• Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
  • The Politics forum has been nuked. Please do not bring political discussion to the rest of the site, or you will be removed. Thanks.

Sony, Tencent, Square Enix invested in a cloud game service provider called Ubitus.

Bojanglez

The Amiga Brotherhood
Apr 16, 2007
2,309
1,573
1,505
UK
Have Sony even gone full in on Azure? I know they signed an agreement to explore working together and share tech, but has anything concrete come from it? I think a lot of the backend services are multi-cloud compatible anyway (using Openstack) which would make sense, I wouldn't want to put all my eggs in one basket.
 

Godot25

Member
Apr 7, 2021
157
443
255
Lol, no?
If you want to have huge cloud service available around the world you have literally 2 options
1. You build it yourself
2. You will use Alibaba Cloud, AWS, Google Cloud or Microsoft Azure

So yeah. Sony is not leaving Azure because the can't afford building their own infrastructure.
 
  • Like
Reactions: SoloKingRobert

The_Mike

Member
Nov 5, 2017
5,031
8,080
650
Denmark
Can't leave Azure when Ubitus runs on Azure.
 

Dream-Knife

Member
Feb 22, 2021
655
792
375
For god sake... why are they continuing to persue this bullshit. Just sell consoles and sell games.

Do these companies not learn that nobody wants this, except as maybe an emergency access to games like Destiny when Xur has something good and you're away from home.
Corporations don't want you owning things. First it was the push to digital, now this.

But this is all a part of a larger trend with economic serfdom making a come back.
 

megreotsugua

Member
Dec 3, 2019
1,634
3,893
410
For god sake... why are they continuing to persue this bullshit. Just sell consoles and sell games.

Do these companies not learn that nobody wants this, except as maybe an emergency access to games like Destiny when Xur has something good and you're away from home.

Streaming games could prove to be popular one day to casuals.

But they have to bundle it in way that a casual gamer* would find worthy of a sub.

IMO, a purely gaming subcription service for $10-$15/ month will DoA among the casuals.

*Casual gamer defined.- Those who don't play games much to warrant buying a hardware for themselves but wouldn't say no to an opportunity to play a game or two ocassionally.
 
Last edited:

Bernd Lauert

Member
Apr 15, 2018
4,014
11,932
690
For god sake... why are they continuing to persue this bullshit. Just sell consoles and sell games.

Do these companies not learn that nobody wants this, except as maybe an emergency access to games like Destiny when Xur has something good and you're away from home.
Ease of access wins every time. See movies and music. Games are just harder to run properly, but the time will come.
 

Bryank75

Banned
Jan 12, 2018
9,905
23,313
960
Ireland
Ease of access wins every time. See movies and music. Games are just harder to run properly, but the time will come.
You can already play games like Genshin and others on mobile with no need for cloud.... Switch is also a mobile alternative.
Access is there and many AAA experiences, particularly the more cinematic style ones need to really be experienced on a big screen.

This is where immersion and quality focused gamers split from quantity and lower quality gamers IMO.

I often say that there are those who play games that value their time and those who play games to simply pass time.
 

Bernd Lauert

Member
Apr 15, 2018
4,014
11,932
690
You can already play games like Genshin and others on mobile with no need for cloud.... Switch is also a mobile alternative.
Access is there and many AAA experiences, particularly the more cinematic style ones need to really be experienced on a big screen.

This is where immersion and quality focused gamers split from quantity and lower quality gamers IMO.

I often say that there are those who play games that value their time and those who play games to simply pass time.
Ease of access doesn't just mean mobile. It's not like people stream movies on their phone (at least most people don't).
 

Bryank75

Banned
Jan 12, 2018
9,905
23,313
960
Ireland
Ease of access doesn't just mean mobile. It's not like people stream movies on their phone (at least most people don't).
PSN went down for like 5 or 30 minutes last night and people nearly lost their minds.... at least single player stuff was still playable due to HW. Imagine if you couldn't play anything?

Plus it's just a step backwards in every sense, it will never be as instantaneous as local play in terms of controls, the more data streaming, the more compression results in higher costs and lower quality image and no ownership over games, saves, profiles etc etc.

There are just too many downsides. Plus when something like Christmas or a lockdown happens and the internet and services are overloaded, streaming will either be down completely or you'll have to wait in a queue to play 'your own games'.

I just don't see the advantages at all. Especially with the mounting quantity of subscription for everything from music, to Disney+, Netflix and all the other TV and Film services and other stuff like office 365 etc.

It's way easier to just unsub too and get out of gaming if streaming becomes a thing.
 

