Microsoft planning to launch a game streaming service within 3 years.

https://www.polygon.com/2017/11/6/16614854/microsoft-game-streaming-service-announcement-xbox-one-no-console

Microsoft will probably debut a streaming service that doesn’t require a console for some types of content in the next three years, Spencer said. A 2012 trial of such a service inside the company was too costly and never made it to the market, but Microsoft’s progress in Azure cloud services over the past few years is changing the economics and quality level, he said.

Not the most surprising of news but I am curious why Spencer mentioned something as potentially important as launching a game streaming service in such a casual manner.

As always it all depends on whether enough people have decent net speeds and the price of the service.
I think the number in the UK who'd be unable to use the service even if they wanted to would be surprising and make it almost pointless to try.

Peter Crisp wrote:As always it all depends on whether enough people have decent net speeds and the price of the service.
I think the number in the UK who'd be unable to use the service even if they wanted to would be surprising and make it almost pointless to try.

I think the numbers with decent internet has increased considerably in the last few years to make that argument irrelevant.

If it was the case there wouldn't be a massive rise in online purchasing etc.

Virtually everyone I know now has fibre or broadband. Near enough everyone I know uses some sort of stream service.

Streaming video and sending commands doesn't need mega mega connections if they get their compression and auto changing resolutions and things right.

Either way I don't think the "not enough people on fast web" argument is actually I thing any more just something people seem to cling to for odd reasons.

Errkal wrote:

Peter Crisp wrote:As always it all depends on whether enough people have decent net speeds and the price of the service.
I think the number in the UK who'd be unable to use the service even if they wanted to would be surprising and make it almost pointless to try.

I think the numbers with decent internet has increased considerably in the last few years to make that argument irrelevant.

If it was the case there wouldn't be a massive rise in online purchasing etc.

Virtually everyone I know now has fibre or broadband. Near enough everyone I know uses some sort of stream service.

Streaming video and sending commands doesn't need mega mega connections if they get their compression and auto changing resolutions and things right.

Either way I don't think the "not enough people on fast web" argument is actually I thing any more just something people seem to cling to for odd reasons.

I agree, I think the latest statistics say that 90% of UK residents use the internet at least once a week. I can’t imagine many of those are using dial up.

That doesn’t mean all of the people have fast enough connections for streaming games, but I’d imagine most of the people that would want to stream games have fast enough connections.

Moggy wrote:

Errkal wrote:

Peter Crisp wrote:As always it all depends on whether enough people have decent net speeds and the price of the service.
I think the number in the UK who'd be unable to use the service even if they wanted to would be surprising and make it almost pointless to try.

I think the numbers with decent internet has increased considerably in the last few years to make that argument irrelevant.

If it was the case there wouldn't be a massive rise in online purchasing etc.

Virtually everyone I know now has fibre or broadband. Near enough everyone I know uses some sort of stream service.

Streaming video and sending commands doesn't need mega mega connections if they get their compression and auto changing resolutions and things right.

Either way I don't think the "not enough people on fast web" argument is actually I thing any more just something people seem to cling to for odd reasons.

I agree, I think the latest statistics say that 90% of UK residents use the internet at least once a week. I can’t imagine many of those are using dial up.

That doesn’t mean all of the people have fast enough connections for streaming games, but I’d imagine most of the people that would want to stream games have fast enough connections.

Isn't netflixes requirement like 2m which was the same for onlive when that came out.

Streaming a game is just video and controls so internet that supports netflix etc. Should be absolutely fine and seen as how but netflix is there must be enough decent web out there to be viable.

Errkal wrote:Isn't netflixes requirement like 2m which was the same for onlive when that came out.

Streaming a game is just video and controls so internet that supports netflix etc. Should be absolutely fine and seen as how but netflix is there must be enough decent web out there to be viable.

Even my 76 year old grandmother has more than a 5MB connection and she only uses it to make “aww” comments on Facebook photos of her grandchildren/great grandchildren.

Moggy wrote:

Errkal wrote:Isn't netflixes requirement like 2m which was the same for onlive when that came out.

Streaming a game is just video and controls so internet that supports netflix etc. Should be absolutely fine and seen as how but netflix is there must be enough decent web out there to be viable.

Even my 76 year old grandmother has more than a 5MB connection and she only uses it to make “aww” comments on Facebook photos of her grandchildren/great grandchildren.

Yup which would be plenty to handle a video stream and send commands back as there isn't any real processing involved due to "the power of the cloud"

I've got a fast enough connection, and I don't want to stream games. It's always going to be inferior. I don't think it'll be aimed at enthusiasts.

Two things:
"Some types of content" - it's not going to be high-end games.

"Doesn’t require a console" - What are they going to stream it to? PC, mobile, a dedicated box? PS4?

Errkal wrote:Yup which would be plenty to handle a video stream and send commands back as there isn't any real processing involved due to "the power of the cloud"

I look forward to the future where I can explain to her that clouds are working so that she can reverse her car over prostitutes in GTA:V.

rinks wrote:I've got a fast enough connection, and I don't want to stream games. It's always going to be inferior. I don't think it'll be aimed at enthusiasts.

Two things:
"Some types of content" - it's not going to be high-end games.

"Doesn’t require a console" - What are they going to stream it to? PC, mobile, a dedicated box? PS4?

I agree with you there, streaming games at home is not for me. While I agree with Errkal that it is all technically possible and that most people would be able to do it on existing connections, that doesn’t mean I actually want to do it.

