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

[Average Manatee]

Google say they are shutting down Stadia and refunding all payments done through their store.... bit what about ingame purchases?
If I bought a game on Stadia, and paid $20 for microtransactions in the game, these didn't go through Google's Play Store. So they won't be refunded. Yet my account will be terminated, and I will no longer be able to access these goods I purchased. Seems like legal fuckery could go down.

And yes, I know its all licenses, and you don't actually own the sword your character wields. But the license is being terminated by a third party, effectively. The license between me and Ubisoft over that pink gun is being terminated by Google. And apparently Ubisoft only learned about it through the news, same as me. Is this okay, legally?

Probably not but you'd have to sue and that means $$$ up front

Jesus! Google is a bunch of fuckup schmuks!

Everyone at google is a fuckup except their core search/web ads business. Everything else is just feeding data to ads.

 

[Lutte]

Jesus! Google is a bunch of fuckup schmuks!

Google is the kind of environment where just doing a good job doesn't get you any further, so what happens is people keep making new projects because it's the most reliable way to get noticed and promoted. This is why Google has made a trillion chat apps : Google Talk, Hangouts, Allo, Chat, Google+ Messenger, Android Messages RCS, Meet. This isn't even counting things that are single focused use like video talk such as Duo, which has never succeeded and is overall a dumb idea. Or things that tried to do EVERYTHING, like Wave, which was supposed to be a replacement for : email, collaborative document editing AND live text messaging all at once.

As a corporation, Google is, without a doubt, the most afflicted with the syndrome of ADHD. Anything that isn't the search engine is the product of ADHD corporation wide.

 

[rusty_shackleford]

Google has essentially killed their brand as anything but an advertisement company by constantly killing off projects. Many companies have products that aren't as profitable or even losses that are kept alive so they don't get a reputation for not supporting their products.

Honestly surprising coming from Ubisoft.

 

[Lutte]

Google has essentially killed their brand as anything but an advertisement company by constantly killing off projects. Many companies have products that aren't as profitable or even losses that are kept alive so they don't get a reputation for not supporting their products.

It's even worse when they do it repeatedly in the same field, like text messaging. I mean, a normal, sane, functioning corporation would keep refining the same piece of software to make it better. Google throws it away and keep making a new one as if that was the solution to their inability to get people to adopt their stuff.

 

[Blaine]

Currently and for the foreseeable future, Google is a candle flame and bird feeder for all of the troons, queer folx, wombyn, numales, vibrant persons of colour, and other creatures of that ilk (you know, just normal, healthy people; you're out of touch with reality, bigot) who've crossed the Jew's palm with silver to obtain their (largely remedial) degree-mill receipts and want to "work in tech," AKA sit at a desk collecting a check while doing nothing much.

The results are exactly what anyone with a grain of sense would expect: pure garbage. There must be a hard core of real software engineers maintaining the company's prize and the floor of its war chest, which is the original search engine.

It is truly incredible that all of these supposed social progressives are not only fiscally conservative money-chasers, but also that there's a curious hole in their supposedly progressive social views as well: in good conscience, they aid and abet an enormous, powerful, and wealthy megacorporation in its quest to surveil the entire world populace and monetize every one of them, right down to pushing gambling ads at the poor.

It's almost as though the only thing about them that's actually "progressive" is the part allows them to look and act special and different and to feel morally superior while looking down on their mostly working-class sociopolitical opponents.

 

[Zed Duke of Banville]

It is truly incredible that all of these supposed social progressives are not only fiscally conservative money-chasers, but also that there's a curious hole in their supposedly progressive social views as well: in good conscience, they aid and abet an enormous, powerful, and wealthy megacorporation in its quest to surveil the entire world populace and monetize every one of them, right down to pushing gambling ads at the poor.

It's almost as though the only thing about them that's actually "progressive" is the part allows them to look and act special and different and to feel morally superior while looking down on their mostly working-class sociopolitical opponents.

Progressivism since the 1930s has involved the cooperation of Big Business in government programs and has favored ever-increasing concentration of business, in order to make Gleichschaltung coordination all the more easier. Moreover, these Big Tech network monopolies have been an essential part of the progressive system since the 1990s and eagerly engage in fostering and enforcing progressivism, "social" or otherwise. The tech network monopolies' goal of placing then entire population under surveillance is part of the process of an incipient totalitarian progressive system. Their employees generally embrace these goals and are genuinely progressive in the ideological/political sense, which has no contradiction with any of these activities.

 

[Blaine]

It is truly incredible that all of these supposed social progressives are not only fiscally conservative money-chasers, but also that there's a curious hole in their supposedly progressive social views as well: in good conscience, they aid and abet an enormous, powerful, and wealthy megacorporation in its quest to surveil the entire world populace and monetize every one of them, right down to pushing gambling ads at the poor.

It's almost as though the only thing about them that's actually "progressive" is the part allows them to look and act special and different and to feel morally superior while looking down on their mostly working-class sociopolitical opponents.

