• knightly the Sneptaur@pawb.social
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    8 months ago

    I still have an OnLive console from the second time they tried games-as-a-service.

    The market isn’t big enough to justify the distribution at scale it’d take to make this tech profitable.

    • Katana314@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      8 months ago

      You talked about console hardware, but then mentioned distribution. I’m going to guess you mostly mean servers - as these days people don’t really need any special local hardware aside from any controller.

      The major cities generally already have those servers distributed and working. It’s true certain edges of the world don’t have a good experience, but that sort of just fits in the 70% of scenarios where you wouldn’t want a cloud game.

      There’s still this weird expectation it would replace your home den where you have lots of space and disposable income for multiple consoles - it doesn’t. It’s really more for the convenience of getting your games from a web browser.

      • knightly the Sneptaur@pawb.social
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        8 months ago

        I’m going to guess you mostly mean servers

        Yep.

        It’s really more for the convenience of getting your games from a web browser.

        Exactly, it’s a niche service that only appeals to a fraction of the folks who play games, but it also requires the operator to purchase servers with graphics cards and set them up in datacenters near everyone who has an account in order to minimize latency. It’s not viable for people who have slow internet or live in a rural area, especially when so much of their income goes to licensing game titles for use in the service.