Google formally unveils the "Stadia" launching in 2019
- Thread starter BAD
- Start date
This was 100% what I expected.
I feel completely neutral about it. I've had a decent time with Playstation Now and I'm sure this will be an upgrade. I'll always prefer to run games natively but this will be one of many services that will provide a decent alternative in some use cases.
So yeah, I don't consider this a game changer or anything. Just a natural evolution / alternative. Maybe it will take off, maybe it won't, maybe it'll take 20 years, who knows. Basically, my reaction is: "eh, sure."
I feel completely neutral about it. I've had a decent time with Playstation Now and I'm sure this will be an upgrade. I'll always prefer to run games natively but this will be one of many services that will provide a decent alternative in some use cases.
So yeah, I don't consider this a game changer or anything. Just a natural evolution / alternative. Maybe it will take off, maybe it won't, maybe it'll take 20 years, who knows. Basically, my reaction is: "eh, sure."
Value is probably going to be the main thing this will have going for it. I'm expecting a model where specific games aren't bought, maybe Netflix style.
Goodluck finding those kids outside US, UK, etc.
A lot of countries still don't have netflix ffs
It was definitely a stream aimed at devs more so than consumers, hence the lack of pricing and game announcements. Which is kinda dumb given how much hype they gave it, but hey.
As for Stadia itself, I think it's pretty neat, and to expect it to fail like OnLive is pretty silly. The world is a very different place now, more people than ever have solid internet connections and the attitude towards streaming has not only gotten better, it's practically normalized. Also it's Google. If you search a game, its Stadia link will pop up on the side-bar. That's probably the easiest and best marketing possible.
But it's not all doom and gloom and it almost certainly won't replace physical media, at least not yet. Eventually, in like 10-15 years, sure. But you can still buy CDs, you can grab a Blu-Ray, even DVDs are still manufactured because there are people who haven't gotten into the streaming ecosystem. IIRC even Netflix physically distributes its shows and movies eventually.
So yeah they'll just co-exist and I think that's kinda great? I'll still buy the games I like to own, like Final Fantasy, but if I can casually stream a fantastic-looking Ubisoft game I wouldn't otherwise buy outright, that's great. Just hope the monthly streaming fee is under £15.
As for Stadia itself, I think it's pretty neat, and to expect it to fail like OnLive is pretty silly. The world is a very different place now, more people than ever have solid internet connections and the attitude towards streaming has not only gotten better, it's practically normalized. Also it's Google. If you search a game, its Stadia link will pop up on the side-bar. That's probably the easiest and best marketing possible.
But it's not all doom and gloom and it almost certainly won't replace physical media, at least not yet. Eventually, in like 10-15 years, sure. But you can still buy CDs, you can grab a Blu-Ray, even DVDs are still manufactured because there are people who haven't gotten into the streaming ecosystem. IIRC even Netflix physically distributes its shows and movies eventually.
So yeah they'll just co-exist and I think that's kinda great? I'll still buy the games I like to own, like Final Fantasy, but if I can casually stream a fantastic-looking Ubisoft game I wouldn't otherwise buy outright, that's great. Just hope the monthly streaming fee is under £15.
Nothing about this felt compelling. It's a cool idea, but it seems like they don't have any substance. No official games, just tech demos. It was clearly a GDC talk, but even that felt..... Not great?
We know it works with the AC: Odyssey test, but it's very clear Google hasn't gone all in with this yet. They haven't figured all of this out, and need to have a more clear vision for a customer facing address.
We know it works with the AC: Odyssey test, but it's very clear Google hasn't gone all in with this yet. They haven't figured all of this out, and need to have a more clear vision for a customer facing address.
So like... Googled released the streaming games platform when they stopped selling the dedicated games console that they never made?
idk what you're saying here, other than suggesting that Google releasing a streaming only platform whose initial primary market is a country with notoriously shitty ISP will catch on the same way that flawless wireless earbuds, a product that benefits dramatically from being untethered and can be used by anyone with a Bluetooth enabled device, did.
Just saw this and skimmed the OP and... nope.
Hard pass.
I'm sure streaming is gonna be huge at some point but right now I want no part of it.
Hard pass.
I'm sure streaming is gonna be huge at some point but right now I want no part of it.
Anyone who doesn't see anything wrong with the whole concept of game streaming should read Stallman's The Right to Read. We're getting much closer to that grim future if this Stadia thing succeeds.
-No mods.
-No config tweaking.
-No reshade or any other graphical changes.
-No way to bypass bugs, you'll be forced to wait until developers fix them. If they ever do...
-No communities keeping games alive years after release by creating content for them.
-No using cheat engine to counter ugly balances in some single player games.
-No way to check/analize how games are made.
-No way to find secrets or things left on the files.
-No game conservation as we don't know if every game will be always available.
