Google Stadia Pro (4K/60, 5.1 surround) $9.99 a month. Stadia Base (1080/60) requires no subscription.

BlueWolfKing

Member
Nov 22, 2018
9
New York
Despite the Extreme negativity towards Stadia (which is justifiable, I suppose)I will be Looking forward to it as I've pre-orderd the Founders edition and a extra controller for my younger brother. And if at launch everything works out and I get to play most games at 60fps like say Final fantasy XV and Ghost recon : Breakpoint along with destiny 2 then it will be worth it for me(more so that I dont have data caps) Mind you I already A ps4 (which I just bought the days of play model),a Xbox One X, and a Switch. On the positive side I cant wait to see where this all goes and I cant wait to make new friends on this platform! (I'm kinda new here so forgive me if i jumble words together and dont make sense)
 

JB1981

Member
Oct 28, 2017
7,538
So, I tried PS Now last night and the input lag was pretty noticeable. What will Google be doing with Stadia to improve on that? Also, I have basic Comcast cable and just tested my speed on speedtest. Would the below result be enough for 4k 60fps?

 

riverfr0zen

Member
Oct 27, 2017
1,350
Manhattan, New York
So, I tried PS Now last night and the input lag was pretty noticeable. What will Google be doing with Stadia to improve on that? Also, I have basic Comcast cable and just tested my speed on speedtest. Would the below result be enough for 4k 60fps?

Your download is okay but your upload is below the requirements (this is typical for cable Internet).



As far as what Stadia does that improves input lag upon current PS Now, it would be the edge networks that Google deploys (a network edge closer to your home), and the controller communicating directly with the network. This is not including any other "secret sauce" that they may or may not have in their implementation.
 

JB1981

Member
Oct 28, 2017
7,538
Your download is okay but your upload is below the requirements (this is typical for cable Internet).



As far as what Stadia does that improves input lag upon current PS Now, it would be the edge networks that Google deploys (a network edge closer to your home), and the controller communicating directly with the network. This is not including any other "secret sauce" that they may or may not have in their implementation.
Thanks for the response. :)

FIOS is an option in my area but I've been getting on just fine with basic Comcast for my purposes. I believe FIOS has much better upload speeds than cable internet?
 
OP
OP
Cpt-GargameL

Cpt-GargameL

Member
Oct 27, 2017
3,795
Thanks for the response. :)

FIOS is an option in my area but I've been getting on just fine with basic Comcast for my purposes. I believe FIOS has much better upload speeds than cable internet?
FIOS does since it's a direct line to you and you only. It isn't on a node like Comcast. Same thing goes for AT&T U-Verse. You get all the upload/download you pay for and sometimes faster (based on my experience with U-Verse)
 

David Wang

Member
Feb 15, 2018
47
I'm able to stream 4K HDR Netflix on my TV over 4G hotspot, so I imagine it'll be fine. My hotspot's download speed is 52mbps. That said, I have a fibre line anyway.
Streaming a movie vs a game is different as you can buffer a movie.

I don't think that can happen with games unless Google invented some new technology
 

riverfr0zen

Member
Oct 27, 2017
1,350
Manhattan, New York
Thanks for the response. :)

FIOS is an option in my area but I've been getting on just fine with basic Comcast for my purposes. I believe FIOS has much better upload speeds than cable internet?
Yeah. With FIOS you typically get parity between upload/download.

That mbps chart is upload and not download speed right?
Yeah, the chart is talking about things like fps, image quality, sound, which are all reliant on download. Wish they had a chart or numbers on upload/latency for things like input lag.

The other factor that Google hasn't really talked about is latency.

Download speed is important for streaming games but it’s not the only—and may not be the most important—spec that comes into play. Latency or ping is the time it takes for data to travel from the input device to the server and back. If latency is too high, there’s a noticeable lag between when the player initiates a command and when the game responds. Low latency is essential for games like multiplayer shooters and racing games where timing is critical. High latency can be a game killer.

How low does latency have to be to provide a good gaming experience? It depends on what kind of game you’re playing. In general, a ping of 20ms (milliseconds) or lower is good for any type of game. Pings between 20 and 100ms are good for most games but the closer you get to 100ms, the more of a problem it will be if you’re playing a timing-critical game. Pings between 100 and 150ms are doable but you may not like it. Over 150ms is not good.
 
