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

[Tehdagah]

"Orcs Must Die 3" is a Stadia exclusive.
https://9to5google.com/2019/08/19/orcs-must-die-3-stadia-exclusive/

They stuffed the slutty sorceress with clothes lol

Before:

 

[gerey]

Where's the hijab?

 

[anvi]

I loved Orcs Must Die, sequel not as much. But it is hardly a killer app.

 

[baud]

There's that too:

Cyberpunk 2077 is coming to Google’s Stadia cloud gaming service

https://www.theverge.com/2019/8/19/20812406/cyberpunk-2077-google-stadia-gamescom-new-games-streaming

 

[rusty_shackleford]

There's that too:

Cyberpunk 2077 is coming to Google’s Stadia cloud gaming service

https://www.theverge.com/2019/8/19/20812406/cyberpunk-2077-google-stadia-gamescom-new-games-streaming

There's nothing wrong with a game being available on Stadia, the problem is when they're exclusive to Stadia.

 

[DalekFlay]

There's nothing wrong with a game being available on Stadia, the problem is when they're exclusive to Stadia.

I agree in spirit, but there's a lot wrong with streaming gaming in general.

 

[Volokard]

Online-only for a singleplayer game is just stupid. Stadia could be fine as an alternative/extra option, travelers, casual gamers, etc., but exclusivity to an online platform in this case is silly. However, it's the devs' choice. No use in complaining or hating them, just ignore it. They'll get the message at some point.

 

[anvi]

I don't think most people care about online only, I noticed that in the past when certain games went online only. (Like Elite Dangerous). There is outrage by some but most people don't seem to care. No idea if Stadia will be a success or not though, I hardly even know what it is, can't be bothered to even read about it.

 

[Volokard]

I suppose we'll see when Stadia launches. But I really don't want the future of games to be like this...

 

[Plaguecrafter]

Most people don't care about online only since we're almost always connected to the Internet anyway, and it got much better and affordable with time.

 

[DalekFlay]

Most people don't care about online only since we're almost always connected to the Internet anyway, and it got much better and affordable with time.

Even if you take out all the online only, you never own it style "DRM" concerns no one gives a shit about... there's still input lag (which should be even more terrible with a mouse), lack of control over settings or ability to mod files and compression or low internal rendering causing visual issues. However if it works okay and is a lot cheaper/easier I expect most consumers will ignore those problems too.

 

[anvi]

Most people don't care about online only since we're almost always connected to the Internet anyway, and it got much better and affordable with time.

Even if you take out all the online only, you never own it style "DRM" concerns no one gives a shit about... there's still input lag (which should be even more terrible with a mouse), lack of control over settings or ability to mod files and compression or low internal rendering causing visual issues. However if it works okay and is a lot cheaper/easier I expect most consumers will ignore those problems too.

Yes. And also the fact that the average gamer doesn't know what any of those other things are. Wot means DRN? Wot iz impot leg? Wots a mowse? Wot is mod? Wot means cotrol sattings? Wot is infernal randoring?

 

[Üstad]

Every AAA game

Will be shit by the time. And %90 of them will have blue haired gender neutral pratagonist. I wish SU didn't dissolve solely for this. Yandex could be proper rival against google and we wouldnt have this kind of retardation.

 

[cvv]

I don't think most people care about online only, I noticed that in the past when certain games went online only. (Like Elite Dangerous). There is outrage by some but most people don't seem to care. No idea if Stadia will be a success or not though, I hardly even know what it is, can't be bothered to even read about it.

Yep, most people don't give a flying fuck about online only, DRM or anything else. A handful of nerds like us are barking about it but the caravan lumbers on.

As for Stadia being a success ....most likely scenario is game streaming vs. traditional platforms will be the same like movie streaming vs. broadcast is today. Both will exist side by side but game streaming will be the cool kid on the block, the one that is growing while other kids are shrinking, the one having the most money and doing all the new, expensive stuff. Eventually it will cross the critical threshold, all the big publishers will go streaming exclusive and then most of the middle ones and even some indies. Non streamed games will be as niche as boxed PC games are today.

It's not gonna happen tomorrow or in 2 years but within 10 years almost sure. Go buy your next gen Playstation boys coz it's gonna be the last one.

 

[LESS T_T]

https://www.gamesindustry.biz/artic...-cross-progression-with-every-title-on-stadia

John Justice: "We are trying to implement cross-progression with every title on Stadia"
Google Stadia VP and head of product confirms service will include free trials, parental controls, mods, more features

According to Google Stadia VP and head of product John Justice, the Stadia team is working hard to implement not just cross-platform play, but also cross-progression across as many games on the service as possible.

Speaking in a video interview with StadiaCast, Justice said that Google wanted to include the feature event for games that don't include online or multiplayer features by necessity. He offered the example of The Elder Scrolls V: Skyrim (though he acknowledged Skyrim had not been announced for Google Stadia) as a situation where a single-player, story-based game might benefit from cross-progression on a new platform.

"We are trying to do [cross-progression] with every single title we're bringing to Stadia. That's something that we see as a key piece of next-gen. We're trying to push that next-gen is all about openness, it's about being able to play across your friend groups, it's about taking down these walled gardens, it's about being able to keep your progression wherever it is you are."

But he also acknowledged the company was encountering some resistance.

"Not every game platform is wholly on board with this, and some of them are on board with it for some titles and not for others."

Justice also mentioned (though did not go into detail on) several other features Google Stadia would have at or after launch, including eventual free trials of games, parental controls, and a system for implementing mods in certain games.

Finally, when asked what the biggest misconception people had about Google Stadia was, he honed in on the differences between Stadia Pro and Stadia Base, as well as what he considered to be an unhelpful comparison of Stadia Pro to Netflix.