-No enough speed in most countries for this kind of streaming to work.
-No control whatsoever over any part of the games.
For example Skyrim wouldn't have survived so many years after release if Stadia was out back then, as no mods would've been released for it.
Google controls it all for you. Sorry but this is a massive no for me.
-No config tweaking.
-No reshade or any other graphical changes.
-No way to bypass bugs, you'll be forced to wait until developers fix them. If they ever do...
-No communities keeping games alive years after release by creating content for them.
-No using cheat engine to counter ugly balances in some single player games.
-No way to check/analize how games are made.
-No way to find secrets or things left on the files.
-No game conservation as we don't know if every game will be always available.
-No enough speed in most countries for this kind of streaming to work.
-No control whatsoever over any part of the games.
For example Skyrim wouldn't have survived so many years after release if Stadia was out back then, as no mods would've been released for it.
Google controls it all for you. Sorry but this is a massive no for me.
That's assuming the experience is at least identical to running a game natively on hardware. I doubt it will or can be for a great many games.
I'm pretty much in the same camp as well. Asymmetrical or we riot!
I think it's cool. I don't think I'm getting Fiber in my area until 2020-2021, according to my ISP, so maybe, by then, this is a fleshed out service with some big exclusives. There are a lot of ideas they batted around that sound exciting on the surface, but I don't watch streamers or stream games myself, so that feature is kind of useless to me, but yeah, the whole being able to stream AAA games on my phone while I'm at work or whatever, that's big, but I also believe MS and Sony are both planning something similar. As with every gaming platform, it comes down to exclusives. I'm still excited to see what those end up being.
Good for google, but not for me.
I suppose it is a gamepass situation...? Like a monthly subscription that includes the platform and the games. But yuck for another subscription service.
Also, data cap is still a thing, even in the Bay Area. The worst part is that many places in the Bay Area has basically only AT&T or Comcast only. AT&T is a rip-off for the price they are charging for 50 Mbps and still running on DSL. Comcast has shit CS and been increasing their price every damn year here.
I suppose it is a gamepass situation...? Like a monthly subscription that includes the platform and the games. But yuck for another subscription service.
Also, data cap is still a thing, even in the Bay Area. The worst part is that many places in the Bay Area has basically only AT&T or Comcast only. AT&T is a rip-off for the price they are charging for 50 Mbps and still running on DSL. Comcast has shit CS and been increasing their price every damn year here.
Three or four posts apart :P
I would make that assumption.
Given that this was done at the Game Developers Conference, I'm not surprised. I actually expected it. I'm a Conference Associate and have been going to the conference for over 10 years. There's usually very little to know consumer related announcements made. This was a little different because it's also debuting tech and Google likes to make a splash.
I'm sure we'll get a lot more consumer friendly conference at E3.
Agreed. Stadium, Stadia for everyone to come together for games. "Gather Around".
Straight ripped from 300 and Gladiator flicks but, I'm in. I dig it!
Yeah looks like Stadia is region locked to Google hardware storefronts. If Google never officially sold hardware through their website in your country you are shit out of luck.
Definitely. Though I wouldn't mind a monthly subscription to access the library of games.
I'm also ok with purchasing the games outright to be be to stream it with Stadia. It'll just be another digital library amongst what's already out there (Steam, uPlay, Origin)
Wait so this counts as a new system, meaning the library is starting from zero essentially? It'll be on devs to port all their games to this, as well as games going forward?
Don't know why I imagined most of the available PC library would work off the bat, kind of unrealistic in hindsight.
Probably already being uploaded, if they haven't already. People do this shit for the classic consoles with Pis and crap so why not I guess. They just miss the point.
Shenanigans! Neither is superior to the other, it's just what you're used to!
One of my favorite things about games is that we don't have those licensing issues like in movies or tv shows where it's it's impossible to buy movies and tv shows (I want to get spiderverse so bad rn but my country is blocked from everything).
and today , it's the first time I ever got "this is unavailable in your country" in a gaming related thing. That leaves a bad taste in my mouth.
and today , it's the first time I ever got "this is unavailable in your country" in a gaming related thing. That leaves a bad taste in my mouth.
So who has the most to fear from this? It has to be microsoft right? They seem to be doing the most similar things.
Nintendo will just be Nintendo like always, thought the portability factor might make it a competitor to the Switch too, I doubt Nintendo's very worried.
And since Sony's making another box and seem to be making that its priority they can just take the whole "actual box and owning games and stuff" stance and a lot of people will (especially on era) will eat it up.
Nintendo will just be Nintendo like always, thought the portability factor might make it a competitor to the Switch too, I doubt Nintendo's very worried.
And since Sony's making another box and seem to be making that its priority they can just take the whole "actual box and owning games and stuff" stance and a lot of people will (especially on era) will eat it up.