While OW2 is coming, i’m not talking about beta but entire game pve/pvp content.
Now OW2, will have lot of hardware spec requeriments that can be fit into a cloud platform like xcloud and geforce now, these cloud gaming platforms can handle this fine, so why blizz still refuses to publish overwatch on that platforms?
They can see lot of new players that can come to game if they release overwatch on cloud platforms…
Platforms like geforce now, you must buy game, and its safe for prevent cheaters.
You cannot hack something else in game, if devs take care about this.
Actually cloud computing is most popular (and ascending) way to implement stuff that you don’t need expensive hardware to use some software.
I hope devs on OW2 deal special attention to this and consider implementing on xcloud and both geforce now.
1 Like
At this rate Cloud Gaming may be a necessity if they still intend to have OW2 on the Nintendo Switch. Honestly, OW1 runs at what I would consider to be “acceptable” at the bare minimum these days, so there’s just no way that they can get OW2 to run acceptably on the Switch with its graphical improvements intact. I agree with what a lot of folks online say about the Switch Version and that’s that it should have been cloud based to begin with. The Switch already had a lot of cloud based versions of games in order to get around the system’s limited hardware specs, so a cloud based version of OW1 wouldn’t have bothered anyone, especially when it’s an Online Multiplayer game which requires a persistent internet connection to play regardless.
So yeah, I hope that Blizzard does reconsider Cloud Based gaming for OW2, starting with the Nintendo Switch.
2 Likes
Probably they want a fee for having their games being hosted by a 3rd party.
Cloud-based gaming has latency issues, right? I can see the case for the Switch but not PC or Consoles.
But game itself will not be hosted by a 3rd party, the cloud platform will just download these files as regular player.
It just depends on your connection, i play xcloud fine without any problems with 100mbps fiber connection and my latency to data center on my country is about 10ms to 30ms (max)
Also while i’m playing i can stream on twitch/youtube at max bitrate without latency issues
1 Like
Maybe because of reliability issues. Cloud gaming has lagging and latency issues. And the market is also not the biggest, so even financially speaking its probably not worth it.
2 Likes
That is the issue. They can host the game to many players by using just 1 or few copies and blizzard probably don’t like that.
Meh, they can figure out a new payment model.
1 Like
I can do this if i buy an azure machine and decides to install overwatch there. So blizzard will dislike this?
Only thing that explains is because blizzard is conservative company, “i’m only owner, and the ONLY one”
Using virutalization is like geforce now does. Pick an stronger machine, share resources between all virtual machines (GPU, memory, network) then play.
I’ve tested GeForceNOW with rainbow6 siege, there’s a extreme huge GPU card to handle all active sessions.
NVIDIA Tesla GPUs is perfect for handle this situation.
1 Like
Some Blizzard games could become streamable once Microsoft purchase the company, because Microsoft is investing in Cloud Gaming.
Even then, i doubt that PvP will be streamable. It’ll be PvE at best.
1 Like
if you are chagrining money for it, they won’t like that because they won’t be getting any royalties for it.
Who said this? lol. You really think that all games hosted on cloud is for free for publisher?
Some of them make partnership between platforms to distribute they games like EA did on xcloud. You can play any EA game (that is in EA Pass) for free on xcloud, but you must pay xcloud first.
Microsoft also has paid about to US$ 2.5 billions to idie developers for games published on xcloud platform.
If you are an indie, having your game on a cloud service is a free adverticing.
Big companies that have popular games on the other hands are very protective of their properties and wants to get paid. This is why geforcenow still lacks a lot of the major publishers. They don’t want to pay them or the publisher just forbid them from doing it.
Its only blizzard/activition thay forced Geforcenow to remove their games due “protective content”
Other developers i’ve saw that removed was because some problem internal game code, or they are developing exclusive build for cloud, but ONLY blizzard because dumb reasons.
About indie developers:
Microsoft has paid developers “more than $2.5 billion in royalties” as part of the publisher’s indie initiative, ID@Xbox (https://www.videogameschronicle.com/platforms/xbox/)
He also revealed that Xbox has paid developers and publishers “hundreds of millions of dollars in Game Pass license fees”.
While the blog also states that the programme has seen over 1000 developers sign up to the ID@Xbox system over the past two years, Charla concedes that Xbox’s work with indie developers still has some way to go.
“One area we talk to developers and players about a lot is discoverability,” Charla explained. “Teams across Microsoft work every day to help solve discovery challenges so players can find games they love, and in turn, ensure developers find the audience for their games.”
At last week’s Game Developers Conference, Microsoft introduced a new program called ID@Azure, which is aimed at independent developers across all platforms that want to use Microsoft’s cloud gaming tech in their titles.
Source: https://news.xbox.com/en-us/2022/03/24/celebrating-nine-years-of-idxbox/
Not only microsoft, also epic games and others platforms
Blizz don’t wanna because they simple prefer receive only expensive money, take an exemple in PVE of overwatch 2, owners of first game will receive an discount? or will be full price AAA? 
That is what I was just saying and it is not exclusive just to Blizzard.
I wish they did. Genshin just arrived on Geforce and the platform has been excellent for my friends who game on MACs
I believe Blizz had some games on there before and pulled them. I think Blizzard (or maybe Activision?) was planning to do their own cloud service for their games and keep everything ‘in-house’ but maybe that got shelved among all the madness these past few years.
To me, Blizzard/Nintendo is a bit like Disney – really slow paced/conservative, keeps everything close to their chest and hesitant to spread resources outside of their bubble. I would prefer to see Overwatch pop up on GeForce but maybe the only possibility will be some future subscription model for activision-games 
1 Like
Most of it has to do with Latency issues and it wouldn’t be fair for everyone. I dont speak for the company, but I have noticed that CLOUD is Clunky for games that do this.
IN a realistic world. if everyone had 10 GB Multi-mode fiber SFP+ coming into their home. it would be one thing.
A good portion of the United States is Rural communities with at best, 100-500mb/s and in a very few select areas 1,000 mb/s.
This means this wouldn’t work out for
- North Dakota.
- South Dakota
- Nebraska
- Kansas
- Oklahoma
- Texas- Most of Western, northern and Eastern
- Iowa
- Wyoming
- Montana
- Eastern Washington
- Eastern Oregon.
- Eastern Colorado
- Idaho
Explicitly banned on the ToS. Actiblizzion won’t let it happen if they can’t milk consumers for it, and exclusivity is a good bargaining chip when negotiating with hosting platforms.
Tldr, greed
Add alabama to this list as well lmao
1 Like
Neither is the status quo. I don’t see the problem.