"Normally [to play games in 4K] I've got to go buy a high-end console or a gaming PC," he said. "That whole layer, that whole hardware there, and it's better hardware than you can buy in a console today, we're giving all that for free. The Pro subscription, think about it more as an optional thing that adds some extra features, just like PS Plus or Live Gold. They add some games, they add some extra features. Not only do we give you the hardware layers [with Base] and don't make you pay for that, we also don't block multiplayer. A lot of people haven't quite gotten that before, probably because we're only doing the Founder's thing now and for that you have to get everything all at once."

 

[DalekFlay]

It's those service features that will get the trojan horse in the door, they know that. It's the same thing Steam did, launching at first as a DRM platform but then winning the community over with game and social features people liked. Insert despair.

 

[anvi]

What is cross-progression?

Also what sort of internet connection do you need to get a super fancy looking game streamed to you at 4k?

 

[DalekFlay]

Also what sort of internet connection do you need to get a super fancy looking game streamed to you at 4k?

They laid out the supposed bandwidth for each tier of video quality before. I want to say 4k with HDR required 25Mb, but it could have been 35 or something like that. It's relatively low, unless you live in potato.

 

[anvi]

Not bad, but it will exclude a hell of a lot of people. The average download speed of US is 5.1 (mbps) and the average upload speed was 1.1 (mbps). In some places in EU like the UK that is even worse. Majority of people have one of those "UP TO 10mbit/s which means about 5). And there are more primitive EU countries. Also Aus is a joke with internet in general. And then even in more developed countries, there are a lot of people who live in rural areas.

I have a 50mbit download but I struggle to stream youtube often. I suspect because youtube throttles some less popular videos, and/or its infrastructure struggles at busy times, or whatever. I suspect Stadia will be the same. When this releases, I would put money on the internet being full of ZOMG DIS HAZ LAGZ?! posts from people who can't stream smoothly in 1080p. I really think it will die like betamax, google glasses, zune, etc. But I don't know how hard they are going to push it.

 

[J_C]

Not bad, but it will exclude a hell of a lot of people. The average download speed of US is 5.1 (mbps) and the average upload speed was 1.1 (mbps). In some places in EU like the UK that is even worse. Majority of people have one of those "UP TO 10mbit/s which means about 5). And there are more primitive EU countries.

LOL, what a joke. I know it is harder to cover larger countries with internet, but what you describe is abysmal. We are in the 21st century FFS. Meanwhile in Hungary service providers are competing with eachother, to decide which one of them can provide 500-1000 Mbps internet for less money. I'm not saying that there aren't some areas here which have shitty connection, but in general we have fast, cheap and solid internet.

 

[anvi]

The worst thing about it to me is how shady it is to bullshit the customer. Selling something as "up to 15mbit" and then they can provide 2mbit and say well it is UP TO. Also apparently the only cable internet company in the UK uses the same gear that one of the top cable companies in the US uses, but they have it deliberately limited at a fraction of its capacity. Mostly this is because they know they have x bandwidth which would satisfy say 5 million customers. But they sign up 30 million customers and just but harsh limits on everyones speed, and if everyone was to log in at the same time, the whole network would break down. Oversubscribing happens on planes and stuff too, but with internet I think they totally overdo it.

Some places are good though. Like in the US, it is generally terrible but in places like the Tristate area where a bunch of companies are competing for a huge market, you can get amazing internet at a cheap price. In other places... not so much. And in rural places, you are fucked. Also in big apartment buildings where one high speed line gets split to 100+ people, it is no longer high speed.

 

[DalekFlay]

Not bad, but it will exclude a hell of a lot of people. The average download speed of US is 5.1 (mbps) and the average upload speed was 1.1 (mbps).

This is because those averages count wide swaths of the U.S. that are very rural but also very sparsely populated. If you live anywhere near a major city, like a 90 minute drive or less, then 25Mbps is no big deal at all. These companies seem fine with writing off rural people.

 

[rusty_shackleford]

The average download speed of US is 5.1 (mbps) and the average upload speed was 1.1 (mbps).

USA has some of the world's fastest internet now, which is impressive when you consider the size of the country and how spread out the population is.
https://www.speedtest.net/global-index

 

[unfairlight]

World's Fastest Internet™**** in the USA™
*cable only
*capped to 50 gb/mo
*$250/mo
*In the state of California and New York, the internet will arrive in the other 48 states in 2028.

 

[Lutte]

I have a 50mbit download but I struggle to stream youtube often. I suspect because youtube throttles some less popular videos, and/or its infrastructure struggles at busy times

Some people really need to get some education on internet infrastructure before making baseless presumptions.
YouTube doesn't have any issue with its internal infrastructure and it's a miracle a service that stores that many new videos on a daily basis can be sustained at all. What's happening for people like you who have issues with youtube streams is that your ISP are a bunch of scammers and refuse to get decent peering agreements with Google. I've experienced that myself, I used to subscribe to an ISP that was constantly trying to get Google to pay money to have the "privilege" of having good interconnectivity between Google's internal infrastructure and the ISP's own (they see google as competition to their own services like DSL/cable/fiber television). Of course it never worked because we have a competitive market here and there are other ISPs who have good peering and thus never have any lag on youtube and other google services. What happens with bad peering is, at the most busy hours when you have the most users from a ISP trying to access youtube, the ISP side of the interconnect to youtube is choking because the ISP doesn't have enough bandwidth to carry youtube's streams. The ISP is banking on the idea that most people will blame Google rather than the ISP.

'nyhow, ever since I switched ISPs, without anything else changing (same location/DSL infrastructure) I have never had any issue with any streams whatsoever.

Other than switching ISPs you could try using a VPN. A VPN that has good peering with your ISP can fix your issues with laggy streams.