal systems.

On average I'm probably spending 1200 a year replacing parts and pieces for my tower. A streaming service that lets me run on low tier 10 year old hardware would all be eliminate my need for a desktop. My work laptop with a streaming client connected to a good KB and Mouse with nice displays that it can barely sustain the resolution on would in essence be plenty. Lets say that's uhh... 20 bucks a month? My cost... 240 a year.

I don't really WANT that. But you could market the Xbox Streamer... the last Xbox you'll ever need. Then all the game companies could negotiate an RMR with the streaming services and boom done. Because RMR is what generates IPO values.
 
I am actually afraid, and expecting Nintendo will be the first one to go bigger with this with the switch 2. They are positioned to be most effective at implementing/ pushing it, and implementing hydrid tech.
To be clear, they already have all this with the switch, its just not in emphasis, but this tech mature plenty they can go hard at it.
Watch out for the switch2 to have 5g, you will know right away what is coming. Sure US's 5g is not ready for this, but probably japan, korea, a whole bunch of china is, I don't know about europe, but US, it might work in cities and dense areas then everybody else will need wifi whatever. Of couse I don't expect the switch2 to be 100% streaming not at all, I expect them to start pushing, specially aaa titles outside its hardware capabilities, again they can do this right now, I expect a bigger push with switch2.
 
Grimlakin said:
Lets see... if we go streaming.... what do we loose the need for.
Click to expand...
Not just the need for but the benefit of as well.
Grimlakin said:
1. High refresh rate monitors. Twitch gaming and 'smooth' performance are important but ultra high rate refresh rates simply stop being a thing.
Click to expand...
That's unlikely, people aren't going to just roll over and give up on high FPS and refresh rate and high resolution uncompressed image, and no lag.
Local games are here to stay, at best I can see streaming as an alternative to get more reach to potential casuals, but when they get hooked they'll shift to local gaming as well.
Grimlakin said:
2. Local 3d accelerating video cards of high power. The low end will be all people need to stream. Even if streaming is a 16k or whatever bullshit number they decide to throw out.
3. Local storage. no need to have storage on your local system. Just enough for a base OS and some cached data the rest is streamed.
4. High power CPU's. That 15 year old 4 core should be fine for streaming really. Maybe a bit more if you want to have discord open as well. Unless discord is your streaming client. Who knows... maybe?
Click to expand...
Unless you are using your computer for more than gaming. I'm working on terrabytes of data all the time, imagine uploading that to the "cloud" on some chicken wire upstream connection. While downstream is usually decent here, uploads are still laughably slow.
Grimlakin said:
So everyone can transition to a tablet or laptop of less than what we would consider moderate spec. 8 gig of ram. 4 cores, some trash tier video card, and a nice display. Everything else is in the cloud and a monthly service fee... that is probably lower than the yearly spend people like members of this forum do on their own personal systems.

On average I'm probably spending 1200 a year replacing parts and pieces for my tower. A streaming service that lets me run on low tier 10 year old hardware would all be eliminate my need for a desktop. My work laptop with a streaming client connected to a good KB and Mouse with nice displays that it can barely sustain the resolution on would in essence be plenty. Lets say that's uhh... 20 bucks a month? My cost... 240 a year.
Click to expand...
You can't just compare hardware cost that you buy and own to the cost of a streaming service that is basically money you throw away with nothing to show for it. $20 is way higher than what I'd be willing to pay for streaming even if I wanted to pay for streaming games.
Grimlakin said:
I don't really WANT that. But you could market the Xbox Streamer... the last Xbox you'll ever need. Then all the game companies could negotiate an RMR with the streaming services and boom done. Because RMR is what generates IPO values.
Click to expand...
Doesn't work, and I tell you why it doesn't work. You walk into the store there are three options:

  • XBOX series X: $600, you own every game you buy and can play them forever in 4K
  • XBOX series S: $300, you own every game you buy and can play them forever in HD
  • XBOX streamer: $150, but with a $20 monthly fee attached. You don't own any of the games, and if you stop your payments it becomes a paper weight. And we can alter the deal at any time in the future. And if you cancel the subscription before the 24 month contract ends, there is a surcharge. Plus you need unlimited data high speed internet for it.

Not so appealing is it? Streaming is worse than a protection racket.
 
Yea to you or I its not so appealing. To little Jane or Billy's single parent wanting to get their kid an Xbox... and games to play. Suddenly it's the best option. No need for Billy or Jane to ask for gsmes. They are all there online. They work and have a decent network connection already. Now billy or Jane get to game and if I want their screen time cut I just cut off their network connection.

Yes to you or I its meh at best. To a parent wanting to find their kid what they want it's gold.
 
Grimlakin said:
Yea to you or I its not so appealing. To little Jane or Billy's single parent wanting to get their kid an Xbox... and games to play. Suddenly it's the best option. No need for Billy or Jane to ask for gsmes. They are all there online. They work and have a decent network connection already. Now billy or Jane get to game and if I want their screen time cut I just cut off their network connection.

Yes to you or I its meh at best. To a parent wanting to find their kid what they want it's gold.
Click to expand...
That is kind of the point, when Billy or Jane gets hooked on gaming and learn that there is a better way, with better response times, where you can be more competitive, they'll want that anyway.

Streaming will either be a giant flop like stadia or shield or all other attempts, or if it does catch on it will only serve as a pipeline to local gaming.

It might slightly encroach on t he console market, but I'm not convinced it is even capable of that.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Become a Patron!
Back
Top