Yes I know I was going by what you said that stadia needed a console and I was saying a chromecast isn't a console
-
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.
The Verge - Google Stadia hands-on: near-flawless Doom Eternal running on a Chromebook
- Thread starter SwampBastard
- Start date
There may be some point in the future where we all stream games, but that reality, if it ever comes will be long after we are all dead. Much like how streaming movies and music haven't squelched physical media in those mediums, streaming games has even more hurdles to over come. Near flawless in ideal circumstances sounds concerning when I consider how the fastest internet available to me still lags while streaming youtube videos.
Exactly! With their own hardware running the way they want it, it's very easy to do things like tune the kernel parameters to eek out every last bit of performance timing they can. In some scenarios tuning the thing to the specific architecture (say, using an Intel or AMD, but not a general x86_64 module) and turning off items they won't need for compatibility will make a difference in the long run. The fewer workers hitting the CPU for any reason the better, regardless of how fast the CPU is. Cycles are cycles.
It's also arguably faster for VM deployment. Azure and HyperV are nice and all but there are a multiple ways to skin the cat with Linux VMs and deployment that make them a much faster build and tear-down.
I have to agree.
This thread is based on an article which had a good impression of the tech.
If you say I wonder how this will deal with bad connections, companies going out of business or getting sold, etc I think that's fair.
But that's not what I am reading from a lot of posts so I was also confused at some of the negativity.
I will definitely try it and if it is blurry or laggy I will come here to give my impression on it. But weird to be so negative on it for this thread at least.
the founders kind of does at launch, is the reference I was going to. We have no idea when the base service will be available. Which the base service is equivalent to GeForce now and you wouldn't have to buy your games again. Because GeForce Now just lets you login to your steam, battle net or uplay and use games you already own.
GeForce now is only free because it's in beta, I imagine they will offer a free version to stay competitive with stadia though
This is what games looked like when I first started gaming:
I don't see why folks think streaming can never go from around 80ms to around 30ms.
We've already seen proof of several pretty decent (granted not 100% where I'd like) streaming experiences. Even taking PS Now as a starting point, I think most of us are going to live to see this work. It's at most 5-10 years off, not 50.
I hope so, I like it quite a bit when I travel to my parents or something. Easy to bring along the device.
"The technology isn't perfect"
Measured response: "that's okay things can and will get better"
Overblown response: " I'm not buying this thing because digital foundry says there's dropped frames, GTFO google"
If this works as well in the wild, will be a game changer. Folk like the majority of us will buy standard consoles/pc but I feel this thing will blow up with the casual or "I only have a console to but CoD and madden/fifa/2k every year." crowd. Not for me but I'll be damned if it isn't interesting!
Every Stadia thread to date has been derailed with numerous posters spreading fud or just stating how they don't want it.
This thread for example is about a positive experience with a demo.. Are your feeling that is still what is being discussed?
It is the xbox360 "pay for online!!", I do not predict many healthy discussions on it.
Yeaaaah, unfortunately this is rampant, even among a few of my friends. There's a lack of understanding or even belief that it can be good enough, let alone good at all, for games. There are certain games I could see being difficult to really make much of , but if you think 30ms is okay that's actually almost better in a lot of cases, when you think of how many games have 30-50ms of latency built-in just because of the system polling rates of USB or bluetooth, not factoring in display lag. I'd be willing to bet that with decent connections we can probably see console-like latency, which really isn't that far off from PC, M/KB aside.
I'm not really sure how this qualifies as "near-flawless" when there was a 2-3min pause to resync the controller and a stream crash. It's fine that this is some time before launch still, but if this happened on any other platform it would have been considered a disaster of a demo. This is way beyond a few dropped frames or a bit of lag.
I understand what your saying but you're conflating two separate things here. The stream and it's quality had not been broken. Instead, it was a controller issue. I think everyone is more concerned about lag/latency an it's quality which what the "near flawless" comment was just likely about. As far as controllers not syncing properly, I think we've all had our fair share of controllers/Bluetooth devices not pairing as expected.
Netflix streaming is not even remotely comparable to game streaming.
Game streaming could get big if internet tech changes drastically, until then it will be a niche market for people with very good internet connections who don't care about hiccups in gaming and only want to play when online connection is available, and for some reasons don't want to buy a console or PC and don't care about exclusive games.
Just think about when a new console would be crashing or lose controller connection in first hands on, it would be a disaster for the company. But I think not many people even care enough about Stadia that such headlines would get clicks.
Given the controller is effectively the platform they're trying to sell in this situation, it matters if it's having basic problems like this. 2-3 minutes is also odd? If nothing else, a flag of "you may way to use your own controller and/or leave it in wired mode" is still not a great look.
It's actually fairly ironic that on a demo of advanced tech that the most notable issues were on the more traditional elements.
Exactly, but I was hoping standards would be a -little- higher than this. "I wasn't expecting much so I guess I had an okay time" is an insult to google.
Project stream was ass and my internet supposedly fast enough for 4k60fps in stadia. I've tried GeForce now as well and that also was not ever good. Any actiony games on this service is a no go to me.
This kind of thing actually happens quite frequently with demos of traditional gaming hardware. They just don't usually register because the controllers etc are a known quantity. It usually only gets noticed because it occurs during a stage demo (Uncharted 4, Skyward Sword, etc). Equating a fairly common hiccup with the entire prospects of the streaming tech is misguided to say the least.
The only streaming I've tried is Nvidia GeForce now via shield TV which works surprisingly well pending some hiccups here & there because I'm on WiFi and PS4 remote play using my Vita where I was connected to a super fast WiFi in a Kyoto hotel to my PS4 back in Singapore with wired Ethernet and 1gbps fiber and I can play a few match of Street fighter v, no joke.
My big issue is streaming games that you still have to buy. Paying full price for a game that I then have to use all my bandwidth to continually play is...unfortunate.
If it was just a monthly fee to access all the games fine...but having to buy the game to them stream it feels very wrong.
If it was just a monthly fee to access all the games fine...but having to buy the game to them stream it feels very wrong.
I am still on the negative side, but not blindly smack talking just because its new.
My concerns come into play with; the lack of hardwire connections today on devices, data caps and still slow speeds for a good chunk of the country.
My concerns come into play with; the lack of hardwire connections today on devices, data caps and still slow speeds for a good chunk of the country.
Who cares about other Stadia threads, it's not relevant to THIS one. Engage and deny the FUD if it's so readily apparent. So many times people are in such a rush to just dismiss people's arguments because they disagree with them that they dismiss them out of hand without understanding why people feel this strongly.
This is a fundamental change in ownership, in technology, in convenience. Why are people so willing to dismiss people for feeling cautious and mentioning the pitfalls? Like right now, we're talking about getting the technology back to what we already have, how is not okay to not be excited about something like that? It's really aggravating because people aren't willing to engage on the actual issue, they just label a bunch of people that disagree as old people yelling at clouds.
The ultimate test of this tech is going to be when the general public gets its hands on it in a large capacity. Until then these impressions add to the general perception that the tech "works good enough".
"I could not detect any noticeable input lag"
I'm not falling for that. I expect these services to be properly scrutinised under various network conditions and come up with the actual input lag(as in measure it!) we're looking at. Then we can judge if it's acceptable or not.
But none of this "it feels alright".
I'm not falling for that. I expect these services to be properly scrutinised under various network conditions and come up with the actual input lag(as in measure it!) we're looking at. Then we can judge if it's acceptable or not.
But none of this "it feels alright".
I'm hyped. I'm not one of the "I must use a wired controller, with ethernet, and 0.00001ms gaming TV" people so I would definitely stop buying consoles altogether if this works as well as the article says it does. I'm already all digital anyways and pretty much expect all my PS4 games to stop working in 5 years.
I just want to remind people that a whole LOT of people play their console games on TVs with post-processing activated (game mode off or no game mode) and currently experience input lag bigger than Stadia will ever have without noticing or caring. A lot of people on these forums are not representative of the gaming mass as a whole. As for me, yeah it's not quite ready to wow my very specific needs yet.
It "feeling" is the most important part. We can throw ms or frames of latency that's been measured mechanically all we want, but how it feels is what matters in the end. That and if it isn't perceptible to many people and then we get measurements people using it will come out in droves to decry the latency they weren't previously feeling. This has happened in the FGC a whole lot with various fighting game PCBs where "this is fine, I like it" suddenly became a rallying cry about a board being measured to have half a frame of input latency. It's insane.
Given how nuts games are gonna look next gen and how much more ambitious devs are going to be able to be......it seems weird that a lot of people are gonna be playing these games on little phone screens.