ChuckeRearmed

Member
Jan 31, 2018
2,408
2,272
415
You can already play games like Genshin and others on mobile with no need for cloud.... Switch is also a mobile alternative.
The thing is that with Cloud you don't need to invest money in developing the apps specific to the device. That's a huge cost saver.
It is like Luna and Stadia - one requires you implementing the support for Vulkan, while Luna runs on Windows so the game developed for Windows will be able to run there.

at least single player stuff was still playable due to HW
I wonder how many people really do anything without some connection to the Internet.
 
Last edited:

Schmick

Member
Aug 7, 2019
626
1,039
400
For god sake... why are they continuing to persue this bullshit. Just sell consoles and sell games.

Do these companies not learn that nobody wants this, except as maybe an emergency access to games like Destiny when Xur has something good and you're away from home.
I want this and have been using PSN for PC. I have completed TLoU, Uncharted 1 and almost completed Uncharted 2. And when i complete Uncharted 2 i will move on to Uncharted 3. I hope they add number 4. But whilst I wait for 4 i'm gonna move on to R&C.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Bryank75

Bernd Lauert

Member
Apr 15, 2018
4,014
11,932
690
PSN went down for like 5 or 30 minutes last night and people nearly lost their minds.... at least single player stuff was still playable due to HW. Imagine if you couldn't play anything?

Plus it's just a step backwards in every sense, it will never be as instantaneous as local play in terms of controls, the more data streaming, the more compression results in higher costs and lower quality image and no ownership over games, saves, profiles etc etc.

There are just too many downsides. Plus when something like Christmas or a lockdown happens and the internet and services are overloaded, streaming will either be down completely or you'll have to wait in a queue to play 'your own games'.
All of these disadvantages (aside from latency) exist with video and music, and I've experienced them all personally too. Yet it's by far the #1 way people consume the media, people just don't care that much because the advantages outweigh the disadvantages.
I just don't see the advantages at all. Especially with the mounting quantity of subscription for everything from music, to Disney+, Netflix and all the other TV and Film services and other stuff like office 365 etc.

It's way easier to just unsub too and get out of gaming if streaming becomes a thing.
The advantage is instant access on any device anywhere in the world to a ton of stuff for a low monthly cost.
 

reksveks

Member
Jun 4, 2020
2,389
2,250
340
I want this and have been using PSN for PC. I have completed TLoU, Uncharted 1 and almost completed Uncharted 2. And when i complete Uncharted 2 i will move on to Uncharted 3. I hope they add number 4. But whilst I wait for 4 i'm gonna move on to R&C.
Grinding in a Jrpg is a god send with xcloud/remote play
 
  • Like
Reactions: Bernd Lauert

Bryank75

Banned
Jan 12, 2018
9,905
23,313
960
Ireland
All of these disadvantages (aside from latency) exist with video and music, and I've experienced them all personally too. Yet it's by far the #1 way people consume the media, people just don't care that much because the advantages outweigh the disadvantages.

The advantage is instant access on any device anywhere in the world to a ton of stuff for a low monthly cost.
Well, maybe it could bring more people into gaming but I seriously doubt that the core gamers that already play on Xbox, PC and PS will move to streaming instead of dedicated hardware.

I certainly would stop gaming or move to PC if console makers stopped. But Sony is a hardware company, so I don't expect them to....although who knows under Jim Ryan.
 

Schmick

Member
Aug 7, 2019
626
1,039
400
Well, maybe it could bring more people into gaming but I seriously doubt that the core gamers that already play on Xbox, PC and PS will move to streaming instead of dedicated hardware.

I certainly would stop gaming or move to PC if console makers stopped. But Sony is a hardware company, so I don't expect them to....although who knows under Jim Ryan.
Exactly! NeoGaf is not a representative of the Gaming demographic. NeoGaf consists of the hardcore gamers or hardcore/casual (me). Casuals are what make up the biggest portion and its the casuals who wont give two hoots where they play their games.

Don't get me wrong though, I like local hardware as much as anyone here at Gaf and although I have stated that I use PSN for PC I do intend to get a PS5 eventually and XSX.

I really don't think that streaming will replace traditional consoles. I think if that was ever proposed we would see that same uproar we saw from fans regarding the Xbox Live Gold pricing debacle and the European Super League. Both ideas were thrown in the bin. The fans still have a say. But can you imagine what exposure developers could get if their games could be streamed to more than just consoles, high end PC's and mobiles? I'm talking TV's and low end PC's. The potential is.... 3 billion! Ha! i'm not saying 3 billion people will, i'm just saying theres huge potential. I find this very exciting.
 
Last edited:
Oct 26, 2018
19,137
26,739
820
Corporations don't want you owning things. First it was the push to digital, now this.