Progressivism since the 1930s has involved the cooperation of Big Business in government programs and has favored ever-increasing concentration of business, in order to make Gleichschaltung coordination all the more easier. Moreover, these Big Tech network monopolies have been an essential part of the progressive system since the 1990s and eagerly engage in fostering and enforcing progressivism, "social" or otherwise. The tech network monopolies' goal of placing then entire population under surveillance is part of the process of an incipient totalitarian progressive system. Their employees generally embrace these goals and are genuinely progressive in the ideological/political sense, which has no contradiction with any of these activities.

Modern Western "progressives" may not be aware of, or may be deeply in denial about, the totalitarianism and authoritarianism inherent to the means by which they intend to achieve their ends; nevertheless, these inherencies are quite real, and they are antithetical to progressive ideology.

Authoritarianism, for example, is a very old concept. To embrace it is regressive, not progressive (or even conservative). It follows that modern "progressives" are in fact regressives in sheep's clothing, vying for sociopolitical supremacy just as cynically and ruthlessly as certain Israelite sects of the Old Testament once did. Every sect, tribe, bloc, etc. always believes utterly in its own righteousness and that it alone is worthy of supremacy, and "progressives" are no different.

There have been influential true progressives, even true progressive blocs for brief periods, during various stretches of world history and in various regions, although what it meant to be progressive thousands of years ago was very different than what it means (or should mean) today.

But this is not one of those stretches of time, and this is not one of those regions. During this stretch of time and within the relevant regions, all "progressives" of influence are in fact regressives. True progressives no doubt still exist, but they have no power or influence, in much the same way that good music still exists despite receiving virtually no airtime.

 

[Noct]

It's amazing to me how Google has delved into so many ventures and failed in virtually all of them. What's even more amazing is how despite this, they make so much money from selling your personal data to the highest bidder advertising that it makes up for all of it several times over.

 

[KeighnMcDeath]

I'm still annoyed yahoo groups was destroyed, geocities, webring, webhub, and various independent websites. They are now ad parking lots or worse. Internet archive does a poor job of keeping such things usable. I guess it is better than nothing. Even myspace fails as a music w/e platform it tried to be.

I primarily used the net around 2000 as a D&D project source and mods for games up to then (primarily doom, diablo, FRUA.)

 

[Fedora Master]

 

[The_Sloth_Sleeps]

Just about to go on the Stadia reddit, and ask if its still worth buying any second hand Stadia gear to get any deals before it finally closes.

 

[Junmarko]

You are all luddites.

Despise it if you want, game streaming is coming and is going to be widely accepted.
Netflix doesn't provide same picture quality as a good Blu-ray. Look how people are caring.

 

[Azdul]

you guys are making me want streaming to take over just because you're all so smugly annoying thinking you're correct when you haven't even tried it

Cool non-argument.

What's a non-argument is "the study is bad because I declare myself a superhuman"

Actual limit of frames-per-second above which humans cannot notice any difference is 300-400. Nobody would build or buy monitors with 360 Hz refresh rate if it was all snake oil without any perceptible difference.

Another hard limit is speed of light - and with network infrastructure working near that speed you could provide smooth 400 FPS almost smooth 144 fps experience to the other side of the planet.

The only issue is the cost.

It is cheaper to improve performance of PC / console / smartphone that is in the same room as TV - than to improve latency and bandwidth of network infrastructure between said TV and nearest Google data center.

 

[The_Sloth_Sleeps]

Another hard limit is speed of light - and with network infrastructure working near that speed you could provide smooth 400 FPS experience to the other side of the planet.

The only issue is the cost.

Surely SOL is not anywhere near the theoretical limit. I would have thought best case is 2 seconds or something. Now I am curious.

 

[Azdul]

Another hard limit is speed of light - and with network infrastructure working near that speed you could provide smooth 400 FPS experience to the other side of the planet.

The only issue is the cost.

Surely SOL is not anywhere near the theoretical limit. I would have thought best case is 2 seconds or something. Now I am curious.

Oops - I've made a mistake. My calculations were done for theoretical ideal scenario for 144 frames per second using remote data center - not for 400 fps.

7 ms is the time between frames for 144 Hz. Light travels 300 km x 7 = 2100 km in that time. You could use lag compensation techniques to prepare immediate response to all possible controler inputs - so the information needs to only travel in one direction (similar solution is used in some emulators to reduce latency).

Actual physically existing networks are nowhere near that speed - so there is room for improvement before we will hit the wall.

 

[The_Sloth_Sleeps]

Another hard limit is speed of light - and with network infrastructure working near that speed you could provide smooth 400 FPS experience to the other side of the planet.

The only issue is the cost.

Surely SOL is not anywhere near the theoretical limit. I would have thought best case is 2 seconds or something. Now I am curious.

Oops - made a mistake. My calculations were done for theoretical ideal scenario for 144 frames per second using remote data center - not for 400 fps.

7 ms is the time between frames for 144 Hz. Light travels 300 km x 7 = 2100 km in that time. You could use lag compensation techniques to prepare immediate response to all possible controler inputs - so the information needs to only travel in one direction (similar solution is used in some emulators to reduce latency).

Actual physically existing networks are nowhere near that speed - so there is room for improvement before we will hit the wall.

Theres many physical factors to consider. The actual distance traveled is going to much further than the geographic distance, the materials will never be optimal for SOL travel, switches, and so on will be considerably slower than any A to B journey, magnetic mediums, etc.

Sure, if you had only a single connection from A to B, then you could maybe get half the SOL or something, but something that can work with database, be distributable etc. Seems highly unlikely to ever get close. I would imagine not less than seconds.

 

[whydoibother]

You are all luddites.

Despise it if you want, game streaming is coming and is going to be widely accepted.
Netflix doesn't provide same picture quality as a good Blu-ray. Look how people are caring.

Game streaming is coming, yes. Its going to see wide adoption, probably.
But it sure as fuck is not going to be a standalone console. It will be a handheld that displays and controls games running on your PC.
Nvidia Shield and VR headsets are effectively that, streaming games running on the PC to be displayed and controlled on more mobile hardware.

 

[Azdul]

Another hard limit is speed of light - and with network infrastructure working near that speed you could provide smooth 400 FPS experience to the other side of the planet.

The only issue is the cost.

Surely SOL is not anywhere near the theoretical limit. I would have thought best case is 2 seconds or something. Now I am curious.

Oops - made a mistake. My calculations were done for theoretical ideal scenario for 144 frames per second using remote data center - not for 400 fps.

7 ms is the time between frames for 144 Hz. Light travels 300 km x 7 = 2100 km in that time. You could use lag compensation techniques to prepare immediate response to all possible controler inputs - so the information needs to only travel in one direction (similar solution is used in some emulators to reduce latency).

Actual physically existing networks are nowhere near that speed - so there is room for improvement before we will hit the wall.

Theres many physical factors to consider. The actual distance traveled is going to much further than the geographic distance, the materials will never be optimal for SOL travel, switches, and so on will be considerably slower than any A to B journey, magnetic mediums, etc.

Sure, if you had only a single connection from A to B, then you could maybe get half the SOL or something, but something that can work with database, be distributable etc. Seems highly unlikely to ever get close. I would imagine not less than seconds.

I've played on the servers across the Atlantic with little over 120 ping. It meant that round trip travel across the ocean took around 120 ms.

2 x 7000 km = 46,6 x 300 km. According to my calculations - the minimal physically possible ping from Central Europe to New York is 47.

When it comes to Starlink - most of time information travels as laser signal between satellites in space. However I don't have Starlink at hand to check how much it improves latency over underwater fiber optic cables.

 

[whydoibother]

I've played on the servers across the Atlantic with little over 120 ping. It meant that round trip travel across the ocean took around 120 ms.

I used to play DOTA2 with a Yugofag from Australia (not Licorice) and despite 100-200ms latency he'd do alright.
Once you are used to the delay, you can sort of play around it. Of course, its always an issue, but you can do damage control as long as its consistent.
It becomes a problem if it jumps around from 50 to 500.

 

[The_Sloth_Sleeps]

Another hard limit is speed of light - and with network infrastructure working near that speed you could provide smooth 400 FPS experience to the other side of the planet.

The only issue is the cost.

Surely SOL is not anywhere near the theoretical limit. I would have thought best case is 2 seconds or something. Now I am curious.

Oops - made a mistake. My calculations were done for theoretical ideal scenario for 144 frames per second using remote data center - not for 400 fps.

7 ms is the time between frames for 144 Hz. Light travels 300 km x 7 = 2100 km in that time. You could use lag compensation techniques to prepare immediate response to all possible controler inputs - so the information needs to only travel in one direction (similar solution is used in some emulators to reduce latency).

Actual physically existing networks are nowhere near that speed - so there is room for improvement before we will hit the wall.

Theres many physical factors to consider. The actual distance traveled is going to much further than the geographic distance, the materials will never be optimal for SOL travel, switches, and so on will be considerably slower than any A to B journey, magnetic mediums, etc.

Sure, if you had only a single connection from A to B, then you could maybe get half the SOL or something, but something that can work with database, be distributable etc. Seems highly unlikely to ever get close. I would imagine not less than seconds.

I've played on the servers across the Atlantic with little over 120 ping. It meant that round trip travel across the ocean took around 120 ms.

2 x 7000 km = 46,6 x 300 km. According to my calculations - the minimal physically possible ping from Central Europe to New York is 47.

When it comes to Starlink - most of time information travels as laser signal between satellites in space. However I don't have Starlink at hand to check how much it improves latency over underwater fiber optic cables.

Ok assuming thats reliable 120ms. The reality is, if you add to that your 2 best mates to your game server, one in bongistan and one in upsidedown world, each with the 500ms ping, the round journey is going up and you will experience an ever so slight lag.

 

[KeighnMcDeath]

Just about to go on the Stadia reddit, and ask if its still worth buying any second hand Stadia gear to get any deals before it finally closes.

Stadia gear? What is that exactly?

 

[Infinitron]

RIP:

 

[Alienman]

Stadia now in heaven with OnLive.

 

[Ismaul]

"These Tweets are protected" lol


*Receiving Mindlink transmission: Products package update*
"Stadia? Not found. Product never existed, citizen."

 

[deuxhero]

Since the controller is the only thing that works now: Was the controller even good?