I'm worried Apple isn't going to allow xcloud or stadia, I may switch to Android if they don't
-
Ever wanted an RSS feed of all your favorite gaming news sites? Go check out our new Gaming Headlines feed! Read more about it here.
Google Stadia Pro (4K/60, 5.1 surround) $9.99 a month. Stadia Base (1080/60) requires no subscription.
- Thread starter Cpt-GargameL
- Start date
- Status
Dual shock 4? I rather use the stadia controller for stadia anyway
Yup. Dual Shock 4.
Do we need to setup hotspot to use Stadia controller while on the go with our phones?
Apple just announced Xbox controllers now work on iOS - i don't think this is a coincidence
Stadia controller very smartly does not talk to the server through the phone via BT - it connects to Google server directly, and does not hop there through the phone
Phone screens are so small, can people really play console games on there? I've tried it with the Steam app and trying to read huds and everything was ridiculous.
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.
lol, yeah they're only reaching out to what, nearly 100 million people?
so ignore the hundreds of millions who do? Because clearly Sony isn't ignoring them.
Hey, if we're going to play ping pong with anecdotes, I see little or nothing advertised on TV that's Playstation related, other than specific games every once in awhile. so where does that leave us? Oh that's right, that still leaves them advertising PS Now to at least half a billion people between the PS Store and FB alone. You can quibble about the exact numbers, but you aren't going to reduce that to "hardly acknowledging" or "barely advertising" the service like you claimed.
The question isn't whether it will be lower than streaming but whether it will be lower than your data cap.
You mean to play on your phone on LTE? The Stadia controller says it can still work with Bluetooth in that case.
If you're at home you'll just connect it to the WiFi.
You do realize that Sony and Microsoft also have (or will soon have) streaming video game services, right? These services are also "progressive" and upgradable on the back end.
It is also expected that the next-generation game consoles from both of these companies will be backward compatible. They won't be starting at zero--they can potentially launch with an instant library of hundreds or even thousands of games--available as-physical media, digital downloads, and streaming.
Google isn't competing in a vacuum. They need to work very quickly, in order to build Stadia into a service with a great game library and an attractive value proposition. Sony and Microsoft both have massive advantages over Stadia, in that they have accumulated expansive game catalogs, and have millions of loyal users who have already invested heavily (both financially and emotionally) in their respective ecosystems. In theory, it would be just as convenient for these users to buy into the PlayStation Now or Xcloud services to augment what they have already gathered over the years. They would not have to make a clean break from either their game libraries (including DLC, cumulative game progression, etc.) or social connections, which would otherwise occur if they purchase games through Stadia.
It doesn't matter how many it is, imo. The users already on PS4 and actively browsing the store regularly (which, mind you, is going to be far less than the number of total PS4 owners) are going to be the most aware of what Sony is offering. So what I'm saying is, they're probably already aware of PS Now.
I never said they should ignore Facebook users, but it's not the first place I'd go to advertise console games. When you're paying for every impression, and the majority of its users don't play console games...just saying.
I see plenty of ads for the PS4 itself as well as specific games. None of them seem to mention PS Now. And if they're really advertising it to half a billion people, I guess not too many are biting, because they're still under 1 million subscribers. Maybe they should retarget their ad campaigns?
If you want to play on your TV, then yes, you need Wifi for the controller to connect. If you are playing on any other device, you can use normal controllers, though you will have slightly more input lag.
OP
OP
I think we'll have to wait till E3 for some questions to be answered because there's been a lot of assumptions and misunderstanding (on my part too)
I think they will but you'll have to buy your games and subscriptions on the web away from their ecosystem. They don't allow third party markets which is why Steam have to remove all purchasing capability.
Steam is on there now though. I was using it yesterday but my iPad screen is too small to play Ori. 😂
No. But that's not an obstacle for xCloud or Stadia either. You'll still be able to play games you own.
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)
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.
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
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)
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
Yeah. With FIOS you typically get parity between upload/download.
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.
Last edited:
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.
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.
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.
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.
They didn't speak about upload. About 5-10 Mbps should be okay, but more important will be the latency. You probably want pings around 20-30ms, although up to 50-70ms may be okay too (you can see the ping/latency with tools like fast.com)
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).
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.
Good or bad, I hope Google doesn't abandon it quickly. Their history of supporting things is sometimes sketchy.
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.
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.
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.
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
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.
Nah just seems like you cant take a different view or an opinion from yours. But thats fine.
- Status