The Hollywood Reporter caught up with former Nintendo of America president Reggie Fils-Aime at this week’s The Game Awards and questioned him about the future of gaming and the video games industry, Reggie says he believes the future of gaming will be “playing any game on any device at any time.”
“As the technology evolves to be cloud, and as download speeds increase, what it means is you’re going to be able to play any game on any device at any time,” he said, adding that, of course, gamers shouldn’t expect that in the very near term. “It will happen over the next decade and be something that’s really meaningful for players.”
Asked about his early experiences with Nintendo, Fils-Aimé responded, “My first system was the Super Nintendo, so I played Super Mario World — and ended the game with 99 lives — and The Legend of Zelda: A Link to the Past. I had over 80 games on that system, and I think that helped me with the fans and the company, because I knew the content so well. … For me it’s been a part of my growing up. I was with Nintendo of America for 15 years. Now, being able to be like a fan [again] and celebrate this industry is really special.”
Noooooooooo.
With all due respect.
Noooooooooooooooooo.
It’s not a future I look forward to at all. I can see why companies are pushing for it because it gives all the control and ownership to them. We will never own anything the way things are going, only will be paying to access them
An unfortunate truth that the era of owning the games we play is ending. I can certainly see within the decade every big name in the industry forgoing hardware for a subscription service.
Our time with a game will be decided entirely by how long a company wants to keep it on the server, and I wouldn’t be surprised if big names like Nintendo still make us pay for each individual game too.
Probably will just stop playing games at that point.
I see streaming as a very legitimate part of the future of gaming. Any game, any device, I can certainly see the benefits of that. However, I emphasise only a *part* of the future owing to the very legitimate points made above, as well as issues surrounding having your gaming tied down to having a solid internet connection which will always be somewhat problematic, even if it gets better.
Especially in the US where rural areas are at the mercy of 1 high quality internet provider & a few crappy ones. And the customer service of the high quality one tends to be crappy.
Man, I really look forward to my game experience relying on a fast internet speed at all times then losing access to the games if the servers go down. Very cool.
same here.
In Japan or South Korea, where a 100/Mbps down is considered “okay”, sure. But not in the states.
No.
Go home, Reggie. You’re drunk.
Yeah…… about 46/50 US States could not support that so I’m going to go ahead and say that he’s wrong. Though the man has worked his career in the tech bubble in Seattle and Redmond, so I’m not surprised he’s convinced that it could work.
There would either need to be a new form of broadband that is cheap and easy to expand over a vast territory, even over areas that are sparsely populated, or else the US would need to pour billions upon billions on data infrastructure we don’t actually need anything, and would not actually be able to pay for itself for decades.
Yeah. Anyone who thinks this has not loved outside a major US city. They don’t understand there’s na lot of gamers who live in areas where they can only be online via satellite… Which is usually pathetic with low data caps.
And even when they can get landline internet, the company doesn’t try very hard to please the customer because they know the only other internet options is crappy satellite and most customers would rather deal with shitty customer service than shitty internet.
Only way I can see it is if they convert internet as a Municipal service. (which will encourage more cities to install Fiber Optics)
But companies will fight hard on tht to prevent internet from evolving.
Since they will lose alot of money if did become Municipal.
People overestimate the requirements of streaming games… It’s already feasible to stream a game in 1080p 60fps with a 60 mbps connection over rainway with very few stutters (I know, I’ve done it myself), in ten years if the technology is perfected and good internet gets cheaper and more common (which is DEFINITELY going to happen) this will very likely be the a very popular form of gaming, if not the most common, and probably the least expensive choice for many people. Whether that is a good thing or a bad thing really depends more on how it effects the quality of game development as a whole. People can get upset about the slow death of physical games but it’s probably going to be inevitable unfortunately…
“It’s already feasible to stream a game in 1080p 60fps with a 60 mbps connection”
Most people do not have 60 mbps connections in their living rooms. Massive portions of the country do not have the option for that level of data even if they wanted to pay for it.
In fact, I just looked it up. As of 2017, the average internet speed in the US was 18.75 mbps. Less than a third of your stat line. Meanwhile, demand for 4k is rising. How does that fair on 60 mbps?
