• The GiftBot 2.0 Launch Giveaway Extravaganza has come to a close with an astounding 8073 games given away to the community by 696 members, a huge success thanks to you! The gifting now continues with more official prizes in the new Gaming Giveaways |OT|. Leftover Steam codes are also being given away to the PC Gaming Era community.

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

BlueManifest

Member
Oct 25, 2017
6,019
also it's more like, normally, buy 200-400 console, then buy the game.

stadia, free, then buy the game.

what part of that are you not understanding the benefit of?

now granted the 10 buck a month thing is kind of sneaky because monthly charges add up fast. that's 120 a year. over lets say a 6 years cycle, you could end up paying 72x10=720 for the premier stadia package, which is more expensive than an xbox one x.

but for joe six pack he can play what games he wants and avoid the upfront fee, plus take it to whatever screens he wants.

not saying it'll work, but i believe it certainly has potential.
You don’t have to use the sub every month either, just use it whenever the next big game comes out then unsub after you finish it if you want to play it in 4k
 

Freakzilla

Member
Oct 31, 2017
4,088

MrFarenheit

Member
Oct 27, 2017
439
Winnipeg, Canada
I’ve seen these type of arguments before. When one point is refuted as incorrect they just move to the next point and so on. It’s always the same points as well. It’s kind of exhausting to be honest lol.
 

bsigg

Member
Oct 25, 2017
9,179
But it's what it should be.
At a glance at their current listed lineup of games, they only have 30 games total that could be available at launch. The Ubisoft games will be available on Stadia with Uplay +, which is $14.99 a month.

So that would be:

Watch Dogs Legion (when it launches later next year)
Gods & Monsters (when it launches later next year)
Trials Rising
The Division 2
The Crew 2
Just Dance 2020
Ghost Recon Breakpoint
Assassins Creed Odyssey
 

riotous

Member
Oct 25, 2017
4,952
Seattle
Yes it should be like Netflix.

1. Buy hardware
2. Pay subscription
3. Play all available games.
Yeah their business model should be to lose endless amounts of money.

Makes sense.

They are running a 10TF+ machine per user every second they play; Stadia will only make money if people actually buy quite a few games. That $9.99 a month isn't going to even cover the costs of a user + whatever Stadia is paying for stuff like Destiny 2 and other "free" games.
 

Kopite

Member
Oct 28, 2017
1,557
Hopefully there's something really cheap/free on when it releases so I can try it out first. There should be demos, right?
 

Dunlop

Member
Oct 25, 2017
1,721
Yeah their business model should be to lose endless amounts of money.

Makes sense.

They are running a 10TF+ machine per user every second they play; Stadia will only make money if people actually buy quite a few games. That $9.99 a month isn't going to even cover the costs of a user + whatever Stadia is paying for stuff like Destiny 2 and other "free" games.
This was really highlighted to me for a course I am taking where were are setting up Windows and Ubuntu servers in Azure. At the lowest specs I've burnt through a good chunk of my credits in the span of 2 weeks.
 

klauskpm

Member
Oct 26, 2017
509
Yes it should be like Netflix.

1. Buy hardware
2. Pay subscription
3. Play all available games.
From our point of view, yes. From the developers' point of view, no. PlayStation and Xbox already have a huge library on their side, while Stadia needs to get developers and games on their platform.

PS Now already offers games by subscription, but they normally don't have the newest games. For instance, they don't even have NBA 2K19. The big games they recently announced for the platform: Grand Theft Auto V, God of War, Uncharted 4: A Thief's End and inFAMOUS: Second Son; will be available only until 2020/01/02. It will probably evolve into something like Game Pass to get newer games.

Game Pass, on the other hand, gets newer games. That probably gets more adoption from devs because of the limited amount of time we have access to their games. But even that doesn't give you access to most new AAA games and neither is the whole Xbox library.

There isn't a platform that has a subscription to the whole platform library, time-limited or not, and thats probably because it is too expensive to get developers on board, or for us to pay. We can see EA Access yearly price which is $29.99 and they don't even give access to DLCs or new games right of the bet. Uplay+ will be $14.99 monthly with DLCs. Those companies are just a part of the industry, and to get all of them on board it would be even more expensive.

I even think that xCloud will follow the Stadia business model. That is if they don't charge a little bit more for Game Pass. Like $19.99 instead of $14.99.
 

riotous

Member
Oct 25, 2017
4,952
Seattle
This was really highlighted to me for a course I am taking where were are setting up Windows and Ubuntu servers in Azure. At the lowest specs I've burnt through a good chunk of my credits in the span of 2 weeks.
Yeah as someone who spends a ton of time on VMs way less powerful than Stadia on Azure/AWS/GCP and sees how much my piddly CPU-only compute costs (for similar amount of time running as an avid gamer would play)....

It's always been really hard for me to fathom how game streaming is even feasible; but I guess it just goes to show you those cloud services are normally priced for fairly extreme profit margins.

Needless to say though they are practically giving away compute that they would normally literally be charging $100+ a month for.
 

ModularBen

Member
Jan 10, 2019
164
Yeah as someone who spends a ton of time on VMs way less powerful than Stadia on Azure/AWS/GCP and sees how much my piddly CPU-only compute costs (for similar amount of time running as an avid gamer would play)....

It's always been really hard for me to fathom how game streaming is even feasible; but I guess it just goes to show you those cloud services are normally priced for fairly extreme profit margins.

Needless to say though they are practically giving away compute that they would normally literally be charging $100+ a month for.
Mates Rates when it's one company selling cloud services to another part of the same company :-) Cloud hosting rates have become the shits.
 

riotous

Member
Oct 25, 2017
4,952
Seattle
Mates Rates when it's one company selling cloud services to another part of the same company :-) Cloud hosting rates have become the shits.
Yeah I've seen how they shrug off "costs" internal to one of the larger cloud companies. I contracted w/ one and one manager "rang up a $2 million bill" one month accidentally and it was obvious by the way they all shrugged it off the real cost was miniscule.

