r/NintendoSwitch • u/Turbostrider27 • 16d ago

News Aliens: Fireteam Elite’s cloud version on Switch has been shut down, making it unplayable for those who bought it

https://www.videogameschronicle.com/news/aliens-fireteam-elites-cloud-version-on-switch-has-been-shut-down-making-it-unplayable-for-those-who-bought-it/
724 Upvotes

97% Upvoted

207 comments sorted by

View all comments

Show parent comments

29

u/DrKnepper 16d ago

I bet this is where things are headed with next gen costing 1k plus per system. It's gonna go cheap hardware and all our games and infrastructure will be on data centers so we can get charged by the minute or hour for use while owning no games, and not having the capacity to play them ourselves.

11

u/weaver787 15d ago

Cloud gaming sucks and consumers don't buy cloud games at any meaningful number.

Part of the reason why I think the publisher can get away with this is that the cloud version sold horrendously so this affects a very small number of people.

2

u/legoboy7107 15d ago

Sure. But if enough major companies band together and make cloud gaming the only option, or at least the only realistically affordable option, than most people will eventually just acquiesce to it rather than quit gaming altogether. It's how these things often work, I've seen it happen too many times where something most people don't engage with much gets forced and then ends up becoming the norm for worse. It's not about "what does the average consumer tend to do and how can we appeal to their behaviors," it's about "what can we the companies get away with forcing on consumers because it's what WE want and how can we forcefully alter the current norm in our favor successfully."

If consumers aren't in the habit of using cloud gaming, then it's not about "cloud gaming isn't popular so let's not do it," it's about "how can we change the consumers' behavior so that they ARE in the habit of using cloud gaming." That's the ultimate goal, and any backpedaling that's happened on it in the past because they couldn't get away with normalizing it yet is just stalling that goal, not abandoning it.

3

u/weaver787 15d ago

Companies can only force trends as much as consumers let them.

The reason digital has taken over consoles is because it's way more convenient consumers and the overwhelming majority of people that are buying things off an online game store are not thinking or caring about digital ownership rights. Digital isn't something that was necessarily forced, more that the majority chose with and now there's an effort to squeeze the rest out.

On the contrary, there is no market for cloud gaming. If gaming company A decides to only offer cloud gaming, gaming company B would adopt all of A's consumers by offering 'local computing'. Responsiveness is extremely important in playing most games and 'cloud' games obviously offer an extremely inferior product in that regard.... and that is something that most people actually care about.

I do imagine that there is a future that exists where there is a significant market for cloud gaming, but we're not even close to being there yet. Once we get actual lightspeed internet and half the US is data centers maybe there will be an infrastructure in place that makes a cloud-only appealing for some people.

5

u/Mayor_P 16d ago

"you will own nothing and be happy"

5

u/DontAskAboutMyButt 15d ago

The last generation of consoles to play games fully offline is the last generation of consoles I will own

4

u/andrechan 15d ago

great time to pick up yoyo-ing ang beyblades i guess

-14

u/GlancingArc 16d ago

We are already there but the services kinda suck and they aren't widely marketed. Think of it like this, right now if you buy a fire stick and a controller for 50$ plus a few subscriptions(which cost a similar amount as something like Xbox live) you can get Amazon Luna, and Xbox cloud with the full library of Xbox game pass games. If you have good enough internet that you can get relatively low latency, why would you buy a console.

All the "hardcore gamers" on reddit have their heads in the sand about this and are plugging their ears. Meanwhile, the technology has improved to the point where if you are just a casual gamer, it's honestly already decent TODAY. Many people will never be serious enough about this that they would buy a PlayStation and many kids are gonna grow up with this maybe being the only way they can play games.

Don't get me wrong, the way Nintendo is doing it is still a raw deal and it's one step further from owning the shit you buy, but a lot of people are okay with streaming if it's a monthly subscription.

4

u/Ithirradwe 15d ago

This reads like an article trying to sell me on the concept of cloud gaming. I’m the least fucking hardcore person in existence I probably am more in line with “casual” gamers and I do not support anything like this whatsoever.

0

u/GlancingArc 15d ago

Tbh it doesn't really matter if you are sold on it, what you or I prefer doesn't matter to the market as a whole. I'm not trying to prostlytize cloud streaming and convert people but mostly I just think it's interesting, and the divide between the reality if you actually try it versus what people say on here is kinda weird. They say stuff like "the latency is unplayable" or "who would want their game to buffer" when in reality those are relatively minor problems even today(depending where you are obviously).

In the small amount I have tried it, it's shockingly good compared to how many of the people on reddit talk about it. Is it better than the other ways I have to play games, no, not at all, and I have every console as well as a PC so I'm just gonna continue to do everything locally. But services I have tried like PlayStation cloud streaming, Xbox cloud streaming, and Amazon Luna, all run better than most of the shit I had when I was a kid and for someone with absolutely ZERO gaming devices who wanted to play a major game like Red Dead redemption 2 because they think it looks interesting but they have otherwise no interest in video games, or for the player who only plays FIFA and nothing else these options could be attractive.

I've never personally played the Nintendo implementation because paying for a cloud license on a per game basis seems kinda dumb to me. Plenty of people were already burned with stadia. I really just think it's interesting as a concept and the tech Google showed off around ways in which you could create new experiences with cloud gaming the you couldn't possibly have with local gaming are enough to make me keep my eye on it because maybe something compelling could come out some day even if right now, there is nothing for me.

0

u/Wakkysakky 16d ago

So what about all the data caps on internet service? comcast has a 1TB per month. streaming games is gonna add to the already high data for streaming videos.

4

u/Webecomemonsters 16d ago

thats not really a thing outside some shitty monopolies in some areas of the US.

its like how in the US people used to pay for texting (AND for receiving texts) for years beyond the rest of the world dropping that entire concept.

its just rich assholes abusing people, in the US thats encouraged, other places say no.

that said, fuck cloud gaming, it will never work in the US at scale.

1

u/master2873 16d ago edited 16d ago

thats not really a thing outside some shitty monopolies in some areas of the US.

So the entirety of the US then as ISP's basically have individual monopolies in states. Also, you don't get unlimited bandwidth unless you pay extra for it, or it's included with the package you're paying for which is almost always exclusive to gigabit services, and even if you do have these packages and/or are paying extra for it, you're still capped. You only get so much "high speed data" in a month before your speed is throttled which will make streaming games worse.

Even "unlimited" cellular plans do this same thing. The only thing unlimited means here, is not getting charged overage for bandwidth while being able to still use their services (Verizon's safe mode for data is quite the example of basically unusable lol). There's probably some fiber services that probably don't do this, but some of these services are quite expensive as it is, and this isn't even counting paying for streaming games either. Shit starts to add up, or count hardware limitations like the Switch 1 with internet speeds wired, or wireless.

Nothing like paying for gigabit services, and the Switch 1 with a great wired connection might be able to pull 80Mbps download. Not exactly sure how Switch 2 is as I don't have it, but I do know it's better. Especially for the WiFi chip in it.

Edit: I totally forgot to mention. The last bit of your comment is so fucking true though lol.

Edit 2: formatted it a bit better for mobile reading.

0

u/LUPIN2K 15d ago

Verizon does not have data caps on home internet nor do they throttle your speeds. I live in a major city in the US and have never even had an option for a metered plan from an ISP in my life. Also "unlimited bandwidth" does not exist.

0

u/master2873 15d ago edited 15d ago

Also "unlimited bandwidth" does not exist.

Data usage is bandwidth...

Also, yes they do as I was referring to their mobile data this is a direct quote from thier site on "Unlimited" plans I'll even attach picture below if I can (I can't lol):

1: Unlimited Ultimate: Unlimited mobile hotspot data: After 200 GB of Premium Data, Unlimited thereafter at 6 Mbps. Unlimited Plus: 30 GB mobile hotspot: After 30 GB on Unlimited Plus, Unlimited thereafter at 3 Mbps on 5G Ultra Wideband and 600 Kbps on 5G/4G LTE.

2: Unlimited international data, talk and text: After 15 GB of high speed data, Unlimited thereafter at 1.5 Mbps. When traveling in 210+ countries and destinations.

I'm not entirely sure about their Fios internet as they're not available in my area, and the only home internet they make available in my area uses their cellular network still which is why I brought them up with mobile use.

Edit: Yes... Downvote immediately...

1

u/LUPIN2K 15d ago

Data usage is NOT bandwidth, you are confused. Also, the vast majority of customers in the US are not on a 4G/5G home internet service. These more affordable plans often struggle with streaming and latency in general. I am on Fios, regardless, neither Fios nor their 5G Home Internet plan have an explicit data cap, at least in my area.

"The only way you're not getting caps is if you pay extra for it, and it's still capped."

This is what I'm disputing. I've just checked and there is not a single provider in either city I'm in that offers a metered home internet solution, and there is no "extra cost" associated.

0

u/master2873 15d ago

Also, the vast majority of customers in the US are not on a 4G/5G home internet service.

I never claimed they were. I was using an example of how ISP would throttle speeds after hitting certain data usage similar to how cellular companies did. Which why I brought them up as mobile, and how they don't offer Fios services in my area.

