Google Stadia: Lower your expectations | Engadget

CurryPanda

Member
Mar 4, 2019
2,351
2,615
370
Phil Harrison won't budge. As a vice president and general manager at Google, he's spent the past 15 minutes explaining why Stadia, the company's freshly announced game-streaming service, will actually work on the existing internet infrastructure across North America and Europe. He's focused on the investments Google has made over the past 20 years in cloud networks, talking up the company's 7,500 server nodes, custom CPUs and partnerships with major internet service providers.

I'm hesitant to believe him. I lived through the hype of OnLive a decade ago; we've heard these promises before, only to be sorely disappointed. Of course, 10 years on, Google is promising even more -- seamlessly streaming games at 4K and 60fps with HDR, integrating "play now" options into YouTube, and even loading a specific section of a game via a hyperlink, on any platform, in just five seconds.
More here: https://www.engadget.com/2019/03/21/google-stadia-gdc-2019-phil-harrison/
 

DanielsM

Member
Feb 11, 2019
985
631
185
I posted this the other day, Phil Harrison 5 years ago. He basically didn't even announce anything, not really, no business model at all.

The biggest screen in the house, having the most powerful CPU and GPU attached to it, is still going to be the best place for a lot of game types. Not all, we're seeing games across multiple screens which is great for the industry, but if you want the most sophisticated combination of CPU, GPU, input mechanism, biggest screen and best sound, it's going to be on console.
https://www.gamesindustry.biz/articles/2013-09-23-xbox-one-our-long-term-vision-hasnt-changed-at-all
 
Last edited:

CurryPanda

Member
Mar 4, 2019
2,351
2,615
370
Stadia Could Be Priced At $15/Month If It Launches With 500+ Titles, Says Analyst

IDC analyst Lewis Ward also feels that at least 50 new games should be added each month.



Google Stadia has caused quite the stir ever since its reveal at the Game Developers Conference. The prospect of a cloud-based game streaming service that can seamlessly work on tablets, browsers, TVs and whatnot seemed like a pipe-dream up till now. But Google seems committed to making it work, even if we lack numerous crucial details at this point.

One such detail is that of price. While Google will unveil its games catalogue in the Summer, the company didn’t really reveal how much it would charge for Stadia. GamingBolt thus asked IDC analyst Lewis Ward for his take in a recent interview.

Ward compared the service to Sony’s own PlayStation Now in terms of pricing. “PS Now lists for $20/month but they’ve offered discounts down to $10/month. You have to make several assumptions about customer uptake, infrastructure costs, and what development studios are willing to get paid on a per-user or per minute of use basis to come up with a profitable and growing Stadia scenario, but my complete eyeball is that if Stadia can muster 500+ solid titles at launch and lays out a plan to add at least 50 new games/month, then $15/month feels about right.”

That’s a tall order for the company, even if Stadia is only being rolled out in the United States, UK, Europe and Canada at launch. Can it support that many titles at launch and consistently add so many more after that, especially considering services like Xbox Game Pass and PlayStation Now currently don’t? We won’t have to wait long to find out – Google Stadia arrives in 2019. In the meantime, head here to learn more about what the service offers.
https://gamingbolt.com/stadia-could-be-priced-at-15-month-if-it-launches-with-500-titles-says-analyst
 

Meowzers

Member
Jun 1, 2017
177
152
180
Wales
I like the positivity. I never have streamed anything in terms of games, besides a few hours on PS Now 2 years back or so.

I'll be going into this as very much a neutral with some skepticism, as will most. If it's a monthly subscription and if it's not up to standard then I'll be happy to cut my losses and move on
to PS5 and Xbox 2 when they release. I still have Xbox X for now and it does a great job.
 

Romulus

Member
Mar 21, 2019
193
178
155
I can see several hundred thousand people supporting this by the end of year one. Maybe 4-6 million by the second year. It'll only only improve in terms of latency. I see word of mouth being huge for this because its convenient.
 
Last edited:

Hendrick's

Member
Jan 7, 2014
3,912
2,322
390
If it is sub $20 a month, I don't care if it is as good as local play, I'm going to give it a go.
 

GreenAlien

Member
Jun 11, 2016
130
107
240
I think a lot will depend on marketing. Google is in a much better position to reach potential customers with their streaming service than Sony/Nvidia.
 
Last edited:

juliotendo

Member
Jan 5, 2019
206
294
165
I’m predicting it will launch with a lot of buzz and paid endorsements from various “tech” youtubers “reviewing” the service and saying it is awesome, etc.

Probably just slowly simmer down after that. We’ve had these services before and they’ve never done well. What makes google any different.
 

