OP drank the Stadia koolaid months ago and is grasping at straws.
-
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.
Stadia needs a plan B if it continues to not gain users
- Thread starter BlueManifest
- Start date
The concept of Stadia is a good one, however. There's a lot of users who may be skeptical about the capabilities and won't even bother giving it a try. I was part of their beta over a year ago and honestly it wasn't bad. The picture quality was good, input lag was minimal, however I wouldn't be replacing my home consoles/PC with it.
A good start would be to release the free version of the service along with something like Destiny 2 (F2P). That would at least get some of the existing Destiny players give it a go, I know I'd personally give it a try since I play Destiny often. I don't expect them to hand out free games like the Epic Store has, but a game or two that could show off the benefits of using Stadia over the consoles (Not many, I know) would set them in the right direction.
I have no plans to get Stadia at this time, but I would like to see it improve and not fail. It may be something I may not need/want at the moment, but who knows how gaming will change in the future.
A good start would be to release the free version of the service along with something like Destiny 2 (F2P). That would at least get some of the existing Destiny players give it a go, I know I'd personally give it a try since I play Destiny often. I don't expect them to hand out free games like the Epic Store has, but a game or two that could show off the benefits of using Stadia over the consoles (Not many, I know) would set them in the right direction.
I have no plans to get Stadia at this time, but I would like to see it improve and not fail. It may be something I may not need/want at the moment, but who knows how gaming will change in the future.
Except that the article says: "The group even talked about—and eventually dismissed—the idea of leaving the market entirely, this person said." It's a bullshit clickbait article. I do AWS and GCP professionally and it's been pretty debunked.
How well did those Cloud games on Switch do? IIRC they released cloud versions of stuff like Resident Evil 7 and Assassin's Creed Odyssey (or was it Origins?) for the system, but had not heard any feedback on them.
Yup, they made many decisions that are fundamental yet so wrong. Their choices of platform and business model are all baffling to me. I would like very much to read their business proposal and the reasoning behind these decisions.
I honestly only understand Stadia in the context of Google Fiber, as in "create a fiber optics competitor to cable internet with Google Fiber, garner a loyal customer base for your internet services, and then sell them streaming games (or whatever it is that you want to sell them)."
Now, my understanding of Google Fiber is that it's sort of got an uneven record of success in the first place, but in the United States as it stands, where cheap fiber service is still way too rare, I don't see how a competitively-priced streaming-only service is going to be able to thrive (yeah, yeah, I'm aware of GamePass, but they're only introducing streaming later this year AND it's an option of playing on GP, IIRC).
I just don't get this service at all. I think it's dead anyway because of the broken nature of internet services in this country. The pricing and poor game lineup are just cherries on top of the feces cake.
Now, my understanding of Google Fiber is that it's sort of got an uneven record of success in the first place, but in the United States as it stands, where cheap fiber service is still way too rare, I don't see how a competitively-priced streaming-only service is going to be able to thrive (yeah, yeah, I'm aware of GamePass, but they're only introducing streaming later this year AND it's an option of playing on GP, IIRC).
I just don't get this service at all. I think it's dead anyway because of the broken nature of internet services in this country. The pricing and poor game lineup are just cherries on top of the feces cake.
And this time hopefully the hype around cloud gaming will stay dead for a few decades, at least.
Cloud gaming will only ever be economically and technologically if propped up by a fascist government that only allows people to play 2 hours of a video games a month.
Cloud gaming will only ever be economically and technologically if propped up by a fascist government that only allows people to play 2 hours of a video games a month.
Yes, but the article also says to cut 'fundings'. What do you think that means?
Investors wants money, GCP is in a distant third place. MS had a big grow in 2019.
Google did not completely deny the article, they later called the report "not accurate"
The main problem with stadia that's not been talked here is not their business model, it's their game library. It doesn't seem like a lot of developers and publishers are willing to support the platform. So, it's basically already DOA. If it doesn't magically turn the sinking ship around during this year, publishers will forget about it ever being existent. We already have awful ports on stadia which look as baseline PS4/Xbox one even though stadia GPUs are next-gen level of performance. And destiny 2 is played by 8k people at best (the game which was given away for free) which shows how large stadia install base is. Thousands of times less than any other platform and it' actually shrinking right now already.
Stadia isn't trying to gain users yet. They are still in the early-access founder/premier mode that was designed to artificially limit access as they optimize, debug, and finish certain features.
You're right, Destiny 2 on Stadia has thousands of times less users than platforms with like 50-million-user bases, and the game is being given away on those platforms too (just not all the extra content). Makes sense when you think about it...
I don't see what the Switch gains from Stadia support. Switch already delivers on the ability to play games anywhere far better than Stadia could ever hope to. The only possible gains would be third party support, but Stadia isn't really doing better than the Switch in that regard.
Posts like this make me sad as a gamer.
It emphasizes how tribal this place is and it's really not about the games
The idea behind Stadia was the ability to play any games across any medium using any input. It obviously hasn't achieved that in the whole 2 months it's been in early access.
But clearly the answer is to use the same box, with the same game types until the end of time.
Stadia can set the world on fire and the big 3 will still exist
I mean I don't even care if it is actually true or not, but the article's source is cited as "a source with direct info". Every other article about this points back to this article as the source. Just the state of shit journalism in technology (and gaming) circles.