I can see uses for it though. If it was just an app on a TV/tablet then it could be great for using when you are away at a hotel or (if mobile data ever becomes reliably fast and cheap enough!) on a train/bus. Sure you could just take a DS, but a system where your saves are all in the cloud and while bored on the train you can just pick up your game where you left off would be great.

I couldn't download a demo from the Microsoft store on my pc.without it repeatedly failing, taking 3 evenings to finally work. Like strawberry float would I trust them to have reliable streaming service.

Morganfreemangoodluck.gif

Errkal wrote:

Peter Crisp wrote:As always it all depends on whether enough people have decent net speeds and the price of the service.
I think the number in the UK who'd be unable to use the service even if they wanted to would be surprising and make it almost pointless to try.

I think the numbers with decent internet has increased considerably in the last few years to make that argument irrelevant.

If it was the case there wouldn't be a massive rise in online purchasing etc.

Virtually everyone I know now has fibre or broadband. Near enough everyone I know uses some sort of stream service.

It's absolutely not irrelevant at all, there's still plenty of areas where fibre optic speeds are either still poor or not accessible at all.

Errkal wrote:Streaming video and sending commands doesn't need mega mega connections if they get their compression and auto changing resolutions and things right.

You have to factor in input lag as well.

It'll be a while time before streaming provides a service on par with playing a physical or digital game.

rinks wrote:I've got a fast enough connection, and I don't want to stream games. It's always going to be inferior. I don't think it'll be aimed at enthusiasts.

Two things:
"Some types of content" - it's not going to be high-end games.

"Doesn’t require a console" - What are they going to stream it to? PC, mobile, a dedicated box? PS4?

My guess would be that streaming is added as a feature for gamepass users and that it'll be limited to Windows 10 devices at the start.

I remain convinced that MS are going to announce support for Windows 10 PCs to use the Xbox interface as a sort of big picture mode in the near future and that we'll see an Xbox equivalent of the Fire TV stick on the market next winter.

Mafro wrote:

Errkal wrote:

Peter Crisp wrote:As always it all depends on whether enough people have decent net speeds and the price of the service.
I think the number in the UK who'd be unable to use the service even if they wanted to would be surprising and make it almost pointless to try.

I think the numbers with decent internet has increased considerably in the last few years to make that argument irrelevant.

If it was the case there wouldn't be a massive rise in online purchasing etc.

Virtually everyone I know now has fibre or broadband. Near enough everyone I know uses some sort of stream service.

It's absolutely not irrelevant at all, there's still plenty of areas where fibre optic speeds are either still poor or not accessible at all.

Errkal wrote:Streaming video and sending commands doesn't need mega mega connections if they get their compression and auto changing resolutions and things right.

You have to factor in input lag as well.

It'll be a while time before streaming provides a service on par with playing a physical or digital game.

Maybe irrelevant was a step too far, maybe not as prevalent would be better, it will be an issue in rural areas but this wont replace traditional gaming for a long time, but for the most part it will be fine for most people.

Input lag will be an issue and it wont be 100% there, but even way back when OnLive was doing it was pretty good and at the time I was on 16mb broadband.

Mafro wrote:It's absolutely not irrelevant at all, there's still plenty of areas where fibre optic speeds are either still poor or not accessible at all.

It depends on your definition of irrelevant, but as of April 2016, BT fibre was available to 86% of homes and businesses in the country.

https://www.ispreview.co.uk/index.php/2 ... mises.html

In my area we don’t have cable options. BT Infinity started to arrive in certain streets around eight years ago (including mine, luckily) but it is now over-subscribed and they’re not taking on new customers. My mum & dad are in the same town but are still stuck with a lousy 2mb service.

And this is in London!

Moggy wrote:

Mafro wrote:It's absolutely not irrelevant at all, there's still plenty of areas where fibre optic speeds are either still poor or not accessible at all.

It depends on your definition of irrelevant, but as of April 2016, BT fibre was available to 86% of homes and businesses in the country.

https://www.ispreview.co.uk/index.php/2 ... mises.html

Without a proper breakdown of the speeds people are getting stats like that are worthless. My local exchange is fibre enabled so technically I can get FTTC broadband but because I am more than 1.6 kilometres from the exchange it's no better than plain old ASDL was 10 years ago.

There should be a proper survey showing just how many people are limited to 0-5 mb connections, 5-10, 10-20 etc. The average broadband speed across a country is what tends to grab headlines but given the sheer chasm that exists between good broadband and shite broadband then that's also an increasingly worthless metric. 100 houses getting gigabit connections can offset 2000 houses getting 1mb connections and lead to an average connection of 50mb which sounds great but the reality is that 95% of that sample have inadequate connections.

Input lag is an insurmountable barrier for streaming quick reaction games, there's no getting around it.

Imagine trying to stream Towerfall Ascension

I can't imagine fighting games will ever be fast enough for the better players who need lightning fast responses.

Peter Crisp wrote:I can't imagine fighting games will ever be fast enough for the better players who need lightning fast responses.

Streaming services will never be aimed at those people so it doesn't really matter. If people can play something like Assassin's Creed Origins on a cheap device like a Roku or Fire TV and have an experience that's almost as good as playing it on Xboxone or PS4 then they'll accept some compromise.

Onlive was a badly designed service and I think it's failures are still souring people's perceptions of streaming games.