Romulus

Member
Mar 21, 2019
193
178
155
I’m predicting it will launch with a lot of buzz and paid endorsements from various “tech” youtubers “reviewing” the service and saying it is awesome, etc.

Probably just slowly simmer down after that. We’ve had these services before and they’ve never done well. What makes google any different.

If they get it cheap enough it will be very different. Onlive, Shield, those required boxes, if you open up chrome and play something instantly, cheap? That's very different. And I only see performance and infrastructure improving. It has to.
 
Oct 26, 2018
2,057
1,476
230
Really depends on the price and how well current Chromecasts sell (which I have no idea). If current Chromecasts sell a ton and Google sells Stadia for a cheap enough price every potential customer kills two birds with one stone and all focus on Stadia, it might be a hit.
 

bhunachicken

Member
Apr 11, 2018
134
141
180
Okay, I sat down and did some maths. Someone correct me if I'm wrong on this.

They say you'll need a 25Mib connect to do 1080p at 60fps (https://www.google.co.uk/search?q=google+stadia+streaming+speed&oq=google+st&aqs=chrome.0.69i59j69i60j0j69i59j69i57j0.2507j0j7&sourceid=chrome&ie=UTF-8)

1MB is 8Mib. So, that's basically 3.125MB per second (25 / 8 = 3.125).

3.125MB per second is 187.5MB per minute
187.5MB per minute is 11,250MB per hour.

11GB per hour to stream at 1080p. I'm sorry, but no matter what your connection is like, that's shitloads of data.

Now, my ISP only meters my connection between 8am and 8pm, so I could play this all I want after 8pm at night. At weekends, it's completely unmetered.

But otherwise, my cap is 100GB per month. If I didn't have that unmetered connection I would blow throw my data allowance just under 9 hours. I play games for about 1h per day, so I would be able to pack in just 9 days of gaming a month, and only if I used my connection for nothing but that. And like a lot of other people I also have Netflix, browse YouTube, read the news, etc., etc.

I don't see this thing working unless you have a totally unlimited plan that can sustain 55Mib down, to account for shared usage by other connected systems.

Again, someone correct me if I messed up the maths here.
 

Larxia

Member
Jan 25, 2018
266
341
190
France
www.flickr.com
What third world country/state do you live in?
Again with this.... Damn it's crazy how self centered people with great internet are.
Not everyone has high speed internet, and you don't need to be in a third world country to be in that situation, but it just seems like a lot of people who have access to high speed internet straight up refuse to believe that some people don't have access to it. It feels like a meme at this point.
 

Larxia

Member
Jan 25, 2018
266
341
190
France
www.flickr.com
I can see several hundred thousand people supporting this by the end of year one. Maybe 4-6 million by the second year. It'll only only improve in terms of latency. I see word of mouth being huge for this because its convenient.
"Convenience" is what is going to end us :( That exactly fits with what someone answered me when I said that I was so sad that people were ready to accept terrible quality.
https://www.neogaf.com/threads/digital-foundry-google-stadia-specs-analysis-exclusive-performance-testing.1473782/post-253871973

"Laziness.

You'd be surprised how many are willing to sacrifice quality and having control over their stuff for the sake of convenience."
 

Lanrutcon

Member
Feb 19, 2014
7,787
1,134
405
Is it? Never heard of them in Germany.
I'm confident in saying that Germany does not in fact represent the world.

<insert tasteless WW2 joke here>

But seriously: data is expensive in most parts of the world, and you generally get two choices: fast and capped, or slow and uncapped.
 
Last edited:

Krabba

Neo Member
Feb 6, 2018
3
4
100
Stadia will work well for European city-dwellers as most countries have cheap internet, free from data-caps. In Sweden where I'm from, fibre is pretty common. With 5G, even rural areas will have access to low-latency connections.
 
Last edited:

llien

Gold Member
Feb 1, 2017
4,416
1,702
475
I'm confident in saying that Germany does not in fact represent the world.
Let's not "true scotsman" shall we?
Could you name the "majority of the world" countries please? For starters, a Western European country with data caps.

And I mean "internet at home" connection, not mobile.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: Believer1

Romulus

Member
Mar 21, 2019
193
178
155
"Convenience" is what is going to end us :( That exactly fits with what someone answered me when I said that I was so sad that people were ready to accept terrible quality.
https://www.neogaf.com/threads/digital-foundry-google-stadia-specs-analysis-exclusive-performance-testing.1473782/post-253871973

"Laziness.

You'd be surprised how many are willing to sacrifice quality and having control over their stuff for the sake of convenience."

Agreed. Theres alot of people that will accept crap for convenience, but I don't expect Stadia to be crap for long.
I'm just wondering what argument will be against Stadia/streaming if its 90-95% as responsive as traditional gaming, but a fraction of the price? That will come much sooner than people expect imo. I guess naysayers will say that they like the retro look of having physical console under their tv.
 
