Pascalxx

linuxplatform said:

Marvin said:

velasarius said:

Who is to say that big game publishers wouldn't absorb significant numbers of mobile game developers to their own streaming platforms and practically deprive Apple iOS and Mac game stores over night.

These kind of game streaming apps have been available on Android for years and haven't caused a shift from native, they tend to serve different categories of games and they tend to shut down after a while because players get a better experience from native games so it's not sustainable to run the servers to serve so few paying users. 
https://www.ccn.com/fortnite-google-stadia-burn/

Due to the limited appeal, Apple not allowing it doesn't affect many people but it reinforces people's negative perceptions of their control over access to apps to decide for themselves. I don't think Apple would see any harm by allowing these game streaming apps on the store. They allow Microsoft's Remote Desktop app on iOS:

https://apps.apple.com/us/app/remote-desktop-mobile/id714464092

If Microsoft setup a Windows server that anyone could access through Remote Desktop, I assume they'd be able to connect to XCloud through that like a stream within a stream. 
Playstation Now is one of the top streaming services, has been around for years and streams Playstation games to PC and console and it says here it has 2.2m users:

https://www.theverge.com/2020/5/19/21263492/sony-playstation-subscribers-active-users-ps4-subscription

That's less than 3% of gamers on one of the most popular streaming services. There's nothing to lose from allowing game streaming and nothing to lose from not allowing them. It'll be possible to do it via the browser anyway as long as the browser offers controller support. If Safari doesn't, Chrome etc on iOS should be able to.

There are "issues" with this. 

0. The remote desktop model that Apple accepts is not in the interests of Microsoft, Google, Nvidia or Amazon (who will launch a game streaming service next year) which is to attract more companies and users to their cloud services. Just as it took video games to shift desktop computing from being a subculture dominated by niche industries and professions to going mainstream, companies that provide cloud software services - Microsoft, Google, Amazon - and who make hardware for the cloud data centers - Amazon - have a vested interest in getting more companies, programmers and consumers to bypass current hardware-centered solutions for cloud ones. Quite naturally companies whose profits rely on consumers continually upgrading expensive hardware such as Apple are going to have the opposite goal. If there are enough great cloud-based apps to do everything you need, there is no need to invest in an $800 iPhone or iPad based on their superiority in executing these mobile apps on the local hardware. A $200 5G-enabled Android phone - which will start to roll out in September and will be commonplace next year - or $250 Wi-Fi 6 Android tablet $250 Chromebook will be just as good. Note that Samsung is dealing with this by promoting their devices as being the best ones at accessing Google and Microsoft services by offering deep integration with the former and software exlusives with the latter and form factors like foldables/bendables (which Microsoft will offer their own next month and Google next year) to take advantage. You should already imagine in your head Stadia or xCloud running in split screen mode with the game on the bigger screen and the camera/chat/stats/health meters on the smaller one because it is definitely coming.

1. Stadia's struggles SHOULD NOT be an indictment on the potential of streaming. Let's just say that Google did a terrible job and came out with a highly questionable product. Stadia would have required cutting edge/bleeding edge innovation in technology, business modeling and management to work. Instead Google hired a couple of former executives from Ubisoft that haven't had a prominent presence in the gaming mainstream - instead of someone from Fortnite, Minecraft or even the people behind the Nintendo Switch - and Stadia initially launched with expensive controllers connected to a special edition Chromecast. Add to that their tiny library consisting almost exclusively of 5-10 year old console or Steam titles that you had to purchase a second time. 

2. PlayStation Now only has 2.2 million subscribers but it is not available on mobile. It is only available on PC and on PlayStation. Also, its business model is specifically designed to complement the PlayStation. Meaning that it is only really desirable if you own a PlayStation and want to play games while you don't have access to it. Google Stadia is explicitly for people who want to play AAA games but don't want to buy a console or gaming rig. As for xCloud, they are taking a middle path. They don't want to make it essentially worthless if you don't have an XBox - like the PlayStation service - and they don't want to replace the XBox or even necessarily your Windows gaming rig either (like Stadia). Instead, it is A) a service for existing XBox subscribers which has 65 million monthly active users - funny. you didn't mention that when you were mocking PlayStation and Stadia - and as a gateway for people who currently game primarily on other platforms - including mobile - to try their games and maybe get an XBox down the line.

3. What you really should be paying attention to here is Amazon. First off, they don't have an existing video game console empire to protect like Microsoft and Sony. They are also an actual business that sells products to consumers, unlike Google, who comes out with absolutely ridiculous products like an Android Wear watch with no physical button, no apps, no Wi-Fi connectivity, whose screen was unusable in direct sunlight and could only last 12-18 hours of moderate use before the battery died, and whose only use was to send voice search commands to your phone over Bluetooth (requiring you to access the phone to view the results of the search). Or the Nexus Player: 1 GB of RAM, no Ethernet, a very hard to get to mini-USB 2.0 as the only port, non-standard CPU, 8 GB of storage ... for the low price of $99. Or their original Chromebook Pixel ... $1300 and remember it was released long before Chromebooks supported Android or Linux. Or their early Pixel phones after they stopped partnering with LG and HTC ... flagship prices for devices with old CPUs, old camera designs, tiny batteries and not enough RAM because "software optimizations were going to maximize the hardware." Like Google, Amazon's product is going to be a full court press to get people to give up their consoles and gaming rigs. But like Microsoft, Amazon's product is actually going to be a good one with an actual content library that doesn't require you to spend $60 to repurchase a game that you bought on Steam 6 years ago. 

So please revisit this comment a year from now. See how many people are using xCloud and Amazon as opposed to a product designed specifically not to compete with PlayStation hardware (PSN) and a product that had no real design at all from a company whose thing isn't designing and selling products in the first place (Stadia). And. yes, by then 5G on mobile devices and home mesh Wi-Fi 6 setups will be more widely available - you can buy Nest from Google and eero from Amazon for the latter, and Microsoft is partnering with TMobile to push xCloud for the former - to address the "lag" that has never bothered anyone in my household who uses Stadia (which despite having a terrible business model still fundamentally works ... i repurchased some of the cheaper Steam games to be played on Chromebooks and Android phones when on the go and it works fine ... it suits the needs of certain people in my household who have outgrown Candy Crush, Clash of Clans, Angry Birds and other mobile titles).