I wouldn't be surprised if they put all their first party games in it at some point, but how is what you describe any different to, say, PS+?
-
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.
-
We have made minor adjustments to how the search bar works on ResetEra. You can read about the changes here.
[Rumor/leak?] Lapresse.ca details the Google Stadia price, release date, launch details, line-up
- Thread starter Deleted member 2791
- Start date
That difference doesn't matter. They are still leasing you a substantial amount of computational power on demand and that has to be paid somehow.
As far as I can tell you don't just need a Chromecast, you need the Founder's Edition specifically to have access at launch.
edit - so, you need to have the Founder's edition, but if you have it, you can play via the Chromecast, Pixel 3, Pixel 3 XL, Pixel 3a, Pixel 3a X or 'other google devices'. But effectively at launch you do have to buy into the bundle with the Chromecast to have access.
Subscription AND paying extra for newer games? This thing needs to be Netflix for games (i.e. subscription only).
I don't see this happening. They are already making a huge effort by almost giving away for free their 1st games at launch with Game Pass. I think it's already too much, and to add on top of that the cost of streaming them and the related maintenance would be too crazy.
The Stadia paid subscription only gives you Destiny 2 and seems that will change it for other ones in the future (games that you'll lose when stopping paying it), in addition to the resolution upgrade. It isn't like Netflix or PS Now where it gives you hundreds of titles for the subscription. Stadia is a virtual console that is played through streaming, not the netflix of videogames.
That paid subscription is more like PS+ than PS Now.
Yes, at launch Destiny 2 but seems that it will change over time (like PS+) and that you'll lose it when stopping paying the Pro sub. You'll keep the games you purchase.
Last edited:
That difference does matter if you are gonna claim they are leasing you a "high end pc"
That's not what's happening. They are leasing you the privilege to stream games for their store. That's it.
There's actually some companies out there that are offering what you described, so the distinction is important.
Huh? The hardware requirements are exactly the same. On the same server hardware that Stadia uses to run your Destiny 2 instance they perfectly could run a Linux instance. And that's all that matters, how costly is it to run. The distinction is not important when it comes to actual cost... And yes, companies offer similar services, except most of them don't include a dedicated high-end GPU and high bandwith requirements.
Again words matter.
You wouldn't claim Sony is "leasing you a PS4" or Microsoft is "leasing you an Xbox" when you stream from them. You are streaming games. Not computational power
And there are companies that offer GPU power.
How does it matters exactly? I already stated my point: from a hardware PoV is the same. They are leasing you 8 cores and a high end GPU and that is not free. That's my entire point. Your point is... 'words mater'?
Actually no, one wouldn't need a 10.7 TF EC2 instance to run a website, for instance. In fact Amazon itself separates the high compute GPU heavy offerings from other EC2 instances: https://aws.amazon.com/about-aws/wh...-are-now-available-in-additional-aws-regions/
Words are important. When you lease an instance, you can do all kinds of things with it, when you get a sub to Stadia you are doing so solely in order to stream video games. This distinction is important no matter how many times you state otherwise.
For example, you might want to use that horsepower to do things other than play video games. You may want to use it for 3D rendering or video editing or what-have-you. There are services that let you do that sort of thing, Stadia doesn't. (Not saying it should but that's the distinction that OrdinaryPrime is referring to.)
Is not important in terms of hardware and running costs, which is my whole point... If anything, running Destiny 2 at 4k60fps should be much harder to queue and pool resources for, making it more expensive than other cloud tasks...
My point is you tried to inflate what's on offer by claiming they are "leasing a high end cpu"
And that's just not true.
Their two main competitors are not forcing you to buy a subscription AND individual games.
I find it problematic that you have to pay them for both the streaming in general AND individual games.
I'd be ok with the streaming charge if you were able to use the computational power for whatever you want as other companies do. But that's not the case here. You have to buy games from their store and pay them a monthly fee to access the games. I honestly can't think of any company that charges customers on both sides of the equation like that.
This isn't even true. It would definitely cost them more money to offer general computational power over just the ability to stream games from their store.
And my point was that's there's no distinction what you are allowed to do with the CPUs. The cost for google remain the same and are high.
Huh? If Stadia an stadia instance needs 4 cores to run Desinty 2 at 60fps@4k then they must lease you the full 4 cores. If you rent 4 cores on a server rack to run other computer tasks, it will still take the same resources. You can rent more cores on other services? Sure, it goes with how much you are willing to pay. $10 for unlimited time on 4 cores + GPU is very cheap. I don't know how google is managing those prices. Renting one K80 with 4 virtual CPU's from Amazon is about $1 per hour.
Last edited:
They do make you buy a console and controllers though. Stadia doesn't.
No they don't. Maybe a controller, but how else you gonna play games?
This is untrue
You are limited to playing games that you buy from them. That distinction is important no matter how much you keep trying to pretend it isn't.
Correct me if I'm wrong, but if you go offline for any reason you're still able to play games in your library in Steam, isn't that so?
It could be. I have not tried this feature during the past 4 years. If I recall right, it works if you anticipate that you have to go offline, and restart in offline mode while you are actually online. Otherwise, Steam might not start.
Moreover, it depends on the games: one of my most played games (Gremlins Inc.) has an always-online DRM, many games are focused on non-local multiplayer aspects which require an online connection, there are the GaaS like Dota2, or if understand right, Destiny 2.
There are games which might be worth buying on Steam (indie games, games with little to no DRM, etc.) for the reason you mentioned, and there are games for which Stadia may add value to your experience (games which require an Internet connection for any reason, games which your PC cannot run at 60 fps, games which have a restrictive DRM anyway, etc.).
Last edited: