DeltaPolarBear
Member
As I already said, what made you think you could get fast and stable internet while traveling? Wouldn't it be better to bring offline games with you when travelling?
-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
Google Stadia - The Future or A Complete Disaster
- Thread starter Vawn
- Start date
The Alien
Banned
Future or a disaster? Its both.
It is the future of gaming (good or bad). I think MS and Sony slowly moving there.
However, I believe Stadia is DOA. Maybe at the end of next gen we'll see things like XCloud start to succeed as an option. Then we'll look back and say "Remember Stadia?"
Google's model sucks anyway. A monthly fee similar to XBox Live without GWG, Game Pass option (+$5 per month), or a history of excellent service. Couple that with full price for games you wont own and zero physical options. I havent seen an influx of devs rushing to the platform either.
It is the future of gaming (good or bad). I think MS and Sony slowly moving there.
However, I believe Stadia is DOA. Maybe at the end of next gen we'll see things like XCloud start to succeed as an option. Then we'll look back and say "Remember Stadia?"
Google's model sucks anyway. A monthly fee similar to XBox Live without GWG, Game Pass option (+$5 per month), or a history of excellent service. Couple that with full price for games you wont own and zero physical options. I havent seen an influx of devs rushing to the platform either.
sonomamashine
Member
so negative your argument is limited to assassin's creed.I would love for my mum to come round one day and show me a new game she's been playing on her phone called Assassin's Creed Odyssey.
GoodIdeaBadIdea
Member
It will be a huge success if they are in it for the long haul, currently there is not much use for it but as more and more areas open up to 5G access this could be the future of gaming. 5G is the real game changer for them and it's supposed to spread across the US over the next few years. So you all might be wrong with your votes but only time will tell.
BusierDonkey
Member
I have a couple friends who have Google everything in their house controlling everything from the lights to the door locks. That's over half of my friends right there who will suck Google's dick just to not have to bother using a light switch anymore. You better believe they'll drink the gravy to avoid pressing the install button in an online store.
DESTROYA
Member
That’s pretty sad
CatLady
Selfishly plays on Xbox Purr-ies X
I have 5G. I also have less then zero interest in Stadia, especially since it's offered by Skynet.
Sentenza
Member
Nothing will ever convince me that Stadia, as plenty of other streaming services before it, will be anything more than an hilariously mis-targeted service.
I mean, who's supposed to be the target audience here? People who HATE having a quality experience while gaming, that are "too poor to buy hardware every few years" but at the same time wealthy enough to pay for a low latency broadband connection, a recurring subscription AND are willing to overpay software they will never actually own?
It feels like a textbook case of "solution in search of its problem".
I mean, who's supposed to be the target audience here? People who HATE having a quality experience while gaming, that are "too poor to buy hardware every few years" but at the same time wealthy enough to pay for a low latency broadband connection, a recurring subscription AND are willing to overpay software they will never actually own?
It feels like a textbook case of "solution in search of its problem".
Last edited:
alabtrosMyster
Banned
I can't decide, something tells me it's just another PS Now, something tells me Google may have implemented it in a way more interesting manner, with the right features, etc. so it makes sense that we pay attention to what happens with it.
I don't like how the charge model is, it's too close to a traditional console... with a monthly fee and a base fee to buy the games, I don't think it makes sense and it it came from any other company than Google nobody would pay attention to them.
Sign me in for a PS5 any day of the week!
So I tend to think it won't catch on, but there is room for me to be wrong.
I don't like how the charge model is, it's too close to a traditional console... with a monthly fee and a base fee to buy the games, I don't think it makes sense and it it came from any other company than Google nobody would pay attention to them.
Sign me in for a PS5 any day of the week!
So I tend to think it won't catch on, but there is room for me to be wrong.
#Phonepunk#
Banned
The Future Disaster
joe_zazen
Member
Idk, the success of facebook, mobile gaming, and Amazon tells me otherwise.
Dr. Claus
Vincit qui se vincit
Facebook was one of the best options for its time and has been shown to be dying over the past few years. Mobile Gaming is not considered the best option anymore and many core devs/publishers have moved away from focusing on it (just take a look at Square Enix who was pushing it super hard before), and Amazon is the worst choice? Since when?
DESTROYA
Member
I don’t think there are enough casuals that will support this long term, if you ask a kid what game system they want they’ll tell you one of the big 3, any real gamer will tell you the same and PC. That’s where all the money comes from, not casuals looking for a cheap alternative that you still have to by games for at full price.
joe_zazen
Member
Since they stopped having best prices and caring about counterfeit items. You buy from amazon, even if the seller is amazon.com, and you are not guaranteed genuine merch or a good price as they are now big enough and the competition so nonexistent that they can start squeezing their customers the same way they have been squeezing their suppliers and governments. Bezos is not your friend. He is a psychopath (most likely) with ties to the cia.
