Live data from Hacker News

Google unveils Stadia cloud gaming service

theverge.com

391–400 of 577 posts

Re: Google unveils Stadia cloud gaming service

#391

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> but I’m pretty comfortable pointing to existing cloud computing business models or streaming services as a precedent. Why are you this comfortable? Netflix, YouTube TV, Twitch, Sling, Amazon Prime Video -- basically all streaming services offer flat rates, not per-MB ones. Further, all existing game library services tout unlimited gaming as a primary selling point! That's the primary reason you opt into Gamefly or…

The amount of variable cost to stream music or video to a user is significantly less than the the variable cost to render high end graphics. The high end hardware costs money and depreciates. Why would it cost less to rent a gpu hour for generic purposes than it would to rent a gpu hour to play video games?

> The amount of variable cost to stream music or video to a user is significantly less than the the variable cost to render high end graphics.

I don't agree. Anything is scalable.

Re: Google unveils Stadia cloud gaming service

#392
post #81

And the games will run on Linux using Vulkan. I find that pretty awesome.

Looks like Fuchsia is a year years too late to be used for this, but I guess it wouldn't be too difficult to switch it out later on. Still a great thing for Linux and Vulkan. Too bad Sony refuses to support them on its PS consoles.

I don't think Fuchsia would be used for this. Vulkan runs on Linux, Unreal/Unity run on Linux, and AMD has a good open source driver. Everything points to Linux being the right choice here.

Re: Google unveils Stadia cloud gaming service

#393
post #197

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Economics were not the main problem with OnLive, it simply didnt work from the players perspective.

Right partially because OnLive couldn't spend the money required to put servers close enough to give users a good experience. It would have taken a monumental amount of money for them to expand in a way that would facilitate that, and custom make servers that had consumer grade GPUs in them. Furthermore, there are other technological advances that have come even in the past 2 years that help facilitate this, like Sec…

OnLive didnt work (good enough) even if you lived next door to their servers.

Re: Google unveils Stadia cloud gaming service

#394

I really don't understand why people here aren't talking about the real underlying principle of this service. Google has captured the education and cheap laptop space with chromebooks. This is the logical extension of that software. Sure they will eventually combine chromeos and android but this is one more step in the direction of everything happening inside of your web browser. The entire reason this is happening i…

What you smoking foo?

>>The entire reason this is happening is because Google has successfully captured what once was the holy grail of markets, education, and is doing things like this to keep people on chromebooks.

Care to share how this tidbit is true?

>>The most important thing to realize is that they are focusing on gamers as a trial, the people who are price sensitive and who have to move first off of Windows 7 since they can't pay for extended support even if they wanted it. They can then continue this into the workplace. This is a brilliant move by Google.

What gamers are still on Win7? Most are already on 10. Most legit gamers care about input lag, which a streaming service will never solve vs. having hardware wired to your monitor. Most legit gamers use a wired mouse for gods sake because of input lag introduced to wireless mice.

Re: Google unveils Stadia cloud gaming service

#395

Rewrote this a few times. Overall I think this would be really bad for the gaming world. Not buying consoles would be nice, but the natural business model will be ads or pay per hour or pay per MB. This is going to further drive the industry to towards mass multiplayer and grindy games I think. More accessible but worse content. Indie shops would probably struggle even more under this model. The cost per user will va…

There's so much that this will hurt in the gaming industry. Some of my thoughts:

1. As subscription services take over, the upfront revenue game studios see will drop. This is just simple math: Xbox Game Pass costs $10/month, which means its the total cost of a AAA game over 6 months. In a traditional model, many gamers would expect to buy, lets say, 2 AAA games per year. In this new model, I can play as many as I want. And even if I only play 1 or 2 every year, I'm almost definitely going to be "dabbling" in the collection for other games I may want to play, ESPECIALLY if they're instant-on like Stadia. Even if they pay-out to studios based on some metric derived from time spent in game, there's no way studios will get the same level of income as they did before. (note: this is exactly why Spotify is having such a hard time, and why they're branching out beyond music. royalties abstracted behind a subscription service suck for the bottom line)

2. So upfront revenue drops. How do studios make that up? In-game transactions. They're already huge, and they'll just keep getting bigger.

3. So what, micro transactions (mtx) are the "new normal". Well, the top 5% of games can afford that decreased upfront revenue by making it up in mtx (think: Fortnite, Apex Legends, CoD). The trailing 95% can't (think: Indie titles).

4. Beyond that, you can bet your bottom dollar that Stadia will pay out tons to the AAA studios just to get their names on the platform, given that Google has no first party studios to speak of. Assassins Creed gets enough upfront revenue to make it worth their while, meanwhile the next indie darling is left out to dry, further balkanizing the gaming industry

5. Switching gears: A massive number of software engineers in the industry entered it because of gaming. Games, even back in the 90s, were such a clear application and value of computers that it was obvious, even to children, that they'd be something huge. It inspired a generation, to not only play, but to mod and even make their own. Now, we're moving that all off into the cloud, hidden from the next generation. Google wants you to own a Chromebook and consume their products, not understand how they work.

6. Speaking of modding: Its literally the source of the world's most popular games. Battle Royale? You can trace its roots back to mods for ARMA and Minecraft. MOBA? Dota, a mod for warcraft. Creativity happens in environments that large corporations can't recreate, and traditionally a great platform has been starting with a base game, a great game, that some studio created, then exerting your creativity on top of that platform. It benefited everyone, including large AAA studios who could then copy your idea and make millions. Yeah, good luck modding on a blackboxed server a hundred miles away.

7. But fine. I guess we're moving into the future and this is part of it. Except, there are millions, even BILLIONS, of people around the world without the internet capability to even join this service. Google tried to help solve this with Fiber, and gave up. Its fucking hard. They'd rather do easy, cool things, like cloud gaming. Modern consoles are bad enough; my brother, who lives just an hour outside of a top 10 US city, recently told me that he downloaded Fortnite on Xbox for the kids. It took a week of 24/7 downloading. Most games drop with day 1 patches in the dozens of gigabytes, even if you buy the disk in-stores. The sheer arrogance of Google, to get up on stage and claim this service is gaming for EVERYONE, the apex of accessibility, is disgusting to me. They're stuck so far up their own ass they've become the ouroboros.

8. Well, streaming games have taken over the world. Let's say you want to compete with Google on this streaming game front. All of the top three cloud providers now want to get into game streaming. So, no way can you compete on cost there with them; they own the data centers and give their game streaming divisions nice fat discounts. They all have the pockets to design nice custom silicon with AMD specialized for the task. And, oh by the way, all the latest games are now optimized for this silicon (whether its the custom AMD chips in the PS4, or XB1, or whatever cloud streaming service we're talking about, they're all custom). You're stuck with off-the-shelf cards. Ha! Nvidia won't let you deploy their cards in a datacenter [1], because they ALSO want in on this big cash pile they've all convinced themselves exist. So, basically, good luck. The world has balkanized, and penetrating it becomes harder every year.

I hate this. I hate it so much. The only saving grace is that it is inevitable that this will fail to realize the results Google wants, and they'll pull the plug. And maybe the rest of the industry is smart enough to recognize how short-sighted a streaming-first/subscription-first strategy is, for literally everyone involved except the people who rent the metal.

I want to go back to the 2000s. This new world sucks.

[1] https://www.techpowerup.com/239994/nvidia-forbids-geforce-dr...

Re: Google unveils Stadia cloud gaming service

#396

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Sorry but I just don't see it. I'm used to designing systems and games that work in 100ms+ latent environments since that's what you see in production(or try mobile where it can be 2-5x that). We were doing 250ms ping times back in '99 with games like SubSpace and the like where you had a predictive game model/design. Yes you lose the overhead of designing for latency because it just won't fundamentally work in those…

I agree that it will all hinge on what kinds of latencies we see. If Google can produce the same kinds of latencies it does to 8.8.8.8, it's definitely got a shot. Mobile's an even bigger challenge, but I've seen wire-competitive latencies from 5G, so I think there's hope there too. This does, however, leave VR high and dry. Wonder if they have any ideas about that angle.

Getting a consistent latency to their edge servers is going to be tricky.

Wifi for instance is completely out. All it takes is someone turning on the wrong blender/micowave/power adapter and just the smallest bit of RF pollution will put you into unusable territory. Gets harder as your population density rises.

You can already see this with in-house streaming today. I can stream Netflix but my local LAN XBOne streaming is pretty unusable for things like Monster Hunter.

As your population density lowers the chance of you having the sub-30ms latency w/ 0% loss decreases significantly.

Like I said in the root, they'll able to get this to work for non-action(~200ms window) singleplayer titles, the idea that you could use this for multiplayer is laughable.

Re: Google unveils Stadia cloud gaming service

#397

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And of course, only Google can build it's game service into it's own browser, and into it's own video sharing site, and into the Play Store. Stadia is Google utilizing multiple of it's existing monopolies to enter into a new space. It's also a major shot at Twitch, not just traditional game platforms like PlayStation and Xbox, since streamers will need to be streaming on YouTube to take advantage of things like Crowd…

What would stop someone from building a Stadia competitor as a Native Client app?

Google's infrastructure, as well as Chrome, Google Accounts and Youtube. Budget too, I suppose.

I mean, this doesn't stop competitors, but it's quite the moat to climb.

Re: Google unveils Stadia cloud gaming service

#398
post #61

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"Serious" gamers can still buy consoles. This is not a zero sum market.

Everyone copied Apple when they removed the headphone jack, whose to say consoles in the traditional sense will still be around in 20 years? Microsoft/Sony are NOT going to sit back and let Google win here. Expect replies from them (especially with Microsoft's Azure). The streaming services of gaming is coming.

Not really, the Samsung Galaxy S10 still has a headphone jack. And Samsung being the largest Android device manufacturer, makes a big counter point.

Re: Google unveils Stadia cloud gaming service

#399

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Steam and Nvidia don't have the stellar 11 9s kind of reputation Google has. Also, you have to actually buy those games first, so your library is a tiny fraction of what Stadia offers.

> Also, you have to actually buy those games first, so your library is a tiny fraction of what Stadia offers. What makes you think games would just be included in Stadia? Competing streaming services here are around $10-20/month without any games included . Origin's game access is $15/month without any game playing hardware included. So... what will stradia end up being, and at what price? Would you pay $30/month for…

Origin does not compete with Stradia, sorry.

Re: Google unveils Stadia cloud gaming service

#400

Rewrote this a few times. Overall I think this would be really bad for the gaming world. Not buying consoles would be nice, but the natural business model will be ads or pay per hour or pay per MB. This is going to further drive the industry to towards mass multiplayer and grindy games I think. More accessible but worse content. Indie shops would probably struggle even more under this model. The cost per user will va…

Why on earth would it be pay per hour or per MB? Does Netflix charge that way? How about Spotify?

Time has shown that the best revenue model for these kinds of services is finding a monthly price, or multiple tiers of a monthly price, that adequately cover the costs incurred from heavy users and light users alike.

Post reply on HN