Last edited:

riotous

Member
Oct 25, 2017
3,954
Seattle
Streaming a movie vs a game is different as you can buffer a movie.

I don't think that can happen with games unless Google invented some new technology
As we’ve seen with Google’s stats 4K game streaming also requires way more data.

They likely can’t compress video anywhere near as much as a video streaming service or even a service like Twitch (Twitch is not really “live”, it’s delayed and buffered). That does relate to not being able to buffer sorta though; compression algorithms rely on knowing what frames are coming up and having time to analyze and compress based on those frames. Game streaming can’t use future frames to predict and compress it has to be as immediate as possible and also has to decompress immediately on the other end if any compression is used. The more you compress the more time it takes on both ends and you end up with input lag. Similar to why you want post processing effects turned off on your TV for gaming because they create similar “buffering” of frames.

So Twitch can have you watching what a streamer was doing 5 seconds ago and have plenty of frames from which to calculate compression effectively and cloud gaming can’t.

People really need to in general make less comparisons between video and game streaming, some comparisons are valid but most come at least with huge caveats.
 

Afrikan

Member
Oct 28, 2017
3,669
With more Streaming Gaming services coming, and most likely larger game downloads/patches for next gen hardware.... do yall think ISPs that currently have no data caps, will feel forced to start to have data caps?

This is not taking into consideration the current and future 8k TV owners who's only way to take advantage of their TVs is to look for 8k Video streams. Rakuten plans to offer 8k streams by the end of the year.

So sure that market will be small... but with also more and more people getting 4K TVs, streaming 4k shows like it's nothing... I don't know. Seems like it's too good to be true that these no-cap ISPs, will stick with it.

Now if Google expands it's internet service, they will most likely have it where certain other Google services don't count against their cap (if they do add a cap)...or just tout that they are one of the few (only?) ISPs still left with no cap, to get new customers.
 

Lokimaster

Member
May 12, 2019
106
Even tho this isnt really going to go anywhere anytime soon, If Apple does not allow it on there devices, then Stadia is out of luck completely. I don't see how it can survive another 2 years. Could be another "google fiber" project here.
 

Dreamwriter

Member
Oct 27, 2017
2,923
Even tho this isnt really going to go anywhere anytime soon, If Apple does not allow it on there devices, then Stadia is out of luck completely. I don't see how it can survive another 2 years. Could be another "google fiber" project here.
Seems a bit of a stretch to say that if people can't play on Mac, then Stadia will fail. Just based on the numbers of people who will play on their TV, people who will play on PC, and people who will play on Mac, that last number will not be high enough to break Stadia finances if it was lost. (Although, as riverfr0zen mentioned, all this requires is Chrome, and you can get Chrome on a Mac).
 

Lokimaster

Member
May 12, 2019
106
Seems a bit of a stretch to say that if people can't play on Mac, then Stadia will fail. Just based on the numbers of people who will play on their TV, people who will play on PC, and people who will play on Mac, that last number will not be high enough to break Stadia finances if it was lost. (Although, as riverfr0zen mentioned, all this requires is Chrome, and you can get Chrome on a Mac).

I was more talking about apple iPhones. But yes if they don't allow it on there, stadia will not go anywhere. Its barely going to go anywhere now as it is.
 

khamakazee

Member
Oct 27, 2017
3,247
I was more talking about apple iPhones. But yes if they don't allow it on there, stadia will not go anywhere. Its barely going to go anywhere now as it is.
They have the money to keep it going and it's really not that much of an investment for them since they have the infrastructure anyways, sounds like you just want it to fail.
 

Lokimaster

Member
May 12, 2019
106
They have the money to keep it going and it's really not that much of an investment for them since they have the infrastructure anyways, sounds like you just want it to fail.

They had the money when the google fiber thing was a thing too, and we saw how that went. They also had the money when they tried to go up against facebook. We saw how that went. Money wont save you in everything. Im just being real about the situation. there are already platforms that play these games natively. Streaming them wont change anything especially not being on Apple IOS phone devices. Thats what I said. For a streaming service, you don't have that user base, it will fail. You and I know this.
 

