Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Luna – Cloud gaming service

amazon.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

271–280 of 288 posts

Re: Luna – Cloud gaming service

#271

Post by SaladFork »

legohead wrote: post #219
CGamesPlay wrote: post #178

I'm not sure I would get back on one of these. I used OnLive back in the day, but now I can't play those games any more. It was a subscription with lock-in, and now that it's out of business I can't even choose to be locked in. Now, I have recently started playing on GeForce NOW, nVidia's offering. However there it's much closer to an EC2 model: I'm renting a machine, and I log into my Steam profile and play games th…

I'm an avid cloud gamer. I used GeForce NOW at first, but it had limited game selection. I use Shadow now and it is much better. I have full control over the PC/VM, and install whatever I want from anywhere. I'm also super impressed with the latency - I can play multiplayer competitive games no problem. I'm on a Mac so cloud gaming makes sense for me. I was going to build a PC but the cost was too high. Much cheaper…

Also going to sound like an ad, but I stream PC VR from a cloud Shadow PC to my Oculus Quest over 5GHz Wi-Fi (effectiveness is really dependent on your proximity to their data centers) but it is really remarkable how effective it is. It is more lag than streaming from a local PC but not to the point where most games are unplayable. I can also play the same games with the same saves from my phone with their app using a Bluetooth-paired gaming controller. Couldn't be happier with their service.

Re: Luna – Cloud gaming service

#272

Post by wayneftw »

scarface74 wrote: post #262
wayneftw wrote: post #231

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Do you really think that MS is naive enough to think that if the courts force Apple to change their policy with iOS devices, consoles won’t be next? You seem pretty confident of the outcome. Are you a lawyer? Seems to me that a lot of different things could happen. We certainly don’t regulate every mode of transportation the same just because they all transport people. You are forcing an analogy between smart phone…

Even if we say that people “need” a smart phone. A) do they need an iphone ? B) do they need any of the apps that Apple doesn’t allow? C) in the case of Epic, why should Epic be treated differently by Apple than it is by consoles?

Easy.

A) When we came up with rules for car manufacturers, why should any single one of them get preferential treatment?

B) Do people need third party car parts that car manufacturers originally wouldn't let anybody else manufacture? Maybe not, but we still have laws protecting those third party manufacturers to allow them to sell.

C) There is no reason to treat bicycles (consoles) the same as cars (smart phones) because smart phones are so much more important to society than consoles.

As a matter of fact - we have laws that inhibit car manufacturers from selling directly to customers. There's absolutely no reason why we can't have the same things for smart phone manufacturers.

I say take their "company stores" away altogether [0]. I'm confident that it's going to happen eventually - if not from this lawsuit then from another.

[0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Company_store

Re: Luna – Cloud gaming service

#273

Post by Terretta »

pier25 wrote: post #160

Apple modified Safari so that Amazon was able to launch Luna on iOS: > “We worked with the Safari team to ensure that some of the things that weren't there are there, and that allowed us to kind of get to where we are today,” Luna head of engineering and technology George Tsipolitis said. https://www.engadget.com/luna-amazon-cloud-gaming-interview-...

Imagine if more devs used the original vision for iOS to release apps: open technologies delivered to the home screen.

So much that's in the app store has, essentially, no need to be a DRM protected binary distributable.

(Unless, maybe, the app store channel brings some significant value.)

Re: Luna – Cloud gaming service

#274

Post by pier25 »

Terretta wrote: post #273
pier25 wrote: post #160

Apple modified Safari so that Amazon was able to launch Luna on iOS: > “We worked with the Safari team to ensure that some of the things that weren't there are there, and that allowed us to kind of get to where we are today,” Luna head of engineering and technology George Tsipolitis said. https://www.engadget.com/luna-amazon-cloud-gaming-interview-...

Imagine if more devs used the original vision for iOS to release apps: open technologies delivered to the home screen. So much that's in the app store has, essentially, no need to be a DRM protected binary distributable. (Unless, maybe, the app store channel brings some significant value.)

That'd be great if Apple hadn't been sabotaging the web on iOS for years.

Re: Luna – Cloud gaming service

#275

Post by scarface74 »

wayneftw wrote: post #272
scarface74 wrote: post #262

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Even if we say that people “need” a smart phone. A) do they need an iphone ? B) do they need any of the apps that Apple doesn’t allow? C) in the case of Epic, why should Epic be treated differently by Apple than it is by consoles?

Easy. A) When we came up with rules for car manufacturers, why should any single one of them get preferential treatment? B) Do people need third party car parts that car manufacturers originally wouldn't let anybody else manufacture? Maybe not, but we still have laws protecting those third party manufacturers to allow them to sell. C) There is no reason to treat bicycles (consoles) the same as cars (smart phones) bec…

A) there is no special treatment. Apple, Google, Amazon, Sony, Nintendo, Microsoft, TiVo, LG (WebOS), Roku, are all allowed to bundle an App Store and curate what goes on their platform.

Can I buy digital currency for use with Fortnite and not give Epic a cut?

B) can I install a third party program on Teslas to enable features that they lock out?

