"Google Stadia is not a product that exists because people want it"
1–10 of 698 posts
Re: "Google Stadia is not a product that exists because people want it"
#2Stadia exists because Google wants to create more opportunities to show video advertising. What better way to do this than to turn games into another type of streaming video. Pre-roll before the game starts, mid-roll in between levels. When players stream games to other views, more pre-roll before they watch.
Re: "Google Stadia is not a product that exists because people want it"
#3I'm not sure if I want a Stadia, but I think there is a product that could succeed doing something similar. Like, I occasionally play Starcraft and other PC games, but it's kind of a pain to plan out future desktop or laptop upgrades because I can only consider products with more powerful video cards and enough extra space to hold each 60+gb game to handle even moderate gaming.
Re: "Google Stadia is not a product that exists because people want it"
#4I think it exists because they've got plenty of infrastructure assets all around the world because of GCP (and are investing in more) and they're probably trying to dream up ideas to drive up utilization and gain some operating leverage on it. A consumer subscription business that depends on all your data centers would do that.
That's not a really good reason to make a product though.
Re: "Google Stadia is not a product that exists because people want it"
#5Offtopic, but why someone bothers to type a proper blogpost in Twitter? It's such a crap experience read something there that multiple thread reader projects exists.
I can only think of the simplicity to publish content makes it too easy for lazy authors.
Re: "Google Stadia is not a product that exists because people want it"
#6Stadia exists because Google is a perpetual spaghetti throwing machine.
Mainframe-style gaming is possible and they have the resources to try it so... here we are. If it doesn't take off, Google will have no problem killing the program in 3 or 4 years.
That said, I really don't see the problem with this strategy. It surely makes much more sense than having an ever growing stable of also-ran offerings. The upshot of course is that every now and then one of these "side projects" takes off into an enormously successful business unit (e.g. Android, Maps, GSuite). All of those programs could have just as easily died on the vine like Google Plus or Wave.
Re: "Google Stadia is not a product that exists because people want it"
#7The author means that she doesn't want it. I want Stadia and everything that it brings.
Re: "Google Stadia is not a product that exists because people want it"
#8Offtopic, but why someone bothers to type a proper blogpost in Twitter? It's such a crap experience read something there that multiple thread reader projects exists. I can only think of the simplicity to publish content makes it too easy for lazy authors.
> Offtopic,
Mmhmm.
> but why someone bothers to type a proper blogpost in Twitter?
I submit that this horse is sufficiently dead and beaten.
Re: "Google Stadia is not a product that exists because people want it"
#9Stadia exists because Google is a perpetual spaghetti throwing machine. Mainframe-style gaming is possible and they have the resources to try it so... here we are. If it doesn't take off, Google will have no problem killing the program in 3 or 4 years. That said, I really don't see the problem with this strategy. It surely makes much more sense than having an ever growing stable of also-ran offerings. The upshot of c…
Stadia is unique though that there are people buying digital games locked to the platform.
So its entirely possible when the inevitably kill it those games could just be lost.
So I hope for the people's sake that buy into it that Google won't shut it down (or at least have a way to add your purchases to steam or something), but its a different risk this time.
Re: "Google Stadia is not a product that exists because people want it"
#10I'm not sure if I want a Stadia, but I think there is a product that could succeed doing something similar. Like, I occasionally play Starcraft and other PC games, but it's kind of a pain to plan out future desktop or laptop upgrades because I can only consider products with more powerful video cards and enough extra space to hold each 60+gb game to handle even moderate gaming.
I couldn't imagine how painful playing starcraft would be with an extra 100ms of latency.