If i were to guess, I'd say the first reason they are doing this is prevent anyone else from entering the cloud gaming space, or maybe they just have bigger plans. Either way, it is quite cunning.
Sony acquires Onlive's patents
- Thread starter Shawn Jelsic
- Start date
If i were to guess, I'd say the first reason they are doing this is prevent anyone else from entering the cloud gaming space, or maybe they just have bigger plans. Either way, it is quite cunning.
This has more to do with streaming rather than downloading and owning that piece of content. That's the main diffence between cloud gaming and the typical way of gaming.
Cunning? more like stupid. Cloud gaming is not new and Sony nor onlive have/had a monopoly on it.
Game streaming is where everything is going. It might not be the future you(or I) desire, but I think it is the future that is coming.
To you, maybe, because you don't know the real reason for the acquisition nor their next move. But i can tell you this, by Sony being in the position they are in financially, there is a very good reason they would go after a direct competitor's idea to be added to one at which they've already acquired, and it may or may not be game related.
And you're right, cloud gaming isn't new. However, there are many different ways it can be manipulated across the cloud. Hypothetically speaking, you are playing a game that is not online, even though the console is connected online, and a window pops up in the corner of the screen that is controlled through the cloud. What's on that window is at question, but its the IDEA that makes it unique.
Moving on.... when Sony aquired Gaikai, they were much cheaper than Onlive at the time, not to mention them having a completely different way of recognising games ran on their servers. This was explained a long while back, btw, and Gaikai's patented way clearly yield better results in quite a few areas. Anyway, instead of going after Onlive when they were expensive at the time, which is what many had suggested in the beginning before we ever knew it was Gaikai, Onlive, instead, ran out if steam and were still acquired and at a much, much cheaper rate obviously. Killing two birds with one stone, as the saying goes
Jesus fookin christ fella.
Here is the first reply where I said all that needs to be said on your first reason & main point(Sony buying it in order to prevent others getting in) of your post.
Cloud is not a slap and pass procedure as you perceive it to be. By Sony picking up some of the larger competitors that control the ideas behind the way in which games are both received and processed across those servers, they eliminated anyone else competing directly with them in that space without having to come up with an entirely new and sufficient way of getting the same, competitive results.
Again, THIS is why Gaikai was so much different from Onlive; although its method was different, it's results were very competitive. Onlive covered more avenues, however, which is why they were so much more expensive. This is where it goes into the hypothetical statement earlier.
Last edited:
Cloud gaming is the inevitable future, but I think Sony is buying in too soon and who knows if this aquired tech will even be useful when that future gets here.
You do realize that Nividia, ATI, intel, MS, Amazon all have the ability to do this right now, right?
My point was, either Sony really has something here and will be able to do it better than the rest, or they are just being dumb and wasting money. Only time will tell.
I doubt it is latter. I am sure there is something they deem worthy of the purchase. It just isn't so others can't have a similar service like Shawn tried passing off.
How many of those names are competitors in the console market is my first question I'd ask you. What size is their catalog would be my next question.
Sony went after Gaikai not only because their method was more efficient but because their tech allowed the servers to recognise their back catalog almost entirely (think beyond PS3) without any special workaround to get it up and running as it originally was. This is what Onlive could not do even though it was designed around gaming. Its not as easy as throwing server farms at games and getting results.
This is where the competition comes in. Very few have the resources to equally compete with them right now, and those that do, Sony has already given themselves a head start.
Now you are just reading what you want. I said one of them could be this or it could be another, as in them having far bigger plans.
You still think by someone possessing server farms, that instantly means game streaming when in fact, it is far more complicated than that. There are so many other variables to consider.
Do many people use the game streaming service?
I don't even know if its offers in my region yet, but due to the state of our internet, I doubt it would be viable for long while.
Still, more choices for gamers can only be a good thing
I don't even know if its offers in my region yet, but due to the state of our internet, I doubt it would be viable for long while.
Still, more choices for gamers can only be a good thing
if the pricing for ps now was lower i might have looked into the monthly price, i did like what i played before when it was in the beta stage and didnt have too many problems. I am excited for the shield streaming console and what microsoft plans to do with x1 and windows 10.