But this is all a part of a larger trend with economic serfdom making a come back.
Actually, it's consumers who want this. If they didn't and stuck to buying physical media, all these streaming services for music, movies and games wouldn't be here.

But the average person would rather stream something for a low monthly price and have a ton of content variety with streaming issues and no ownership, than spending $100s or $1,000s per year buying every piece of content they want to try.

Unless it's an obscure piece of content, most stuff you can buy it outright if you search for it. But the trend is just stream it. Music and movies have gone that way. Games will trend there. The key thing that prevents it trending faster is lag effect which some core gamers wont put up with. Movies and music dont require millisecond response timing.

One big example which people caved in is Photoshop. You cant even buy it outright anymore. I dont know when it changed, but its now a $20/mth sub plan. YOu cant buy it outright for $500 anymore like the old days. Yet Adobe has record sales and profits. People went with the flow.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: DrAspirino

reksveks

Member
Jun 4, 2020
2,389
2,250
340
Actually, it's consumers who want this. If they didn't and stuck to buying physical media, all these streaming services for music, movies and games wouldn't be here.
It's all very easy to blame the 'producers' in the capitalist system without taking any look at yourself.
 

splattered

Member
Feb 8, 2012
2,446
2,826
825
Maybe this will tie into their PS1-PS3 backwards compatibility solution? Just stream a large library instead of letting people download them.
 

Dream-Knife

Member
Feb 22, 2021
655
792
375
Actually, it's consumers who want this. If they didn't and stuck to buying physical media, all these streaming services for music, movies and games wouldn't be here.

But the average person would rather stream something for a low monthly price and have a ton of content variety with streaming issues and no ownership, than spending $100s or $1,000s per year buying every piece of content they want to try.

Unless it's an obscure piece of content, most stuff you can buy it outright if you search for it. But the trend is just stream it. Music and movies have gone that way. Games will trend there. The key thing that prevents it trending faster is lag effect which some core gamers wont put up with. Movies and music dont require millisecond response timing.

One big example which people caved in is Photoshop. You cant even buy it outright anymore. I dont know when it changed, but its now a $20/mth sub plan. YOu cant buy it outright for $500 anymore like the old days. Yet Adobe has record sales and profits. People went with the flow.
Yeah people do use it for movies and music, but I thinks games are different. You play them over several hours opposed to just consuming them once or twice like movies. Theres also many more hardcore gamers than there are movie buff (probably).

No one paid for photoshop except companies, now they get recurring money from companies, same as office 365.

Although I am saddened by the decline in bittorrent usage. Hopefully it makes a comeback.
 

ethomaz

is mad because DF didn't do a video on a video of a video of a video on PS5
Mar 19, 2013
40,167
40,711
1,310
39
Brazil
I'm not sure why all the Azure talk... the company is not focused in infrastructure but streaming tech.
They can use any Could Infrastructure they want.
 

yurinka

Member
Jan 19, 2007
12,488
3,580
1,685
Barcelona, Spain
www.capcom-town.es
Which is scarey AF! We don't need such centralization of the internet.
Why? Azure has a minority of the server cloud market, it isn't even the market leader.

PSN server cloud, Sony's game server clouds, PS Now server cloud or this company's server cloud can be hosted in Azure, Amazon AWS or many other ones.

Azure doesn't have anything special and doesn't perform better or have unique features compared to the other companies who offer the same, often cheaper or offering better performance. Sony, this company or anyone else don't need Azure, maybe did choose it because MS offered a better deal for their specific case or because or something like that.

Maybe this will tie into their PS1-PS3 backwards compatibility solution? Just stream a large library instead of letting people download them.
This is a cloud gaming company with maybe the best implementation of cloud gaming on mobile. So probaly Sony wants to use their technology to stream PS2, PS3, PS4, PS5 games via PS Now to mobile.

Have Sony even gone full in on Azure? I know they signed an agreement to explore working together and share tech, but has anything concrete come from it? I think a lot of the backend services are multi-cloud compatible anyway (using Openstack) which would make sense, I wouldn't want to put all my eggs in one basket.
Yes, in addition to share R&D as part of this deal they agreed to migrate PSN, PS Now servers and so on to Azure and as I remember they already migrated them (I'd bet it was when they made the big changes everywhere to support PS5).

Azure doesn't offer the best prices, scalability options, more data centers or something like that. Sony's servers are a giant monster so they must have millions in servers every year, so maybe MS offered them a great deal for being such a huge potential client for them.

These companies run many different business areas. Even if they may compete in one they an hire each other in other area and so on. They care about business, not about fanboy wars.
 
Last edited:

Unknown?

