I know you didn't ask me but for me it's all about saving money, I can save a lot by not buying hardware
the 2nd would be cloud exclusive games that can take full advantage of cloud computing
-
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.
The Verge - The world is waiting for Google Stadia to flop
- Thread starter Parenegade
- Start date
the 2nd would be cloud exclusive games that can take full advantage of cloud computing
That's a fair answer but I don't think hardware is all that expensive - maybe at first but over time? Either way, I get that - I just can't relate!
For cloud computing...I'm curious to see what it can do BUT I have a difficult time discovering a use case that would result in a game I would enjoy. I don't really play multiplayer games with a few random exceptions here or there.
For me, it all comes down to the way I like to game and work.
What I do would be useless for Stadia games and I don't think I'll have the connection to even properly support it at home any time in the next decade due to the infrastructure here. As long as other consoles and hardware continue to exist, however, it's fine - I want it to remain optional. That's key. This talk of streaming being 'the future' DOES genuinely worry me. Silly or not, that's my take.
...but I'm also someone that only like to own games physically or at least be able to enjoy them without anything internet related getting in the way. I also value image quality and spend a lot of money ensuring things are as perfect as possible.
Stadia takes away ownership, offers reduced image quality, relies on internet, probably won't work on my connection very well, would render my work useless etc.
I know that a lot of people don't care about these things - games are disposable to them. That's fine and I hope this works for them. I'd love to know how much money it genuinely saves you in the long run, though.
So, before you go on, just know that, foolish or not, those are my thoughts. I am super worried about this taking off...and maybe that's just me clinging to the old ways. I don't even stream music, after all. It's my old man moment but I'm sticking to it.
If I buy a ps5, Xbox 2 and new PC next gen that's 2,000$ right there
and then in 6-7 years that will another 2,000$
and then another 6-7 years after that it will be another 2,000$
keep adding this up over the rest of your life
And that's not even factoring in hardware failures
Why all of them?
Either way, I have a tough time with this as I own 140+ consoles now soooo...yeah. We're in very different worlds.
Because all of them have exclusive games I want to play
Xbox doesn't have many I want but there's a few
Hi John was just curious if you can measure performance on streaming using the same tools you use for actual consoles and PC? Sorry if that's a stupid question!
Are DF going to cover Stadia next week?
So I guess you're going to miss out on them then? How will Stadia save you anything?
Maybe? Not sure.
No idea about coverage either.
So you would still have to buy a PS5 and an Xbox 2 for those with or without Stadia.
Is anyone planning on getting Stadia?
I've heard next to no hype from any gamers I know, but they talk all the time about PS5 and Xbox Scarlet.
I rather agree with the thread title, I don't have ill will to the idea, but given the launch games and the price... it doesn't look like they're trying very hard to succeed especially after Microsoft's XCloud announcements yesterday. With the money Google has at its disposal, you'd think they would have shored up a few more titles for launch.
I've heard next to no hype from any gamers I know, but they talk all the time about PS5 and Xbox Scarlet.
I rather agree with the thread title, I don't have ill will to the idea, but given the launch games and the price... it doesn't look like they're trying very hard to succeed especially after Microsoft's XCloud announcements yesterday. With the money Google has at its disposal, you'd think they would have shored up a few more titles for launch.
Riiight, the constant thread derails on every single Stadia topic posted here are just due to skeptism...
There are literally posts in this thread of people posting how they explicitly want Google to fail.
I want stadia/GeForce now to replace my pc
I want xcloud to replace my xbox
I want PSnow to replace my playstation
Sony has a lot of work to do on PSnow though
I mean, if the choice is between spending money on the games plus a 1000+$ gaming computer, or simply being able to use any computer like your ultrabook to get similar results through streaming, the streaming is very enticing.
If Steam offered a streaming service tomorrow that lets you play your library, I know for a fact I wouldn't buy a gaming PC ever again.
Totally valid, personally I have been gaming since Pong but for me it is just a release and totally disposable.
I have always had problems relating to to tribes that form for these boxes that are marketed towards us by mutli-billion dollar corporations as if any of them see us as anything else than a metric.
I use my PC for so much more than games so that's a bonus for me.
Either way, sorry for badging in. I'm very stressed out about this. Streaming only, if that is the future, is the end for me and modern games. That would be a shame so hopefully it won't come to that.
