Yeah... but you'll need a very good internet connection with no data caps. Stadia will be a very niche product imo.
-
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.
Stadia Reddit AMA: ''Stadia Pro isn't “Netflix for Games” ...a closer comparison would be like Xbox Live Gold or Playstation Plus''
- Thread starter SuikerBrood
- Start date
Yeah, I agree. This is the aspect of trust I've referred to. However, unlike a Nintendo console where it's assumed new hardware will eventually replace old and old distribution servers go offline, Stadia will more likely be one service for as long as Google exists. There's more reason to expect that purchases made on Stadia will be available indefinitely than any download you make on a Nintendo console.
If you're gearing up to buy a next-gen platform where games are likely to exceed 100GB, I think you've already got satisfactory internet.
It helps, but I don't think it goes far enough. Google really had an opportunity here to experiment with different price models
Tier 1: Buy games normally
Tier 2: Rent games for a cheaper cost to play for a limited time
Tier 3: Gamepass style sub with multiple games per month
I think if Stadia were set up like that it would be a much more compelling service
I said "most people", not "most US people". Also that's mobile, and I find it hard to believe home connections doubled their average from 2017 to 2019 to be equal to mobile
You do know that the only reason they shut down DS and Wii online is because the company they partnered with basically shut down?
There's no real reason to assume that they would shutdown any other service they have otherwise.
I mean they're not Sony.
Also mobile has even lower caps than wifi/landline.
on a 2Gb cap you can barely do video for more than a few days, gaming will kill that shit in the blink of an eye.
Talking with my non-hardcore-gamer friends I think the consensus is that this service would be amazing if there was an ability to rent the game or to have great demos.
With the ability to jump immediately into a game what you want is a low entry price so you can test it out and then you can decide if you want to buy it.
Like Amazon movies and all that.
Im REALLY confused who is the target population of this. You are willing to buy full price games but not to buy a console? I don't know those creatures.
With the ability to jump immediately into a game what you want is a low entry price so you can test it out and then you can decide if you want to buy it.
Like Amazon movies and all that.
Im REALLY confused who is the target population of this. You are willing to buy full price games but not to buy a console? I don't know those creatures.
this is about mobile, latency and paquet losses on mobile are horrible and unfit for game streaming. it's ridiculous to even bring this up.
I like my source better. But I still find it really weird to argue against the internet. What are we even arguing about? That Stadia is not addressable to 100% of humans? I concede the point.
I don't think Stadia has to be accessible to 100% of humans, or even 100% of existing gaming households to establish itself as a 5th platform in gaming.
So if I buy a game through Stadia Base vs. Stadia Pro is it the same $60? Seems a bit odd since the Base service is a lower quality, and I'm imagining the same $60 could be used to buy (and permanently own) a 4K game on a PS5.
If I upgrade (or downgrade) my service, will the game I bought work with either?
If I upgrade (or downgrade) my service, will the game I bought work with either?
That is the hope at least, but it requires an aspect of trust that I just don't have at the launch of a new service. While Google is never going anywhere, If Stadia doesn't meet their expectations they have no obligation to keep it running. So the service is going to have to mature before I begin to trust it imo
OP
OP
Yes.
I can also imagine you getting a discount on certain Google games when you have Pro. But that's just me making that up.
Your data is about mobile, the market where ISPs are providing 2Gb of data per month and then surcharging you through the nose or making you with for 56k otherwise.
If you think this is representative to a good environment for game streaming....
Maybe, maybe not? Still, it's different. I'll still be able to buy physical games and only download updates and even if I have to download the game itself, it's over after the download is done. Stadia will use your internet all the time and it'll use more data in the long run. And if your internet is slow, you won't be able to play the games at all.
christ, Stadia's value proposition just keeps getting worse. If Microsoft just adds xCloud library access to Game Pass Ultimate, which is what I currently expect, it'd be a vastly better value even at 50% more a month.
This also has me scratching my head.
I already pay full price to buy games from Steam, Uplay, EA Origin, it's more attractive to have a game subscription service similar to the EA subscription service and the upcoming Uplay+ for a game streaming service to me than needing to buy a game full price from Google.
If Google allows Stadia users to connect their pre-existing game libraries to Stadia and that will allow Stadia access to all the games you already own at no additional cost, that would be great.
It would help to read the AMA rather than spread false information.
You basically said that internet costs should not be considered when discussing Stadia costs. Which would be true if Stadia required the average internet connection that most people pay for. Except that is not the case, it requires better.
If I had to pay extra - either for datacaps or speed - on my internet plan to use Steam, or Switch, or Ouya, it absolutely is a cost that I will consider when choosing which platform to go for.
"metadata". This doesn't mean actual game data (which btw, would be a specialized linux build that wouldn't run on your PC anyway).
it's ironic to ask people to read shit when your own reading comprehension skills fail you.
"so that you can download your game metadata, including saves if you want to "
This is not about the game ownership, it's PR talk to dodge the question because the answer is embarrassing, metadata and saves are not the game, you will be fucked and lose your game, but you can export the saves if so you want. as if anybody gives a shit about that.
Business model for Game Pass or Netflix like gaming service is still in the early stage and unproven. Google has no exclusive content now and is at the mercy of the 3rd party. Taking a cut from MSRP is still the best business model at this point for Google.
I hope Game Pass is successful enough financially to show other platform holders and 3rd party publishers that it's a viable business model.
I hope Game Pass is successful enough financially to show other platform holders and 3rd party publishers that it's a viable business model.
Lol little did they know every single Xbox/PlayStation user HATES psplus and gold. Only reason why we have them is because we're forced to have them. The free games a month was like "Hey we know we're practically raping your wallet but here's a few games so don't hate us (entirely) please." I can't think of a single person that's like "OH YEAAAAH my gold ran out and I can't plau halo MCC online, time to go buy some more, fuck yeah this is so exciting." Lol who at google thought that's what we think of gold and psplus, the ONLY saving grace they have is "free" games imo, and if stadia gives "free" games away at the level of destiny 2 frequently then it might have a chance. But if this isn't DOA it'll most definitely be populated by people building there libraries at stadia base then MAYBE upgrading to stadia plus and all that jazz. I honestly think this won't be DOA for the simple fact that they have the biggest advertising site on the internet ala YouTube, but if they treat it like google plus then yeah it'll definitely fizzle our quickly. Sorry for not being a super negative Nancy like the rest of you guys but I like to look at things a little objectively.
...downloading metadata and having ownership over the copy you paid for couldn't be more different.
Did you know that there are arcade games you can download metadata and saves through a card or a USB stick but you still don't own the cab?
I think if you're currently rolling with < 30Mb/s internet at home, you probably shouldn't get into game streaming regardless. And probably your conventional online gaming experience is pretty bad. I've had a 300Mb/s connection for a few years now, with no Stadia. When I get Stadia, it won't be a factor in my cost consideration. I'm not saying i'm representative, and i'm also not saying some pathetic 1.5Mb/s DSL line is representative either. It's really pointless to say what "most people" have, it's Google's job to figure out if there's a market for their shit.
People are really stretching to find ways that this isn't a good deal imo.
Maybe I'm the one misunderstanding, but the highlighted section about being able to download your save data isn't a response to the issue of losing any ability to play the games you've bought if the service becomes unavailable.
Which misinformation you were trying to clarify from the AMA quote?
So looking at this the service (Stadia in general) is for someone who doesn't want to buy top end hardware but has a decent internet connection and is ok buying a license to play games contingent on them having internet.
Stadia pro is for the above plus access to whatever games they're able to make free month-to-month.
I guess if they have decent sales and you're ok with the limitations Stadia base is probably an ok solution. I'm having a hard time coming up with an argument for Stadia Pro though. 4k streaming isn't enough for the monthly cost for me.
Stadia pro is for the above plus access to whatever games they're able to make free month-to-month.
I guess if they have decent sales and you're ok with the limitations Stadia base is probably an ok solution. I'm having a hard time coming up with an argument for Stadia Pro though. 4k streaming isn't enough for the monthly cost for me.
Imagine a world with a video streaming service that presents two options: a sub-free 1080p service, and a £10 per month 4K service. In both scenarios you cannot view any movies unless you buy them for the same cost as a brand-new UHD disc.
Everyone would say that was mad.
Stadia, no different. Not seeing any value proposition.
Now if new games were £20 instead, then that becomes an interesting proposition.
Everyone would say that was mad.
Stadia, no different. Not seeing any value proposition.
Now if new games were £20 instead, then that becomes an interesting proposition.
So it is like Plus and Gold then and you do get discounts on Stadia just like those if you subscribe.
I keep hearing about data caps but I've never seen anyone in my city have to deal with that. Neither when I went on sprint or T-Mobile, I'd legit download Netflix movies in 4K multiple times a day on the go and never seen anything about data caps. Here's the thing, online gaming is the most popular genre in gaming, no ifs ands or buts, it is what it is. If your internet isn't capable of playing 2k online than your probably exempt from using online gaming in general, so I don't think google or ms or Sony are counting on those gamers. There counting on the millions playing destiny online daily, the siege players, the cod players, the everything that's popular players, to buy it or he service. And everyone else that has modern day internet, we buy more, spend more share more etc. Why on God's geeen earth do you think people in mountains are going to make or break a streaming service?? Plus U.S has shitty internet but we buy the most online service games lol so that's not a good comparison, even people with shitty internet like to play online. And seriously if you have data caps on mobile that's just sad, I'd change carriers. I live in Massachusetts and we're not renowned for a our service trust and believe, my home is a dead zone but we all get fiber and cable lines so I don't see how the "nOT eveRyONe HAs STabLe iNteRNeT SPeEds" argument because I doubt any of best companies are banking on selling to them. I think these Fortune 500 companies are tad bit smarter than that. Now I'm not saying stadia will succeed to so don't crucify me, but availability will not be its downfall. It'll be it's price and games.
I straight up don't understand how people are still surprised by this. No publisher on Earth would agree to offer up their $60 game for a share of a $15/month sub.
I guess Stadia's marketing team has dropped the ball because I still see folks learning about this for the first time. The value proposition is that you no longer have to buy a console/PC to play games. Just like Netflix/Hulu/Spotify/etc, the assumption is that you have half-decent internet, don't care about a dedicated blu-ray/cd/record player, and can just sit down and boot up a game anytime.
I guess Stadia's marketing team has dropped the ball because I still see folks learning about this for the first time. The value proposition is that you no longer have to buy a console/PC to play games. Just like Netflix/Hulu/Spotify/etc, the assumption is that you have half-decent internet, don't care about a dedicated blu-ray/cd/record player, and can just sit down and boot up a game anytime.
imo the best way to compare Stadia to existing competition is as next-gen "console" with no upfront hardware costs, and a lot of new conveniences. Performance-wise, it's going to come in in the upper-end of PC hardware, but not the absolutely highest-end.
Probably there will be some visual fidelity hit associated with compressed video streams, but we don't now how much. And that (+some amount of latency) will have to be weighed against the convenience of playing any game in your library within seconds on virtually any device anywhere you go.
and that is why google will change the economic model drastically after 18 months (bookmark this), if not drop the whole thing as they are used to do.
The people that may get the "pro" subscription are non existent, those people with a 4k tv, high internet quality and the willingness to pay 60$ for a new release digital, well they have a pc or console already, and disposable income. and they won't get the pro subscription and buy a not cross save compatible stadia version because it makes no fucking sense, except for a small part of them that do not give a shit about money and is OK to throw away $/€ so they can play while in a uber.
It seems as thought the $60 gives you the right to play the game at whatever quality you can access at any given time up to 1080p (on base subscription) or 4k (on paid subscription). If you choose to downgrade you choose to play that game at 1080p.
This was mentioned on a podcast I listened to recently, but I think the approach they're kind of going for is to be the vessel for other subscriptions services. So someone subscribes to UPlay+, they get access to all those games and can play them through Stadia without even needing to buy hardware. Now imagine that with the inevitable other subs on the way. Just adding EA covers basically the majority of what the "casual hardcore" gamer is interested in short of Call of Duty and they can plug those gaps with games you just straight up buy (just like you'd do with Xbox and Game Pass). I do think they'll one day come out with a Game Pass style service (on top of the Pro sub) but not until they have a large enough library. Until then, they can lean on third party sub services.
then.... don't pay a monthly subscription and use the free service? I mean, i'm just tossing out wild ideas here
I've got data caps on my mobile & on my home internet. Jealous of you. Not much choice of carrier either so I'm stuck with what I got.
Whats this nonsense about DOA. Stadia is a future console competitor without a lifespan and they will probably use it to gather data about people. It's an app that will be baked in every Google Smart TV the coming decades.
Youtube still isnt even profitible in 2019 for gods sake.
Youtube still isnt even profitible in 2019 for gods sake.
Google is doing a good enough job at this by themselves. This isn't a good deal and isn't looking anymore promising after this ama.
Well with some hyping it up like they are, I think that's an apt comparision.
All that says is you get to keep your game save data. It does not mean you get to keep the game. What good is the save data without the game? Seriously, that is not a gaurentee if they give up on Stadia that you'll still have access to your games. You will still have to buy them over again and honestly, would the metadata even be useful if you buy it on another console/PC that isn't theirs? I'm guessing the ideal answer is that their stuff is running on PC hardware which means you'll have to have or buy a PC to use that data as well as the game over again. Otherwise you'll have to find out what they were running their games on and hope it's something you can obtain now that they no longer run the servers.
So.. how is that not relying on them not taking the game away? That answer he gave really wasn't an assurance other than, "Trust us, we're not going to make it go away. And here's some stuff that really won't be helpful if we do". So it's back to you have to trust Google to keep your games with them.
The actual experience remains to be seen, and will vary from person to person. People are talking about Stadia like it's going to be a flawless 4K/60fps.
I doubt it.
Seriously? I'd think it being like the biggest advertising website would pay for itself.
Damnit Google you copy and improve on Gamepass or PlayStation Now, Not the MP pay wall.
To me this says that They want to generate money from the paid online without having to go through the hassle of building a console, fan base, or development house
Shortcut to the gravy train
To me this says that They want to generate money from the paid online without having to go through the hassle of building a console, fan base, or development house
Shortcut to the gravy train