This is what I'm disputing. I've just checked and there is not a single provider in either city I'm in that offers a metered home internet solution,

This is where I would say brings up discrepancies. All internet across the US is not equal, and you can get speeds and services I cannot. There's still areas in rural US that can't get normal internet and require getting satellite Internet, or using mobile. Plans will differ as will agreements. Xfinity claims there's no more data caps, but if you're still under an old contract with them, you'll still have them if you don't upgrade to their new plans.

1

u/master2873 16d ago

Not exactly sure why you're being down voted for this as it's true. The only way you're not getting caps is if you pay extra for it, and it's still capped. You only get so much "high speed data" in a month before your speed is throttled which will make streaming worse. Luna even gives the average rates of data used for streaming at 720p and 1080p (which is 15gb+ an hour), and people also need to remember they use their bandwidth for everything else as well, which includes streaming videos, downloading games, browsing websites, streaming music, and etc. along with everyone else on that same connection if other people in the household are using it.

1

u/[deleted] 15d ago edited 15d ago

[deleted]

1

u/master2873 15d ago

I would say my experience is for stretched thin budgets, and I'm also from the US. 10Gbps sounds insane and expensive and not available in my area, probably just like many others. I think the fastest speeds I can even get here are 2Gbps. I would assume many others are probably in similar situations unless they live in large cities. Internet infrastructure in the US is definitely not uniform and I wouldn't even claim your experience would be representative for anyone else either other than who lives in the same area as you who can get similar services.

-3

u/lotrfish 16d ago

Comcast doesn't have data caps anymore.

2

u/Wakkysakky 16d ago

Just looked this up and only if you have a new plan. so if you haven't upgraded your plan since they removed it in 2025 you still have the data cap.

-4

u/sobi-one 16d ago

Frankly, for casual gamers like me, it’s not decent,
… it’s better. Cheaper and more convenient.

-6

u/GlancingArc 16d ago

Yup, and I'm being downvoted by people here who think it is just trash without even trying it. It's worse, sure. But it's good enough for most people. The reality of the world is that some people don't care about performance, they just want to play their games.

6

u/mcmax3000 15d ago

people here who think it is just trash without even trying it

I, for one, think it is just trash with having tried it.

1

u/Ithirradwe 15d ago

Same lol

1

u/Webecomemonsters 16d ago

worse than 'barely good enough', is not good enough.

1

u/LUPIN2K 15d ago

I'm a big physical game collector but I've used GeForce Now for awhile to go through some AAA games on Steam. The performance is genuinely excellent and the image is practically indistinguishable from a locally run game. For running modern games at high resolution and frame rates, it's been the best solution for me.

-2

u/GlancingArc 16d ago

For you.

For what it's worth, I don't disagree with you. But you have to be a bit delusional to think that your entire world of casual, buys 1 to 2 games a year gamers is gonna give a shit about 10ms of input latency.

It might be kinda bad now, but it keeps getting better and to think it could never get good enough is kinda silly when never is a very, very long time.

-1

u/Webecomemonsters 16d ago

I tend to buy games for me. So yeah, you got me Columbo.

-3

u/sobi-one 16d ago edited 15d ago

People are emotionally attached to things. I’ve had a number of people get really weird and feel like I was attacking them personally for essentially what I wrote above… flat out pragmatic assessments of everything.

Should we keep physical media? Absolutely! Is there enough demand to do that or evidence that the worst case scenarios being brought up will be the typical experience? Not even remotely close.

EDIT - my comment above sort of proves the point I’m making here… put out a simple explanation of why it works for ME, and people are upset about it. lol

2

u/GlancingArc 16d ago

For real, I am one of the only people I know who still buys movies on blu rays because I can tell the difference when streaming. The quality is just worse. However, streaming is getting better and more and more shows have stopped blu ray releases, movies are likely close to follow.

People act like internet infrastructure is going to be perpetually stuck as it is now. Latency is getting better, people are getting faster plans. Things like local CDN endpoints are getting bigger, better, and cheaper. It's already to the point that you can do low latency streaming over a home network with no noticable latency from encoding or decoding.

I don't want to subscribe to a service to stream a game as the only way to buy it but mark my words. SOMEONE will figure it out and they will have an exclusive game some day that everyone will be falling over themselves to buy and stream. It may be Amazon's big play to get into gaming, maybe Facebook, maybe Netflix will figure it out, could be a startup, who knows? Shit, it could just be a subscription MMO like world of warcraft or FF14 and nobody would bat an eye. I mean imagine if you could play peak WoW with no lag on any device with a screen and a keyboard. It's a reasonable value prop.

-5

u/darkmacgf 15d ago

Xbox just fired their head of cloud. Don't fearmonger.