Microsoft CEO Satya Nadella Lays Out the Company's Vision for Its "Netflix for Games"

Megalith

Megalith

24-bit/48kHz
Staff member
Joined
Aug 20, 2006
Messages
13,003
When Microsoft unveiled its Project xCloud project, which lets users stream Xbox titles to a range of devices, many saw flashes of the world’s most popular streaming video service. That analogy, of course, was Microsoft’s plan all along: CEO Satya Nadella has admitted the project’s internal nickname is, quite literally, “Netflix for games,” and claims Project xCloud will be better than the competition due to the “huge” back-catalog of Microsoft-published Xbox games, success of Xbox Live, and the brand having a foot in both the console and PC space.

"There are 2 billion people who play video games on the planet today. We're not going to sell 2 billion consoles," Spencer told Business Insider in an interview in June. "Many of those people don't own a television; many have never owned a PC. For many people on the planet, the phone is their compute device," he said. "It's really about reaching a customer wherever they are, on the devices that they have." For now, Project xCloud — the "Netflix for games" service Nadella spoke about — is still in development. Microsoft is planning to run public tests of the service in 2019.
 
I have no issue with his vision, as long as it is strictly an option. Also, the games need to avoid the direction Netflix is going with most of their original movies, which is to say, extremely boring.
 
Gen Z, who are the future of gaming want business models like Fortnite. Not Netflix which they don’t even pay for in the first place.
 
Skyblue said:
Now they just need to get rid of the limit of the speed of light so the latency can be reasonable.
Click to expand...
That's where the new Quantum Internet comes into play, that combined with direct neural linkage will make lag a thing of the past.
 
Skyblue said:
Now they just need to get rid of the limit of the speed of light so the latency can be reasonable.
Click to expand...
Microsoft fixed that shit years ago. They now have Ludicrous speed.

latest?cb=20150812152815.gif
 
Kind of like "Playstation Now"? Which has been out for YEARS? It works well enough, if you have a good internet connection. It will never be the same quality as running the game locally, though.
 
ManofGod said:
I have no issue with his vision, as long as it is strictly an option. Also, the games need to avoid the direction Netflix is going with most of their original movies, which is to say, extremely boring.
Click to expand...
Not much of a vision when 20 other companies are also claiming their service will be "the Netflix of videogames" -with the same unimaginative phrasing - many who have already been in this space for years optimizing and tweaking and building out infrastructure, trying to be first to that tipping point. MS is very late to this party.

I don't see anything standout or novel about MS's plans here. Backlog of Xbox games? How's that working out against PS4? Old games don't drive adoption.

They can go ahead and try but its more likely to end up the Windows Mobile or WIndows Store of gaming than the Netflix of gaming. Their consumer days are pretty much over.
 
Last edited:
Ahh, just another "must have" Microsoft product that nobody actually wants, well they wont once they experience the 30ms delay between button push, and result in the game, not to mention the compression artifacts and they fact that you don't own the game, so if a publisher falls out with Microsoft, then the game gets removed, so tough doodoo on you...

I hope this dies a horrible death, like Windows Mobile, Cortana, Metro UI, Zune etc etc...
 
Future of gaming: MS streaming 10$ a month... PS streaming 10$ a month, Nintendo Streaming 10$ a month... If the libraries are huge and growing, peppered with AAA titles, I am ok and ready for this... Even if it means to buy a decently priced console from each.
That will be so much gaming my head will explode.
 
The only thing I could see streaming a game for is getting to try it out before actually downloading it and paying for it.

In other words, Demo only.

I will never pay for a game that is streamed with no option to run it locally.
 
Why would be much different than multiplayer games currently run on servers?
That same delay is there, just your local machine shows faster results - but its smoke and mirrors (compared to the "actual results on the server) that gets resynced constantly.
Local only games would never be as good with the delay. But since most people only seem to care about multiplayer games (not me)... I would think the results would be similar.
 
I mean... MS and their track record for stores will be a great selling point on this.
most of the win8 titles I purchased through the store are no longer available. Not because my hardware has changed, or because the developer pulled the title, but because MS decided to remove 'backwards compatibility' on their 'legacy' 2 year old programming languages on any current version on Windows.
Then there was Games for Windows Live... lets not forget that. Good investments there
And the 5-6 attempts MS has had at a music store. They warned us to download all our music on the last one... so I did. Then they pushed a software update that deleted all of the music off of my phone where I downloaded them. Great work MS. Truly great.
Lets not also forget the phone app store. I bought a mere 2 titles on that, so that doesnt hurt quite as badly.

I still pay for Office 365, which I use, and I am *pretty sure* isn't going away. But outside of that and the occasional copy of Windows, I am done purchasing anything from MS. They just can't be trusted.
 
lol microcrap "vision", they cant even count to 10 without messing up lol
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top