Yes I know I was going by what you said that stadia needed a console and I was saying a chromecast isn't a consoleYou don't need a $1000 pc or a $400 console either to stream GeForce Now...…….
Yes I know I was going by what you said that stadia needed a console and I was saying a chromecast isn't a consoleYou don't need a $1000 pc or a $400 console either to stream GeForce Now...…….
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.This is presumably an area where Linux is a big advantage. Not because Linux necessarily is way snappier than Windows, but because Google will have what they need to observe, profile and improve it. If they went with Windows, they'd be at MS' mercy to solve these kinds of issues.
I have to agree.~90% of "healthy skepticism" on this topic actually manifests itself in concern trolling or sarcastic mocking. I don't think anybody takes issue with healthy skepticism, it's when people are trolling a new service or people interested in a new service and then pretending that "They're just asking questions!" or something.
It's pretty easy to tell when "concern" is coming from a place of malicious intent, and when it's an actual technical interest in learning more about something.
Yes I know I was going by what you said that stadia needed a console
GeForce now is only free because it's in beta, I imagine they will offer a free version to stay competitive with stadia thoughthe 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.
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.
GeForce now is only free because it's in beta, I imagine they will offer a free version to stay competitive with stadia though
we need to end that "negativity " argument there are valid concerns about this technology from people that actually tested in real-world scenarios. So we should keep quiet and just take for granted everything that Company/Media even when our experiences don't match with the expressed in the article.
Been Positive or Negative about Gaming Streaming service doesn't going to make it better or worst.
Companies invest million to know the positive and negative about their services and for some reason here is something that users label as "negativity " and something to be criticized.
C'mon
Every Stadia thread to date has been derailed with numerous posters spreading fud or just stating how they don't want it.Sure it does. Healthy skepticism and asking questions is how people learn. Why not engage people on the specifics of the tech?
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."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"
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.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.
What's a "very long way" in your mind? Because the technology has made a ludicrous leap forward in the span of one console generation. I agree that the perfect solution won't come this year, but I don't think we're 10+ years away from this working just as well as local gameplay.
Netflix streaming proves that near flawless is absolutely good enough. Physical blu-rays still blow Netflix quality out of the water from a picture, and especially sound, perspective. But to 97% of people, it just doesn't matter.
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.
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.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.
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.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.
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.
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.
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."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".
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...)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".
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.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
They say in the article that it was hooked up to a Samsung TV. They were merely using the Chromebook as the streaming client.Interesting that they used Chromebooks again, last night during the Giant Bomb interview Phil Spencer straight up said this shit isn't gonna look great on a 65" TV. Google probably isn't going show games on a TV to press before launch.
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.
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.Stadia will be, for the people with the internet speed and data allowance to allow it, more than serviceable. I'm confident in that.
However, there will be a TON of people who will swear up and down, no matter how good the experience is, that it's not good enough. Google will need to do blind Pepsi Taste Tests with this thing, to prove to people that they don't care about the minuscule concessions the way they think they do.
Phone screens? Stadia can be played on whatever device you want.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.
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.
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.
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.
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.