Comment on Netflix developing over 10 games in-house currently

• Mojojojo1993@lemmy.world ⁨2⁩ ⁨years⁩ ago

  Wasn’t successful in playerbase no. Was in terms of a cloud gaming system. It worked. All I neeee it to do. Didn’t hit googles lofty ideals though.

  source

  • Zahille7@lemmy.world ⁨2⁩ ⁨years⁩ ago

    It’s fine if it actually worked perfectly for you, but “just working” isn’t exactly a measure of success.

    They still needed the playerbase to actually use it, and devs to actually make games for it. Which they got very little of both. So it wasn’t successful.

    source

    • Mojojojo1993@lemmy.world ⁨2⁩ ⁨years⁩ ago

      It kinda is though. In terms of what others attacked it for. All the attack videos and yet I played it via VPN in a non supported country. Google fucked up by launching in America. A place with plenty cash and a spoiled player base. Where it would win would be poor countries. Just look at down votes ? For saying a device worked as intended. Tells you all you need to know.

      Internet infrastructure was a big issue and games were mostly Ubisoft but still. What a game changer. Then I moved to GeForce and haven’t looked back.

      source

      • SzethFriendOfNimi@lemmy.world ⁨2⁩ ⁨years⁩ ago

        I think you’re saying it showed it could work. Where others are saying a success on the sense of a viable product that can make enough money to operate and, ideally, to be profitable.

        And unfortunately when it comes to a service that requires servers, bandwidth and staff to maintain and operate it then there has to be a certain threshold of users to make it profitable or else it is doomed to fail.

        source

        • -> View More Comments
  • Katana314@lemmy.world ⁨2⁩ ⁨years⁩ ago

    It didn’t have a way to function in the event of system failure.

    Steam sometimes goes down. When that happens, people can often still play their singleplayer games. If Steam had totally failed business-wise, it either would have been sold to another publisher who would maintain access, or the games would’ve been unlocked for permanent offline play.

    Take a look at Stadia’s failure resolution strategy; they had to fully refund every person who bought a game there, because all purchases became completely unusable. Imagine if they’d gone a decade selling games to people and building off of their revenue, before encountering failure.

    source

    • Mojojojo1993@lemmy.world ⁨2⁩ ⁨years⁩ ago

      Nothing works in a system failure. It’s a system failure.

      They can only play their download games if it doesn’t need to access steam for a reason. Yeah you can go get a Nintendo 64 and play a game. Modern games require an internet connection. Yeah it’s a downside to it but it’s like saying you can’t play when it’s a powercut. It’s what board games say to video gamers.

      Also true. An issue that has just come up with Ubisoft. They have discontinued a game. No way to access it. That’s probably the most legit point.

      Very true. Look at Sony. Look at discovery. They aren’t refunding. Are you calling them failures ?

      source