-
Ever wanted an RSS feed of all your favorite gaming news sites? Go check out our new Gaming Headlines feed! Read more about it here.
-
We have made minor adjustments to how the search bar works on ResetEra. You can read about the changes here.
Stadia has officially gone 40 days without a new game announcement/release, feature update, or real community update. It has been out for 69 days.
- Thread starter Theorry
- Start date
today i learned that 98.6% don't own a playstation 4 because they are poor and not due to a million other reasons
Please stop, you sound like someone who just learned how to google things and found a nice soapbox at the same time. An "average human being" means jack shit without context whatsoever.
Don't listen to any of the naysayers here. Speak your truth. Keep going. Go deeper. Dig, man, dig!
What else have they done aside from acquiring Typhoon Studios? They only established their own development division under Jade Raymond in March 2019, so it stands to reason they're probably a couple of years from releasing any games actually exclusive to the platform, which is the most baffling thing about all this.
To be fair, Google has many VPs like other big corporations.
That was the take of the year right there, in less than a month in 2020.
Lol the average human being couldn't give two shits about playing console or pc video games.
That's the whole idea of Stadia. Its to make it accessible so people who wouldn't give two shits otherwise.
Im not saying it'd work, but that was at least the whole point.
People don't care about console/pc games because they don't have any interest in playing console/pc games. Accessibility isn't why over 95% of people in the world don't play console/pc games.
I should say console since who knows what percentage of people who own PCs actually play games.
That's the idealistic point, sure, but I'd say the main goal from Google's POV is "how do we get more money from game advertising"
I don't understand what is so complicated from this. It's not just Stadia talking about lowering the barrier of access to play games. You will hear Microsoft talking the same way about cloud gaming. Cloud gaming is all about lowering the barrier of access to play games. As you mentioned these are people that use their phone to play but they cannot access traditional console games from there. So honestly even if 5% of that group of people start buying consoles games, we are talking about of millions of new sales for games. Why is that a problem somehow? Even on consoles you understand how sales increase when the price goes down from $400 to $300 right? Can you say why is that?
"We know that the first customers for xCloud are going to be people who own an Xbox. It's going to be, 'Oh, I want to play my Xbox when I'm away.' Last month, Catherine [Gluckstein, chief of staff/strategy for Xbox] and I were in Africa. Not a lot of Xboxes in Africa. Not a lot of game consoles. 1.2 billion people on the continent of Africa. Average age is 19 on the continent. They know Fortnite, they know Halo, they know Gears of War. They just don't have a device.
There are gamers there, but the device they have is an Android phone. So today they are kind-of locked out of what an E3 is -- outside of watching -- because of the capability they have.
When I think about the two billion [gamers worldwide], which is a number that has tripled over the last two decades, I really think about how we service the two billion who play today with as much content and services as we can offer, but also go to places like Africa. I was looking at some of the PUBG mobile numbers in India and they're crazy -- they've had 100 million downloads or something. You see these markets where gaming can grow to the next two billion or even more.... There are seven billion people on the planet. For me, I think they should all play video games."
Last edited:
I misunderstood you then, you were responding to someone who was saying how the vast majority of people can't afford to get into gaming. So when you responded I assumed you were talking about them.
That is a really reductive argument. It should be obvious that it's not just because of the price, that is just one factor among many, but instead of disregarding it as something that doesn't even exist, why don't we acknowledge that it is a pretty big limitation? There are 2 billion people playing games out there and most of them are on mobile. What Microsoft, Sony and Stadia are trying to do, is reach that market and remove the barrier of having to buy a console. It should be obvious to you how sales increase for consoles as they reduce in price right? That right there is a pretty good indication on how the price of a console is a barrier. Microsoft, Sony and Nintendo haven't sold 300 million current gen consoles combined and there is a lot of overlap specially with the Nintendo Switch. If they manage to convince at least 5% of that group of 2 billion gamers, to buy traditional console games, we are talking about adding 100 million more customers.
Maybe they'll turn it around, but as of right now it's so satisfying seeing the Stadia presentation and thinking it will flop and there is no market for it, then seeing people argue against that for months, only to be proven right in such a decisive manner
I'm sure Google are looking further down the line than the first few months of launch. It's not a traditional platform.
They have to buy a controller to start playing console games correctly. Whatever device they use as substitute controller might be a deal breaker.
Also a lot of mobile gamers play games on their phone on the go, in short bursts, or while doing something else
It's going to be a hard sell to get someone who only plays match 3 games when they have time to kill to start playing Assassin's Creed Odyssey with a gamepad, more so when they need to buy the gamepad, and pay up front for the game
I don't believe there are a ton of people who would love to play console and PC style games, but don't because they dislike the idea of getting a console/PC
The vast majority of mobile gamers are mobile gamers because they like mobile games and mobile games suit their needs. The idea that they're a gateway drug to "real games" and all we need to unlock the market is to remove the console barrier, just seems misguided
Stadia bombing backs that up
Streaming will appeal to the same people who already play console and PC games, if and when the experience is as good as native hardware, and currently the experience is worse, so there isn't a good enough reason for most people to ditch their own hardware
This was obvious to me within 30 mins of seeing the Stadia presentation. They set themselves up for failure. This was never going to work
Just to be clear: I wasn't having concerns over her financial situation.