Last edited:
Dr. Claus
Vincit qui se vincit
Cool. And? Amazon wasn't the worst and still isn't the worst place to buy from. Not saying they are great or even good. Just that there are far worse places to purchase from.
joe_zazen
Member
Point was people don't choose the best option, and winners aren’t the ‘best’ companies. So, whether stadia is best or not wont be the determining factor. Thats all.
I cant remeber the guys name, but some dude won the Nobel prize in Economics for coming up with the insight that people don’t behave rationally and those economic models that have that as their base are inherently flawed.
Last edited:
Dr. Claus
Vincit qui se vincit
My point wasn't that they would choose the best option, just that they wouldn't choose the worst option. Which, in all 3 of the companies/products you listed, they were not the worst option. Stadia *is* the worst option.
Last edited:
mango drank
Member
There's a free tier (Stadia Base: no monthly fee) but it looks like it's coming only next year.
Trimesh
Banned
But in the end, it doesn't matter how much it actually costs - what matters is the amount of perceived value it provides to the customer. What you really saying is that this is not a business, since the cost of providing the service exceeds what people consider it to be worth. Which is precisely why I think it will be an abject failure.
Last edited:
Yes, but your games are more or less locked in. (Pray they don't alter the agreement further, there is no free lunch) I'm not going to feel sorry for any of the stupid bastards that get sucked into this, when the obvious occurs.
"You can check anytime you want, but you can never leave..."
Last edited:
DeltaPolarBear
Member
I agree.
Basically, the same issue with PS3's original launch price; it was sold at a heavy loss and technically great value from the manufacturer's perspective. But the consumers just don't see it worth that much on their end.
In the end, you had to sell at what the customer think it is worth. And if you can't make a profit at that price, then the issue is your entire buisness model.
EverydayBeast
thinks Halo Infinite is a new graphical benchmark
Interesting enough Sony and MS are countering Stadia with streaming services of their own. I got to say, Google seems confident with this service.
I wouldn't say Sony is countering. They were invested in streaming years ago.
Vawn
Banned
Sony was so bothered by Google's streaming service they traveled back in time to release theirs years before Google even announced Stadia.
I think a big point of failure is this :
I tend to disagree strongly here that ISP's are on the side of the consumers. If Stadia even remotely takes off triggering the next big internet boom expect an appropriate increase in monthly bills as well.
Either that or expect a "gaming package" offer from your ISP, where gaming traffic will get prioritized over say movie/streaming traffic - and that (from my understanding) opens up another can of worms regarding that old belief that all network traffic should be treated equally by ISP's.
I don't believe Stadia will be any cheaper than your typical retail game over time. The costs will just be shuffled elsewhere instead of an upfront cost.
TL;DR - Watch your ISP bills very carefully if you're planning to jump in. Stadia fees and purchase costs in addition to ISP "upgrade" costs and potential equipment rental can balloon costs really fast, potentially to the point where it's just cheaper and less headache inducing to just buy a retail game instead of streaming it.
Google Stadia head Phil Harrison believes ISPs will lift data caps
Stadia chief Phil Harrison says that ISPs will raise data caps for game streaming services in the future.www.androidcentral.com
I tend to disagree strongly here that ISP's are on the side of the consumers. If Stadia even remotely takes off triggering the next big internet boom expect an appropriate increase in monthly bills as well.
Either that or expect a "gaming package" offer from your ISP, where gaming traffic will get prioritized over say movie/streaming traffic - and that (from my understanding) opens up another can of worms regarding that old belief that all network traffic should be treated equally by ISP's.
I don't believe Stadia will be any cheaper than your typical retail game over time. The costs will just be shuffled elsewhere instead of an upfront cost.
TL;DR - Watch your ISP bills very carefully if you're planning to jump in. Stadia fees and purchase costs in addition to ISP "upgrade" costs and potential equipment rental can balloon costs really fast, potentially to the point where it's just cheaper and less headache inducing to just buy a retail game instead of streaming it.
HeresJohnny
Member
I’d forgotten it was even coming. I don’t think it succeeds and I don’t think it fails. I think it remains completely irrelevant. And that’s good if it does imo, Google is scary and streaming sounds like shit to me.
Spukc
always chasing the next thrill
Tbh Big tech companies growing like crazy over the back of ISP's is a bit scummy.
I know they do help improving infrastructure.
But they def need to put in more to make everyone better.
Fyi datacaps are long gone here.
Even mobile is "unlimited"
Stadia in general, will most probably be more expensive (than native console playing) if they plan on generating positive margin.
- More hardware is needed, as there is hardware in the datacenter and you'll have either have an existing piece of equipment or buy (thin client) to play games.
- More electricity is being used as you have more hardware to power.
- Vastly more internet bandwidth is used.... on both ends.
- The hardware located in the datacenter costs more to house per square foot than your home.
- You are now paying someone to maintain your console in a datacenter.
Even, if Google is generating their own electricity and is getting government kickbacks, I would imagine the electricity usage on both ends will make that a negative.
