Sony, Microsoft, Google and Nvidia Show Little Interest in Becoming "The Netflix of Video Games"

“The Netflix of video games” is a label thrown around like confetti at a victory parade. It’s held out as the prize that awaits the winner in the burgeoning game streaming arena. How close are current or near-future game streaming services to being the Netflix of games? Are the services even trying to emulate the Netflix model or are they aiming at something different?

[Bigman4k]

I disagree Microsoft xbox game pass is taking steps to try and be like netflix of gaming and I think sony will follow starting next generation with their ps now

[Applejack]

If Sony does decide to go that route, then they better keep the quality up for it. I’ve personally tried PS Now and although I enjoyed playing games I never would have otherwise, I can’t get over the issues that came with it.

[Spurg]

Psnow shouldn't be a way to measure how cloud gaming will be in the future. Sony has neglected to update the infrastructure of the service. If Sony thinks it still acceptable to be streaming games at 720p late in his gen then they are way behind times.

[Obscure_Observer]

@Spurg

"Psnow shouldn't be a way to measure how cloud gaming will be in the future."

Why not? Ryan already said that Sony will be taking PS Now to the "Next Level" later this year and the service will be renamed to Playstation Streaming. I think it´s part of their partnership with Microsoft.

[ILostMyMind]

The main feature of Netflix is to be streaming. The second is to be on all media platforms. How does the GP compare to that?

[LabRat]

@ ilostmymind - I think they mean you get access to tons of games for a low monthly subscription. Also, gaming is a different media type then shows and movies, where you want to download the game to have good frames and reduce input lag etc.

[SocialDanny123]

The main feature of Netflix is the monthly subscription to access all their games, not streaming itself.

[Steveoreno1]

Sony won't do a game pass because their exclusive actually sell.

[SocialDanny123]

Sorry if they don't do a Game Pass, their PSNow service is guaranteed to be a failure.

Why would anyone subscribe to Sony's service over Game Pass? Right now PSNow content is absolute garbage. Game Pass gets good releases of games whereas PSNow only has very old titles.

[rainslacker]

Hasn't MS explicitly used the term "Netflix of gaming" in one of their PR interviews?

I'm also pretty sure that Forbes of all sites had used the term more than any other site over the years...so if they are writing this article now, are they saying they've been wrong all these years?

[ShadowWolf712]

Gamepass is losing money right now, MS just reported revenue for services is down 3%. Meaning that price is gonna be creeping up soon and we'll likely see quality take a hit on games for that service.

Not sure that's the route I want gaming to go at all.

[SocialDanny123]

Microsoft is a company that is willing to take a short term pain for long term gain. If loosing money will allow Microsoft to gain a massive user base, they would take it.

[jsiddlehfx]

ps now is... a streaming gaming service already implimented

[jeb69]

This is interesting but in the case of video game publishers they were already offering cloud-based and downloadable games. With movies and TV, Netflix beat the studios to the punch and now you see them catching up. Eventually Netflix may only offer their own content.

[PhoenixUp]

Netflix would never give up on licensed content

[Sono421]

What is this article on about? How is Google NOT trying to become the Netflix of gaming? They are the ones putting in the biggest effort to do so, with Microsoft taking a good second, and Sony in third.

Meanwhile you got Nintendo in a corner over there by themselves still trying to figure out how to get regular online play to work.

[ShadowWolf712]

@Sono because Google is not trying to be the Netflix of gaming. They themselves have said they're more akin to PS Plus and Games with Gold; an occasional free title, with anything else requiring a full-price purchase.

[PhoenixUp]

@ Son

“What is this article on about? How is Google NOT trying to become the Netflix of gaming?”

If you actually read the article then you’d know. Stadia isn’t an on demand service. You have to buy each game individually, which isn’t the case with Netflix

[XiNatsuDragnel]

I absolutely disagree with Microsoft with this, because they stated they wanted to be the netflix lol

[Stanjara]

This Guy who wrote this totally can't see the tree from the forest. The whole point of games on subscription is Netflix model. The problem I have with that model is that companies will be putting fast, mediocre content on that services.

