Boosteroid: There's No Evidence of Activision Joining the Cloud Soon; CMA Is Slowing Innovation

Wccftech talked with Boosteroid, one of the cloud gaming platforms that signed a 10-year deal with Microsoft, about the CMA's block of the Activision Blizzard merger.

[XiNatsuDragnel]

Right.... more like slowing down your ability to gain numbers imo.

[chrisx]

I'd say MS are the ones slowing innovation when all they're trying to do is buy everything up instead of actually investing in their AAA studios

[Crows90]

Not to mention it's not actually innovative...they use that word too carelessly

[shinoff2183]

Chrisx, I couldn't of said it better myself

[giovonni]

I’d say you’re wrong about your assessment. What causes slowing of innovation is conflict of interest between consumer and company, Funding, and infrastructure. The truth is MS is not slowing down innovation. bias, lack of knowledge of the industry in question, uneducated assumptions, and old philosophies are. So, Disney was allowed to buy Hulu, ESPN, Fox, marvel, and Lucas Films and no one has anything to say about that. However for those in the know understand that in order for streaming service to be successful content is needed. This is the reason Sony, google, and other failed and abandoned the market. Consumers annd some companies are stuck in the old gaming model and won’t push forward so it fails before it even gets a chance to take off.

[JBlaze226]

You mean Sony Slowing innovation. Sony King of remakes/remastered

[giovonni]

@imagamdev it’s innovative because cloud gaming changes how games are consumed. Innovation comes by way of “ play anywhere on any device at any time” along with the networks supporting the cloud infrastructure. It’s not MS’s fault that they prepared their business to lead the pack. However that doesn’t mean they will always be the leader. AOL and AT&T says “Hi” a lot of people on here are looking at a very narrow minded scope and don’t truly understand how streaming works it needs an endless amount of content. Good bad or indifferent, every other market has made the switch except for the video game industry it’s still stuck with the old model.

[r2oB]

Streaming effects gaming differently than every other market. Movies don’t have to worry about processing the data for multiple inputs, or rendering random assets in real time based on the decisions of the player, or countless other ways gamers interact with a game that a person doesn’t do with other forms of media (so using their adoption as your argument is unfair). If you want to watch a video game streaming is perfectly fine, if you want to play a video game it just sucks. Sure streaming innovates in how games are consumed, but it’s at the price of hindering the quality of the games being consumed. I reckon that’s a trade off most gamers don’t want to make. Cloud computing just isn’t anywhere near local computing in regards to games, and the onus shouldn’t be on gamers to bear with the downsides while the infrastructure gets brought up to par, if ever.

And you don’t need cloud gaming to play anywhere, on any device, at anytime. If that was the goal Microsoft could just make their games available anywhere, on any device, at anytime without the need to buy their console or subscribe to their service (they would still make money similar to how a publisher makes money on their games). To me, this whole play anywhere mantra is just a PR smoke screen for another agenda. It’s seems they are more along the lines of purchasing major publishers so that gamers can play all the games “anywhere, on any device, at anytime that we completely, or at the very least mostly, control”. Microsoft has controlled Xbox for over 20 years now, and for the last 15 or so it has been sub par, so it’s understandable people are hesitant about them trying to control gaming by buying large chunks of it. Maybe people would be more comfortable if they had a track record of nurturing talent and creating quality as opposed to just buying it (not saying acquisitions are bad, but it’s a bad look when it the only way you succeed).

[giovonni]

R2ob it sucks right now, but again you aren’t looking toward the future. Do you honestly think streaming is going to suck in the future? Like I said before people are looking at this through a narrow scope. I have tried streaming games through my iPad Pro and with a 5g connection I’ve played gears of war hive busters waiting to board a plane. It’s not unfair because it’s the same concept that video games will be moving to. Just because you don’t see it doesn’t mean it’s not going to happen

[MrDead]

You know what slows innovation and has proven to in almost every industry its happened to? Market consolidation and monopolies.

[FinalFantasyFanatic]

I cannot think of many industries where a monopoly would be best for the consumer and the industry, it always brings the worst outcomes in due time.

[gleepot]

This isn't true for video games.

[Huey_My_D_Long]

What isn't true for video games? that Market cosolidation and monopolies lead to slowing innovation. or that Monopolies aren't best for the consumer?
I don't think you were saying the first line, because Madden is a huge proof why that concept has been true even for gaming companies.
But your comment could be agreeing with FFF. (or disagreeing, I guess)

[shaenoide]

If AKB wanted to be on the cloud they would already be. Like a switch version of CoD.

