Install Steam
login
|
language
简体中文 (Simplified Chinese)
繁體中文 (Traditional Chinese)
日本語 (Japanese)
한국어 (Korean)
ไทย (Thai)
Български (Bulgarian)
Čeština (Czech)
Dansk (Danish)
Deutsch (German)
Español - España (Spanish - Spain)
Español - Latinoamérica (Spanish - Latin America)
Ελληνικά (Greek)
Français (French)
Italiano (Italian)
Bahasa Indonesia (Indonesian)
Magyar (Hungarian)
Nederlands (Dutch)
Norsk (Norwegian)
Polski (Polish)
Português (Portuguese - Portugal)
Português - Brasil (Portuguese - Brazil)
Română (Romanian)
Русский (Russian)
Suomi (Finnish)
Svenska (Swedish)
Türkçe (Turkish)
Tiếng Việt (Vietnamese)
Українська (Ukrainian)
Report a translation problem
I want to be able to pay for cloud gaming in order to play any Steam game of mine from any distance with none of the dropped connection issues Steamlink has. I would consider paying up to $15 for this per month. 
Discussions Rules and Guidelines
Report this post
https://partner.steamgames.com/doc/features/cloudgaming
Cloud gaming will not solve this, in fact it will be FAR worse. Have you actually tried any of the cloud gaming services out there? You need a beast of an internet connection to use it.
Public wifi, not enough. Wifi you get at a hotel, not enough. You pretty much need gigabit connection at all time to have decent streaming and even then the latency will kill any fun you think you will have.
Seriously, cloud gaming at this point, is at least 20 years too early. Unless you happen to be connected to the building holding the servers for both your ISP and the cloud gaming servers its going to suck and even then it might not be good.
I've seen a few videos from well known hardware testers that were invited to test it. They were in a hotel within a mile or so of the servers with a gigabit fiber optic connection and it was still laggy and not a good experience.
I suggest you actually try a cloud gaming service before asking for one. Give Stadia or Nvidia cloud gaming a try. Stadia at least has a free option with a few free games that you can try before putting money into it.
Oh and one other thing, if you have a limited amount of data you can download, well cloud gaming will suck that up, so if you use any other streaming services you're gonna hit the limit at which point they throttle you down, which will not be a fun experience or start charging you more money. 1 or 2 hours a day of gaming till take hundreds of gigs of data by the end of the month.
Also if you have anyone else in the house that want to play games or stream shows or use the internet while you steam, it will disrupt both.
So ya, give cloud gaming a try before asking for it. I mean its obviously going really well for Stadia right?
Steam is in the perfect position to pull this off. GeForce Now is amazing but lacks many popular titles.
Because it is the game devs choice to opt in.
Valve isn't going to do it on their own. They are partnering with Nvidia.
And even if Valve did it on their own, developers would still be able to opt out of such a service.
I have been using "Steam" for a long time and I have been facing with the fact that most of the games are not suitable for the requirements of my computer. I have an opportunity to buy games and pay a subscription for using cloud technologies (for example, from NVIDIA to play resource-intensive games on my weak PC), but I have no opportunity to buy a powerful computer and update it from time to time (to be honest there is no desire too).
Why don't you make a service for games using broadcasts, as NVIDIA has made? It would be much more convenient to pay you (I believe even cheaper), rather than contact with third-party services (since NVIDIA acts as a vendor, then I still use the services of a distributor from GFN.ru, or it is basically russian adaptation from NVIDIA). I think you could cover more players around the world, who have weak PCs and fast Internet to play "heavy" games (like me). It would be possible to introduce a monthly subscription, as well as monthly payment of games (EA Games already offers such a service inside the Steam platform). One more inconvenience is that the cloud service from NVIDIA does not support all the games in which I want to play. For example, there was no game "Doom", so I had to ask a friend to borrow her computer, and there are no games "Need for Speed". I wrote in NVIDIA's support, but the only thing I have is hope and expectation of future updates that they would add these games to their cloud platform. I guess Steam (specially Valve) has enough money to deploy a game cloud infrastructure for its users.
I suppose, that my proposal has been already presented by members of your team or by other users like me, but then it is not clear to me why you still have not introduced such functionality? If this is not a secret, please let me know the reason why Steam users have no opportunity to play "cloud games" (via cloud services).
I hope that my feedback will help you make the right decision.
You can contact me by email: bely_forever@mail.ru
Thanks for attention.
Ivan
https://partner.steamgames.com/doc/features/cloudgaming
Assuming Steam's service would be cheaper doesn't mean it will be. I would expect it to be priced competitively, but there's a bit of overhead to having enough computing power to run games for thousands or millions of customers.
The games that will be available will probably need to be opted in by the developers. So your complaint that Nvidia's service doesn't have all the games you want, doesn't mean Steam's service will. Valve doesn't own the games it sells, and it doesn't have rights to do whatever it wants. Developers make decisions about what they participate in, pricing, etc, not Valve.
I mean cloud gaming is coming of course, but you might want to temper your expectations about paying less than $9.99 a month and having access to Steam's entire catalog.
Or the fact that there are already massively big players like Amazon in the market and that trying to compete with them when they have a massive advantage in manpower and hardware would be a bad idea?
Or the fact that Steam doesn't own the games so they can't just include whatever games they want in a subscription, that is up to the developers to do and why so many games aren't available for steaming from other services.
Then there is also the fact that large segments of the population don't have sufficient bandwidth to even use streaming services required for games.
Makes far more sense for steam to focus on what they do best, creating a storefront and integrating with those who wish to leverage that.
Major assumption that it would be cheaper. Wishful thinking never is a good basis.
That's because the game developers/publishers decide which games they want on which service. It's not up to Nvidia to decide, it was even one of the issues when GFN launched that Nvidia put games on there that they had no licensing contracts for.
It's how Cloud/streaming based services work. Their catalog is dynamic.
Because a business doesn't always see the same advantages or disadvantages as users. They decide whether it fits their own needs and wants.
I suggested this idea, and I'm not sure if it's still up, or a moderator summoned all their tolerance and intelligence in order to lock it, for a reason excused with 'rules'.
A cloud-based Steam service would be good, but doubtlessly would cost money.
I bet if Google had launched Stadia, but already offered Steam's entire catalog, they would have been a smash hit instead of nearing the grave like they are right now with their obscurity and overpriced crap.
Again, I recommend Steam charge no more than 15 dollars per month to access your full catalog, but if they want to make serious money, charge 10 or less.