Close
Report Comment to a Moderator Our Moderators review all comments for abusive and offensive language, and ensure comments are from Verified Users only.
Please report a comment only if you feel it requires our urgent attention.
I understand, report it. Cancel

Perry: Which company wouldn't want to partner or own a company like Gaikai?

Perry: Which company wouldn't want to partner or own a company like Gaikai?

Thu 28 Jun 2012 8:14am GMT / 4:14am EDT / 1:14am PDT
Business

Gaikai CEO says raising money for cloud gaming "isn't a problem"

Gaikai CEO David Perry is fuelling rumours of a possible buyout following talk that the cloud gaming company is up for sale at the price of $500 million.

Speaking exclusively to GamesIndustry International he admitted the company is fielding a lot of acquisition enquiries and even went so far as to suggest companies such as Google or Facebook could be interested.

"We're just trying to evangelise this concept of cloud gaming and in doing so we expect someone will pop up and want to participate or partner or own the company," said Perry.

"Microsoft, Apple, Citrix, even a Facebook or Google might want to do a game strategy because our engagement times are so long compared with a normal ad"

David Perry, Gaikai

"That's why we keep as much momentum as we can. It's a case of keep executing and at some point, somewhere, cloud gaming will become interesting to someone. Media companies are realizing the importance of games, and software companies, are realizing that it's just as easy to stream footage off power points as well as games."

"When you think about the big picture, which company wouldn't want to partner or own a company like Gaikai? Microsoft, Apple, Citrix, even a Facebook or Google might want to do a game strategy because our engagement times are so long compared with a normal ad."

Gaikai has signed number one players in various media sectors, including Samsung, YouTube and Electronic Arts, to supply a game streaming service for their customers.

According to Perry, Gaikai has "reached the point where raising money isn't a problem" but if he did sell the business to another company, he claims he would stick around for the long run.

"Intel, Qualcomm, Limelight and the VC guys are all investing in us. It's been good support so far," he said. "People are calling all the time asking if we need funds. Money is not a subject of concern any more. We're focusing more of the onboarding and scaling of the company.

"My objective is clear. In the history of the game industry, some day there will be a chapter in the book on cloud gaming. We have to see this through to the end. We have to finish what we started. We'll stick around for a good time yet. There's plenty more work to be done. I'm not selling and moving on. I'll continue working."

David Perry will be speaking at Cloud Gaming USA this September in San Francisco.

24 Comments

In a nutshell: if its so great. Why sell?

Posted:2 years ago

#1

Terence Gage Freelance writer

1,288 120 0.1
Maybe a company who doesn't want to splurge half a billion dollars on a relatively young, unproven business like Gaikai wouldn't be interested?

Posted:2 years ago

#2

Aleksi Ranta Product Manager - Hardware

288 138 0.5
Or even better: if its so great why hasnt it sold already?

Posted:2 years ago

#3

Bruce Everiss Marketing Consultant

1,692 594 0.4
It could do with a big company to take it under their wing.
Someone with global reach and the resources, both technical and financial, to make it all work.

Posted:2 years ago

#4
Personally, I'm still very cold on the whole cloud gaming idea.

Gaming is everywhere - tablets, consoles, handhelds, TVs, phones... there is no shortage of it. And the *best* way to do gaming, is to move as much of it local as possible (just look at the Diablo3 issues, and thats still essentially a local game, with local gfx - and only partially network backed events & control).

We aren't at the point where we have unlimited bandwidth, at a very low cost, at a very low ping - widely available. And when we do get there... guess what? The hardest part of cloud gaming will have been solved, and any company can effectively create a remote desktop to a virtualised machine for gaming (it won't be hard).

If cloud gaming is targeting casuals... its a tough sell. They are happy with simple, portable, social games - at a very low cost.

If cloud gaming is targeting hardcores - its going to have to be comparable (and not much worse) than what consoles can provide.

Good luck with that.

Posted:2 years ago

#5
Cloud game saves is a good thing. Why the heck do we need to do cloud streamed games is beyond me. Locally stirred makes most sense for every possible scenario including zombie apocalypse

Posted:2 years ago

#6

Felix Leyendecker Senior 3D Artist, Crytek

184 204 1.1
Who exactly they are targeting seems the right question to ask.

Hardcore gamers are a snobby bunch that are hard to please. The experience gaikai delivers is just not good enough to win them over. I have tried it and the input lag, compression artifacts and blurriness put me off, I would play demos on it but never pay for it. And I have a 50mbit VDSL connection with sub 20 ping times.

Casual gamers are easily pleased but the kind of games they play are not the kind of games that lend themselves well to cloud gaming. They don't require lots of processing power and are often free to play of sell for 99c, making it more expensive for the publisher to provide a 720p stream running of a rented server for weeks on end, then to just let users download the few megabytes and run them off their own low-powered devices.

I could see it work as part of some cable subscription deal. I actually use IPTV with some paytv channels bundled in, but not to the same extend as people in the US paying 50-70$ a month for their cable bill.

Posted:2 years ago

#7

Brian Smith Artist

197 89 0.5
It probably has sold already but the latency means we won't know for sure until next week sometime.

Posted:2 years ago

#8

gi biz ;,pgc.eu

341 51 0.1
Either I'm missing something or this story is completely insane. It means I can also sell my terrific time traveling machine that doesn't work yet but with 500 millions I can certainly do research and get it ready? Please have a look at the website http://terrifictimetravelingmachine.com/ it doesn't work but it clearly show off the potential, auction starts at as low as half a billion, it's only 5.5k a day spread on a quarter of millennium.

Posted:2 years ago

#9

Terence Gage Freelance writer

1,288 120 0.1
You liar; that link doesn't work! I had seventeen pounds I was ready to invest there and then... :(

Posted:2 years ago

#10

Brian Lewis Operations Manager, Aeria Games Europe

139 90 0.6
Either I'm missing something or this story is completely insane. It means I can also sell my terrific time traveling machine that doesn't work yet but with 500 millions I can certainly do research and get it ready? Please have a look at the website http://terrifictimetravelingmachine.com/ it doesn't work but it clearly show off the potential, auction starts at as low as half a billion, it's only 5.5k a day spread on a quarter of millennium.
It does not appear that your site is available yet. Perhaps you should fix this once you have your time machine working. At that point, you will see that I have already invested 500 Million into your product.

Posted:2 years ago

#11

Kevin Patterson musician

187 103 0.6
A question I have been pondering for awhile would be if it would possible and feasible to use cloud gaming to render only some features in a game. My example would be a game like Mass Effect. Your on the citadel and all the action scenes and main geometry would be local so there would be no latency. The background of the citadel could be rendered in the cloud and latency would not be that big of a deal. Doing this you could still have a background that was live rendered and not a movie, but far more detailed than if you were running everything on the same machine. You could have ad placements or unique things geared to the user that could change depending on any number of factors.

If you didn't have a internet connection the game would just render everything with its standard background.

Posted:2 years ago

#12

Antonio Moro Creative Director, Vae Victis

2 0 0.0
Which company wouldn't want to partner or own a company like Gaikai?
Just LOL. Maybe is better to sign a deal and then brag about it.

Posted:2 years ago

#13

Antonio Moro Creative Director, Vae Victis

2 0 0.0
Either I'm missing something or this story is completely insane. It means I can also sell my terrific time traveling machine that doesn't work yet but with 500 millions I can certainly do research and get it ready?
LOL, exactly.

Posted:2 years ago

#14

Greg Wilcox Creator, Destroy All Fanboys!

2,194 1,169 0.5
@ Terence, @ Brian: I can see the site fine. You just need a PC running Windows 98, an AOL account and a dial-up modem to see it properly.