I know they will be the same games but I wouldn't want to gimp my experience......I'll not give up my sofa and big tv without a fight,lol.
I know they will be the same games but I wouldn't want to gimp my experience......I'll not give up my sofa and big tv without a fight,lol.
Again because these pitfalls are mentioned in every thread and it is a derail, there is a Stadia OT (there was even a thread how a shark could take out the internet and bring Stadia down...)
We are all aware there are millions of people who do not have the internet to handle this, what is not often mentioned is there are millions of people who can. Ownership is important to some and not important at all to others...again nothing to do with a thread about a positive demo
The onus is on the poster to stay on the topic of the thread, not for other posters to sheriff them
It also doesn't help that, while valid in most cases, the arguments made against it are always the same and get repeated ad naseum even if they've been discussed and, in some cases, even proven to be non-impacting. That's what bugs me most: that some people have cement shoes on and refuse to budge because they don't want their stance to be wrong.
They say in the article that it was hooked up to a Samsung TV. They were merely using the Chromebook as the streaming client.
I don't think Stadia is primarily about phone screens. That aspect of the service is probably the weakest of the launch package (only supporting the latest Pixel phones). Based on the founder's pack, Google is pretty clearly gunning straight for PS5 and Scarlett as its primary use case. The configuration they're pushing hardest is Chromecast + Controller + 4K subscription. That's a next-gen console.
For me the 2nd most interesting use-case is being able to play high end games on any intel-graphics laptop. The tradeoffs for discrete graphics in a laptop are pretty bad right now. Either you get a desktop-replacement tank with a mobile 1070 inside, or you get like a "workstation" 15" laptop with a 1050 inside which are usually expensive, still pretty large, poor battery life, and not that great for gaming anyway. The best laptops imo are 13" ultrabooks, but they're totally unsuitable for gaming. Stadia makes it possible.
Just for reference when talking about latency, here is a DF article about PS Now with measurements to have some figures from a game most of us has played.
Latency
Killzone Shadowfall (30fps lock)
Local 110ms
Ethernet 174ms
WiFi 185ms
Latency
Killzone Shadowfall (30fps lock)
Local 110ms
Ethernet 174ms
WiFi 185ms
Ok,so I'm actually a potential customer for them......thing is,if I have an option to play locally then I'm just not going to consider streaming at all.
Reason I mentioned phones was because of all the talk of play anywhere and a phone is the one piece of hardware everyone has on them all the time.
Regardless anyway,it's not for me....but the tech is amazing and has come along so fast just within this gen I'm sure during next gen it will only get better.....I'll get in on it when I have to,lol.
Reason I mentioned phones was because of all the talk of play anywhere and a phone is the one piece of hardware everyone has on them all the time.
Regardless anyway,it's not for me....but the tech is amazing and has come along so fast just within this gen I'm sure during next gen it will only get better.....I'll get in on it when I have to,lol.
Very pertinently point about blind tests. Totally agreed. I get the impression that there is a subset of gamers who are truly against this regardless, probably more older school gamers. The Fortnite and Snapchat generation? They won't be fussed. Those of use that grew up in the 80s/90s and early naughtiest will probably be less open to it.
Phone screens? Stadia can be played on whatever device you want.
Edit: ah, just saw your response above. Still check out the video. The tech is really cool.
Another thing about the latency.
NX gamer did a console input latency test awhile back, and Doom had 80 ms input latency, Halo 5 had 120 ms latency and Forza Horizon 3 had like 170 ms input latency. This was the total chain of latency including the bluetooth controller and TV. But if Stadia can lower the input latency by being directly connected to the cloud servers it should be very serviceable as long as you have a good internet connection and stable wifi in your house.
NX gamer did a console input latency test awhile back, and Doom had 80 ms input latency, Halo 5 had 120 ms latency and Forza Horizon 3 had like 170 ms input latency. This was the total chain of latency including the bluetooth controller and TV. But if Stadia can lower the input latency by being directly connected to the cloud servers it should be very serviceable as long as you have a good internet connection and stable wifi in your house.
In general, the problem I have with a lot of these conversations is that -- whether people intend to or not -- the battle lines always invariably get drawn. Laying my cards out on the table I'll note that I'm more into high end hardware myself. But even though my preference is with owning my own hardware that's running locally, I still think there's a potential place for streaming. Like especially as a supplementary service it sounds great. Thinking about crossplay and being able to play my game on my PC (or Xbox or whatever) at home and being able to play on a laptop or phone or whatever via Stadia (or xcloud or whatever) on the go sounds great. Take me to that future. I'm in.