Give it ten years, the internet is a very fast growing resource and high speed internet is quickly becoming a necessity in many lines of work, the infrastructure will be here for widespread high speed internet before you know it.
also, accokrding to ookla, the average download speed in the us as of june 2018 was 93.98 mbps
https://www.ncta.com/whats-new/average-us-internet-speeds-more-double-global-average
1080p 60fps needs about a 1.5 gbps connection for lossless streaming. Yes you read that right! This means with 60 mbps you lose 96% of all image information. Yes you read that right as well! That’s why the image quality looks like shit, especially in games where alot is going on on the screen. Even if image quality will be alot better in 10 years, I doubt that the biggest problems, which are high latency and your internet not working from time to time will be solved. I have problems with my internet at least once a week. It can be the router randomly restarting (probably updates) or my laptop losing connection and the only fix is restarting the router, or maintenance, where the internet isn’t working for a while, or the internet gets throttled on a device because a new device (phone) just connected… the list goes on.
Want to know what my speed is? 1.2 down. Tops. And my internet is pretty fast for my area, and I’m not talking about the middle of Wyoming.
Nothing comes close to buying a nice new physical game and opening it up and smelling the brand new smell of the case and cartridge and if your lucky some stickers and little books like you get with limited editions.
There’s so many good games coming out on all formats now, that I have a ridiculous back log so il just keep buying physical games for now and in several years time il have stacks and stacks to play if I don’t feel like streaming any new ones.
Digitals bad enough, but streaming is so crap for true gamers that want copies of their games for collection. It would have to be really cheap and you’d have to get used to not throwing your dummy out your pram when you lose connection and that can STILL happen even if you’ve got the best, fastest internet around. There’s always going to be moments of technical maintenance and overload, blah, blah, blah.
If it’s used as a way to keep continue to play your games, that you own physically, on the go as an added experience, I’m all for it. If it’s ment to replace our right to own our own games — I won’t accept it. I got backlog to crush back to the 90′. If they will force streaming upon me, I’ll just turn 100% retro.
Been saying it for a while, stock up on the games you want to own now while getting is still potentially good.
I actually want a copy of Animal Crossing GC all the sudden.
No thanks, we don’t need this.
I prefer to actually OWN and keep the games I purchase.
As long as it’s an option and not the standard then it’s cool . Otherwise my gaming days are numbered.
Pingback: El streaming es el futuro, declaraciones de Reggie Fils-Aime - Nintenderos.com - Nintendo Switch, Switch Lite y 3DS
Then dont buy it when streaming is the future. If they dont make money then they will have no choice.
I don’t even have Ethernet cables hooked up to my computer or consoles. It’s something not every gamer has and maybe not even a majority, even closely. I don’t think a market can abandon its audience to appeal to the few who can afford it
I’m look forward for the future of gaming.
As a lover of all things digital, and a supporter of the full digitization of all things media. I still must disagree with Reggie on this one. While digital games you download are in fact the future of gaming and will be sooner rather than later phasing out all things physical. Streaming games most definitely will not be the wave of the future. I do however see great potential in rental services like the Microsoft gamer pass where you still download the content but lose access to it if you let your subscription slip. Those are actually a really great value. I also see a lot of potential in games as a service, games such as Hearthstone which don’t get sequels but are just continually supported with content. Overall that seems better to me than plopping down money for a full priced marginal upgrade to a series every year, but if they are suggesting that games in the future will work like Netflix does for movies and shows. No. That’s just a terrible idea. People can handle a hiccup in their internet here and there when streaming a movie, watching a buffer for a couple second there isn’t a big deal, but no one could handle that while gaming. Nor should anyone have to. It’s asinine.
I feel that that kind of thing is way further off than 10 years, the worldwide internet speed just isn’t there yet, and realistically won’t be for a long time to come. I do foresee more companies offering their own rental-esque services in the near future however, following in Ubisoft’s, Microsoft’s and the likes footprints, because it’s actually a good idea. It allows people to play fully through games without actually having to buy them and then be stuck with things that were fun to play once, but you probably have no interest in revisiting, and if for some reason you do down the line it will probably still be on there to play. Also, you never have to buy a bad game thinking it will be good again. The point is there are no commitments. The best part is I can still own the games I really love by simply buying them, and yes you do OWN a digital game when you buy it. You might not be able to hold it in your hands but it is yours and if you so desire to future proof it you can do so. It’s very easy to back up data in SD cards, and HDD/SSD if someone is so inclined to do so.