Yeah, but it will help her get a good opportunity afterwards.
Ok? The value for the cost of entry is fantastic, more so because I play Destiny.
By the time my founder's 3 months expire, I have 8 games. One of which is exclusive (Gylt) the other was console exclusive for the time it released (Samurai Shodon). I also picked up Darksiders which was consumed exclusive as well.
My experience with the tech had been any amazing. If it had my ps4 library on it I would get rid of my slim and pro consoles without hesitation.
Even with the founders edition needing a Chromecast, it is the cheapest entry to a new "console" in the last few decades.
Yes Google communication is abysmal.
Sure, it might be a deal breaker for some, but do we disagree on that buying a controller is a lower barrier of entry compared to buying a console with a controller?
It was the Montreal Game Developers Demonight. Stadia opened a studio here and then bought an already - existant one (Typhoon Studios). So they sponsored this industry event. The product is far from dead. Google bought these studios knowing that they won't be producing products for at least a few years. Also, the free version still isn't out yet.
I don't get what's with this whole "Stadia is dead" fanaticism, it's just weird to me.
This is funny.
I pay 40 bucks for 1GB optic fiber with unlimited download and upload. That's even cheaper than what my parents pay for god awful internet because they are far remote and there is no proper installation to get anything better.
Good net is about infrastructure and healthy competition. Don't think America is reflective of the rest of the world.
"Everyone in this thread is so sheltered and privileged and ignorant lol btw I believe literally every human has unlimited access to high speed internet."
It's part schadenfreude, part people feeling vindicated, but also a lot of gamers are really averse to change. These same threads popped up for EGS all the time.
Sure, but you know what is an even lower barrier to entry? Selling games that don't require a controller at all.
There is a ceiling for complicated games that require a twin stick controller that has nothing to do with tech and everything to do with complexity. I'll give you we don't know where that ceiling is, but it is obviously not the entire population of earth as others have contended.
My point earlier was simple, I think reaching this huge "untapped" market is far more likely through mobile gaming than through cloud streaming of complex AAA games.
I don't understand the "Look at the amount of people that don't do something arguments". We could be spending all day talking about how just a fraction of the 7.8 billion humans on earth currently buy consoles. Instead of wasting time with that, we should talk about how even though a relative small % of humans buy consoles, it can and is a successful industry. Why is it so difficult to understand that just a small percentage out of the 2 billion smartphone gamers buying traditional console games would easily double the current market for console games? Just 5% would mean 100,000,000 additional customers for developers. Look at that number while you also notice how the PS4, Xbox One and Nintendo Switch combined don't reach 210 million. Again, on that example we can spend all day talking about how JUST 100 million out of the 2 billion will buy games and play them at their house or wherever a good Internet connection is available, but whats the point?
You can see on the poll below how most people report having a good experience with a service like Stadia and things will continue to improve from here. So if the technology has been shown to work, what is the argument here exactly? The idea of lowering the barrier of access to something and seeing the demand increase because of that, should be clear to anyone here. Is it weird to anyone that console sales increase when the price is reduced? Do you know why that happens instead of sales staying the same after lowering the price? If you can understand that then it should be obvious that if someone only has a smartphone and an internet service that qualifies for Stadia, the barrier of access is a lot lower compared to buy a console and the game, instead of just buying the game on Stadia.
Last edited:
They're not in it to make games, they're only interested in getting people onto their service. If that service dies, they won't be making any games.
This is true but it's not one or the other. Stadia doesn't need to be as gigantic as mobile gaming to be a success.
I've bashed it on here but I'll hold out until after general release to form my final opinion of (launch) Stadia. The BT push will put thousands of Stadia in UK homes. I just can't write it off yet.
I don't think I have seen that before, going to wait a few weeks and link one of the many positive threads and see what happens : P
Do you only buy games that don't require a controller at all? You know, because they have a lower barrier of entry? How about we talk in real terms here. It is no coincidence that smartphone gaming is the largest market out there, in number of players and revenue, but you and me know what console games can offer and even though we know there are cheaper options, we buy console games because of the quality of the experience. If you just spend a minute looking at the current library of smartphone games, you will see how there are multi million download shooters and RPGs. We can have a better discussion than pretending that all of them play candy crush and traditional console games a just too complicated for smartphone gamers. This market has not been given the opportunity at a large scale of buying console games on a cloud gaming service, Stadia has not launched on all regions and is currently only available on Pixel phones. Xcloud is currently on beta. I think anyone that says that once a cloud gaming service is available that does provide a good experience for millions of smartphone gamers, will not immediately generate a big increase on traditional console games sales, is willfully blind. What is the point of pretending Stadia and other streaming services wont eventually be available on all regions and most smartphones? What is the point of pretending internet speeds wont continue to improve over time? What is the point in pretending that cloud gaming does not work right now?
Last edited:
Bingo
All they had to focus on was make sure you could easily cast any mobile game to any display. Essentially using the mobile as the console platform, which everyone already has. No need to stream the games.