Dreamwriter

Member
Oct 27, 2017
2,923
They had the money when the google fiber thing was a thing too, and we saw how that went. They also had the money when they tried to go up against facebook. We saw how that went. Money wont save you in everything. Im just being real about the situation. there are already platforms that play these games natively. Streaming them wont change anything especially not being on Apple IOS phone devices. Thats what I said. For a streaming service, you don't have that user base, it will fail. You and I know this.
I don't understand this point of view. I don't think the phone market is the "do or die" market for next-gen console gaming. I don't know anybody who would pay $50 for a game to play on their phone. It's a really neat feature, kinda like Nintendo Switch, but not one they are financially dependent on.
 

khamakazee

Member
Oct 27, 2017
3,247
They had the money when the google fiber thing was a thing too, and we saw how that went. They also had the money when they tried to go up against facebook. We saw how that went. Money wont save you in everything. Im just being real about the situation. there are already platforms that play these games natively. Streaming them wont change anything especially not being on Apple IOS phone devices. Thats what I said. For a streaming service, you don't have that user base, it will fail. You and I know this.
Difference is Google already has the ability so it's very little investment. Same goes for Microsoft and xCloud. Once you remove your bias against streaming you will realize it is the future of gaming as a supplement, not a replacement.
 

Bowl0l

Member
Oct 27, 2017
1,226
They have the money to keep it going and it's really not that much of an investment for them since they have the infrastructure anyways, sounds like you just want it to fail.
Google had to purchase AMD hardware to provide for 4K cloud gaming, design controllers and add support for popular controllers, which probably isn't cheap.

XBoxOne had a plan: A box that don't play used games. Money didn't make sure the plan is executed.
 
OP
OP
Cpt-GargameL

Cpt-GargameL

Member
Oct 27, 2017
3,795
I don't understand this point of view. I don't think the phone market is the "do or die" market for next-gen console gaming. I don't know anybody who would pay $50 for a game to play on their phone. It's a really neat feature, kinda like Nintendo Switch, but not one they are financially dependent on.
Precisely.

A phone is just one of many ways people will get to play with Stadia on, not the definitive option. We all know the majority of users will play on their PC, laptops or TVs. Phones is the lesser of it all when it comes to options.
 

Lokimaster

Member
May 12, 2019
106
Difference is Google already has the ability so it's very little investment. Same goes for Microsoft and xCloud. Once you remove your bias against streaming you will realize it is the future of gaming as a supplement, not a replacement.

Nah just seems like you cant take a different view or an opinion from yours. But thats fine.
 

Lokimaster

Member
May 12, 2019
106
Google had to purchase AMD hardware to provide for 4K cloud gaming, design controllers and add support for popular controllers, which probably isn't cheap.

XBoxOne had a plan: A box that don't play used games. Money didn't make sure the plan is executed.
Yea money isn't going to save you from anything. I mean we can look at MS with Xbox and see that.
 

khamakazee

Member
Oct 27, 2017
3,247

Lokimaster

Member
May 12, 2019
106
Of course I can which is why I said it will be supplementary. Honest question, do you want it to fail?



They stopped making Xbox systems and investing in games? Wow, talk about a E3 spoiler!

I don't care for it period, I don't care if it fails or not. It wont take over mainstream from what it looks like anyway. If it has no iOS phone support i don't give it more than 2 years out here.

You could have fooled me the way Xbox One games looked from 2016- till now. Buying up some double A studios isnt going to really change much. The way you guys talk about money, you would think the xbox from MS would have done better with the OG Xbox and the Xbox One.Its not about money at all period. Its about having a product that the mass will want. This doenst look like it at all. But we will see.
 

Dreamwriter

Member
Oct 27, 2017
2,923
I don't care for it period, I don't care if it fails or not. It wont take over mainstream from what it looks like anyway. If it has no iOS phone support i don't give it more than 2 years out here.
PS4 doesn't have iOS support, XBox One doesn't have iOS support, Switch doesn't have iOS support. Why does Stadia need it to survive? You still haven't explained why you think iOS support is vital for the survival of a next-gen game service. I don't think many people will want to be playing Doom Eternal on an iPhone.

Plus they haven't said it won't have iOS support, it needs Chrome, which is on iOS.
 

Lokimaster

Member
May 12, 2019
106
PS4 doesn't have iOS support, XBox One doesn't have iOS support, Switch doesn't have iOS support. Why does Stadia need it to survive? You still haven't explained why you think iOS support is vital for the survival of a next-gen game service. I don't think many people will want to be playing Doom Eternal on an iPhone.

Plus they haven't said it won't have iOS support, it needs Chrome, which is on iOS.

