It would be hard to choose a worse company.
this post was submitted on 22 Aug 2023
139 points (97.9% liked)
Games
32750 readers
1123 users here now
Welcome to the largest gaming community on Lemmy! Discussion for all kinds of games. Video games, tabletop games, card games etc.
Weekly Threads:
Rules:
-
Submissions have to be related to games
-
No bigotry or harassment, be civil
-
No excessive self-promotion
-
Stay on-topic; no memes, funny videos, giveaways, reposts, or low-effort posts
-
Mark Spoilers and NSFW
-
No linking to piracy
More information about the community rules can be found here.
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
Googlie is just bigger, not worse, than ubisoft.
Google's streaming tech is pretty good.
Still an awful company
This is how they say they don't have a monopoly on streaming games but also not need to feel threatened by who they are licensing their games to.
Nice, the 5 people who subscribe to Ubisoft+ will be thrilled I'm sure.
I wonder if this is just a Hail Mary to try to stop the fear that the merger will make Microsoft the most dominant face in streaming.
Even if it's agreed upon, it just means in two generations once internet speeds reach where they need to be for streaming to be feasible, Microsoft will get those rights back. Streaming means next to nothing today, but the fear is in a couple generations, that's going to be the future of gaming, especially seeing how much publishers want to stop gamers from owning anything.
If streaming is the future of gaming I think I'll just stop gaming.
Thats it. I'm sure we all have a huge backlog or old games to get through.
I keep GOG backlog and rom archive as a just in case everyone shits the bed.
Oh but Steam is great has DRM free blah blah
Sure and steam is great because it's a proprietorship with Gabe as owner. What happens when he dies hmmm? Will his successor keep the company private or will he immediately sell to the highest bidder?
Internet speeds are already fast enough. The problem is latency and it's impossible to fix. You can't beat the speed of light. You just can't have a 200ms delay between your controller and something happening in the screen.
You can beat the speed of flight, by moving the data centers closer to people. Edge routing did this for content delivery networks and likely if this is ever to work it'll need to happen for streaming. But that means data centers that can stream in every built up area in a market which is pretty tricky.
What is likely not going to be fixed is users home networking. Home networking in 99% of users homes is going to be using consumer routers, and those consumer routers are all just terrible and lead to endless problems around anything real-time.
Don't kid yourself: data centers are easier to have closer to many locations, but ones with hardware that works for cloud gaming, less so. And even in a best case scenario, it's still too big a delay to comfortably play anything apart from casual games.
Even streaming a game from your PC to living room box, such as Nvidia Shield, even wired, makes it nigh impossible to play racing games well, or anything that requires aiming. It's not far, almost playable when streaming in LAN, but any WAN in the mix and it's just not feasible.
Networking has a long way to go before streamed reactive games are even close.
I was playing Hollow Knight on Gamepass streaming the other day. It's a game that would be just awful to play with any real latency, and it was absolutely fine. There was no perceivable latency.
That's what it is. They need approvement from the UK and will play nice 5-10 years and then they reconsider.
My hope is that the more pro-consumer storefronts like Steam and GOG will help stave that off. At least to the extent of ensuring both approaches remain as options (especially now that one of them makes handhelds). Time will tell, though.
Ngl I already stream a ton from buttfuck nowhere Canada. If we got good enough internet, everyone better
What the holy monopoly is this. Basically the three worst major game developing companies have now joined forces. Activision, Blizzard, and now Ubisoft. Holy shit. Yea guess who isn't playing any more titles put out by them, big yikes.
Almost makes you miss the days when EA was the world's worst company.
They were always there lurking in the background making shitty titles, they just weren't in the light like the are now.
I'm confused. Why would this be the thing that stops you playing games by these companies? Especially considering Activision Blizzard might stop being so shitty when the people at the top leave after the acquisition. I'm not saying you shouldn't avoid games based on ethics, I just think this deal is a weird one to be the deal-breaker for you.
Never really liked titles from Activision or ubisoft to begin with and thats just my opinion, just enjoyed the odd blizzard game and that's been a rocky road as of late. I'm just not a fan of monopolies really, and if I can avoid shoveling money into the beast then I will. But as time goes on it will be harder and harder to navigate this because I'm sure there I'll be some games put out by companies owned by Microsoft because their reach is so big I'm starting to get more into indie games as well party because of this in part.
Fair enough. I do agree with you on the indie front. Hades and Hollow Knight are two of my favourite games of all time. Remnant 2 has knocked it out of the park. And there are so many interesting smaller games coming from indie studios these days.
Does Ubisoft have a game streaming platform?
If they did it probably wouldn't work. Considering that ubisoft connect is possibly the worst piece of software ever
The Game Pass PC client and EA Desktop are great competition for worst client.
UbiConnect would be FINE if it remembered my login info. Steam does. Galaxy does. But that checkbox "remember my login" must be Swahili for "forget everything you just typed in"
Look at the bright side, at least it doesn't require you to be online to open offline mode, and then have offline mode throw a tantrum because it doesn't have an Internet connection...
I bought the last call of duty for modern warfare 2, ohhhh believe me... never again. What a fucking disappointment and waster of 80$ that was. The lack of content is astonishing.
COD generally holds it's value most of the year.
Buy physical, complete campaign, sell for 90% of what you paid.
An interesting development to be sure
I don't... bwah? What does this mean? Will Activision games be offered on Game Pass or just Ubisoft's service?
On both.
Ubisoft will have the ability to license the games out to other companies, so I wouldn't be surprised if they then license back to Microsoft.