Last edited:

Larxia

Member
Jan 25, 2018
266
341
190
France
www.flickr.com
Agreed. Theres alot of people that will accept crap for convenience, but I don't expect Stadia to be crap for long.
I'm just wondering what argument will be against Stadia/streaming if its 90-95% as responsive as traditional gaming, but a fraction of the price? That will come much sooner than people expect imo. I guess naysayers will say that they like the retro look of having physical console under their tv.
No matter what, it will still remains a video feed instead of a real time video game, it's really different, and something I really don't want. You are turning a pure, raw clean source, into a compressed media, it will always be noticeable. When I record videos locally at even 50 mbps, you can clearly notice that it's a video and not a real time game. It's maybe less noticeable on a TV from distance, but on a monitor it's clearly noticeable, video just doesn't have that pristine, pure look that real time rendering has.
 

Bryank75

Gold Member
Jan 12, 2018
1,285
1,212
375
Ireland
Google has no investment in gaming, they just switched a load of servers over to use for this opportunity to make cheap money, people supporting this are going to really screw up the industry. Just look at how much they've been fined in less than 2 years for anti-competitive practice.

https://edition.cnn.com/2019/03/20/tech/google-eu-antitrust/index.html

"The tech company has now been fined €8.2 billion ($9.3 billion) in total by Europe since 2017. Money collected from the fines will be handed to EU member states."

You're going to see Google benefit in every conceivable way and you are going to see customers and developers get shafted.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Believer1

Lanrutcon

Member
Feb 19, 2014
7,787
1,134
405
Let's not "true scotsman" shall we?true scotsman
Could you name the "majority of the world" countries please? For starters, a Western European country with data caps.
Nope. Original poster inferred that only third world countries have data caps. He can start listing all the countries with caps, and then we'll talk.

Edit: After some Googling I'm now curious: things have changed in the last decade, so how prevalent are caps these days? I was fairly confident of my statement, but now not so much. Perhaps a poll is in order.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: Believer1 and llien

Quezacolt

Member
Jan 8, 2019
96
111
160
Let's not "true scotsman" shall we?
Could you name the "majority of the world" countries please? For starters, a Western European country with data caps.

And I mean "internet at home" connection, not mobile.
I have friends that live in belgium and always complained about reaching their data cap. If im not wrong, UK also has data caps. I'm sure there's more, but those are the ones i know specifically.
 

Fuz

Member
Jun 8, 2009
3,807
2,206
785
Cagliari, Italy
The better question is: what first world country do you live in? Data caps are the norm for the majority of the world.
America is not "the majority of the world", you people need to learn this once and for all.
you generally get two choices: fast and capped, or slow and uncapped
I have fast and uncapped. Like, if I have to guess, pretty much all of Europe.
 
Last edited:

CeeJay

Member
Mar 9, 2014
347
196
320
I have friends that live in belgium and always complained about reaching their data cap. If im not wrong, UK also has data caps. I'm sure there's more, but those are the ones i know specifically.
UK here too and no caps. I don't know anyone who does have a cap either. A quick look at the packages generally available from all the main suppliers and you have to look pretty hard to find a package that has a cap. Caps have not been widespread in the UK for probably over 10 years now. Also, for mobile contracts we are starting to see mid-range packages where you can use streaming services without it going on your monthly cap.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Believer1

ethomaz

Member
Mar 19, 2013
22,509
1,428
520
36
Brazil
I can see several hundred thousand people supporting this by the end of year one. Maybe 4-6 million by the second year. It'll only only improve in terms of latency. I see word of mouth being huge for this because its convenient.
How they will improve the latency over the actual lighting speeds of Fiber? Are there any magical new tech that overcome the speed of light?

It is easy to say it will improve but hard to archive when there is no tech available to that.

Maybe Google start to put a server inside each subscriptor's house... wait that will be a console I guess.
 
Last edited:

Ozrimandias

Member
Jun 21, 2018
400
276
200
Agree, "Lower the expectations"......... but most than a half of Gaf aparently are losing their minds on this.
 

LordRaptor

Member
Aug 20, 2015
9,573
392
305
Let's not "true scotsman" shall we?
Could you name the "majority of the world" countries please? For starters, a Western European country with data caps.

And I mean "internet at home" connection, not mobile.
Bro, its the internet, just assume when someone starts talking about how 'the world' is that they're american and they're talking about america
 

wutnau

Member
Sep 18, 2017
1,805
1,668
260
Or Denmark.. only on cellular
In Finland not cellular even. You only pay for the theoretical max speed, but the data is unlimited (no throttling after a certain point or anything like that).