Yikes.
Im not sure if you are getting it. All those system you name have native box support. they don't just rely on streaming. If you are going to rely on streaming, you need the biggest company out there on mobile on your side, which is the iPhone. Its not that hard to get.

Where do you think Google wants most of their support to come from? Mobile right? thats where they will and can make most of their money. A set alone box for streaming games at home is not going to do so well.
 
OP
OP
Cpt-GargameL

Cpt-GargameL

Member
Oct 27, 2017
3,795
PS4 doesn't have iOS support, XBox One doesn't have iOS support, Switch doesn't have iOS support. Why does Stadia need it to survive? You still haven't explained why you think iOS support is vital for the survival of a next-gen game service. I don't think many people will want to be playing Doom Eternal on an iPhone.

Plus they haven't said it won't have iOS support, it needs Chrome, which is on iOS.
Because it needs to come out the gate swinging with iOS support or else it's doomed!

Google has been fine on it's own without iOS support and so have SONY, Microsoft and Nintendo.

I'm thinking the mentality about it failing if it doesn't have iOS support (which it will since it's just running on Chrome and Chrome is on EVERYTHING) is tied to people who are heavily invested in the Apple ecosystem.

iOS/iPadOS is not a REQUIREMENT. Chrome is and all these iOS/iPadOS devices have Chrome. It'll be supported so I really don't understand the argument.

Phones are the smallest demographics Stadia will target. Yes people will play Stadia on tablets/phones but that's not where the majority of people will be playing on and I guess he thinks it's the opposite.
 

Agent X

Member
Oct 27, 2017
691
New Jersey
iOS/iPadOS is not a REQUIREMENT. Chrome is and all these iOS/iPadOS devices have Chrome. It'll be supported so I really don't understand the argument.
The problem is that--by Google's own statements--the only mobile devices that will be supported initially are Google Pixel 3 series phones. Not iPhones, not other Android phones, not even other Google Pixel brand phones. That tells me quite clearly that Stadia is not compatible with the mobile version of Chrome--if it was, then they'd proudly proclaim this from the four corners of the Earth.

I guess that when playing on mobile devices, you'll need either a dedicated Stadia application, or some kind of plugin for mobile Chrome that will be released at a later time.

I wonder if Google is artificially limiting Stadia to Pixel 3 series phones in an attempt to use Stadia as a selling point for Pixel 3 phones, much like Sony limits the Android version of the PS4 Remote Play app to their own Xperia phones. I don't believe this was a wise strategy for Sony (which they are apparently changing soon, thankfully), and I don't think this is wise on Google's part, either.
 

Lokimaster

Member
May 12, 2019
106
Because it needs to come out the gate swinging with iOS support or else it's doomed!

Google has been fine on it's own without iOS support and so have SONY, Microsoft and Nintendo.

I'm thinking the mentality about it failing if it doesn't have iOS support (which it will since it's just running on Chrome and Chrome is on EVERYTHING) is tied to people who are heavily invested in the Apple ecosystem.

iOS/iPadOS is not a REQUIREMENT. Chrome is and all these iOS/iPadOS devices have Chrome. It'll be supported so I really don't understand the argument.

Phones are the smallest demographics Stadia will target. Yes people will play Stadia on tablets/phones but that's not where the majority of people will be playing on and I guess he thinks it's the opposite.

Did you not read, how stadia works with mobile?
 

khamakazee

Member
Oct 27, 2017
3,247
I don't care for it period, I don't care if it fails or not. It wont take over mainstream from what it looks like anyway. If it has no iOS phone support i don't give it more than 2 years out here.

You could have fooled me the way Xbox One games looked from 2016- till now. Buying up some double A studios isnt going to really change much. The way you guys talk about money, you would think the xbox from MS would have done better with the OG Xbox and the Xbox One.Its not about money at all period. Its about having a product that the mass will want. This doenst look like it at all. But we will see.
Xbox One did pretty bad this generation but it still sold roughly 40 million so far. Not sure why you insist on trolling about Microsoft when it's clear they are here to stay. If you don't like the product (Xbox or Stadia) then don't buy it, but unlike you I think Stadia will be around and Microsoft/Xbox will definitely be around. These are two of the highest valued companies in the world. Enjoy the show tomorrow, I know you will.

Did you not read, how stadia works with mobile?
Mobile isn't even what they are marketing the most right now, that's why they only annound Pixel 3 phone support so far.