[343_Guilty_Spark]

With what cloud server backend? Gaikai? GoDaddy?

[Servbot41]

They could put their games on Gamepass' Cloud service, Geforce Now, Luna, etc. They don't need to be owned by Microsoft to be able to do this as plenty of games already support these services without being owned by a megacorp.

[Binarycode]

Godaddy. lol that advert.

[Obscure_Observer]

Boosteroid is a direct competitor and they believe the merger will be good for both Cloud Gaming and innovation.

And still some people which has zero knowledge or money invested in Cloud Gaming feels entitled to say how they should run their business. Smdh.

[Eonjay]

What is actually stopping ABK from offering COD to a streaming service. Literally nothing. Why does it have to be Microsoft who offers it?

It doesn't. The CMA is saying that Microsoft already has 60 to 70 percent of the streaming business in the UK.

That mixed with content control of the most popular titles is more market power than they are willing to approve of in the UK.

It's pretty to see their point of view.

[343_Guilty_Spark]

Does AKB have any investment in a a cloud computing platform, which offers access, management, and development of applications and services through global data centers? What cloud services have they deployed that will enable cloud gaming? Microsoft has customized Xbox blade server farms for Xcloud. They have data centers all over the world.

There is a reason major players have either abandoned or aren’t interested in cloud. It’s very costly.

[bleedsoe9mm]

Activision has no stake in cloud gaming and if they did there is no incentive for them to share their IP. MS was only doing it to get the deal by regulators and more stake holders probably increases adoption somewhat but that not the primary reason to share. MS wanted King for the mobile presence 1st Blizzard for PC 2nd and Activision for Cod as the cherry on top.
Oh and you understand how gaming works even if the CMA doesn't, Cloud isn't a market its a side feature of a service for both Sony and MS

[Eonjay]

@343

No ABK doesn't have Cloud infrastructure. That would be provided by those with their own cloud service (GamePass, PlayStation, or in this specific case Boosteroid).

This is what the CMA wants to allow for real competition according to their findings.

What they are claiming is that Microsoft owning the most popular content gives them an insurmountable advantage considering they already own 70% of cloud game streaming market in the country. It is a real uphill battle for them. The chances of the tribunal finding against the CMA is almost zero.

[Workshyskiver]

They 'own' 70% of the market because various companies like google have given up on cloud gaming as not being worth the investment, hardly the same as having 70% of a market thats competitive.

[Obscure_Observer]

@Mcardle

"They 'own' 70% of the market because various companies like google have given up on cloud gaming as not being worth the investment, hardly the same as having 70% of a market thats competitive."

False.

When MS entered the Cloud Gaming space, both Google and Sony´s PS Now were its direct competitors, so yeah, MS simple brought more innovation, better and more reliable infrastructure and support, not to mention a new and more genre diverse library of games.

The reason why MS has now 70% of the Cloud Gaming market is because they have all of its competitors beat down.

[shinoff2183]

Yea cause it brings more to cloud it gets it out there. Not everyone I thrilled with cloud. Ms and people that theyve swindled into believing the cloud is the best thing ever , isp that charge for data caps, and others who own cloud type of services. Eh hard pass

Also maybe acti can buy up some cloud with part of that 3 billion or whatever ms gonna own them if they that worried about it.

[MrSec84]

Exactly, Activision are so massive they could definitely own a cloud gaming company to hoast games from server farms. The best way would be to become as vertically integrated a company as possible, that way costs can be kept down, don't rely on some other company that can dictate what happens with your products.

Activision Blizzard definitely doesn't need to be owned by Microsoft and Microsoft certainly doesn't need to buy them to do anything with them as a company.

[MrSec84]

None of those people have zero knowledge, they just want to play the games they want to play, on the platforms they want to, without some big company coming along and thinking they can buy up everything they want to control the industry.

No one needs to own shares in Microsoft or some other company to have a say in where they buy products or play them.

[Extermin8or3_]

Boosteroid is not a direct competitor as the cma already outlines. Boosteroid allows you to play games you already own like George now. Not pay a subscription and just instantly get a library stream able games.

[jznrpg]

@bleedsoe9mm cloud is the focus of MS long term . They want to be a games as a service company. Play anywhere with cloud streaming is clearly their focus right now. It may not be fully implemented and the world isn’t ready for that totally yet but that’s their end game.
Another monthly sub they can add on their long list of subs they have.

They have a console but clearly that’s just a side gig to their real objectives.

