The nightmare scenario: incomplete stream

It's been an interesting sort of saga when it comes to Playstation Now, Sony's online streaming solution for customers looking to play older games.  Instead of offering traditional backwards compatibility options like the emotion engine chip found in launch PS3's, they've instead decided to invest in a streaming service not unlike what was offered by the late OnLive, electing to stream an intractable image from a remote server farm.  This has resulted in a fair bit of critique from various sources:  high prices for rentals and subscription services, gameplay with noticeable lag and input delay, a truncated available library, and for some, a total non-option for service due to high bandwidth requirements.

One of the more critical viewpoints of the service

This isn't to say that the service can't improve sometime in the future.  Internet speeds continue to get faster, (though not as fast as I like, I'm actually typing the beginning of this article with a downed connection as we speak) and some of the tricks offered by the acquired Gaikai technology help to bridge the gap from an experience that's offered on disc.  What was interesting to me however was listening to one recent account of the service usage.

Giant Bombcast on an oversight with the service.  What kind of world do we live in when we can't buy small robot dogs?

Despite allowing Danny O'Dwyer the ability to go back and play some games he missed on the PS3, like Tokyo Jungle and Bioshock: Infinite, even go so far as earn trophies on his account, there were features that were locked away from him, namely the option of DLC and microtransactions.  In essence, he wasn't able to get what some would argue was the full experience of a game.

There are some I know that would argue that this is a good thing:  triple-A publishers and developers already spend too much time trying to squeeze every last cent of customers as it is with season passes, expansions, map packs, and other forms of downloadable content.  I get that.  But to not even have the option to choose anymore if you wanted to partake in playing more content for game you really enjoyed seems like more oversight with the service offered itself.  Granted, I don't know if you could create a system where customers would be happy with buying DLC for a rental game, only to loose the ability to access it when your rental was up.  The simple solution of course would be to offer "Game of the Year" or complete editions on the service to begin with, in return giving customers more value for their subscription or rental.

This one had it all:  A great story turn, reuniting with old friends, and setting up for the future.

The nightmare scenario offered here however comes in relation with game preservation, an interesting topic that gets far too little thought and attention.  Losing backwards compatibility on consoles and relegating more archiving solutions to streaming could make the hypothetical future where extra content for games like this have no alternative.  Instead, you'll be left with broken menus advertising the ghosts of scenarios past, sitting there, taunting potential customers and making a mockery of game creators.

Bethesda games wouldn't have nearly the longevity they enjoy today if not for extra content

For me, there have been games I have genuinely been ecstatic to throw a few more dollars at to squeeze out more content.  Fallout 3 and Oblivion add entire new lands to explore and people to meet.  Mass Effect added stories to help flesh out your crew.  Dishonored let you play as the villain.  Hell, Dragon Age essentially added an entire second chapter to it's first game, so big that they offered on disc as well as a downloadable option. It would be an incredible shame if these games would be shared with future generations in just their base forms.

Until then I suppose, we're lucky for so many PC versions, and we're lucky for the inadvertent preservation that pirates do, though that's a story for another time.