They fundamentally don't need a Plan B. Google writes off so many initiatives because they take the tech and the most talented people involved and repurpose/transfer them to other areas where they can profit. Write off the investment and move on. It rarely actually costs them much in the long run.
Hopefully it dies without having got too many exclusives (and heaven forbid that Google acquire any studios) because once inevitably Google pull out (releases have already dried up), those games will be unplayable forever.
There's no benefit for Nintendo in getting involved with this disaster, they're succeeding just fine with a business model that actually works.
There's no benefit for Nintendo in getting involved with this disaster, they're succeeding just fine with a business model that actually works.
It's google they will lose interest before the year is over.
If Stadia were a Gamepass style service where I could pay monthly and get access to games, I would try it in a heartbeat, regardless of the KilledByGoogle track record.
But making me buy full priced games is way too much with that lingering fear that they'll just kill it off.
But making me buy full priced games is way too much with that lingering fear that they'll just kill it off.
The whole point of it being a cloud based system is that it can do things impossible on consoles (and difficult for PCs?)
But at this point in time its struggling to run current gen ports of games. Its not a good look at all. The only exclusive as far as I know is Gylt which isn't going to sell any units... They had no fuckin plan for this thing when they launched it and now its too late. Stadia is going to be overshadowed by the PS5 and Xbox announcements this year.
But at this point in time its struggling to run current gen ports of games. Its not a good look at all. The only exclusive as far as I know is Gylt which isn't going to sell any units... They had no fuckin plan for this thing when they launched it and now its too late. Stadia is going to be overshadowed by the PS5 and Xbox announcements this year.
lmao, none of the big 3 want to touch this thing with a ten foot pole
It's either gonna get a Game Pass-esque service or it's gonna slowly rot away
It's either gonna get a Game Pass-esque service or it's gonna slowly rot away
How exactly is Stadia supposed to allow new "game types"? It's just a console that you're not allowed to actually own where you have to put up with extra latency and image compression and having to be online 100% of the time.
All server side gaming. But I was referencing cloud gaming in general. The tech in Stadia in amazing, if you look at the real situation that this is a beta and the titles are first gen.
I want all the companies to build on the tech so we can just buy the games we want regardless of owning a specific plastic box.
But "all server side" gaming is just local gaming where you're just renting someone else's box. The only major difference is the location and ownership of the box.
The main thing Google needs to do is to get a first-party line-up of some kind as soon as possible. The downside of the tech in terms of image quality/latency, the strong negative response towards cloud gaming as a whole, and even the prohibitive pricing model they currently use can be somewhat overlooked if they just provided good first party games that could really show off what cloud gaming (and specifically a gaming ecosystem that ONLY uses the cloud) can really do.
But instead they decided to rush a launch, and message it poorly.
And this post kind of gets at what I'm talking about. There are a ton of examples in tech just within the last decade of innovations that happened specifically because of processing power and data being held server-side, and Google probably has more examples of such than any other company. But since Stadia's launch was made to look like it was just a different kind of console, people come off saying stuff like this. And I can't even blame them; Google did very little to prove otherwise so far.
But instead they decided to rush a launch, and message it poorly.
And this post kind of gets at what I'm talking about. There are a ton of examples in tech just within the last decade of innovations that happened specifically because of processing power and data being held server-side, and Google probably has more examples of such than any other company. But since Stadia's launch was made to look like it was just a different kind of console, people come off saying stuff like this. And I can't even blame them; Google did very little to prove otherwise so far.
Last edited:
Cloud gaming is 100% fine, it's their business model that sucks big time.
Forcing you to stream even when you have native hardware that could run it and also not having anything free or to trial is a massive oversight on their part.
Why do you make that sound like a bad thing? The Information isn't just some random tech blog you know. When to comes to technology news and leaks not much else comes close. Your second sentence makes me think you've probably never heard of them before.
The idea was that with all the power in the machines they were hyping they could do stuff that's not been done before, but it's clear they over hyped that power since a lot of their streams don't even get close to what the Xbox X is doing.
Stadia is just a "different kind of console", though. Theoretically they could try to link the instances together, but the financial and logistical incentives are stacked pretty hard against Google letting developers lean too hard on that, and the technical costs of implementing that sort of feature in a game aren't exactly going to be small.
Everyone gets caught up on the fact that they didn't call it a beta, despite the fact the word 'founder' and 'early access' have been used to describe this phase of their rollout, both of which essentially mean the same thing.
These takes always come off as concern trolling to me, especially considering very few of the KilledByGoogle services are ever consumer facing paid services.
The only service I can think of that is in any way comparable to Stadia is probably their VR platform, Daydream.
I have asked several times and never got an answer, but how many paid consumer facing services has Google actually killed off?
Everyone seems scared they are going to lose their content, but I just don't see it. I still have every paid game or movie I have bought on Google Play.
Pretty sure Microsoft has a much longer list of defunct gaming services, no matter how you look at it.
Remember GFWL? What about UWP? Kinect?
Not too mention probably a couple of dozen game studio closures over their history.
Microsoft is definitely going in the right direction, and I am not saying they are going to suddenly cancel Game Pass, but it feels like the concerns around Google's history of killing projects are only very tangentially related to the current product they are offering.