UBI CEO Doubles Down on Streaming Games Over Hardware

Dang it! i just had a good long post typed up and accidentally hit f5 lol.
Basically we are effed if the majority of general population adopts this regardless if it provides an overall worse experience.
There will now be 4 catergories of gamers:
1. PC
2. Console
3. PC streamer
4. Console/other device with a gamepad Streamer

Imagine streaming a FPS with a gamepad...... gamepad + extra streaming lag = :(
 
On top of the massive lag involved, no one seems to comment on the excessive load times that would come with it.

Even with gigabit connection speeds it's still gonna be, what, 5 times slower than what a standard SSD can do?
 
Bobert said:
View attachment 99770
Click to expand...

/slight rant

Holy shit , every other week I have one of my clients come back from a conference where some snake oil software salesman tells them about moving to “the cloud” and they ask me about doing it.

Well , we’re going to have to move your 3 sql servers , exchange , 6 TB data up there , pay for all that hosting , and then move you from your 300 a month internet connection to about 2 grand a month that will get you 100/100 when last week you were complaining about moving files took too long over your 1000/1000 network.

How’s that wonderful cloud sound now ?
 
DNMock said:
On top of the massive lag involved, no one seems to comment on the excessive load times that would come with it.

Even with gigabit connection speeds it's still gonna be, what, 5 times slower than what a standard SSD can do?
Click to expand...

They're not transferring files, Just streaming whats on the desktop. Just like netflix.

What you're saying is the equivalent of downloading a netflix movie before watching it.
 
Dahkoht said:
/slight rant

Holy shit , every other week I have one of my clients come back from a conference where some snake oil software salesman tells them about moving to “the cloud” and they ask me about doing it.

Well , we’re going to have to move your 3 sql servers , exchange , 6 TB data up there , pay for all that hosting , and then move you from your 300 a month internet connection to about 2 grand a month that will get you 100/100 when last week you were complaining about moving files took too long over your 1000/1000 network.

How’s that wonderful cloud sound now ?
Click to expand...

Cloud is only good for things like email and offsite backups lol.
I wonder how much it costs per month to have 6TB of Data
 
Rockenrooster said:
They're not transferring files, Just streaming whats on the desktop. Just like netflix.

What you're saying is the equivalent of downloading a netflix movie before watching it.
Click to expand...

Surely you would need to pre load all the textures and such to buffer it down a bit (kind of like netflix buffers the feed) so if/when you get a hiccup in your connection speed it doesn't absolutely devastate the game.
 
DNMock said:
Surely you would need to pre load all the textures and such to buffer it down a bit (kind of like netflix buffers the feed) so if/when you get a hiccup in your connection speed it doesn't absolutely devastate the game.
Click to expand...

Doesn't work that way.
You can't buffer gameplay without adding input lag.
Connection hiccups = bad experience just like VOIP phones! (you can't buffer that either without adding lag!)
It works for videos and netflix because it is a static video file that doesn't change and is stupid easy for the computer to "see" what will happen 5 sec from now.

Try to do that for a game and your head will explode lol. You can't predict the unpredictable.......
 
The way gaming is going, I might need a new hobby in a decade or so...

This is the best way to make me not play your games Ubisoft.
 
I'm sorry, but I like my games here.
xf39ulo.jpg


And my graphics here.
XHQfzMr.jpg
 
DNMock said:
Surely you would need to pre load all the textures and such to buffer it down a bit (kind of like netflix buffers the feed) so if/when you get a hiccup in your connection speed it doesn't absolutely devastate the game.
Click to expand...

They are literally just streaming a shitty compressed video. And it looks terrible.
 
I agree with UBI, it has a long way to go but streaming games like assassins creed origins from my main PC to my work laptop works well enough. Only games I have real issues with are platformers and FPS games right now, everything else I can stream using steam inhome over my vpn and its very playable. The biggest hurdle is going to be ISP networks and connections, for me both my house and work laptop are ont he same ISP in the same city both fibre to the door so my ping is normally very very low.
 
