Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

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

threader.app

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

111–120 of 698 posts

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

#111

Post by utf985 »

EugeneOZ wrote: post #62

I want Google Stadia. My internet bandwidth is more than enough for 4k 60 FPS and price for their service is pretty good - better than $3k PC for 5 years - you need to upgrade GPU at least every 3 years and CPU every 2 years (and, therefore, motherboard) to keep "high-end PC" title and play new games on "ultra" settings. Here they promise the same for a price, comparable to what my high-end PC takes for electricity.

Where are you getting this data from? 2 years for a new CPU? My gaming pc from 2015 that cost just a little over $1k runs all recent games on ultra just fine.

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

#112

Post by ansible »

birdyrooster wrote: post #11

Stadia is and will remain laughable because it has absolutely no answer for VR content and is a laggy mess in the best conditions. If a partnership between AT&T and NVidia couldn’t crack this egg, why in the world would Google be able to? It’s a physics problem that cannot be overcome. The hubris of Google to tout this platform is incredibly annoying as a gamer.

Yes, on the one hand, traditional gaming (FPS, etc.) is most of the market now. Call of Duty, Fortnite, etc. But we're on the cusp of VR/AR really taking off.

The current all-in-one VR systems are almost good enough for a lot of people to jump in. I can see the next-gen of those being very popular. Certainly, you're giving up a lot by wearing all the rendering silicon on your head, but the other side of that is that it shaves precious milliseconds off the end-to-end latency, which is critical for a good experience.

And there's no way to do any of that with streaming games.

Now, for an old man like me who's mostly playing turn-based strategy games, card games and such, Stadia might be an attractive offer. Of course, those sorts of games don't push the limits of my old system, so... yeah, I don't need it right now either.

While top-end PCs can render better than top-end consoles right now, I don't see that as being compelling enough, especially when you factor in the network bandwidth / low-latency needed.

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

#113

Post by Crinus »

ArmandGrillet wrote: post #36

I want Stadia. I've read reviews yesterday and was amazed by the lack of a long term vision from the reviewers. If Google doesn't drop the ball (which is a huge if knowing the company's history), Stadia makes a lot of sense. I want to play Red Dead Redemption 2, the cheapest way to do that as I don't have a console nor an expensive computer is Stadia. And when I will want to play Cyberpunk 2077, Stadia will be the ch…

> the lack of a long term vision

How about this for a long term vision: any game you buy now will be totally lost in the future ("long term") when Google decides to shut down the service (which happens all the time) or deactivate your account (which also happens all the time) while developers will have moved on and/or closed and wont give a second thought about. In the meanwhile, while Stadia exists, any games will be filled with anti-consumer garbage that you wont be able to do anything about - not even the files that make up the game are under your control.

I'm 100% hoping this will fail, not because it isn't a technically cool product nor because i cannot imagine the potential it has - i want it to fail exactly because i can imagine all the negative potential it has.

I do not want to rent my computer nor i want to rent my gaming device, i want to fully control everything in it and i do not want any commercial scheme that erodes the marketplace which allows me to have that freedom.

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

#114

Post by tonmoy »

Someone1234 wrote: post #94
ArmandGrillet wrote: post #36

I want Stadia. I've read reviews yesterday and was amazed by the lack of a long term vision from the reviewers. If Google doesn't drop the ball (which is a huge if knowing the company's history), Stadia makes a lot of sense. I want to play Red Dead Redemption 2, the cheapest way to do that as I don't have a console nor an expensive computer is Stadia. And when I will want to play Cyberpunk 2077, Stadia will be the ch…

> I've read reviews yesterday and was amazed by the lack of a long term vision from the reviewers. In my experience you should should never buy a product for what it might be one day and instead only pay for the what you're getting on day one. That way you're never disappointed/always get what you paid for. For example I recently purchased an Oculus Rift. I waited until enough games released so that I couldn't be dis…

> Stadia costs $129 with no games

No, stadia founder’s edition costs $129. The regular 1080p stadia is free

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

#116

Post by flak48 »

fulafel wrote: post #108
eternalny1 wrote: post #14

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…

The 4k 60 fps bw requirement is just 35 Mbps, is there really catching up to do unless we're talking about mobile hotspots? Netflix 4k is 25 Mbps.

Latency might still be an issue for many

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

#117

Post by zaarn »

londons_explore wrote: post #69
nerdjon wrote: post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

If Google shuts it down, they will likely refund all games purchased. (But probably not any subscription fee) They have done that previously with all discontinued products. Even hardware they tend to refund in full if it fails during the warranty and they don't have stock of that model anymore, or if they shut down the servers.

In my experience, it's difficult to get Google to hold up that warranty. When my Nexus 6P started to bootloop, Google refused to repair the product at all nor refund me the money (I purchased directly from Google and I did have copies of all receipts including pictures of the original package it was delivered in).

The bots don't care if they decide the warranty doesn't apply.

If Google decides to just not refund the game price or offer ownership in other ways, what are you going to do? You didn't buy a game, you bought a license to stream the game from Google's servers. You don't own anything and Google owes you squat.

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

#118

Post by raymond_goo »

zaarn wrote: post #105
ArmandGrillet wrote: post #36

I want Stadia. I've read reviews yesterday and was amazed by the lack of a long term vision from the reviewers. If Google doesn't drop the ball (which is a huge if knowing the company's history), Stadia makes a lot of sense. I want to play Red Dead Redemption 2, the cheapest way to do that as I don't have a console nor an expensive computer is Stadia. And when I will want to play Cyberpunk 2077, Stadia will be the ch…

The problem is that cloud gaming already exists and many providers did a better job than Google. Even the latency shouldn't be an issue, I've cloudgamed to a DC in the netherlands with 2ms of latency but apparently somehow Google manages to fuck that up somehow. I doubt Google will continue Stadia, the press is already bad, the product is bad, it'll likely be dusted in a few years, leaving the product owners out of a…

https://www.xbox.com/en-US/xbox-game-streaming/project-xclou...

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

#120

Post by Iv »

ArmandGrillet wrote: post #36

I want Stadia. I've read reviews yesterday and was amazed by the lack of a long term vision from the reviewers. If Google doesn't drop the ball (which is a huge if knowing the company's history), Stadia makes a lot of sense. I want to play Red Dead Redemption 2, the cheapest way to do that as I don't have a console nor an expensive computer is Stadia. And when I will want to play Cyberpunk 2077, Stadia will be the ch…

I could see playing RTS or tactical RPGs, but it is a very poor idea to propose FPS.

It is already hard to have a reactive system locally, proposing remotely is. You need to react in 16ms if you want a snappy 60Hz. 1000 km from the server is adding 6 ms of ping. At one point, proposing this kind of service has the speed of light as a "technical constraint".

Post reply on HN