Help Us Decide New Pricing


The performance is low thats it bro, there are a lot users playing and its a shared gpu. Even uf you say something about the performance, the staff or an manager will say: We are working in a new update for the gpu bla bla bla. Its been the same for months, theres no way to say something xD


Oh yeah I actually forgot to mention I was playing on 1280x800 resolution.


Yeah that will do it. It can’t handle 1080p for most recent games on max settings. 2013 isn’t hardly recent but even that…


First - 200GB Storage is NOTHING, absolutely useless. 500GB outdated too.

You already a year ago reduced twice the credits accrued monthly in the Gamer subscription (from 80H to 40H). Now you increase the price twice, let even that and for the “unlimited” plan. Even now, even at night it is unrealistic to find a stable time, when you do not have to “share” with other cloud computer performance (FPS drops to 45 and up to 30 frames per second on any settings on “Ultra” Sky Computer ). And the hardware remains almost the same as 3 years ago (except for the GPU, there is realy progress).

It seems that the idea of a Cloud computer will never “shoot” in the mass market. According to the idea, this technology should become cheaper and more accessible for everyone every year (more users - lower price for each person), but instead the price of using cloud servers only grows. You wanted to expand into new markets, start free-ads services, but instead you had to close all data centers, except the USA, Europe and Hong Kong. Minus South America, minus India and Asia, minus Australia/New Zeland.

If someone has a lot of money and he often plays, then he can easily buy himself a computer any power, even a modern top-laptop, which is almost as good as a desktop computer. This computer is forever yours, always ready when you need (without “oh, today I can’t”), unlimited in time of use. And if someone tries to save money on an upgrade/purchase using LiquidSky as an Ersatz-computer, then a rational question arises: “Is it really saving money?”.

Sorry, for a lot of text :slight_smile: But there has really problem with selection fork “Power - Price - Mass using”.


I just found the thread and noticed the public voting of the future price.

I am just gonna share my case…
I am a family guy with limited time for gaming because of children, despite large Steam collection, especially on mini/short games, which allows me to play a little while without recall the last time status.

Hence, I found Liquidsky which allows me to game everywhere when I have spare time.
I subscribed the monthly plan which allows me to have more storage for my games hence I can switch my games easily without waiting to re-install after liquidsky pc boot up
It turns out now I have over 60k points non used to only keep my games in the cloud ready for me to play anytime

For sure you may suggest turning to pay as you go for playing a few games at a time with 200 GB.
But a few favourite games already cover the spaces.

What I suggest is could we have a plan related to the storage instead of related to the game hours?
Option B sounds great so we can ignore game hours, but I really do not prefer to add $10 a month or total $240 a year just to keep my PC in the cloud.

current $160 a year is acceptable(so as my wife), but $240 a year maybe just too much to ask:sob:


This is it, quality and performance have dropped since beta 1, while Price and limitations keep increasing. Which is the complete opposite to what cloud computing represents.

Given a lot of players are getting into this area now I am hoping to see more competition and better consumer offerings, as at the moment it very much feels like we are being treated poorly and should just be happy that LS exists, and while that was the case a couple of years back, going forward it’s not going to be the case.


This is a resource-intense service, especially computational resources, so I would object any “unlimited plan”. This is for the sake of the sustainability of LiquidSky.


At least keep the one time purchases so it won’t be that expensive.


Plan B - one love. Very good


Let me start by telling you, I really love your service. You allowed me to use my shitty tablet as a high end laptop since the start of your service.
I do have a desktop PC that is powerful enough to use as my daily driver, but occasionally I come across the problem of me needing more power on my tablet. Under that circumstance I use your service. Fast, relatively reliable and good hard drive speed.
But me only using the service from time to time will never result in me buying a annual package for 300$. That is a incredible high price for a service that requires an extremely good internet connection to even work.

So what would be my package?