Trimesh
Banned
I've never understood this argument. People get an internet connection because they want to connect to services on the internet - suggesting that the most popular services are somehow a "problem" is absurd, because they are the primary reason that the ISPs even have a business in the first place.
I honestly suspect the real primary reason for all the pissing and moaning about services like Netflix is that most US ISPs are also in the content business, and they would obviously much rather you bought one of their overpriced "content packages" than use some other company, but are not willing to say so in as many words because it would be bad PR.
Spukc
always chasing the next thrill
With netflix 4k youtube 4k twitch etc etc
Bandwidth use has skyrocketed
But isp costs are about the same here actually they went down by a LOT
lukilladog
Member
Stadia in general, will most probably be more expensive (than native console playing) if they plan on generating positive margin.
- More hardware is needed, as there is hardware in the datacenter and you'll have either have an existing piece of equipment or buy (thin client) to play games.
- More electricity is being used as you have more hardware to power.
- Vastly more internet bandwidth is used.... on both ends.
- The hardware located in the datacenter costs more to house per square foot than your home.
- You are now paying someone to maintain your console in a datacenter.
Even, if Google is generating their own electricity and is getting government kickbacks, I would imagine the electricity usage on both ends will make that a negative.
One unit of the hardware will obviously serve several different users during the course of a day, how many they need to make it profitable?, who knows, but this pricing might be just introductory.
Bradamante3D
Member
Pretty sure the long-term business model they have in mind is: monthly subscription fee + free games or no sub fee + 60$ games. Similiar to how car sharing models work. Currently it's both so they an milk early adopters. A few months down the road they will offer a "free" model and at that point people might come in.
It's a bit naive to think that Google expects this whole operation to return a profit with the next three, maybe even five or seven years. They will be willing to accept heavy losses if that guarantees long term success. Stadia was probably not even designed with western market in mind. Intead they are looking at the BRIC+ countries that will have 5G internet soonish and Statia offers a way to play high quality multiplayer games on mobile platforms.
It's a bit naive to think that Google expects this whole operation to return a profit with the next three, maybe even five or seven years. They will be willing to accept heavy losses if that guarantees long term success. Stadia was probably not even designed with western market in mind. Intead they are looking at the BRIC+ countries that will have 5G internet soonish and Statia offers a way to play high quality multiplayer games on mobile platforms.
Trimesh
Banned
True, but providing that bandwidth has also become a lot cheaper because of improvements in datacomms technology. I find it extremely impressive - of course, I'm old enough to remember when 100mbit Ethernet was considered blindingly fast and how a bit later $1000/port was regarded as a reasonable price for GbE.
Vawn
Banned
Unless I missed something, nothing they have said would indicate this is their plans at all.
Unless I missed something, nothing in their history would indicate this is in their plans at all.
Last edited:
F
Foamy
Unconfirmed Member
I'd like Stadia to be successful for the simple fact that competition is vital to keep advancing in the games industry.
That being said it's not for me as I do my gaming on a high end 75inch 4K tv and I want the vary best resolutions and frame rates possible (from a console).
That being said it's not for me as I do my gaming on a high end 75inch 4K tv and I want the vary best resolutions and frame rates possible (from a console).
Justin9mm
Member
It'll be like that new restaurant that opened up and everyone wants to go and try it and for the first few months the line up is out the door. You finally get to go and try it and realise the experience is average at best and overpriced, you don't go back and you move on with your life. Now that everyone who wanted to try it has been and shares the same experience, the restaurant is quiet then after a while shuts down because it can't sustain it's business. I give it 1 year or so before they abandon it.
Boaty McBoatface
Member
It really needed to be the Netflix of gaming for it to work. Who wants to buy games on a rental basis?
Krabba
Neo Member
The technology and infrastructure needed to create low latency, high resolution streamed gaming is here. Google is one of only a few companies with the skill, experience, and infrastructure to pull it off.
Will they manage to create something that is good enough? We'll know when we get our hands on it.
Some people are worried Stadia will fail and Google will pull out. No. They'll keep going until they get it right.
The gaming industry's market value is $134.9 billion and growing. Google missed the social media train. They won't miss this one.
Will they manage to create something that is good enough? We'll know when we get our hands on it.
Some people are worried Stadia will fail and Google will pull out. No. They'll keep going until they get it right.
The gaming industry's market value is $134.9 billion and growing. Google missed the social media train. They won't miss this one.
PS Now is more or less that and very few customers. Matter of fact, 40% of the gains they got in a year on PS Now probably has more to do with the ability to download the games - not stream them. Very few customers either way.
DeltaPolarBear
Member
Game streaming has three issues;
1. It is not superior to traditional gaming.
2. It is not cheaper than traditional gaming.
3. It is not more portable to traditional gaming (because portable internet, hotel intent, and backpacker internet are certainly not going to be good for streaming)
Where is the value proposition?
Last edited: