|
On June 13 2015 04:00 SkrollK wrote:Show nested quote +On June 13 2015 03:46 Plansix wrote:On June 13 2015 03:45 SkrollK wrote:
Here they come.
Death of Twitch inc.
Honestly, to me, YT will just crush Twitch. Twitch works very poorly when you got a low connection, YT to the contrary just works well...
The only important data to me will be the ads remuneration figure on YT. If it's bigger on YT, then it's just instant death to Twitch. The other way around, Twitch might still have a chance. Twitch is owned by Amazon, so that won't happen. This is two of the largest tech companies in the US going toe to toe in the same market. Neither will wipe the other one out. Does Twitch uses Amazons servers ? I don't think so. Does YT Gaming uses YT servers ? I do think so. To me, Twitch is to laggy to watch when i'm not at home. For exemple, right where I am, I can't watch LCS EU on ogmaing in more than 240p. Else I lag. On YT, I'm just 720p while surfing... So, I go on YT. If enought of the big streams steps forward and go YT as well, then for me Twitch is basically over. (I'm not saying that my case is the case of everyone there. Just stating for me  )
Yes, if in that totally simplistic scenario where Twitch does literally nothing to improve and Youtube is a service without any flaws or issue of its own, twitch will die.
But that is extremely unlikely.
|
|
|
Israel2209 Posts
This is GREAT for eSports.
The rumor has it that CPMs on twitch have been declining steadily. Advertising is what funds a large portion of the TV market, and I hope youtube can do the same for online streaming.
|
On June 13 2015 04:01 Plansix wrote:Show nested quote +On June 13 2015 03:59 Grettin wrote:On June 13 2015 03:51 WindWolf wrote:On June 13 2015 03:46 Grettin wrote:On June 13 2015 03:40 WindWolf wrote:
If this has HTML5, YTG has imminently won it for me. With how unstable Flash has been compared to HTML5, I would choose a HTML5 service all days of the week
Not to mentioned that I personally feel that Twitch hasn't improved that much in quite a while... HTML5 won't help if there's not anything worthwhile to watch (except tournaments). I do agree though. I personally don't expect anything major out of this just yet. There will certainly be some growing pains. But with how little improvement there has been to Twitch as of late some competition will be better than nothing at all Of course and as i said, tournament wise its amazing as I am sure many organizers will put their streams there as well. But as a general gaming content wise, i don't see any medium or big Twitch streamer changing over. What i read from twitter about the possible "incentives" in general to stream there, it's not worth it. Unless Google acts like a TV network and offers big streamers money to switch. Or bit streamers start offering. Thats now network TV works, the stations bid on the content and put it up. Netfilx out bid all the networks for House of Cards.
YouTube can pay streamers way better CPMs for a certain amount of time, but if the viewers don't come over, CPMs mean nothing. Will be certainly interesting to see.
"YouTube Gaming will be available this summer, starting in the U.S. and U.K." I'm not sure how I feel about this, potentially slow launches in different countries could be very bad for the platform as the streaming / esports community relies on being global
|
On June 13 2015 04:01 Plansix wrote:Show nested quote +On June 13 2015 03:59 Grettin wrote:On June 13 2015 03:51 WindWolf wrote:On June 13 2015 03:46 Grettin wrote:On June 13 2015 03:40 WindWolf wrote:
If this has HTML5, YTG has imminently won it for me. With how unstable Flash has been compared to HTML5, I would choose a HTML5 service all days of the week
Not to mentioned that I personally feel that Twitch hasn't improved that much in quite a while... HTML5 won't help if there's not anything worthwhile to watch (except tournaments). I do agree though. I personally don't expect anything major out of this just yet. There will certainly be some growing pains. But with how little improvement there has been to Twitch as of late some competition will be better than nothing at all Of course and as i said, tournament wise its amazing as I am sure many organizers will put their streams there as well. But as a general gaming content wise, i don't see any medium or big Twitch streamer changing over. What i read from twitter about the possible "incentives" in general to stream there, it's not worth it. Unless Google acts like a TV network and offers big streamers money to switch. Or bit streamers start offering. Thats now network TV works, the stations bid on the content and put it up. Netfilx out bid all the networks for House of Cards.
