Originally Posted by SimoxTav
With several devices becoming "smart" (TV, fridges, ovens etc...), the opportunity to change the market with this technology is at hand IMHO. Don't forget that today we still have "software exclusives" for specified platforms, that constrain the users to purchase a specific hardware.
This would simply override the problem (p.e. I decide to buy a specific console A, but a game that I would really like to play is on the console B; I purchase a service to stream it on my device (paying it as A SERVICE, not as A PRODUCT)).
To me, the developers could also benefit by the streaming services developing programs just for one "hardware" and gaining incomes thanks to a "subscription plan" instead of royalties "per sold" copy (dependent on the console, the availability of a distributor, etc).
Paying as a service would also grant a benefit for users on games that have a ridiculous longevity, with an option to "rent" it for a limited time and, if the interest fades quickly, you surely spent less than buying a physical copy of the same game.
On the other hand, while it would completely kill the piracy, it would also kill the market of used products (that is again a plus for the gaming industry but not for the user).
I see your point
But the phrase "opportunity to change the market" (in my understanding) means that thr whole industry will turn into streaming-based only
So let me explain why it's not gonna happen
I think that streaming service can only and ONLY be applied to the PC gaming segment
If such a thing is applied to the console segment - imagine how much money can developers actually earn by spreading their games in streaming service online shops (let's call them like this for now)?
Today it costs millions of dollars to develop a game, especially when you do it for several platforms, which means that you gotta spend money and resources to develop and test the game on each announced platform
So, even with a streaming service, which means a single platform, the money go to the service holder, who pays some % of the income to the devs
The downside of it is that when a player pays 50$ a month (which includes unlimited access to the games library) - the devs literally get nothing from that
Today the Gaikai service (and Nvidia Grid) exist only because devs can afford to spread their games in these service, since they gain profit from the sales on other platforms
So I see several main downsides of the situation when streaming services take over the industry:
1. It creates a single platform, which means that the user has no choice, just a straight-on "subscribe and play scheme"
2. A single platform on the market means that there will be no competition, except for maybe the service holders, but it will just tend to lower the prices and maybe increase perfomances
3. Main rule of ANY market is there's GOTTA be competition. No competition = no progress = high chance of a fatigueness
4. Changing the market into streaming-based will only create chaos and it literally means an end to exclusives and such, no uniqueness
5. Since today most companies release their games on several platforms - it means that the devs can cover most of the money they spent on actually developing the game, and that means BIG money since the platforms have big audiences (and they only tend to increase more and more) which literally equals to 60$ per a game X number of platforms X number of units sold (mostly the numbers are more or less equal)
And 6. Since the devs wouldn't get much $$$ from spreading their games in a single streaming service - it would only lead to creation of several services from each of the big companies
I bet that today's Steam vs Origin example would be the best. We don't want or need that to happen with each gaming company, right?
Wow, sorry for the long post
P.S. Sorry for possible typos - typed this on my N7 lol