Option B would not be an option.
As for Option A:
I do not want to buy a monthly package with no rollover as long as I’m using this service as rarely as I do now. So my only option would be the beginner pack for 15$. 15$ for 25 hours of compute time sounds like a horrible deal no matter how I look at it.

It was a fun ride with you LiquidSky but as soon as my credits run out and I see these new prices implemented, I’ll stop using your service as long as the prices are as high as they will be for casual users of your service.

That being said, please consider changing the twice as fast usage of the beginner package and you might still have me as a potential customer.


Thanks for the detailed feedback. Let’s hope LS will find a way to accomodate all users. :crossed_fingers:


I have almost finished my skycredits… What do you suggest? Can I buy another PAYG package? Or it’s better to wait for the option B and buy the (precious and really waited) unlimited plan? Can I spend my skycredits even after the implementation of the new plans? Please help me! Thank you


Considering the usual development speed (Soon™ :wink:), you should be good with another PAYG package.
Also, even when (if) the new pricing model will become active, you will be able to spend your credits. I’m pretty sure Morgan said something about it further above in this topic.


The Unlimited Plan return sounds amazing to me :star_struck:

I used to have the ‘unlimited’ package back when LS was in Beta and although I know a lot of people abused that feature and it uses a lot of power I want to have the best internet speed when downloading a game and I don’t want to worry about running out of SkyCredits while the game downloads since during peak times the speed isn’t as high as advertised. Adding the Unlimited feature has its pros and cons of course, but I think this will be a relief for people that are downloading multiple games and wont worry about how many credits are being used. I am looking forward to see this service improve even more, but so far it has been an amazing rollercoaster ride.

Thank you LS Team!



Forgot to say, as for option A? I feel like that will separate the less fortunate people from being able to use this service to play their favourite games and get good performance - as the gamer system is not able to run more graphic based AAA games. Hope you understand my point of view. Option B will be worth it because its effect it will have on the current subscribers won’t be as much.


I’m a vip. If unlimited plans is implemented,I purchased Gamer plan,Will the previous 500G storage remain?


Also, as long as you don’t change your payment plan, your current plan will continue.


Can’t feasibly agree with the pricing structure of the Pay as you go model or the restrictions but I understand how some people really need it to continue using the service. I’d be more than willing to pay $39.99 for an “Elite” package as well if it could replace the current $39.99 subscription plan or also be done as a yearly lump sum, which correct me if I’m wrong would make you guys more annually with the former… but the yearly rate is a bit steep for me.

I’d say for the sake of fairness if there was a way to implement both that would be fantastic. I’d also love an Elite package but I couldn’t afford that much in one lump sum. I’m definitely more interested in the unlimited model.


I think you should reconsider the A OR B option, and really go for some variant of A + B. But, you cannot offer so many things as separate options, it gets too confusing. It really should be presented as just two options “Pay as you go” vs “Subscription”.

The new “Pay as you go” would then contain all your A-type plans under this headline, with suboptions for “single payment” or “automatic refill” where the latter is similar to the present subscription, i.e., X credits/month + your sky computer isn’t deleted + some form of credit rollover. Just like now, these options give access to all performance tiers, but the higher ones cost more credits/min.

The new “Subscription” alternative would then be your B options; unlimited, no credit counting. There is then a suboption for the performance tiers with determines price/month.

This would also allow monitoring net earnings from these two groups separately. Then you can adjust prices so both groups contribute equally.


Option B is out of the question for me since I’m a PAYG customer and only use the service occasionally (depending on the game).
When I look at option A for the PAYG tier, it looks like we’ll be paying 14.99 for what currently costs 9.99. Yes, it’s 3000 credits, but if we burn 2 per minute instead of 1 per minute then it comes down to the same thing. So we’re basically talking about a 5$ price hike. If I had to choose I would choose A, but also hoping that the increase in price will be reflected in the improvement of service, right now LS is far from being a smooth experience.


This would be perfect. Option A for Pay as You Go, Option B monthly. Gives a chance to try before commiting to LiquidSky fully.