But when it gets presented as this sort of inevitable takeover of how video games will be played by everyone that's where I get defensive. Like, I totally am aware of how people come across as old people yelling at clouds when they reject change, and I get that there might be some of that here. But I really, really think that some people are overestimating both the reliability of the tech and current infrastructure when they think that this is just absolutely, 100% how people will be playing games in the future, that this will be a Netflix-like massacre of non-streaming delivery mechanisms for gaming. Now, that doesn't mean it's right to launch into FUD about just how garbage any and all game streaming tech is and how we should reject it wholesale of course. But I do think that the approach many take (on both sides) is what makes these topics so needlessly contentious.
Call me a foolish optimist, but I honestly don't see why both streaming and traditional can't co-exist to expand the audience as opposed to the former replacing the latter.
But when it gets presented as this sort of inevitable takeover of how video games will be played by everyone that's where I get defensive. Like, I totally am aware of how people come across as old people yelling at clouds when they reject change, and I get that there might be some of that here. But I really, really think that some people are overestimating both the reliability of the tech and current infrastructure when they think that this is just absolutely, 100% how people will be playing games in the future, that this will be a Netflix-like massacre of non-streaming delivery mechanisms for gaming. Now, that doesn't mean it's right to launch into FUD about just how garbage any and all game streaming tech is and how we should reject it wholesale of course. But I do think that the approach many take (on both sides) is what makes these topics so needlessly contentious.
Call me a foolish optimist, but I honestly don't see why both streaming and traditional can't co-exist to expand the audience as opposed to the former replacing the latter.
Unless I am mistaken, Google has not given prices yet on game purchases, yet everyone assumes it will be full price. What if it's cheaper, as it will only be available for streaming?
Notice I said non-impacting rather than wrong? Latency being one, because while latency will always exist for something like this, a lot of existing games already have decently high amounts of latency that are mitigated by some of the systems Stadia uses that are designed to mitigate it.
Another one always brought up is ownership, which means different things to different people. They've already said you can purchase games outright to stream without having to do the Pro sub. If it's physical ownership, fine, ya got me, but if it's ownership of the ability to play the game, which most of us talk about in general terms, then it's not an issue with how they're doing this. I've resigned myself long ago that physical ownership doesn't even matter to me in almost any game made after the beginning of last gen consoles, because digital licenses are more useful in a lot of cases and the only benefit to a physical copy, now, is resale, which I rarely ever do.
They can, which is what makes the vitriol here odd. Stadia is a low risk low cost (literally free in 2020 outside of games) alternative.
Personally I am just excited about new technology possibilities, I have no doubt there will be problems at launch and if the product is shit I will not even bat an eye as it cost me about the same price as the Destiny 2 collectors edition and I will walk away with a $90 chromecast.
I've been gaming since the early 80's , I am always happy to explore new avenues that this hobby can go.
My discouragement is I can already see Stadia taking the same heat as "online must be free!" or the Xbox1 announcement months on Gaf where it was impossible to have an actual discussion due to endless thread derails that would ultimately get locked by a moderator (Xbox One was so bad on Gaf they tried to create a single thread to have positive discussions and the mods even locked that).
Every persons reason for not wanting this is valid, it should not be to the detriment for those who want to explore Stadia..
I think my favorite part of Stadia, so far, is that if it works as I expect it to (vs how they're presenting it, though it aligns almost perfectly anyway) I'll be able to just have a $10 sub that gives me the option to play some games I might not otherwise have played and if I decide to not longer be a part of that I can simply unsubscribe. With the founder's pack I'm getting what looks to be a pretty decent/nice controller and a Chromecast Ultra with some service tacked on for free. If I bail, I bail, but I'll still have a decent PC controller available and a good streaming device for one of the rooms in my house (or a gift to a family member).
I guess we'll see on latency, using PlayStation Now made it a no go for me, even for RPGs. And I realize this was one of the first major iterations of the tech (along with OnLive).
As far as ownership, it isn't about 'getting you' or 'winning', this isn't a competition for us. I understand that for you physical ownership isn't a big deal. To me it's not just about resale, but also about game preservation. We're already seeing some Telltale stuff basically lost to the ether essentially forever.