It's like moaning about Witcher series not having the right armor, or music, or cast, or whatever. Yeah, its Netflix people. They are investing in lot of shows.

[Spurg]

You will get a range of different types of games. Not all games are going to be AAA quality IP. There will be gems on Netflix and there is also crap you can't have only AAA. The whole idea is to give people choice and will break the cost barrier to try a new game.
Speaking of difference in the quality of games it is easy to go for only buying games that an 80+ on Metacritic but there are some seriously underrated games like Vampr, Call of Cthulhu and many more around the 70 range that are more fun and memorable than AAA games. Service like Gamepass will allow players to try those game without needing to buy it outright and if they like it the choice is still there for them to buy.

[Stanjara]

I agree, but also like to buy those 70ish games on sale to own them. Great response. I just afraid that we are not going to support great product from these subscription, but something else.

[rainslacker]

I can see it being the same. Netflix, o tend to binge watch older shows through to the end. I wouldn't do that with games, as long series of games get tiresome when played in succession.

With Netflix I'll watch the new Netflix produced stuff that comes out if I'm interested. I'd do the same with games.

With netflix, I'll watch newish movies that come out if in interested. I'd do the same with games.

With netflix I'll watch some older stuff on occassion if it interests me. I'd do the same with games.

Overall, it's not much different.

One difference is I'm not going to sub to a game streaming service, because I like to own my games, and I'm not opposed to buying hardware.

[PhoenixUp]

You’re never going to have a 1-1 comparison with Netflix, but on-demand gaming does exist

[Tesal]

Emulated/hardware backward support with no extra costs or at least 1 USD re-access cost at some new generations is the way to go ... " paying 1 $$ is to re-access already owned digital games from an older generation "
it should be like that.
PS5 = free support to all games that work on PS4.
PS5 = free support to all working/supported PS3/PS2/PS1 physical games you got.
PS5 = paid " 1 $$ Only to re-access PS1/PS2/PS3 for each digital game you. " unlocking DLCs free at no extra costs"

I want the 3rd option to be with no extra costs ... but we know/understand that some-people at Sony are not allowing PS5 to support PS1/PS2 'n at least first parties of PS3 games .... due to Greed really .. no other reasonsI can think of atm. The costs are nothing compare to the success they saw with PS4 'n the success they will see after showing the gamers/consumers that they are willing to support every possible old titles from any old generation with each new jump to a newer PlayStation

'n they can keep streaming/PSnow etc as secondary optional monthly/yearly paid service.

[rainslacker]

Seems rather complicated.

[Xx_Pistol_xX]

Good. Netflix is current 21 billion in debt.

[SocialDanny123]

But has a market cap double of Sony. According to your definition, Netflix is a failure despite being bigger than Sony.

[Xx_Pistol_xX]

That still doesn't make it 21 billion in debt. Good day sir.

[Anon1974]

I've had PS Now for a couple of years and I'm pretty happy with it. My kids never have any problems finding something to play more than myself. I was excited for Google Stadia until they clarified that it wasn't going to be a PS Now/Netflix type service and right there I'm out. I thought that was the whole point of it. I guess I'll just be sticking with PS Now the last of this gen and into next. $100/year for it in Canada to access what? Close to 700 games now? I still consider it a steal.

[rainslacker]

Point of stadia is so Google can profit off the game industry, while not bothering to have more than a cloud server to run it on with what amounts to redesigned closed system OGL APIs, at which point they'll take their cut from the devs/pubs, and then double dip on the customers. It's the console model for the most part, sans a tangible hardware solution for the player.

There is some benefit to the end user depending on their situation or what they want from the service, but I think MS seems to have a better plan for how they're approaching it. And I say this as a big Sony fan.

I can't speak to what Sony plans to do with psnow in the future, but it's a good service overall, and is still better than stadia, as it doesn't require a special build to run on psnow, so adding games by the dev is a lot easier. There is no "purchase" or outright rental only option that can be used off the sub service...which is how it started off