When did I troll MS or Stadia? I was giving an example of how having the most money doesn't guarantee anything. What don't you get about that?
How is it trolling when Im giving you the facts?
It takes money to compete, that is why they went on a spending spree and got a bunch of studios. They are not stopping you from buying a Switch or a PS4/5 but you act like Microsoft and Google bother you somehow. It's called options and reading from some threads there are quite a few that have pre-ordered (Stadia Founders Edition).
 
Last edited:

Lokimaster

Member
May 12, 2019
106
Xbox One did pretty bad this generation but it still sold roughly 40 million so far. Not sure why you insist on trolling about Microsoft when it's clear they are here to stay. If you don't like the product (Xbox or Stadia) then don't buy it, but unlike you I think Stadia will be around and Microsoft/Xbox will definitely be around. These are two of the highest valued companies in the world. Enjoy the show tomorrow, I know you will.

When did I troll MS or Stadia? I was giving an example of how having the most money doesn't guarantee anything. What don't you get about that?
How is it trolling when Im giving you the facts?
 

Stimpack

Member
Oct 27, 2017
166
My Chromecast ultra just shit the bed after a year, probably due to overheating issues, which appear to be by design as whatever heatsink they use isn't strong enough. I have no faith in this thing's ability to stream in 4k for very long before meeting the same fate. At current I only use mine to stream in 1080, and that's much less taxing, yet here we are.

I can't believe they wouldn't even put the effort in to make new hardware. I was actually somewhat excited until now.
 

Dreamwriter

Member
Oct 27, 2017
2,923
Did you not read, how stadia works with mobile?
You are right, it's compatible with mobile devices as an extra feature few people will actually use (you either need to set your phone on a table and grab a game controller, or install one of those game controllers that grips the phone). It's definitely not a requirement in any way, or something that will greatly affect game sales on the service. Which is why they aren't targeting them at the test period, they are locking out any phones other than their own so they won't have to customer support other company phones while they are trying to work out the kinks with the service.
 

LGHT_TRSN

Member
Oct 25, 2017
2,633
I dont know why people are touting 60fps when its response time that makes 60fps desirable, something you aren't getting via streaming.
 

bdbdbd

Member
Oct 27, 2017
980
Let's say the average ps5 game is 100gb. That is still allot lower than having to stream 600gb of data to finish playing a 40 hour game.
Now account for patches, updates, DLC - some of these can be quite sizable to download. Factor in next-gen 4K media streaming around the house by family members on top of that and you're telling me you aren't the least bit concerned about your monthly data caps?
 

LGHT_TRSN

Member
Oct 25, 2017
2,633
There is more to 60+fps than latency. A lot of people like 60fps because it looks better (it's smoother).
The number 1 reason to run games at high framerates is latency.

Smoothness is more a result of frame times than anything else. Consistent frametimes at 30fps can be very smooth for example.
 

bdbdbd

Member
Oct 27, 2017
980
The problem is that--by Google's own statements--the only mobile devices that will be supported initially are Google Pixel 3 series phones. Not iPhones, not other Android phones, not even other Google Pixel brand phones. That tells me quite clearly that Stadia is not compatible with the mobile version of Chrome--if it was, then they'd proudly proclaim this from the four corners of the Earth.
I'm not sure how you quite clearly derived that...they have also quite clearly stated they are not offering Stadia in all countries to start. Does Chrome run differently on laptops in those countries?

Google has released dedicated apps to iOS first several times in the past, so fact that Stadia is launching on Pixel phone first doesn't necessarily imply its an app just for that reason.

It is (currently) using an app on mobile in this case, but that could really be happenstance. Because the more likely reason for the launch restrictions is basically the same as any other game platform which have all launched under limited availability in specific countries initially: they're not ready to open the floodgates to everyone and they want to pace the rollout with a more focused audience initially.
 

Dreamwriter

Member
Oct 27, 2017
2,923
The number 1 reason to run games at high framerates is latency.

Smoothness is more a result of frame times than anything else. Consistent frametimes at 30fps can be very smooth for example.
Disagree. I'm not a tournament level gamer, I don't choose 60fps for latency or control response, I choose 60fps because motion is much smoother, much more realistic (and when I had a 120hz monitor I played at that for even more smooth gameplay). That's my #1 reason for high framerates. I use this in games like Final Fantasy XIV where your local latency doesn't matter much.

But also, when you play Stadia at 60fps, you get better latency, assuming your internet can handle it.