Live data from Hacker News

"Google Stadia is not a product that exists because people want it"

threader.app

21–30 of 698 posts

Re: "Google Stadia is not a product that exists because people want it"

#21
> Sun started with: "What can we build?" "What would be good for US, if people wanted it?".

The author wasn't in the room when this idea came up, so I feel like this is a completely made up story. These Sunblade were a great idea, and they still are. I'm sure we'll eventually get there again at one point. Sun failed on the execution, but that's an other story.

Re: "Google Stadia is not a product that exists because people want it"

#22
With smaller devices like laptops and netbooks (along with smartphones) becoming increasingly popular, Stadia caters to people who don't want to invest in a second device just for gaming. I know several people who only own a laptop and are interested in this service; I'm sure the market is there.

The main challenge, though, is that they are late to the competition -- NVIDIA GeForce NOW seems much more mature (the aforementioned people are already using their beta) and it's not clear what Stadia brings to the table that NVIDIA can't do better (since they make the consumer GPUs).

Also, I think Google messed up by focusing on the Stadia controller and other physical devices; that's exactly what people don't want, to purchase more devices. And I read through their FAQ and don't even understand whether you need the controller to use Stadia. If it's actually required, that's ridiculous.

Re: "Google Stadia is not a product that exists because people want it"

#23
post #9
post #6

Stadia 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.

I think Stadia being shut down is a near certainty (and the GP comments' 3-4 years is very optimistic for how long it might survive), but I think that Stadia owners losing their games is fairly unlikely. When other digital services with purchases have shut down, there's often some attempt to offer a migration for user licenses. (I've watched Ultraviolet and Flixster's shutdowns and the like of late.) The game studios partnering with Google would be extremely upset for their customers to be dropped, and I'd especially expect games like Destiny 2 to cleanly migrate a user's data and progress to playing on another platform.

Even when Google shut down their Assassin's Creed demo of Stadia's technology, which was free, they gave everyone a game key to redeem on Steam at the end, so my guess is that's what would happen in a Stadia shutdown.

The most likely "loss" is from the hardware purchases, though Google has hedged here a bit on the fact that a Chromecast Ultra will still be useful post-Stadia. Even the controller might not go to waste if it works as a generic PC game controller.

Re: "Google Stadia is not a product that exists because people want it"

#24
post #4

I 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.

I would argue that, and it allows them to reuse idle resources. Instead of everyone having to buy their own game console or pc which sits idle most of the time, google only needs to buy enough for peak demand and then they can use the idle resources for their own purposes when not in demand.

Re: "Google Stadia is not a product that exists because people want it"

#25
post #6

Stadia 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…

>Android, Maps, GSuite All of these products have existed for 5+ years. What recent thing has Google brought to the table that actually stuck?

It’s more like 10+ years but your point is a good one. Hard to grow trees when you keep cutting off the saplings.

Re: "Google Stadia is not a product that exists because people want it"

#26

The strange thing about Stadia is that not only is Google making an impractical product that people don't want, but so are Sony and Microsoft. It's like the "race" to 5G or the "race" to AI, but in this case there is no prize -- you expect any hardware from Google to be a lost cause, even Microsoft has had good luck selling mice, but Sony is serious about hardware so how did they get caught up in it? The one real adv…

> but in this case there is no prize

The prize is getting people to pay for a subscription forever instead of buying your console once

Re: "Google Stadia is not a product that exists because people want it"

#27
There's already a bunch of gaming computer providers like Parsec and Vortex, what does Stadia bring to the table? Personally I doubt the decision makers involved play games more twitch-based than Civilization. For fighting and rhythm games, being meters too far away from the game system makes latency annoying, let alone 200ms away! Even a game server at every residential zone and apartment block would not be better than a potato machine a foot away.

Cynically, it looks like they're trying to swallow that market whole, betting they have more money on hand to price themselves artificially low to carpet-bomb the small cloud gaming market.

EDIT: Something I forgot to mention, Parsec already works with the games you own anywhere else, and on a crappy Android tablet. What Stadia looks like its selling is increased latency, plus a walled garden store, plus necessary custom hardware.

Unless Google is giving away the hardware you need to play, I can't see this being price competitive next to a Nintendo Switch, and the latter needs no Internet connection at all.

Re: "Google Stadia is not a product that exists because people want it"

#28
post #6

Stadia 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…

>Android, Maps, GSuite All of these products have existed for 5+ years. What recent thing has Google brought to the table that actually stuck?

Google photos?

Re: "Google Stadia is not a product that exists because people want it"

#29

Stadia to me may not be ready yet, but I have no doubt in the future this is how we will be gaming. Once bandwidth is ubiquitous enough to stream 4K games at 60 FPS without having to INSTALL anything or even OWN A GAMING PC/CONSOLE, this is a no brainer. Why shell out for a new 2080TI card when you can just pay another month to Stadia and let them handle all the hardware to run Red Dead Redemption 2 at 4k 60 FPS? No…

Bandwidth isn't the problem. Latency is. Multiple gigabits of bandwidth won't help you when it takes half a second for your character to start jumping after you hit the button.

Re: "Google Stadia is not a product that exists because people want it"

#30
post #10
post #3

I'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.

It's funny how often I have experienced 30 to 300 ms between a computer or game console and the display.

I have a Alienware "gaming" laptop where the built-in screen lags about 30 ms relative to most monitors I plug it into. I have a video to prove it where I am duplicating the screen and running a clock.

When I was playing League of Legends it seemed to me that I just couldn't win when I was using the built-in monitor but then the game got a lot easier when I used an external monitor.

I had a similar experience with much worse latency playing Titanfall on an XBox plugged into a Samsung TV. When I switched it to "Game Mode" I suddenly started moving up the ranks.

It's an issue that people are surprisingly oblivious to, but fast reaction doesn't matter much for single player games and when people lose at multi player games they just blame themselves.

Post reply on HN