Indeed and thats obvious, it might happen. Right now they are just offering promotion, but that's NOTHING for medium or big Twitch streamers.
Not to mention how some major countries in Europe (Germany for example) can't even properly watch Youtube streams/videos. That ain't helping.
|
|
|
On June 13 2015 04:06 Vallelol wrote:Show nested quote +On June 13 2015 04:01 Plansix wrote:On June 13 2015 03:59 Grettin wrote:On June 13 2015 03:51 WindWolf wrote:On June 13 2015 03:46 Grettin wrote:On June 13 2015 03:40 WindWolf wrote:
If this has HTML5, YTG has imminently won it for me. With how unstable Flash has been compared to HTML5, I would choose a HTML5 service all days of the week
Not to mentioned that I personally feel that Twitch hasn't improved that much in quite a while... HTML5 won't help if there's not anything worthwhile to watch (except tournaments). I do agree though. I personally don't expect anything major out of this just yet. There will certainly be some growing pains. But with how little improvement there has been to Twitch as of late some competition will be better than nothing at all Of course and as i said, tournament wise its amazing as I am sure many organizers will put their streams there as well. But as a general gaming content wise, i don't see any medium or big Twitch streamer changing over. What i read from twitter about the possible "incentives" in general to stream there, it's not worth it. Unless Google acts like a TV network and offers big streamers money to switch. Or bit streamers start offering. Thats now network TV works, the stations bid on the content and put it up. Netfilx out bid all the networks for House of Cards. YouTube can pay streamers way better CPMs for a certain amount of time, but if the viewers don't come over, CPMs mean nothing. Will be certainly interesting to see. "YouTube Gaming will be available this summer, starting in the U.S. and U.K." I'm not sure how I feel about this, potentially slow launches in different countries could be very bad for the platform as the streaming / esports community relies on being global
That's true. But on the other hand a slowly but steady launch prevents the launch from being overloaded overnight
|
On June 13 2015 04:07 WindWolf wrote:Show nested quote +On June 13 2015 04:06 Vallelol wrote:On June 13 2015 04:01 Plansix wrote:On June 13 2015 03:59 Grettin wrote:On June 13 2015 03:51 WindWolf wrote:On June 13 2015 03:46 Grettin wrote:On June 13 2015 03:40 WindWolf wrote:
If this has HTML5, YTG has imminently won it for me. With how unstable Flash has been compared to HTML5, I would choose a HTML5 service all days of the week
Not to mentioned that I personally feel that Twitch hasn't improved that much in quite a while... HTML5 won't help if there's not anything worthwhile to watch (except tournaments). I do agree though. I personally don't expect anything major out of this just yet. There will certainly be some growing pains. But with how little improvement there has been to Twitch as of late some competition will be better than nothing at all Of course and as i said, tournament wise its amazing as I am sure many organizers will put their streams there as well. But as a general gaming content wise, i don't see any medium or big Twitch streamer changing over. What i read from twitter about the possible "incentives" in general to stream there, it's not worth it. Unless Google acts like a TV network and offers big streamers money to switch. Or bit streamers start offering. Thats now network TV works, the stations bid on the content and put it up. Netfilx out bid all the networks for House of Cards. YouTube can pay streamers way better CPMs for a certain amount of time, but if the viewers don't come over, CPMs mean nothing. Will be certainly interesting to see. "YouTube Gaming will be available this summer, starting in the U.S. and U.K." I'm not sure how I feel about this, potentially slow launches in different countries could be very bad for the platform as the streaming / esports community relies on being global That's true. But on the other hand a slowly but steady launch prevents the launch from being overloaded overnight
When it comes to this market, i doubt it would happen anyway.
