Do We Really Need a Slingbox for Video Games?

As I wrote the other day, I can’t say I’m ever happy to see a product or company die. But I just don’t see a place in the world for Spawn Labs. Introduced at TechCrunch50 (video above), they liken their product to a Slingbox for video games. Making them a niche within a niche. The $200 Spawn Labs HD-720 hardware isn’t unreasonably priced for what it provides, yet I don’t see a sustainable market for remote console gameplay through a web browser. Additionally, as an Xbox Live Call of Duty sniper I worry what sort of impact network latency might have when trying to line up a head shot on a moving target from 100 yards.

spawn_hd-720

And speaking of misguided gaming innovation, does Sony really think we’ll line up to play in theaters? It seems like a pretty cool promotional tool for Uncharted 2, but I’d rather play 1vs100 from the comfort of my home. Where snacks won’t break the bank and pants are optional. From Technologizer:

Mike Fidler, Sony’s senior vice president of Digital Cinema Solutions and Services, suggests that this isn’t a one-off thing. In explaining that he wants more theaters to go digital, Fidler said that gaming “will be an important part of that equation.

7 thoughts on “Do We Really Need a Slingbox for Video Games?”

  1. Since I only use a Slingbox to watch live sports, I’d say no, we don’t need one for video games. I don’t see how this is much better than just playing PC games on the road or bringing a portable gaming device.

  2. Take Spawn Labs and Sony theater announcement for what they are – the sunset of dedicated/proprietary hardware, physical media and “theater-as-walled-garden”.

    Be happy this era is over, commit it to memory, so you can be *that guy* 20 years from now…

    “I remember when we had to PAY for the privileged to keep corporation’s physical hardware in our homes, and that hardware only did *one* thing, and we had no control over the content or how it was used…no, they companies didn’t pay us, we paid THEM…” ( *gasps of astonishment and disbelief* )

  3. Dave you c rack me up,
    Im sitting here reading this in the comfort of my home , pants optional mode. Or maybe we can call it Zatzing?

    Maybe that’s the whole goal of technology, to do away with pants at home!
    Ron P

    I know TMI!!!

  4. Latency isn’t my concern. I think OnLive and Spawn will solve it. The real issue is, who the heck is going to pay $200 to occasionally play a game when they are on the road? This company has zero future. Look to OnLive.

  5. I actually would love to use this product. I am out on the road quite a bit and away from my dear Xbox 360. I am sure there will be some games that will be difficult to play due to latency, but there will be others that will be fine. Also, if you have your Xbox networked to a home computer, your entire movie library becomes available as well. I would pay $200 for it… heck, I would probably pay more… but it’s definitely a lifestyle thing. If you aren’t away from your system enough of the time anyway, you aren’t the target market.

  6. As someone who spent about 100 nights on the road in 2007, travel regularly for work and pleasure, and love my 360, I’m probably the target audience. If I’m not biting, they’re in trouble is what I’m saying. Not to mention many hotels have a way of blocking ports or throwing up other roadblocks to non-web traffic. And my aircards have often been good for other stuff, but introduce their own latency. I’d sooner buy a second Xbox for $200 and drag it with me.

Comments are closed.