Dahkoht said:
/slight rant

Holy shit , every other week I have one of my clients come back from a conference where some snake oil software salesman tells them about moving to “the cloud” and they ask me about doing it.

Well , we’re going to have to move your 3 sql servers , exchange , 6 TB data up there , pay for all that hosting , and then move you from your 300 a month internet connection to about 2 grand a month that will get you 100/100 when last week you were complaining about moving files took too long over your 1000/1000 network.

How’s that wonderful cloud sound now ?
Click to expand...

We go through that at my work in waves fairly frequently. I fight it off as well as I can locally. We have some huge datacenters and MPLS circuits running all over the place, so having to replace all of that with some generic cloud solution, (while maybe more efficient on the pure-hosting aspect) would be a nightmare cost-wise. I also get to use the current internet speed argument frequently. :D We have 10Gb single-mode running around here in the local branch, and people still complain about speeds sometimes.
 
Rockenrooster said:
Lol! Great! Good old local disk C!
Click to expand...

That's just for organization, it's actually followed with this mess to send it all to other drives.

mklink /J "C:\Games\GOG Galaxy\Games\The Witcher 3 Wild Hunt GOTY\" "D:\GOG Galaxy\The Witcher 3 Wild Hunt GOTY\"
mklink /J "C:\Games\GOG Galaxy\Games\Amnesia - A Machine For Pigs\" "G:\GOG Galaxy\Amnesia - A Machine For Pigs\"
mklink /J "C:\Games\GOG Galaxy\Games\Amnesia - The Dark Descent\" "G:\GOG Galaxy\Amnesia - The Dark Descent\"
mklink /J "C:\Games\GOG Galaxy\Games\Beyond Good and Evil\" "G:\GOG Galaxy\Beyond Good and Evil\"
mklink /J "C:\Games\GOG Galaxy\Games\DOOM 3 BFG\" "G:\GOG Galaxy\DOOM 3 BFG\"
mklink /J "C:\Games\GOG Galaxy\Games\Dragon Age Origins\" "G:\GOG Galaxy\Dragon Age Origins\"
mklink /J "C:\Games\GOG Galaxy\Games\F.E.A.R. Platinum Collection\" "G:\GOG Galaxy\F.E.A.R. Platinum Collection\"
mklink /J "C:\Games\GOG Galaxy\Games\Hard Reset Redux\" "G:\GOG Galaxy\Hard Reset Redux\"
mklink /J "C:\Games\GOG Galaxy\Games\Hard West\" "G:\GOG Galaxy\Hard West\"
mklink /J "C:\Games\GOG Galaxy\Games\HellbladeSenuasSacrifice\" "G:\GOG Galaxy\HellbladeSenuasSacrifice\"
 
J3RK said:
We go through that at my work in waves fairly frequently. I fight it off as well as I can locally. We have some huge datacenters and MPLS circuits running all over the r place, so having to replace all of that with some generic cloud solution, (while maybe more efficient on the pure-hosting aspect) would be a nightmare cost-wise. I also get to use the current internet speed argument frequently. :D We have 10Gb single-mode running around here in the local branch, and people still complain about speeds sometimes.
Click to expand...

Some CEO or managing partner always gets baboozled by a salesman or just watches an Intel or Cisco commercial showing everything being done from a table side dinner at the beach over a wireless tablet and it magically syncs with everyone else and all done with a click of the button thanks to “ the cloud”.