C) there is no difference technologically between a Nintendo switch and a phone. If Nintendo added a cellular chip to the Switch, does it mean it should have to open up development? Could Apple be required to open up iPads with cellular and not those that don’t have one? Since phones are “essential” and tablets and smart watches aren’t, does that mean Spotify complaining about not having the same access to features on watch as Apple has is an invalid complaint [1]?

Could Apple just call the iPhone the “Apple Switch w/cellular”? Or more on brand “iPad Nano w/cellular”?

> As a matter of fact - we have laws that inhibit car manufacturers from selling directly to customers. There's absolutely no reason why we can't have the same things for smart phone manufacturers

Now you are in favor of laws passed only protect local dealers. Those laws are the definition of “regulatory capture”. They don’t help consumers at all. It prevents Tesla from selling in many states. Why shouldn’t we be able to order a car online directly from the manufacturer?

[1] Apple addressed every single one of Spotify’s technical complaints - opened up Siri integration to third party music streaming providers, added the ability to stream from the Watch and download music locally Tessa ago and Spotify is just now updating their app.

Re: Luna – Cloud gaming service

#276

Post by wayneftw »

scarface74 wrote: post #275
wayneftw wrote: post #272

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Easy. A) When we came up with rules for car manufacturers, why should any single one of them get preferential treatment? B) Do people need third party car parts that car manufacturers originally wouldn't let anybody else manufacture? Maybe not, but we still have laws protecting those third party manufacturers to allow them to sell. C) There is no reason to treat bicycles (consoles) the same as cars (smart phones) bec…

A) there is no special treatment. Apple, Google, Amazon, Sony, Nintendo, Microsoft, TiVo, LG (WebOS), Roku, are all allowed to bundle an App Store and curate what goes on their platform. Can I buy digital currency for use with Fortnite and not give Epic a cut? B) can I install a third party program on Teslas to enable features that they lock out? C) there is no difference technologically between a Nintendo switch and…

Ahh, sorry but I'm not going to read anymore from you here.

I've pointed out undeniable real life parallels where things might not go the way you're thinking. If you can't accept that reality, then I can't really help you.

I guess you can enjoy having that last word though!

Re: Luna – Cloud gaming service

#277

Post by kiddico »

mdoms wrote: post #109
ocdtrekkie wrote: post #92

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Bear in mind: While very few consumers benefit from cloud-based gaming, the outcome of dragging consumers over to it for businesses is huge. Why sell software and hardware once when you can sell software, the hardware it's hosted on, and the support and services to manage that software and hardware every single month . It's why companies like Adobe and Microsoft have tried to push their main, relatively static[1] sof…

You may speak for yourself but you most certainly do not speak for every consumer, regardless of how many superlatives you use. I, for one, prefer the subscription model for some things. I like that I can dip my toes in and out of the Photoshop ecosystem without having to shell out hundreds up front. I prefer to rent Netflix for a month rather than purchasing DVDs or Blurays I may watch once or twice. And when cloud…

> I like that I can dip my toes in and out of the Photoshop ecosystem without having to shell out hundreds up front.

I agree, that part is nice. However, once I've dipped in a toe and know I want to OWN it, I can't. The non-saas option is gone.

So now I have a perverse incentive to argue against you, for my own sake. Because the more people like you enter a market, the less likely that market is to provide a single purchase product.

Re: Luna – Cloud gaming service

#278

Post by teaswift »

oehtXRwMkIs wrote: post #49

Does anyone know the basic tech stack behind Luna? This landing page doesn't mention anything, and I'm dying to know if they're also going the Linux and Vulkan route of Stadia.

I read on another site they're using Windows and DirectX to maximize the amount of games that can be played without porting.

Re: Luna – Cloud gaming service

#279

Post by teaswift »

neaden wrote: post #3

Interesting. Disregarding my issues with Amazon as a company, on paper this looks like a better system then Google's Stadia, by actually having a netflix style access games for a monthly fee that I think most people expected Stadia to do.

It does feel like a improvement over Stadia. However the channels strategy does feel a bit like cable TV versus Xbox Game Pass Ultimate which is closer to a true Netflix style all you can play. I do think the post early access price, which will likely be higher then the current $5.99, will be the real deal breaker between this and Game Pass Ultimate.

Re: Luna – Cloud gaming service

#280

Post by op00to »

legohead wrote: post #219
CGamesPlay wrote: post #178

I'm not sure I would get back on one of these. I used OnLive back in the day, but now I can't play those games any more. It was a subscription with lock-in, and now that it's out of business I can't even choose to be locked in. Now, I have recently started playing on GeForce NOW, nVidia's offering. However there it's much closer to an EC2 model: I'm renting a machine, and I log into my Steam profile and play games th…

I'm an avid cloud gamer. I used GeForce NOW at first, but it had limited game selection. I use Shadow now and it is much better. I have full control over the PC/VM, and install whatever I want from anywhere. I'm also super impressed with the latency - I can play multiplayer competitive games no problem. I'm on a Mac so cloud gaming makes sense for me. I was going to build a PC but the cost was too high. Much cheaper…

Shadow is great - for a few dollars a month, I have a full second PC so my kid can play along with me.
Post reply on HN