Why doesn't the video game industry have a service like

>>386370165
No one wants to stream games, the input lag is awful.
No company is going to let you install games on your hard drive for 10-15 dollars a month, people will pirate that shit much easier.

Like game pass?

>>386370165
Wasn't there such a thing about ~3 years ago? forgot wtf it was called, I tried a trial of it, while shit was pretty and ran on my toaster, the input lag was insane.

>>386370165
What is Playstation Now?

>>386370430
OnLive and it was older than that. Sony has PS Now and there is probably another service by now

>>386370165
Because it would never work.

>>386370430

There's been a few throughout the years. OnLive is what most people remember. There was one many years before that though and I cannot for the life of me remember the name. I just remember it had a bunch of classic Sega games and otherwise the library was pretty lame.

>>386370331
>>386370565

It seems like a service that would happen sometime in her lifetime. I bet you back in the day people never would have thought Spotify would work either, especially when you consider how greedy the music labels are, lol.

Once they get the encryption down in the lag time down and all of that A-OK, I think it'll be a matter of time.


To be honest with you, I would almost prefer that over pirating. I would love to pick up where I left off on a game that I haven't played in like 7 years you know? Have a saved files there forever just seems like a common sense kind of a move.

>>386370565
A game streaming service could work once the technology is there to do it. Onlive was considered a ludicrous idea when first shown but now Sony is doing it.

Do people honestly believe Spotify has every song?

>>386370770
OP here

I'm watching a Gaming Historian video on that lol. Blockbuster did it. But ya, it inspired me to make this thread for something for the modern era

>>386370165
>8 minutes in and no one comments on OP's image

>>386370165
>What is Xbox Game Pass

>>386370921
It has every song worth listening to.

>>386370824
It won't happen unless ISPs across the world kick up how good internet is. Streaming a game is much different than a music file. I can't imagine playing a game at current USA internet.

File: 100547101_a1199c6af9.jpg (22KB, 472x250px) Image search: [Google]

22KB, 472x250px

>>386370770
>>386370934

This is what I was thinking of: Gametap. I guess it isn't exactly streaming, but kind of a similar business idea.

>Xbox Game Pass

Next closest thing is PSNow but

>streaming

>>386370165
Isn't that kinda what Nintendo's doin with Switch?

$20 a year for all the games in the service, complete with adding online multiplayer to the older classics.

>>386371134
pleb taste

even /v/ could know this isn't true, as most of you listen to video game soundtracks missing entirely from Spotify.

Let's also not talk about the sound quality..

Why does everyone think this concept of unlimited gamed is shackled to streaming the games?

Why can't we have the user pay the subscription fee, then download the game to their computer to be played locally? Sure there's always online DRM but at least the damn thing plays.

>>386371402
No one listens to video game OSTs. If the service has Kanye West and Taylor Swift, it has everything.

Pretty sure Nvidia had a service like this with their shield tablet. But only had a limited library

>>386370165
Where exactly did this stupid S come from?

>>386371619
Yeah that could work too

WAY in the future, eventually there would just be a USB dongle that you will plug into your smart TV and you will be able to just stream all games through to that.


Nintendo, Microsoft, Sony, they will all manufacture these dongles that you will plug into your USB slot on your smart TV.

Probably like, fifteen years from now or something.

It seems like $10-15 would be too cheap. You would need to keep playing the same game for at least four months for a developer to get as much out of it as just selling you the game for $60. I almost never play one game for more than one or two months, so I would be spending much less. This would also discourage developers from making single player games that can be beat relatively quickly assuming they get some cut based off what people are playing.

>>386371134
>worth
Utilitarian faggot pls go

>>386372592
>You would need to keep playing the same game for at least four months for a developer to get as much out of it as just selling you the game for $60

lolwhat? That's not how it would work at all. You're paying for the service, not the game. The game you're playing doesn't matter. Any dev who licensed their games to be on the service would be collecting a fee as long as the game is available, doesn't matter if anyone plays it or not

File: charlottess55.gif (20KB, 304x224px) Image search: [Google]

20KB, 304x224px

>>386370165
It's been done plenty of times. Game Tap is the earliest example I can think of but paying for emulation is stupid.

>>386372934
I don't use other streaming services, so I indeed don't really understand how they work. It just seems like this would be a bad deal for developers and publishers if I am paying 1/4 of what I would normally pay for the same content.

>>386370165
>No company is going to let you install games on your hard drive for 10-15 dollars a month

EA Access

Shit company but its is a great business model. If only the actual games offered were any good. Only Titanfall2 is decent

EA actually has a program like this on Origin. 10 dollars a month and you can download and play a selection of games. Mostly bioware shit but it's expanding.

I don't think you'll get something like spotify. You'll have something more like Netflix v Hulu v Amazon with different services having games from differeny publishers.

>>386370165
Because songs generally cost a dollar and games cost sixty.

>>386370934
>Gaming Historian
Mind as well read a Wikipedia article.