Vapourware Google Stadia - "a game streaming service for everyone"

[DalekFlay]

It's amazing how much they fucked up their launch. You'd think a company like Google could hire actual smart folks who know the market, but their insane business plan shows otherwise.

I still maintain streaming is a danger though. Keep your eyes on Xbox Gamepass/Xcloud.

 

[Grauken]

It's amazing how much they fucked up their launch. You'd think a company like Google could hire actual smart folks who know the market, but their insane business plan shows otherwise.

I still maintain streaming is a danger though. Keep your eyes on Xbox Gamepass/Xcloud.

People who have never worked in large companies are always surprised that some departments are always starved for money or good people

 

[cvv]

It's amazing how much they fucked up their launch. You'd think a company like Google could hire actual smart folks who know the market, but their insane business plan shows otherwise.

My guess is that the insane woke culture at Google has gotten to the point where they genuinely don't give a fuck about money anymore (and therefore about customers). Probably because money is evil and muh capitalism and such.

I bet they're all about innovation and being "the force for good" and pushing politics now. I think they've completely forgotten what is business and how it works. And the reason they could afford to forget is because they've never faced any competition.

 

[Tacgnol]

It's amazing how much they fucked up their launch. You'd think a company like Google could hire actual smart folks who know the market, but their insane business plan shows otherwise.

My guess is that the insane woke culture at Google has gotten to the point where they genuinely don't give a fuck about money anymore (and therefore about customers). Probably because money is evil and muh capitalism and such.

I bet they're all about innovation and being "the force for good" and pushing politics now. I think they've completely forgotten what is business and how it works. And the reason they could afford to forget is because they've never faced any competition.

Could also be garden variety hubris.

Lots of tech companies seem to be completely oblivious to reality these days with new projects.

 

[rusty_shackleford]

It was bound to be a technical failure from the start, anyone with basic knowledge of how the internet works could have predicted this. It's like playing an online game without any form of lag correction or predictive behavior on the client side, worthless for anything but turn based games.
Whether it was an actual failure or not was entirely on Google's marketing team.

 

[DalekFlay]

It was bound to be a technical failure from the start, anyone with basic knowledge of how the internet works could have predicted this. It's like playing an online game without any form of lag correction or predictive behavior on the client side, worthless for anything but turn based games.
Whether it was an actual failure or not was entirely on Google's marketing team.

Game performance is honestly what reviewers complained about the least.

 

[Alpan]

I think the existential threat to gaming revealed by Stadia still exists, even though Stadia itself may be a flawed instrument. I'll just reiterate what I said before in this thread:

When the target hardware for a developer stops being the game console or an average PC but the near-infinite processing power of Google's datacenters, we'll essentially be facing a Google monopoly on game development and choice of gaming platform.

It is a dystopian projection, to be sure, but I don't think this is implausible. Consolidation is everywhere, and this is merely a few steps further along that road.

And it need not be Google: Any of the large corporations currently playing around with game subscription services, most notably Microsoft, are in a position to exploit this.

 

[rusty_shackleford]

It was bound to be a technical failure from the start, anyone with basic knowledge of how the internet works could have predicted this. It's like playing an online game without any form of lag correction or predictive behavior on the client side, worthless for anything but turn based games.
Whether it was an actual failure or not was entirely on Google's marketing team.

Game performance is honestly what reviewers complained about the least.

Because this is the kind of people doing the reviews:

 

[Valky]

This is an objectively 100% positive outcome for google to not be doing anything with this shit. Stadia needs to be aborted.

 

[Grauken]

This is an objectively 100% positive outcome for google to not be doing anything with this shit. Stadia needs to be aborted.

No, that's the best of all worlds, streaming tried by one of the largest companies around, dead on arrival and killing the dreams of other assholes trying the same in the near future. Bought us maybe 5 years

 

[DalekFlay]

Because this is the kind of people doing the reviews:

Sure, but the target market is more casual gamers anyway. This shit ain't aimed at us, at least not until it catches on enough to be forced on us. Go to any home theater forum and read all the enthusiast complaints about streaming video and audio quality, then think about how much that matters in the greater market.

 

[Infinitron]

https://www.gamasutra.com/view/news...le_over_radio_silence_and_lack_of_support.php

NOOOOO STADIA WAS MEANT TO CHANGE EVERYTHING BROS

https://www.gamesindustry.biz/artic...ds-to-complaints-of-slow-stadia-announcements

Google responds to complaints of slow Stadia announcements
Internet giant tells GamesIndustry.biz there will be more news on streaming service exclusives "soon"

Google has addressed concerns that it is not informing the initial Stadia userbase about future releases and upcoming features for the cloud gaming service.

Reports on various sites earlier this week pointed to frustration among the Stadia community, often citing a particular Reddit thread. The poster claimed it had been 40 days since Google had added or announced a new game for Stadia, with the bulk added around the launch 69 days ago (and the time of the post).

The post also complains of the lack of iOS support (and that the only Android phones supported are the Pixel models), family sharing, the subscription-less Stadia Base membership, or regular updates on the roadmap for these and other features.

Finally, there was reference to a stat Google revealed in its New Year update: that more than 120 games were coming to Stadia in 2020, with more than ten exclusives in the first half of the year.

A Google spokesperson told GamesIndustry.biz that the Stadia team has in fact been providing weekly updates on the Stadia Community forum, as well as monthly recaps on the Google Keyword blog.

They also addressed expectations surrounding the 120 titles.

"We understand the desire to hear more specifics on the games," the company told us. "After all, that is what it is about: the games. Of course, not all 120 titles will be announced by the Stadia team, as we leave it up to the publishers to make the announcement about their IP/games, and which platforms it will appear on -- just as we will do with the exclusive content coming to Stadia.

"There are a lot of reasons for the time of those game announcements -- anything from planned promotions or events, title readiness, proximity to first playable demo, shareholder requirements, etc. We continue to work closely with our publishing and developing partners and are here to support them in all areas. We are excited to share more about some of the exclusive games coming to Stadia soon."

Elsewhere in its New Year update, the Stadia Team has already promised that 4K resolution and wireless controller support when playing on browsers, support for additional Android phones, and extra Assistant functions are all expected to be implemented by the end of March.

Since the Reddit thread was first posted, Google has announced the two games Stadia Pro subscribers would be able claim in February -- a fact the original poster has acknowledged.

Subscribers will be able to add Gylt and Metro Exodus to their collections next month, bringing the total number of included games up to seven (if they claim Samurai Showdown and Rise of the Tomb Raider before January 31).

Stadia launched in November to a cautious reception with many critics claiming the cloud gaming service was still essentially a beta rather than a fully-fledged product.

People who bought the Founders Edition received three months subscription to Stadia Pro. With the renewal date approaching, Google is under pressure to convince players to sign up again.

 

[Hace El Oso]

Bought us maybe 5 years

 

[Decado]

The problem with Stadia is that it is quintessentially Google -- they came up with the technology first, and then figured people would just like it because it is cool. Turns out, most people don't give a shit.

Without getting too far into my day job, I work in this industry and spend a lot of time explaining it to outsiders. Included in these outsiders would be companies that are looking to invest, and companies that are trying to break into it. Almost universally, these people are interested in the wrong things. They always come to the conversation with stats on microtransactions, hardware adoption curves, mobile, China, etc. So far, not a single non-gaming company has successfully identified the most important part of this industry: the fucking games.

Most of these people don't play games, so they don't understand. They think the game is incidental to success, because they are treating games like cheap appliances (that is, if it is made cheaply enough and is shiny enough, you'll sell enough units to at least break even and maybe even make some money). Most of these companies -- even the tech giants like Google -- have no fucking idea what they're doing.

Amazon is a great example. Amazon Game Studios was founded in 2012 -- eight years ago. EIGHT! And they have yet to release a singe title of note. Amazon has enough money to produce nothing but failure for eight years and still stick around, but obviously most companies cannot do this. Google is another one. They can run Stadia at a loss for a decade and probably not feel it, especially since their end goal is not to be in the video game space, but to expand their reach into the data-collection-and-sales space. This is why they're ending support for third-party cookies. It is all about selling your data to advertisers. They could honestly give a fuck about games.

Which is why, in the final analysis, Stadia has been such a risible failure. "You can play Assassin's Creed on your phone if you attach this stupid fucking controller to it! How cool is this, fellow gamers???" The silence to this coolness has been deafening, because at the end of the day nobody was asking for this. Nobody really gives a fuck if they can play a three year old game on the toilet with a substandard control scheme. And the few suckers dumb enough to fall for this do not make an install base -- they are a curiosity, a blip, a fad.

Stadia is, for all intents and purposes, a console. Treat it like a console launch and its failures become simple, even embarrassing. You simply do not launch new consoles without high-end exclusives. Sometimes you can release a new iteration of a console without them, and I suppose PlayStation and Xbox could launch a new console with fewer exclusives than in the past, but they both now have decades of brand awareness and customer loyalty behind them. Even with that cache in the bank, they both know that new and existing IPs are what make money. This is why consoles are traditionally viewed as loss leaders. You make the money back on the games.

So what is Google actually selling? Pay $130 to get a "Founder's Edition," then still shell out full price for games -- most of which are at least 2 years old? What's the fucking bargain, here? How is it "The Netflix of Games" if you're still paying for each game? And of course you have to pay for each game. No publisher is going to cough up their insanely lucrative first-sale to a streaming service when they could sell directly to consumers and keep all of the money. Again I ask: where's the deal? What is so great about this? I can already play my games on my preferred devices and in my preferred spaces . . . so what am I changing this for?

I had a meeting with the Stadia people last year at GDC. I came into the meeting prepared to talk about a brief history of where things had been, and where games were likely headed. They interrupted me, and said "We already know all of this, can we talk about XXX?" I laughed, finished the meeting, and told my boss that Stadia was fucking doomed. My boss didn't play games, and he said what everyone else says: It's Google! Of course it will be a hit! You can play a video game on your TV without a console, who won't like that? I shrugged, and told him nobody would be saying anything nice about Stadia a year from then (March 2019). We are approaching March 2020. The Stadia brand is untrustworthy, slowly approaching total garbage. I was right again (I am frequently right).

I'm enjoying seeing these smug silicon valley shitbirds get knocked down a peg or two. Maybe they'll come out of it, maybe not. But people should be learning from this fiasco. Make a fucking good game first. Everything else is details.

 

[Wyatt_Derp]

Cost of doing business stuff. Stadia succeed, google happy. Stadia fail, google run to tax man and get relief. Hollywood does the same thing. Studios have been known to release stinkers once in a while, knowing they will fail. Then they can claim it as a loss on next year's taxes and ensure a return - for those with 'aversion to risk' on the mind, it's a pleasant pillow to rest one's head on.

But yeah, the idea of tossing away hundreds of millions of dollars just to 'test the waters' seems insane to us, but we're not listed on the NYSE. The lessons of the too big to fail era have obviously fallen on deaf ears. If anything, it's just taught the conference room kids to learn that failing at something has no consequences - and even if there are, they can always blame it on ___ and spin a story about it on the Washington Post.

All these fuckers should learn Mandarin and move to Beijing. Their schemes and scams will go over far better with the sneeze-a-choos and cough-fus. Over there giving in to bad ideas isn't just a consumer choice - IT'S THE LAW.

 

[baud]

microtransactions, mobile, China

To be fair, there's a lot of money to be made in those things with a lower cost of entry and a lower quality bar for success. It doesn't create any good or interesting games, but the suits that try to break into video games are just doing that for the money, so they don't care.

 

[Valky]

The problem with Stadia is that it is quintessentially Google -- they came up with the technology first, and then figured people would just like it because it is cool. Turns out, most people don't give a shit.

Without getting too far into my day job, I work in this industry and spend a lot of time explaining it to outsiders. Included in these outsiders would be companies that are looking to invest, and companies that are trying to break into it. Almost universally, these people are interested in the wrong things. They always come to the conversation with stats on microtransactions, hardware adoption curves, mobile, China, etc. So far, not a single non-gaming company has successfully identified the most important part of this industry: the fucking games.

Most of these people don't play games, so they don't understand. They think the game is incidental to success, because they are treating games like cheap appliances (that is, if it is made cheaply enough and is shiny enough, you'll sell enough units to at least break even and maybe even make some money). Most of these companies -- even the tech giants like Google -- have no fucking idea what they're doing.

Amazon is a great example. Amazon Game Studios was founded in 2012 -- eight years ago. EIGHT! And they have yet to release a singe title of note. Amazon has enough money to produce nothing but failure for eight years and still stick around, but obviously most companies cannot do this. Google is another one. They can run Stadia at a loss for a decade and probably not feel it, especially since their end goal is not to be in the video game space, but to expand their reach into the data-collection-and-sales space. This is why they're ending support for third-party cookies. It is all about selling your data to advertisers. They could honestly give a fuck about games.

Which is why, in the final analysis, Stadia has been such a risible failure. "You can play Assassin's Creed on your phone if you attach this stupid fucking controller to it! How cool is this, fellow gamers???" The silence to this coolness has been deafening, because at the end of the day nobody was asking for this. Nobody really gives a fuck if they can play a three year old game on the toilet with a substandard control scheme. And the few suckers dumb enough to fall for this do not make an install base -- they are a curiosity, a blip, a fad.

Stadia is, for all intents and purposes, a console. Treat it like a console launch and its failures become simple, even embarrassing. You simply do not launch new consoles without high-end exclusives. Sometimes you can release a new iteration of a console without them, and I suppose PlayStation and Xbox could launch a new console with fewer exclusives than in the past, but they both now have decades of brand awareness and customer loyalty behind them. Even with that cache in the bank, they both know that new and existing IPs are what make money. This is why consoles are traditionally viewed as loss leaders. You make the money back on the games.

So what is Google actually selling? Pay $130 to get a "Founder's Edition," then still shell out full price for games -- most of which are at least 2 years old? What's the fucking bargain, here? How is it "The Netflix of Games" if you're still paying for each game? And of course you have to pay for each game. No publisher is going to cough up their insanely lucrative first-sale to a streaming service when they could sell directly to consumers and keep all of the money. Again I ask: where's the deal? What is so great about this? I can already play my games on my preferred devices and in my preferred spaces . . . so what am I changing this for?

I had a meeting with the Stadia people last year at GDC. I came into the meeting prepared to talk about a brief history of where things had been, and where games were likely headed. They interrupted me, and said "We already know all of this, can we talk about XXX?" I laughed, finished the meeting, and told my boss that Stadia was fucking doomed. My boss didn't play games, and he said what everyone else says: It's Google! Of course it will be a hit! You can play a video game on your TV without a console, who won't like that? I shrugged, and told him nobody would be saying anything nice about Stadia a year from then (March 2019). We are approaching March 2020. The Stadia brand is untrustworthy, slowly approaching total garbage. I was right again (I am frequently right).

I'm enjoying seeing these smug silicon valley shitbirds get knocked down a peg or two. Maybe they'll come out of it, maybe not. But people should be learning from this fiasco. Make a fucking good game first. Everything else is details.

Of course the majority of companies see nothing but the ability to make a profit off of this and as a cheap appliance. The entire model of streaming is built to erase the concept of ownership, which directly traces to the ability to force people to spend more money. Ownership = self reliant, self reliant = don't need to buy your products, removing ownership = reliant on company making product services, reliant on company making services = constant cash flow.

 

[fizzelopeguss]

Until 90% of housing is wired up with FTTP then this shit a pipedream. Fuck all your fancy algorithms or latency "reducers".

 

[DalekFlay]

Of course the majority of companies see nothing but the ability to make a profit off of this and as a cheap appliance. The entire model of streaming is built to erase the concept of ownership, which directly traces to the ability to force people to spend more money. Ownership = self reliant, self reliant = don't need to buy your products, removing ownership = reliant on company making product services, reliant on company making services = constant cash flow.

Correct. The problem is, consumers are eating it up in every other medium.

 

[Valky]

Of course the majority of companies see nothing but the ability to make a profit off of this and as a cheap appliance. The entire model of streaming is built to erase the concept of ownership, which directly traces to the ability to force people to spend more money. Ownership = self reliant, self reliant = don't need to buy your products, removing ownership = reliant on company making product services, reliant on company making services = constant cash flow.

Correct. The problem is, consumers are eating it up in every other medium.

The uneducated man, who does not know half of his rights and refuses to take advantage of the other half, will sell his freedom for convenience.

 

[Hace El Oso]

The goal is to permanently capture the people and their money. Achieving this through sucking all the oxygen out of the environment rather than producing anything anyone wants is THE tactic of large entities like them. With time and without serious opposition on a societal level they will succeed.

 

[DalekFlay]

It's already game over with TV, movies and music. I don't see anything stopping it with games, you already see people creaming their panties for Xbox Gamepass. Valve is rumored to be up to something with Steam, Origin and Uplay are already doing it... People will say "buying is always an option," but then come the subscription exclusives (something Google is already doing). Only a matter of time until video games are just like everything else.

 

[Fedora Master]

And just like TV, people will find a way to pirate that shit.

 

[Valky]

It's already game over with TV, movies and music. I don't see anything stopping it with games, you already see people creaming their panties for Xbox Gamepass. Valve is rumored to be up to something with Steam, Origin and Uplay are already doing it... People will say "buying is always an option," but then come the subscription exclusives (something Google is already doing). Only a matter of time until video games are just like everything else.

I thought music won the war last decade? With itunes making all music on their platform drm free.

 

[DalekFlay]

I thought music won the war last decade? With itunes making all music on their platform drm free.

MP3 download is now like 7% of music revenue or something, with vinyl and CD combined at less than 10%. The vast majority of money made from music is now from streaming services like Spotify and such. That's what I was referencing, the move toward everything being a subscription.

 

[Owl]

And just like TV, people will find a way to pirate that shit.

How do you pirate a game that's only available on a streaming platform?