Incidentally, if you were to buy 3 $9.99 a month subscriptions to Stadia, xCloud, and PSNow to play all of the exclusives, after 6-7 years you will have paid $2160 to $2520 in subscription fees alone.
You're not really ahead by much of anything under the Stadia pricing model.
Same. Digital only... I can work with but streaming exclusively? Nah. Whatever advantage streaming provides, I can't sacrifice owning games for it nor hardware.
You spend that much on gaming hardware alone?
Yes, I'd love for it to fail. I think this technology is bad for games and Google is overtly evil.
Good thing I don't to have sub every month to all the services right? This generation for example I would have only needed 7 months of PSnow because I only played 7 Sony exclusives this gen
You can figure out the rest
I bought 3 Xbox exclusives this gen so this gen I would have only needed 3 months of xcloud
I don't need 84 months of a cloud sub to play 3 games
I mean, geforce now allows you to stream your Steam library...
-It's important because I see it as a way to allow more people to play games that traditionally have been behind the barrier of having to buy a console or gaming PC.
-Since it will expand the amount of people that can buy games, this means less risk of failure for developers.
-This will allow for developers to take risk and create more experiences that traditionally are not approved because "they don't make enough money". Even as someone that will continue to play exclusively physical games, you must understand how that is beneficial for you, especially after playing a game like Death Stranding. I want more of that, do you?
-It is a more environmental safe way to play games. Just imagine all of the Xbox and PS4s that have been sold this generation. Combine that with the average play time of 6 hours per week and you have a lot of plastic just sitting there most of the time, that on the best case scenario is off and not on standby consuming energy. This argument is even stronger when you think about how a single Xbox One X hardware could be covering the needs of something like 10/15 people playing a game like Cuphead. Everyone can keep playing on consoles with physical games all they want, but everyone should also be aware of this fact. Microsoft is even working on under water data centers that generate energy from water currents and use the same water for cooling.
-I'm very excited about the games developers will be able to create with all that connected hardware. I'm very curious about how will the best physics and AI possible on Stadia will look like, once developers get the hang of it, as well as all of the other new techniques that will emerge over time.
Physical games will be there for a long time, but it should be clear to someone like you that cloud games will continue to evolve for the better. I don't understand how that will not be beneficial for your work, if anything there is a lot of confusion out there and the insight you bring to everything else you do is necessary to help with all of the confusion out there. If I'm trying to convince you to cover cloud games is purely out of selfish reasons, because honestly there are not a lot of people out there that cover things with the same love to detail as you bring to your videos and I hope that some day you understand what I'm trying to say, once you see it. There will be a game that surprises you in the cloud and I hope you share your real opinion on it.
Last edited:
Ok. Same argument for the "you spend $2000 every 7 years on hardware" then. I can just buy an Xbox and resell it 7 months later for the vast majority of what I paid for it. People do this all the time.
"All hardware for the entire gen" vs "selective subs" is an apples-to-oranges pricing comparison.
Gylt is launching. They have new studios opening up. Third Party games, if designed to take advantage of the cloud like Grid and
Seconded. Also playing in more places without much hindrance.
Whats the point of doing all that when I can do the other for much less work? And what if a exclusive comes out that I didn't know about after I sold it and I would have to buy it back
or what if my system breaks outside of warranty
I mean, it's your argument. I'm just pointing out that the math isn't nearly as lopsided as you were suggesting.
If you want to argue that it wins on convenience instead of costs go right ahead, but that's a completely different argument than you were making earlier
It still wins in cost, by the end of the generation I can't sell the system for 500$ maybe 200
I don't think it will, at least not for a very long time. Streaming hasn't stopped music artists selling their tracks on bandcamp, or films from coming out on DVD and Blu-Ray. And those are mediums where streaming is sound, far more sound than it is for gaming.
Why is it in our nature to always want to tear something down rather than lift it up? Google isn't the only name in streaming. PlayStation has been doing this for five years with PlayStation Now. Xbox is finally getting into it with xCloud. So why is that when specifically Stadia gets talked about, you all want to see it fail? Why do you feel it's important to voice that?
I feel like if Google just said that this was early access, no one would be complaining. But they didn't & they're speaking as if this some huge launch when it's not.