Of course the cost of such a setup to work so quickly and seamlessly is never mentioned
 
Azphira said:
That's just for organization, it's actually followed with this mess to send it all to other drives.

mklink /J "C:\Games\GOG Galaxy\Games\The Witcher 3 Wild Hunt GOTY\" "D:\GOG Galaxy\The Witcher 3 Wild Hunt GOTY\"
mklink /J "C:\Games\GOG Galaxy\Games\Amnesia - A Machine For Pigs\" "G:\GOG Galaxy\Amnesia - A Machine For Pigs\"
mklink /J "C:\Games\GOG Galaxy\Games\Amnesia - The Dark Descent\" "G:\GOG Galaxy\Amnesia - The Dark Descent\"
mklink /J "C:\Games\GOG Galaxy\Games\Beyond Good and Evil\" "G:\GOG Galaxy\Beyond Good and Evil\"
mklink /J "C:\Games\GOG Galaxy\Games\DOOM 3 BFG\" "G:\GOG Galaxy\DOOM 3 BFG\"
mklink /J "C:\Games\GOG Galaxy\Games\Dragon Age Origins\" "G:\GOG Galaxy\Dragon Age Origins\"
mklink /J "C:\Games\GOG Galaxy\Games\F.E.A.R. Platinum Collection\" "G:\GOG Galaxy\F.E.A.R. Platinum Collection\"
mklink /J "C:\Games\GOG Galaxy\Games\Hard Reset Redux\" "G:\GOG Galaxy\Hard Reset Redux\"
mklink /J "C:\Games\GOG Galaxy\Games\Hard West\" "G:\GOG Galaxy\Hard West\"
mklink /J "C:\Games\GOG Galaxy\Games\HellbladeSenuasSacrifice\" "G:\GOG Galaxy\HellbladeSenuasSacrifice\"
Click to expand...


LOL that's hilarious!
I don't even bother with Symlinks unless I have to
 
Dahkoht said:
Some CEO or managing partner always gets baboozled by a salesman or just watches an Intel or Cisco commercial showing everything being done from a table side dinner at the beach over a wireless tablet and it magically syncs with everyone else and all done with a click of the button thanks to “ the cloud”.

Of course the cost of such a setup to work so quickly and seamlessly is never mentioned
Click to expand...

I've seen some pretty heavy IT choices that seemed like they were made on the golf-course. :D I know exactly what you're talking about. I try not to stress too much, and just fight the battle at our division. Occasionally something slips to the cloud or datacenter, but something always has to be stood up here locally to take its place. :D
 
Ragenrok said:
I agree with UBI, it has a long way to go but streaming games like assassins creed origins from my main PC to my work laptop works well enough. Only games I have real issues with are platformers and FPS games right now, everything else I can stream using steam inhome over my vpn and its very playable. The biggest hurdle is going to be ISP networks and connections, for me both my house and work laptop are ont he same ISP in the same city both fibre to the door so my ping is normally very very low.
Click to expand...

Dang you and your fiber connection!
 
Dahkoht said:
Some CEO or managing partner always gets baboozled by a salesman or just watches an Intel or Cisco commercial showing everything being done from a table side dinner at the beach over a wireless tablet and it magically syncs with everyone else and all done with a click of the button thanks to “ the cloud”.

Of course the cost of such a setup to work so quickly and seamlessly is never mentioned
Click to expand...


Hey, lets move our local server to the cloud even though the best internet we can reasonably get is 6 down and 0.5 up!!!! It'll be so awesome!
 
Hardware specs wouldn't really matter on the consumer side, if streaming games, right?
 
///AMG said:
I've been thinking a lot lately about why everyone is moving to the cloud for gaming or trying to. Then I realized if they moved to the cloud they cut out the console licensing fees, cut out the need to physically manufacture, cut out inventory costs, I would bet that with compression technology the overall data transferred for most games will be a lot less than downloading the whole game (they won't even have to send data to patch games anymore) so less cost on data. If they can sell games for $60 on a cloud platform and other costs it will probably net them after considering the cost of the cloud $40? vs the $20 or so now?

Overall I don't think its better for gamers but it is a hell of a lot better for the Developers and Publishers.
Click to expand...

The consoles will still be around they'll just be streaming devices and I don't think Sony and MS are going to give up the licensing fees without creating a new fee to replace it.

