Why would I give up fixed operational expense of distributing my game and instead pay Amazon computing resources everytime one of my users played? The more you use, the more you pay. The more users you have, the more revenue you will need to cover the cost of the computing resources needed to run the game for your players.
Not to mention if you ever need to get off of Appstream there is no migration path, because you used their SDK to build your game.
So there is a high level of lock-in, and its introducing a cost structure that is coupled to the usage of the app. If using Appstream helps your apps be more successful, then it also helps you give more of your profit margin to Amazon.
You want to introduce a higher, linear cost structure just so users who don't have the hardware can play the game? I can see the excitement of solving that as a technical problem.
What I can't see, however, is a huge hole in the marketplace that is underserved which would justify the additional risk. This is not a "service," because it fundamentally changes your business model.
It is actually quite easy to integrate your app/game into AppStream, with minimal changes to the code. EVE Online integrated their Character creator in 3 days, with a team of 5 people, and they had to add touch.
on the cost structures: my guess is this is primarily aimed at the type of game developers who build upon a MRR (monthly reoccurring revenue) model - from WoW through to XBox-Live type gaming. Being server based particularly lends itself to multiplayer gaming where network latency should be zero and MRR is most common.
It's basically OnLive for mobile but you bring your own distribution channels.
This isn't going to compete with casual games you would natively run on devices for a fixed deployment cost.
I don't see that as a problem. My guess is, even if you remove the barrier to entry by not requiring strong hardware to run the game, you still have to turn someone that has had no previous motivation to play hardcore games, to now play those games simply because they can.
Sure, those who would love to play these games without chasing hardware will, but I can't imagine that's worth the additional, continual cost of rendering the game in the cloud and piping it over the network.
Not to mention if you ever need to get off of Appstream there is no migration path, because you used their SDK to build your game.
So there is a high level of lock-in, and its introducing a cost structure that is coupled to the usage of the app. If using Appstream helps your apps be more successful, then it also helps you give more of your profit margin to Amazon.