[giovonni]

Thank you JZNRPG, Xbox has said this many times. Yet and still people are still trying to sandwich them into the old business model of gaming. Streaming is only successful through large quantities of content. It’s no different from Netflix, Disney plus, HBOmax. An abundance of content is needed to be successful. Hints why Microsoft is buying these companies to boost the streaming library. It’s no different than what Disney did by buying Lucas films, Marvel, Fox, and Pixar then offering it into Disney plus. Once the infrastructure was built then Disney invested in the studios.

[thesoftware730]

Obscure, Exactly!

They create these "What ifs" and "Maybes" and present them as facts, even in the face of direct reality.

[Obscure_Observer]

There´s no "what ifs" and "Maybes" dude.

Both Stadia and PS Now were active long before MS´s XCloud arrival.

Both simply got destroyed and that´s the reason why CMA fears MS´s domination of the Cloud Gaming market which they own 70% already. Just facts. It is what it is.

[shinoff2183]

Idk maybe the cloud isn't the type of innovation we all want. So I don't have any sympathy for them. For as I'm concerned the cloud is whack as fuck and large portions of the world can't handle that type of gaming. Cloud isn't real innovative either imo. Innovation is gta going from top down to gta3. Not look look you can stream games. Well that's fantastic cause it blows. Streaming blows , what about the counties that the isp has data caps , how's that gonna work. Sounds like a pyramid scheme. You buy games and the the isp gets richer to by taxing you for going over your cap.

Not something I'm interested in at all. Keep it away

[gleepot]

its not what you want YET, but when cloud gets to the point where theres no connection or latency issues, itll be fantastic

[Hofstaderman]

So says the unheard of company that’s signed a deal with MS? Talk about overreaching.

[Kekewei]

They don't even produce their own content, what kind of innovation can they bring to gamers?

[BrainSyphoned]

"one of the cloud gaming platforms that signed a 10-year deal with Microsoft"
Just end your piece right there, their "opinion" has already been signed away.

[MIDGETonSTILTS17]

CMA is preventing M$ from kicking the can on games for another decade.

I’m okay with the CMA stopping Xbox from planning for an industry takeover 10 years out with a huge cloud library (that they bought instead of creating), instead of investing in the current decade first…

…like how they promised games for the LAST decade.

[MrSec84]

The CMA aren't stopping Microsoft from building Server Farms on UK soil or hoasting games in this part of the world.
Microsoft can certainly partner with Activision all they want and hoast COD or any of their's and Blizzard's titles remotely from server farms in any of the countries that make up the UK.

What exactly is preventing Microsoft from building infrastructure and selling products on UK land?

[jznrpg]

Why sign 100 10 year cloud deals if not on cloud soon?
The use of innovate by buying up the industry is stupid

[Ra3030]

There's no evidence that any gamer that's wants to stream Call of Duty and play it in a laggy , unplayable state the CMA do gamers a favor.

[jznrpg]

I don’t know why Xbox console fans don’t see that they are the last thing MS cares about and are still cheering them on because their console isn’t going to be around much longer with their clear goals of play anywhere phone PC TV tablet. Console is not in their future long term plans.
At best you will be able to download some games for awhile but a streaming monthly sub is their end game where you can stream anywhere they just call it play anywhere.

[meanmallard]

Have you tried offering them all your profits? That worked with Microsoft apparently.

[Babadook7]

Look at the lack of innovation coming from Gamepass titles for years. Not a good sign. The deal was bad for all gamers. I don’t doubt that Boosteroid itself would have benefited for a while. They were getting a splendid Trojan horse.

[gold_drake]

innovation, innovation. i get a rash whenever i hear that.

of course it was gonna be on the cloud ya tools. thats what they want to do.

[shinoff2183]

So boosteriod says this. Hmmm interesting. Did they not stand to gain from this deal? Were they suppose to say yea this is gonna fk us royally

[Reaseru]

If there's no evidence of Activision joining the Cloud soon, why did Boosteroid, a cloud gaming platform, signed the 10-year ABK deal with Microsoft?

[EvertonFC]

This play anywhere is just stupid, I dont see any gamers playing handhelds outside on a switch, vita, steam decks etc. Gamers play games on the tv or handhelds on the sofa or bed at home.
Seriously ask yourself a question, when have you ever seen anybody play a 3rd party or AAA 1st party game on a laptop, phone or tablet wether that be at home or outside? the Answer is NEVER.

[UltimateOwnage]

lol, the company MS is in contract with to give access to its IP says something in its defense to help push the Activision deal. That’s not a conflict of interest, no sir.

[cheetah]

MS are very good at playing the long game, shit at the short game though. Thank god someone has seen the light. If anyone needed any proof that the Activision purchase is a bad idea for the industry, just ask the consumer from that industry.