I also think it would generally take more data. 50 hours is an average length for the SP games I play and the largest of those are about 50GB which would mean it needs to use less than 1GB/hour to use less bandwidth, the 1920x1080 30fps H.264 video I record with my capture card is about 5 times that and I wouldn't consider it anywhere near good enough IQ or framerate for a game.
 
Ebernanut said:
The consoles will still be around they'll just be streaming devices and I don't think Sony and MS are going to give up the licensing fees without creating a new fee to replace it.

I also think it would generally take more data. 50 hours is an average length for the SP games I play and the largest of those are about 50GB which would mean it needs to use less than 1GB/hour to use less bandwidth, the 1920x1080 30fps H.264 video I record with my capture card is about 5 times that and I wouldn't consider it anywhere near good enough IQ or framerate for a game.
Click to expand...

Publishers will work with TV makers or make their own apps etc. Just like whats happening on Android with Fortnite and other games, there are plenty of work arounds to avoid those fees, I think it will be much cheaper and easier for casual gamers to just buy a controller that connects to your TV and play like PS Now. h.265 is much better than h.264 plus there are plenty of other tricks to compress data.
 
We all know what EA and Ubi are going to do with this.

IF they get it running well, and it's successful; in another 5 or 10 years, they'll simply stop releasing games as local programs.

Then you can only rent your games for a monthly fee.
 
umeng2002 said:
We all know what EA and Ubi are going to do with this.

IF they get it running well, and it's successful; in another 5 or 10 years, they'll simply stop releasing games as local programs.

Then you can only rent your games for a monthly fee.
Click to expand...

Until they no longer feel like supporting it. Then it's gone forever.
 
umeng2002 said:
We all know what EA and Ubi are going to do with this.

IF they get it running well, and it's successful; in another 5 or 10 years, they'll simply stop releasing games as local programs.

Then you can only rent your games for a monthly fee.
Click to expand...
z14r7.jpg
 
///AMG said:
Publishers will work with TV makers or make their own apps etc. Just like whats happening on Android with Fortnite and other games, there are plenty of work arounds to avoid those fees, I think it will be much cheaper and easier for casual gamers to just buy a controller that connects to your TV and play like PS Now. h.265 is much better than h.264 plus there are plenty of other tricks to compress data.
Click to expand...

A normal TV isn't going to be able to handle game streaming with an app(they can hardly handle video streaming) so you're still going to need a dedicated client side device, it would be simpler than current consoles but people won't want to buy a different one for each publisher and the publishers would still have to build out massive server side infrastructure. I don't see how this would eliminate consoles or the associated fees even if games shifted to 100% streaming, I'm pretty sure this is about cementing games as a service.

H.265 would need to be 10x as efficient to use the same bandwidth in the scenario I gave and provide 1080p 60fps and it would still also be lossy compression. I don't think it's close to possible with current tech to save bandwidth unless the IQ is complete garbage.
 
Ebernanut said:
A normal TV isn't going to be able to handle game streaming with an app(they can hardly handle video streaming) so you're still going to need a dedicated client side device, it would be simpler than current consoles but people won't want to buy a different one for each publisher and the publishers would still have to build out massive server side infrastructure. I don't see how this would eliminate consoles or the associated fees even if games shifted to 100% streaming, I'm pretty sure this is about cementing games as a service.

H.265 would need to be 10x as efficient to use the same bandwidth in the scenario I gave and provide 1080p 60fps and it would still also be lossy compression. I don't think it's close to possible with current tech to save bandwidth unless the IQ is complete garbage.
Click to expand...

Normal TV's wont but almost every new TV now with "smart" features with any type of quad core ARM SoC could probably do it "well enough" at 1/10th the price of a console (look at PS Now with a few of the Sony TV's and ps tv which are insanely cheap, the SoC's in those can be had for $10-$20 for OEMs). TV's are already putting the tech in without game publishers pushing it, ARM SoCs are getting more powerful every year at and cheaper.

