Video games might be a relatively new medium when compared to films or comics, but this hasn't stopped the industry from finding new and exciting ways to interact with games. Streaming video games has been a distant dream for a long time, which is turning into reality with technological advancements in streaming infrastructure. Many tech giants are constantly trying their hands in this new realm, but nothing has quite caught on just yet.
The biggest disappointment for players is Google Stadia, a promising concept that never really took off as expected. However, Amazon also has a similar offering in the cloud gaming space known as Luna. With not much buzz currently surrounding the service, many fans are curious to know whether Amazon Luna would suffer the same fate as Google Stadia?
RELATED: YouTube Introduces New Features to Compete with Twitch
There are some major differences between Google's Stadia service and Amazon Luna. With Stadia, Google sought to create an entirely new platform to play games, and thus required players to purchase their titles from Stadia's own digital storefront. However, Amazon is pursuing a Netflix model where players are provided access to a catalog of titles to choose from at the cost of a monthly subscription.
This instantly makes Luna more progressive, and thus, more appealing to the casual gamer which is arguably the target audience for streaming games. The entry fee for Amazon Luna's base subscription is relatively low at $5.99, which is definitely more inviting than Stadia's Pro subscription of $9.99 per month. However, a Luna subscription can add up quickly when developer channels come into play, with the likes of Ubisoft+ costing $14.99 per month in exchange for access to all of the developer's games that are available for streaming.
In addition to these major differences, Amazon's choice of using Windows servers for Luna poses a great advantage as opposed to Stadia. Porting games over to Stadia (which uses Linux) requires considerable development resources while porting to Luna is touted to be as simple as putting the Windows release on an AWS instance.
Amazon Luna has a sizeable collection of games, but a huge portion of these titles are indie games. Sure, there are some middle-market titles like A Plague Tale: Innocence and Call of the Sea, as well as a handful of AAA releases such as Control and Metro Exodus, but it pales in comparison to offerings by the likes of xCloud or PS Now. With not a lot of popular releases at the time of writing, Luna doesn't make much sense as a viable alternative to traditional gaming.
In addition to these missteps, Amazon does not have any convincing first-party games for the platform. Amazon Game Studios is currently hard at work on New World, but there has been no confirmation regarding whether the game would be available on Amazon Luna or not. With not a lot of hype surrounding the service, it's possible that Amazon does not have quite the focus on Luna that it needs to make the service popular.
While there might be an argument that Stadia's failure could be attributed to reckless expenditure on procuring high-profile releases, but Amazon really needs to put in the work towards making Luna an accessible and appealing platform if it wants to survive and thrive in today's landscape. As it stands, there's a very real possibility that Luna (despite its progressive measures) might be the next Stadia.