But that's internal; they don't worry about covering the cost of investment in expansion of services only the operating cost... if end users/consumers are going to be using a huge chunk of compute in a given data center and not paying jack shit that's pretty wild to me... the cost of building out the DCs is going to need to be covered by game sales is my point.
 

BlueManifest

Member
Oct 25, 2017
6,019
I’m surprised nvidia has been able to keep the beta of GeForce now for free as long as they have, and without hurting their earnings. I wonder how much this stuff really costs to run? It can be that much going by nvidia
 

Pheace

Member
Aug 23, 2018
653
I’m surprised nvidia has been able to keep the beta of GeForce now for free as long as they have, and without hurting their earnings. I wonder how much this stuff really costs to run? It can be that much going by nvidia
Geforce Now you're using your own hardware to stream aren't you? That's not exactly comparable
 

riotous

Member
Oct 25, 2017
4,952
Seattle
I’m surprised nvidia has been able to keep the beta of GeForce now for free as long as they have, and without hurting their earnings. I wonder how much this stuff really costs to run? It can be that much going by nvidia
The actual costs to operate are fairly low; the cost of building out the infrastructure is massive.

Businesses can justify costs for a lot of reasons though; the reason PS Now kind of sucks is because Sony has no other way to make money off of the infrastructure they built out. MS / Google can justify all kinds of things in Azure/GCP because the infrastructure is shared across profitable existing services, and any "research" they do having to do with game streaming might also benefit them outside of just game streaming.

They can essentially treat these things as loss leaders for now, but IMO the pricing right now isn't fully long-term realistic. But honestly I'm just guessing.

nVidia probably justifies GeForce Now because they use it as a testing bed for general cloud GPU compute/virtualization/etc. Tech they sell to the likes of Google/MS/AWS/IBM/etc. theoretically.
 

BlueManifest

Member
Oct 25, 2017
6,019
The actual costs to operate are fairly low; the cost of building out the infrastructure is massive.

Businesses can justify costs for a lot of reasons though; the reason PS Now kind of sucks is because Sony has no other way to make money off of the infrastructure they built out. MS / Google can justify all kinds of things in Azure/GCP because the infrastructure is shared across profitable existing services, and any "research" they do having to do with game streaming might also benefit them outside of just game streaming.

They can essentially treat these things as loss leaders for now, but IMO the pricing right now isn't fully long-term realistic. But honestly I'm just guessing.

nVidia probably justifies GeForce Now because they use it as a testing bed for general cloud GPU compute/virtualization/etc. Tech they sell to the likes of Google/MS/AWS/IBM/etc. theoretically.
If all that’s true I don’t see any reason why google would ever need to shut it down even if they only had 1 million users
 

ModularBen

Member
Jan 10, 2019
164
Yeah I've seen how they shrug off "costs" internal to one of the larger cloud companies. I contracted w/ one and one manager "rang up a $2 million bill" one month accidentally and it was obvious by the way they all shrugged it off the real cost was miniscule.

But that's internal; they don't worry about covering the cost of investment in expansion of services only the operating cost... if end users/consumers are going to be using a huge chunk of compute in a given data center and not paying jack shit that's pretty wild to me... the cost of building out the DCs is going to need to be covered by game sales is my point.
And it's totally valid. None of this compute comes for free so at some point game sales will need to make up for it. Or some other model.
 

The Albatross

Member
Oct 25, 2017
10,180
Really hoping that Rockstar lets you share Social Club accounts / characters across platforms and keep them in sync. If they do, then I'm definitely getting Stadia when RDR2 comes out. But, if they don't, then it's a longshot for me.

Should still just be a tiered subscription with free games.
I prefer the method they have now.

I'm unlikely to pay a subscription for something, but knowing that I can drop in and play a game if I really want to and not be tied down long term is a plus for me. I'm comfortable with 1080p in that case because I'll likely be playing on a screen that is either 1080p or it's small (tablet, phone) so it doesn't matter to me that it's not 4K w/o the sub.

Also it's unclear whether they could secure enough games through a subscription option without a really high price (~$50 or $100/mo or something). It's unlikely that they would.

I'll probably check Stadia out sometime next year, and I like that it's free for me to try, see what I think, and then ditch it if it doesn't work for me or isn't a good value.
 

Dreamwriter

Member
Oct 27, 2017
3,701
That depends how much porting costs, if all they need is 20,000 people to buy a port to pay for the costs and they have a potential 1 million that could buy it then they have no reason not to port
The big developers don't think that way. They could make lots of AA games that would sell enough to make a profit. They don't want just a profit, they want a huge profit, giant wins. And those huge AAA games cost a lot of money to port to other consoles like Stadia.
 

BlueManifest

Member
Oct 25, 2017
6,019
The big developers don't think that way. They could make lots of AA games that would sell enough to make a profit. They don't want just a profit, they want a huge profit, giant wins. And those huge AAA games cost a lot of money to port to other consoles.
I think someone said doom eternal only took 3 weeks to port to stadia or something
 

predprey

Member
Sep 20, 2019
134
Wait, are the games from Stadia Pro yours to keep forever or like the other subscription services locks you out once you pause subscription?
 

Dreamwriter

Member
Oct 27, 2017
3,701
Aww... I thought it would be like a Humble subscription. That would be an awesome deal to get Destiny 2 for $9.99.
It's still a pretty good deal - even discounting the other free games and game discounts you get with Stadia Pro, if you play all the Destiny 2 content in the pack in less than 8 months, you'll have saved money over playing on another platform.