You may have a point with the codec, but think about this not everyone completes a game, some only play for a dozen or so hrs (I think 20hrs~ is the avg for most games now) and the size of AAA games is reaching 100GBs. I am fairly certain its cheaper for Publishers to do streaming and spend 50GBs for most consumers to play through the whole game than 100GBs for them to download it, and all the big patches now too. Think about all the games people buy on steam that never play it, or download them and never touch. Publishers will get to control everything and thats a powerful thing for them.

Going forward this will be the standard I can put my money on it, it makes too much financial sense for them not to do it. They will most likely make it too cheap to pass up and then steadily increase the price like Netflix, most people will happily do it as well if all they have to do is have a new and decent TV and buy a controller, or buy a $50 streaming device. I know this is [H]ard but we are such a small subset of the gaming market compared to the casual gamers. This isnt for us, its for everyone else.

Also future prediction, if they can make the input lag and video quality work it will be the end of console generations and used games. $10-60 a month in some sort of tiered structure for whatever games you want, where ever you want it (TV, Phone, Computer), any time you want it would probably sell really well.
 
Just updated my Xfinity plan so I wouldn't be raked over the coals (as hard) monthly.

I now have a 1TB monthly cap.

I am not streaming a fucking thing that isn't Netflix or Hulu, or seeing how far I can piss before missing the toilet.
 
Can't believe AMD, Nvidia, Intel are happy with this or want it to take off and become popular. It certainly would mean less hardware sales overall if everything was streamed to low-end devices that users own. What will happen to the $1000 GPUs that users used to buy? Sure, the cloud services will buy some, but not one piece of hardware per user that would have bought it in the current model. Why would AMD/Intel/Nvidia (and for that matter, any PC hardware manufacturer) think this is a great idea for their bottom line?
 
BSmith said:
Bzzzzt! Wrong bar-room-breath! About 133ms to send it around the world, but you still need to get it back. So that makes it 266ms. That is too slow for even a modest twitch player, like my Grandma. :)
Click to expand...
Nope, 133ms is correct. You would never have to go more than halfway around the globe. (If it was 133ms one way, it'd be in your neighborhood, so why isn't that 1ms instead?)
 
Azrak said:
Can't believe AMD, Nvidia, Intel are happy with this or want it to take off and become popular. It certainly would mean less hardware sales overall if everything was streamed to low-end devices that users own. What will happen to the $1000 GPUs that users used to buy? Sure, the cloud services will buy some, but not one piece of hardware per user that would have bought it in the current model. Why would AMD/Intel/Nvidia (and for that matter, any PC hardware manufacturer) think this is a great idea for their bottom line?
Click to expand...

What exactly can they do about it? Are they going to pay publishers and developers the fees and cost of physically manufacturing the games? They will need to adapt to a new model if it hurts them that much. This move for devs and publishers is huge for cost cutting and profit margin increases. Nvidia and Intel are starting to develop and focus more on enterprise and AI stuff anyways.
 
When the publishers decide they need to charge for their "services" too. I just really hope they don't pull a $ony/M$ and charge to connect UPlay to the internet.
 
i don't see why streaming can't be prioritized for Adventure type games (ala Detroit: Become Human, Life is Strange, The Council ) Then there won't be restrictively tough hardware limitations ( for pc ) anymore.
 
Last edited:
A few months back I would have called anyone suggesting a game may release before the end of the year that implemented ray tracing a nut bar.

So who knows. I do believe there are a lot of games that would play very well with streaming.

Also a lot of people here I think fail to realize that the vast majority of gamers are used to playing on mid range and even low end hardware... of course if your accustomed to always playing on the top of the line or close to gaming hardware streaming won't be all that attractive. For a large chunk of the market however who are quite used to seeing the odd stutter and have accepted that Ultra and even High settings is never going to be them. This may look much more attractive.
 
One other thought on streaming.... RTX.

We'll see what the benchies look like but if its true that turning Ray Tracing on will result in 1080p resolutions even on top end cards.

It may be very good for the stream companies. There may be a lot of games with Ray Tracing options in the next couple years... if the streaming servers can pump them out at 1080p / 1440p with all that RT eye candy cranked to 11, it may make people more likely to put up with the odd stutter to get the platform subs moving initially. Get a few smaller developers to make streaming exclusive aimed games with a TON of ray tracing that would bring 2080ti sli to its knees and game play that feature lag friendly inputs. A game that makes you honestly feel like your inside a Pixar Movie.

To be honest considering how slimy NV seems to be right now... it wouldn't shock me at all if this entire RTX line junk is nothing but a way for them to get game developers on board, so they can sell a ton of Server based Quatro cards and/or custom stream server GPU clusters.

At that point they really woudln't care if a 2060 could handle RT or not... their plan could be to try and lock up all the streaming server business for the low-mid range gamers instead of selling tons of low profit mid/low end cards. Just make big massive dies aimed at Quatro with the cast offs ending up in high end cards like 2080ti ect. It would mean they wouldn't even have to worry about spinning lower cost silicon at all. They already protected their real last generation silicons margin by never putting one in a consumer card.
 
ChadD said:
One other thought on streaming.... RTX.

We'll see what the benchies look like but if its true that turning Ray Tracing on will result in 1080p resolutions even on top end cards.

It may be very good for the stream companies. There may be a lot of games with Ray Tracing options in the next couple years... if the streaming servers can pump them out at 1080p / 1440p with all that RT eye candy cranked to 11, it may make people more likely to put up with the odd stutter to get the platform subs moving initially. Get a few smaller developers to make streaming exclusive aimed games with a TON of ray tracing that would bring 2080ti sli to its knees and game play that feature lag friendly inputs. A game that makes you honestly feel like your inside a Pixar Movie.

To be honest considering how slimy NV seems to be right now... it wouldn't shock me at all if this entire RTX line junk is nothing but a way for them to get game developers on board, so they can sell a ton of Server based Quatro cards and/or custom stream server GPU clusters.

At that point they really woudln't care if a 2060 could handle RT or not... their plan could be to try and lock up all the streaming server business for the low-mid range gamers instead of selling tons of low profit mid/low end cards. Just make big massive dies aimed at Quatro with the cast offs ending up in high end cards like 2080ti ect. It would mean they wouldn't even have to worry about spinning lower cost silicon at all. They already protected their real last generation silicons margin by never putting one in a consumer card.
Click to expand...


Yeah RTX raytracing will look soooo good being streamed over a network.
We would need absurd amounts of bandwidth to overcome lossy compression codec artifacts or an uncompressed stream.
 
Tak Ne said:
Smart move for Ubi, they get to decide how long games stay 'playable', charge extra to support older games or 'premium' server access. They could even charge more to support 4k, HDR or RayTracing.
Click to expand...

This x1000 - just another way to reach deeper into your wallet
 
Rockenrooster said:
Yeah RTX raytracing will look soooo good being streamed over a network.
We would need absurd amounts of bandwidth to overcome lossy compression codec artifacts or an uncompressed stream.
Click to expand...

They already have that all figured out. They put all that into the tegra for the shield years back already.

That is the main advantage of streaming. It doesn't matter how much eye candy the game being streamed has... it can be on low settings or 5 steps above ultra... the streaming requirements are the same.

Its like saying a AAA hollywoo movie costs Netflix more bandwidth over a B grade bollywoo film.

Only thing it will cost them really is the added server GPU horsepower... which may well be NV thinking. Sell the streaming companies millions of $ in customized RTX GPU clusters.
 
What I would like to understand is how, currently, Fortnite is playable over a stream and Quake Champions isn't. Both of them are guys running around shooting each other. If someone is running perpendicular to my aim, and there is lag, then I must have to lead the guy in order for the shot to hit. What is Fortnite doing that is able to combat this, and why isn't Quake Champions doing that?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top