I feel like if Google just said that this was early access, no one would be complaining. But they didn't & they're speaking as if this some huge launch when it's not.
Hardware isn't the only thing that costs you know. He can buy a console, get all the games he wants to play second hand physical, resell those games, resell the console, and really not be out anywhere near as much as you think he would.
Again, convenience vs pricing.
PC is the same thing. Having a PC is going to save you a ton of money on deals and subs you can run vs Stadia being your only pricing option.
They should've pushed for an infrastructure overhaul within the US to coincide with this. Mandatory coverage % and mandatory minimum speeds.
I realise that what you are saying is meant in a way to question the negative reception that Stadia has had, but I feel that you made exactly the kind of points as to why I feel negatively about it.
Streaming clearly has some kind of future in the gaming industry. The point is that Google are doing such a bad job of demonstrating that with Stadia.
This is such an incredibly bad faith argument.
You could, of course, also NOT do the least efficient thing possible with your money? Like if we're going to assume you're managing your subs as efficiently as possible you need to in good faith look at the actual costs of engaging in the hardware market efficiently instead of this transparent "hurr durr but it's cheaper than doing the stupidest thing possible" shit.
Always remember to bring up the cost to play online. That alone is $60 every year for Xbox and PS4. A lot of people forget about that when they compare numbers.
Because Google is well known for killing projects on the regular.
People have zero reason to trust them.
Sony, MS and Nintendo have all shown that they will persevere if a generation doesn't go their way and will try even harder next time.
Strange argument. You can rent consoles out over here for like £3 a week. Assume similar services are there the US - if you aren't interested in keeping the hardware just rent it - and as you seem to only want to play games once and then be done with them just trade them in once you're done with them and recoup at least 50%
No way streaming is cheaper. Less hassle sure but not cheaper
Pc vs stadia/GeForce isn't even close in cost, I would have to have every single game I bought this generation on pc to be free to even come close
the reselling console and games is close to cloud pricing but in this generation cloud would still have been cheaper for me
Yes, if you didn't do anything else at all with your PC, as we've talking about before. You want to count the entire cost, I and tons of other people would have a PC in some form or another regardless. For most people it's added cost, not the entire cost.
I can't sell the system before the end of the generation I don't know what might release for it unless you want me to keep selling it and buying it back which would cost even more
Yea I still have my pc, if I ever need it for something, there's no need for me to upgrade or buy a new one now though for next gen
I don't shit on any new consoles/ideas until they come out. I still remember the humbling I took when I predicted that the Wii would crash and Burn and Nintendo would be bought by Sony or Microsoft.......Yeah.
Or you could....not buy one or more consoles until the end of a gen and play multiple exclusives at once. You could even buy one or more consoles used! And resell them, at minimal overall cost. Just like you could efficiently sub to a streaming service for the minimum amount of time needed to play all of its exclusives if your goal is to save as much money as possible. But, suspiciously, you keep assuming the hypothetical streaming gamer makes the most efficient use of their dollars, and keep insisting that the hypothetical hardware buyer will do something dumb with their money.
Look, its obvious you're not interested in engaging in any kind of good-faith analysis of the costs and savings of various ways of approaching the hardware and streaming market, because the result of any honest accounting of the pros and cons of each route is really "whether or not buying hardware or streaming is going to be cheaper for an individual really comes down to a lot of variables like what games they want to play, how many subs they'll have active for the majority of a generation, whether they intend to be active in multiple exclusives across multiple services for long periods of time simultaneously, how long they're willing to wait to play exclusives, willingness to engage in secondary markets, etc, etc, etc".
There is no clear or easy winner to the question. And it seems like your only goal here is to construct the silliest possible strawman that lets you say "see! streaming cheaper!".
Assigning a personality to a corporation is amusing, none of them give a shit about you.
Google has done more to improve our way out life then Nintendo or Sony ever can
If I wait that long I'll just able to play the games for free on PSnow and gamepass on xcloud for just the cost of the sub which would be even cheaper
I'm usually too hyped for certain games though to wait that long
but yea if I wait till the end of the generation I can play most of the exclusives that released for free practically on the cloud much cheaper than buying 250$ console and 10$-20$ game's
So you don't use Gmail, Chrome, YouTube, Maps, Google Pay... Or any other Google apps?