Member
Jan 5, 2016
4,597
2,503
535
Why? Azure has a minority of the server cloud market, it isn't even the market leader.
I wasn't referring to Azure specificallly, I was responding to three companies essentially being the gatekeepers of the internet. There are other companies like Linode but are so insignificant compared to the big three that it doesn't make much of a difference.
 
  • Like
Reactions: SoloKingRobert

yurinka

Member
Jan 19, 2007
12,488
3,580
1,685
Barcelona, Spain
www.capcom-town.es
I wasn't referring to Azure specificallly, I was responding to three companies essentially being the gatekeepers of the internet. There are other companies like Linode but are so insignificant compared to the big three that it doesn't make much of a difference.
Well yes, in all markets there are always a few companies who control the big majority of the market. As I remember, in gaming the top 20-50 grossing public companies generate over 80% of the gaming revenue.

In servers it's the same, but in this case there are 5-6 companies who control the majority of the market. Amazon, Google, Tencent, Microsoft and I don't remember the other ones.
 
Last edited:

Fafalada

Fafracer forever
Jun 22, 2004
7,766
545
1,770
Azure doesn't offer the best prices, scalability options, more data centers or something like that. Sony's servers are a giant monster so they must have millions in servers every year, so maybe MS offered them a great deal for being such a huge potential client for them.
They aren't only on Azure though - the thing many larger companies do is not tie themselves to any one cloud-vendor specifically to minimize the leverage.
This goes for solution providers too - can't speak for Ubitus, but these companies can and do build their services cloud-agnostic in terms of design practices, so if a vendor doesn't work out, they can just up and move as their IP value is supposed to be in the specific problems their service solves, not the infrastructure behind it.
 

yurinka

Member
Jan 19, 2007
12,488
3,580
1,685
Barcelona, Spain
www.capcom-town.es
They aren't only on Azure though - the thing many larger companies do is not tie themselves to any one cloud-vendor specifically to minimize the leverage.
This goes for solution providers too - can't speak for Ubitus, but these companies can and do build their services cloud-agnostic in terms of design practices, so if a vendor doesn't work out, they can just up and move as their IP value is supposed to be in the specific problems their service solves, not the infrastructure behind it.
Yes, all these things like game servers, PSN servers, PS Now servers, shops, websites, and so on are platform agnostic. One day can be running on Azure (or another one) and some day they can migrate it to AWS (or another one) because they got a better price deal. Another day they can migrate to Google (or another one) because of some scalability reason, etc.
 
Last edited:

CS Lurker

Member
Sep 17, 2020
62
84
185
Do these companies not learn that nobody wants this

I def want it.

People tend to project what they think as an universal truth, and that's a big mistake. There's a huge world out there, where people live different lives with many different needs.
 

ChuckeRearmed

Member
Jan 31, 2018
2,408
2,272
415
Azure has a minority of the server cloud market, it isn't even the market leader.
Azure is the second biggest cloud and it also grows. Also has - probably - the best coverage across the world.

some day they can migrate it to AWS (or another one) because they got a better price deal
I really don't think people migrate from cloud to cloud due to better price deal. Migration is not cheap and it is relatively time consuming process that affects business metrics.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: SoloKingRobert

ChuckeRearmed

Member
Jan 31, 2018
2,408
2,272
415
So in Laymens terms they basically all gave Microsoft money? So Playstation, Tencent, and Square are helping Xbox grow? 🤭
Ironic. Microsoft is using their Azure money to power Xbox after all. Azure also made a deal with Starlink/SpaceX so they will have even better coverage later.
 
Last edited:
  • Thoughtful
Reactions: DrAspirino

yurinka

Member
Jan 19, 2007
12,488
3,580
1,685
Barcelona, Spain
www.capcom-town.es
Azure is the second biggest cloud and it also grows. Also has - probably - the best coverage across the world.


I really don't think people migrate from cloud to cloud due to better price deal. Migration is not cheap and it is relatively time consuming process that affects business metrics.
I said it's a minority of the cloud market. In fact, a 20%:



Yes, it grows. Like the other ones:


All the main ones offer worldwide coverage and hire the same outsourcing data center companies, who handle the majority of their physical servers. So no, it doesn't have a better coverage. If you pay, you can get servers, Akamai and stuff wherever you want independently of the cloud you are using.

Today almost every server is implemented as platform agnostic, and are migrated with almost no downtime, or no downtime at all. Obviously they don't switch every day from a server cloud to another one, but many game servers do it several times during its lifetime. In the same way they migrate from using some database type to another one to solve issues related with scalability issues or to reduce costs, etc. What they do frequently is to increase or decrease the amount of servers they hire depending on the volume they have.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: Bo_Hazem