Google Stadia - Googles new game streaming platform

[Schattenlied]

The idea they are trying to implement (streaming games to a device) is not new, services exist right now that already do this, problem is they never catch on because they add latency, most notably input lag... There is no real way around this.

I expect this to flop like all the others have.

[Schattenlied]

So, I'm dumb. Can someone explain this to me. Does this mean your personal computer's specs don't matter? I've got a decent pc, but not having to keep upgrading to the top of the line (aka expensive) hardware seems like a big positive. I'm not too worried about the internet connection, as I have a 500mbps speed.

Services that do this exact same thing already exist right now, and have for almost a decade, you can go subscribe to one and see how it works for you. Don't get your hopes up though.

However, you're gonna be spending ~$30 per month on the subscription... so, $360 a year, for $360 a year you can easily keep your own PC performing at reasonable levels, and it's yours.

[Agrossive]

The idea they are trying to implement (streaming games to a device) is not new, services exist right now that already do this, problem is they never catch on because they add latency, most notably input lag... There is no real way around this.

I expect this to flop like all the others have.

You must not have been in the project stream and are totally speaking from ignorance because I played it and there was no latency or lag issues by the end of the beta playing AC origins.

[HitRefresh]

Yeah that's super weird... Earlier in the stream they said up to 1080p.. The guy speaking now says 4k :shrug:

During the Project Stream beta test it was 1080p@60Hz. When they release it officially it will be 4K@60Hz.

- - - Updated - - -

Services that do this exact same thing already exist right now, and have for almost a decade, you can go subscribe to one and see how it works for you. Don't get your hopes up though.

However, you're gonna be spending ~$30 per month on the subscription... so, $360 a year, for $360 a year you can easily keep your own PC performing at reasonable levels, and it's yours.

The only thing I really liked is the splitscreen multiplayer. I mean, I hope it brings more splitscreen games into the market.

[Tech614]

You must not have been in the project stream and are totally speaking from ignorance because I played it and there was no latency or lag issues by the end of the beta playing AC origins.

Best case scenerio DF tested during the project stream beta was 188ms...

If 188ms is your definition of "no latency issues" lol... And that is the "best case scenario". Guys that where there today already said Doom had major input lag issues and that is on their test units, not in your home so...

If there isn't a server in your metropolitan area it's probably going to suck ass. Then, even if there is one it will stick suck ass for game that require quick reactions.

[Charge me Doctor]

They haven't really mentioned anything about latency yet other than we have a lot of datacenters... If they're not doing any predictive modeling, then this will suffer from the same latency issues as any other service.

You should read that as "you are going to have latency problems, but they all be on your side, ergo, your fault"

[Jtbrig7390]

Another streaming service......woooooo

All these gaming streaming services are going to run into the same issue that Movie/Tv streaming services are dealing with now.

They will also deal with issues that is exclusive to them like latency.

[Charge me Doctor]

So for years they try to sell low ms mice and monitors to reduce input lag, then expect us to game on a streaming machine?

What if I have 3 people that want to play at the same time? What if I have someone watching 4k netflix at the same time? What if I have low bandwidth or a metered connection? What if I live in the country? Can I use this with my satellite internet?

It's hilarious, i know.

Then you are out of luck, just like in times when you needed internet via phone line and someone wanted to use said phone line. Also - this thing will eat your data (limit if you have one) like candy

- - - Updated - - -

Change is hard... but streaming is more about opening up gaming to a larger audience. There will always be people like yourself that want something physical, but if you can make a cheap enough service that actually works, you'll eat into traditional console sales. Next Gen is going to be a transitional generation, but I'd expect the majority of sales in the generation after that to be via streaming services.

Gaming doesn't need any "opening up to a larger audience", because you end up with diablo immortal

- - - Updated - - -

I have a feeling your definition of fast internet is not the definition of fast internet where I live. Also predictive modeling is not necessarily a good then when perhaps devs will need to start building their games with streaming in mind. It's also a big phrase for something really simple, which is also an insufficient answer to my assertion that buffering isn't applicable to a gaming scenario except under very specific conditions and is just a fake answer to an unanswerable question. Also when you wrote "think about phones and tablets" what does that mean?

Why should we accept the downgrade to gaming? Is there anyone here who would rather have a worse experience and stream their video games and pay a monthly fee? What about pro gamers? Is this not a box for casuals who don't want to invest that much in gaming? What is it for but to widen the tent of gaming, but to who? Who can't afford a 200 dollar xbox but can afford low latency high bandwidth internet and this box at the same time and would rather pay a monthly fee for mostly crappy games instead of buying good ones they choose? I'm not sold.

I understand why the corporations want to sell it. To make money. I just don't know why anyone would want to buy it. They should have done a real box that also streams.

Another really silly thing, look at the steam streaming machine over the local network. I got one of those to stream over my own local network(not even using the Internet) the Witcher 3 from my PC to my TV. It SUCKED. I mean sucked bigtime compared to playing directly off my PC(worse picture quality, slightly higher latency, completely unacceptable). If they can't even make it stream properly over a local network, then how does this work like magic over the internet.

If I hooked this up at my house it wouldn't even work.

If I had to play every game with 50ms WoW latency, I would quit gaming. I accept it in WoW only because it is an online game. I will not accept added internet latency in single player offline games.

I can agree with that. That's a good post

[Very Tired]

Seems like Google is single handily trying to get the younger crowd to get out there and protest the oligarchy that controls our internet. The technology for fast internet exists today, they just don't want us to have it.

[LazarusLong]

Services that do this exact same thing already exist right now, and have for almost a decade, you can go subscribe to one and see how it works for you. Don't get your hopes up though.

However, you're gonna be spending ~$30 per month on the subscription... so, $360 a year, for $360 a year you can easily keep your own PC performing at reasonable levels, and it's yours.

It's not a fair comparison. Sony or Valve don't have Google Global Cache and Edge network. No one does.

[Usagi Senshi]

Man, I ain't touching that shit with a ten foot dildo!

I put up with digital only on PC as it is and made peace with it, but I'm not going the own nothing with massive input lag route.

I used to play M+ 10-15s with Aussie friends on 189-220ms and I still payed fine (usually no deaths and #1 on damage with monk, wooooooo) but fuck doing that constantly and paying for it.

[dope_danny]

20gb per hour data usage and 200ms+ input lag. Hoo boy this is gonna be onlive all over again.

[Shinzai]

180ms lag at least... That's the same as when I was try-harding in Quake 2.

Laggy, unresponsive, imprecise. And any issues with your connection and you will basically enter a stutter festival, or games will outright stall/crash.

I don't see the point of this thing, like if it's successful, fair enough, but so many others have already tried and failed with the exact same design basis.

Main problem is always infrastructure, given most places have questionable broadband quality at best and its often shared by multiple people.

I'm skeptical at best about this "console" as a whole.

[Realitytrembles]

Interesting. So, my gaming desktop will be able to basically "plug and play" without the downloading?

Steam must be shaking in their boots.

[Soeroah]

My 4 Mbps-between-four-people internet with a 200 gb a month data cap cries out in pain.

[Tech614]

Seems like Google is single handily trying to get the younger crowd to get out there and protest the oligarchy that controls our internet. The technology for fast internet exists today, they just don't want us to have it.

Speed doesn't matter much here. Having more bandwidth ain't gonna magically make your latency any better. The only thing speed will increase is your image quality of the stream itself.

Even in a world where everyone had gigabit connections minimum this shit is still bad because of latency.

[Katchii]

Interesting. So, my gaming desktop will be able to basically "plug and play" without the downloading?

Steam must be shaking in their boots.

Only if Google somehow magically reduced latency and input lag to zero, which isn't even physically possible over the internet.

Streaming services have been around a long time, but none of them have taken off because of just how sub-par the experience is vs playing it directly on a home console. That coupled with just how much data this kind of stuff uses, and how much the experience can be affected by minor fluctuations in bandwidth due to multiple users on the network, etc...and it just doesn't add up to a very appealing service IMO.

[paralleluniverse]

lol where are the anti-online DRM people?

This crap is by far worse than the original Xbox One.

The idea of an online only game DIGITAL STORE platform is a huge positive, but the idea of an online only game SUBSCRIPTION STREAMING platform, which is what Stadia is, is awful.

The same problems with TV streaming applies here too: buying a monthly subscription to everything is less value for money than buying specifically the items you want. And on top of that, there's also an additional problem unique to games: games come and go from the service, so what happens to your save, your progress? It's effectively gone if you can't play the game anymore.

You have no ownership of your games and game progress with streaming. You do have ownership with a digital store model (people say that technically you don't, but for all practical purposes, yes, you do).

[XDurionX]

So, I'm dumb. Can someone explain this to me. Does this mean your personal computer's specs don't matter? I've got a decent pc, but not having to keep upgrading to the top of the line (aka expensive) hardware seems like a big positive. I'm not too worried about the internet connection, as I have a 500mbps speed.

Your PC does nothing but read the controls and display the images that are rendered on the server. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thin_client

[Rustedsaint]

Do not want and will not subscribe to it.
Streaming only really works if the user internet doesn’t experience lag and having to be online when you wanna play games can be a turned off