|
On June 13 2015 03:54 Clubfan wrote:It's blocked here (by Google itself) as they would have to get licenses for every channel. There's an interesting article about that in one of the most recent issues of c't. Basically every broadcaster who has a linear internet/tv/radio submission and a fixed schedule has to get one of those licenses. The first point is pretty clear, the second one is very arguable, but apparently YouTube/Google wants to be better safe than sorry  Funny thing is that you can broadcast on YT from Germany, just not watch it^^
Rofl, okay thank you!
|
This will be interesting. As with other posters the thing that excites me the most is HTML5 over Flash.
|
I mean, its owned by Amazon, I don't think they are going to let it die off. I agree they need to put up some more fight and improve their service, including CPM.
|
Nice I thought that was just a rumor, that's a feature I'm looking forward to. SORRY TWITCH YOUR SHIT TAKES TOO MUCH RAM.
|
And now I'm officially more excited about this.
Even though I'm not the biggest Apple fan, I'm beyond happy that they were the catalyst for the developent of HTML 5
|
"YouTube Gaming will be available this summer, starting in the U.S. and U.K."
So, does that mean for streamers or for streamers and viewers?
|
On June 13 2015 04:03 Plansix wrote:Show nested quote +On June 13 2015 04:00 SkrollK wrote:On June 13 2015 03:46 Plansix wrote:On June 13 2015 03:45 SkrollK wrote:
Here they come.
Death of Twitch inc.
Honestly, to me, YT will just crush Twitch. Twitch works very poorly when you got a low connection, YT to the contrary just works well...
The only important data to me will be the ads remuneration figure on YT. If it's bigger on YT, then it's just instant death to Twitch. The other way around, Twitch might still have a chance. Twitch is owned by Amazon, so that won't happen. This is two of the largest tech companies in the US going toe to toe in the same market. Neither will wipe the other one out. Does Twitch uses Amazons servers ? I don't think so. Does YT Gaming uses YT servers ? I do think so. To me, Twitch is to laggy to watch when i'm not at home. For exemple, right where I am, I can't watch LCS EU on ogmaing in more than 240p. Else I lag. On YT, I'm just 720p while surfing... So, I go on YT. If enought of the big streams steps forward and go YT as well, then for me Twitch is basically over. (I'm not saying that my case is the case of everyone there. Just stating for me ) Yes, if in that totally simplistic scenario where Twitch does literally nothing to improve and Youtube is a service without any flaws or issue of its own, twitch will die. But that is extremely unlikely.
Yep, agreed. But in that case, it'll just be awesome for us, customers.
(And, BTW, I don't think that Twitch can have access to the same server space than YT. Even if they put lots of money in it. But I'm really not an IT man so...)
|
Good to see some competition for Twitch.
|
On June 13 2015 04:11 Heyoka wrote:Nice I thought that was just a rumor, that's a feature I'm looking forward to. SORRY TWITCH YOUR SHIT TAKES TOO MUCH RAM.
RAM isn't even the problem. It's the CPU usage, and shitty hardware acceleration that sometimes makes things perform even WORSE.
|
United Kingdom20322 Posts
On June 13 2015 03:44 johnhopfensperger wrote:
They should use HEVC. Then streamers could all go 1080p 60fps.
Sure, but do you know how hard it is to CPU-encode h265 efficiently?
Who has the spare CPU power to stream at 1080p60 right now? Take that and increase load by like 5-15x. I don't have any benchmarks but it's a pretty drastic change in CPU requirements
h265 support is extremely important, but it would be used only by a niche of people if it was added today.
|
Mexico2170 Posts
I really hope this goes well!
|
On June 13 2015 04:36 Cyro wrote:Show nested quote +On June 13 2015 03:44 johnhopfensperger wrote:
They should use HEVC. Then streamers could all go 1080p 60fps. Sure, but do you know how hard it is to CPU-encode h265 efficiently? Who has the spare CPU power to stream at 1080p60 right now? Take that and increase load by like 5-15x. I don't have any benchmarks but it's a pretty drastic change in CPU requirements h265 support is extremely important, but it would be used only by a niche of people if it was added today.
Decoding is pretty CPU heavy right now too. HEVC is still a couple years away from widespread use tbh
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