That's the time travel part... ;^P

Posted:2 years ago

#15

Curt Sampson Sofware Developer

596 360 0.6
Well, that so many people think that this can never possibly work is encouraging news for anybody investing in the company. It means that you get in cheaper than you would otherwise.

Ok, now, hands up. How many of you, in the waning days of the PS2, said that Sony and MS were clearly aiming at a small specialty market, and the real money to be made was with a new gaming console with poor graphics compared to the competition and a funny controller that made sure you'd get fewer third-party ports than otherwise?

I don't know if streamed games will go big or not, but given that so many people complaining about the quality of it are the same people who will happily play a game on a console when it's less than half the resolution and frame rate of a PC, I'm a bit inclined to discount their opinions. If you're not willing to pay a few hundred dollars more to get less latency, why would Gakai fail when also aiming at a crowd willing to live with more latency if they pay less?

Edited 1 times. Last edit by Curt Sampson on 29th June 2012 5:46am

Posted:2 years ago

#16

Dave Herod Senior Programmer, Codemasters

528 788 1.5
@Kevin - How the background is rendered each frame is completely dependent on where the player's viewpoint is, so that couldn't really work, since all you get back is a video feed. It's all or nothing.

Posted:2 years ago

#17
Plus I rather not play a game vs having jerky laggy streamed content. its just not remotely fun. far better to twiddle thumbs waiting for the next frappacino to arrive whilst waiting for the wimbledon canopy cover to close

Posted:2 years ago

#18

Fran Mulhern , Recruit3D

863 707 0.8
The industry seems to have a number of personalities who did something years ago, haven't done much since, but keep making the news. Just, like, my opinion, man....

Posted:2 years ago

#19
Lack of new heroes, bugbears or figures of hate to become famous, infamous or disappearing into obscurity

Posted:2 years ago

#20

Paul Shirley Programmers

178 150 0.8
@Curt:"are the same people who will happily play a game on a console when it's less than half the resolution and frame rate of a PC"

I'll admit owning a WII. I even own a game for it ;)

My whining about both OnLive and Gaikai is from the perspective of using an ancient low to mid range GPU (EAH4770 from 2009) to play PC games and seeing it outperform both services in all of fps,render quality, render resolution and latency simultaneously. Neither streamed service is remotely feature competitive with even low end gaming rigs.

Or consoles. And the people that would get better results than the onboard graphics in their chain store PC or laptop would be better off buying a console if they care about the gaming experience. Low resolution is far preferable to rampant compression artefacts and motion sickness from the lag.

Posted:2 years ago

#21

Curt Sampson Sofware Developer

596 360 0.6
Paul: you say that, "Neither streamed service is remotely feature competitive with even low end gaming rigs." That's perfectly true, at the moment. But my point is, consoles aren't competitive, especially when it comes to latency, with mid-range gaming rigs that have a CPU and graphics card costing less than $150 each--about $500 for the entire system. Yet people still live with that. And the streaming services will only get better.

Once again: I'm not saying that Gakai is guaranteed to succeed. I'm just saying that I see nothing about them that guarantees them failure, since we have plenty of other examples of situations where something technologically worse was more successful than something technologically better.

Posted:2 years ago

#22

Matt Martin Editor, GamesIndustry.biz

173 113 0.7
Sold to Sony for $380 million. Believe the hype. http://www.gamesindustry.biz/articles/2012-07-02-sony-acquire-gaikai

Edited 1 times. Last edit by Matt Martin on 2nd July 2012 8:29am

Posted:2 years ago

#23
(Reuters) - Sony Computer Entertainment said on Monday it would buy all shares in California-based gaming firm Gaikai Inc for about $380 million as loss-making Sony Corp seeks to strengthen its online content.

:o

http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/07/02/gaikai-sony-games-idUST9E8HR00720120702

Posted:2 years ago

#24

Login or register to post

Take part in the GamesIndustry community

Register now