Those of you still thinking physical games are going to be a thing after the next few years, well, I have bad news for you as an insider. Guess if you will quit enjoying games in the future as a result of that and your own misguided/misdirected stubbornness/pride then you better start planning now.
I have an absolute stack of games in my collection and if one day I have the desire to not own them anymore I can sell them and get back some nice and possibly needed cash.
You can sell yours too ………. actually no you can’t.
You are making a bunch of assumptions here which is… well you know the saying.
Assumption #1: You are assuming that I don’t own any physical games. I have been gaming since the 90’s and didn’t go fully digital until the Wii u era, so I assure you that I too have stacks of games, probably more than you.
Assumption #2: You presume that I even want to sell my games, I don’t. I have never traded or sold a game in my life, that’s where all those aforementioned stacks of games come in. I have quite the collection of old consoles and games piled up. Some of that stuff is probably worth quite a bit of money even, but I have no desire to sell it so it might as well be zero; the same as my digital games.
Assumption #3: You believe that you can’t sell digital games, you can… though it might not exactly be legal per say. For instance, if I wanted to I don’t think I’d have any trouble whatsoever finding a buyer for my Steam account. I’m sure there are a lot of people that would want to buy it. Though much like with pretty much all other games except those that are rare or in mint condition, I’d have to sell it at a loss, and to me that’s worth less than just keeping the game thus it is also the reason I have never sold any of my games; the meager amount of cash I could bring in from them is not a valuable to me as just having the games to play.
The point is, don’t assume, so many errors are made by jumping to conclusions in life.
Exactly. If you find the right person, you can easily sell your Steam account or your PlayStation account or whatever to someone for a lot of money.
I didn’t see where he even mentioned the word “streaming”. I thought streaming was just what people do on Twitch. Play games live, while others watch and comment (which I don’t really know what the point of doing is). Besides, the way my life is going, I might be dead in another decade. So I’ll never see this happen (if I did die).
I never have (and never will) be a fan of ANYTHING digital when it comes to video games. I think it’s a complete waste of money to buy something you can’t even hold in your hands and show off to others. It’s like paying for something, but never really owning it. Imagine how many more used video game stores there would probably be if it weren’t for the stupid digital gaming.
Ten years ago GameFAQs ran a poll asking whether gamers prefer digital or physical when it comes to buying games. Only a dismal 10 – 20% of answers said digital. This year they ran the same poll and the number is much higher where Those who voted for digital games sat at around 40%.
However this will not be the case with streaming games. While I think it will find a place for a niche type of gamers, it will be far from the norm.
Another example is 4K, it existed more than ten years ago but only recently people started adopting it in their homes yet it is no where near becoming a standard. It is still expensive to make and expensive and watch.
Just like 4K, streaming games needs a whole lot of infrastructure before it becomes a thing. And making it seamless is unfortunately beyond the capabilities of the game developer and the gamer.
Let’s talk in 2030 and reevaluate the feasibility of streaming games.
I agree with Reggie and I’m looking forward to it.
Pingback: Reggie Fils-Aime says game streaming will definitely be the future over the next decade - My Nintendo News - TechBits
I don’t know why people are acting like streaming games will kill local games. Blue-Rays and DVDs still sell well despite most people having access to Netflix or another Streaming service.
Great post :)
My back log is so huge and there is so many games I would like to play and I have not play yet that in 10 years, I will still catching up. I am not even talking games I would like to play again like final fantasy series (1 to 10) . I am not even worry, furthermore like many others say, streaming will be one option as people will still buy physical copy.
Streaming will be a major option in the future but not the replacement. If streaming did become the replacement, you would definitely see at least half, if not most, of the video game community leave. Most people know not to fully trust any company & streaming where they don’t have any control over how long they can play a game for as long as they want is not something they will put up with. Especially now people are realizing most companies ultimately only care about two things: themselves and/or whatever political affiliation they subscribe to. Look no further than Disney when they let all of the media bash fans & customers alike when they have any criticisms toward a movie with a female or minority lead with bullshit like “you’re just a racist, troll, blah, blah, blah.”