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

261–270 of 698 posts

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

#261

Post by [deleted] »

skybrian wrote: post #188
Crinus wrote: post #113

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> 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 b…

Okay but why? When you walk out of a movie theater you don't have anything. Was it still a good movie? Maybe longevity is overrated? If you play a game for a month or two and enjoyed it, it's worth the price. Rental services make this explicit.

[deleted]

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

#262

Post by guitarbill »

edna314 wrote: post #230
chrischen wrote: post #165

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You can play new AAA games on high with just a $150-$200 GPU. Every other piece of your computer doesn't really matter.

Doesn’t it make more sense if google buys this gpu and shares it among, say, 50 users who have maximum an hour of gaming every week? It almost certainly has to be cheaper sharing hardware among users instead of having each single user owning a piece of hardware which is idle almost all of the time. Unless of course hardware price is neglect-able with respect to game price.

i'm interested how this will work at peak times, when everybody gets back from work and wants to play? or for new releases. are they just going to throw money at it and be massively over-provisioned most of the time?

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

#263

Post by akvadrako »

evervevdww221 wrote: post #154
akvadrako wrote: post #104

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How does it make sense that a computer at home, with 5% utilization and retail power prices, can be less per hour than a computer with 50% utilization and wholesale power? Even if all you do is host single-user machines with retail games installed and some kind of imaging solution, it seems like it should pay off.

$2 per hour per machine is not a made-up number, just check how much Amazon charges for a GPU vm. Again, we were a small company, we had to use other cloud providers. I don't know why amazon or alike are so expensive. We tried colocation too, not any cheaper to be honest. Also, when buying a computer or a console, you don't pay by usage. you pay one time to own the hardware and the remaining 5 year usage is free, plu…

I assumed you were not using Amazon because it's obviously a bad choice for this use case. $2/hour is $87k over 5 years — not surprising you can't make money.

One can rent a rack for about $3k a year which comfortably fits 20 servers. Obviously, colocation is much cheaper.

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

#264

Post by Thimothy »

javajosh wrote: post #156
raxxorrax wrote: post #100

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I am not so sure. Downloading, updating, installing are certainly no issues if the bandwidth problem is solved. It just isn't really a hassle today for people with good connections. Maybe it will capture the casual market, but there are disadvantages to the platform. Just think of modding as an example. It might capture some console players, but I am not sure if they pull off even that, since the service is actually…

> Downloading, updating, installing are certainly no issues if the bandwidth problem is solved. No. The problem's of proper system administration go far beyond issues of bandwidth. To apply a positive change you have to know about it, find it, download it, install it, and configure it. Not to mention it helps to understand the content of the patch, how it applies, and the social/technical context of the patch. And wi…

Er... Was 2001 the last time you gamed on a computer?

All those issues are solved in modern day pc gaming. Even GOG with its drm free games automatically updates and syncs your games, and even supports beta channels. Also, I don't recall the last time I had a OS related problem more complex than "update your graphic card driver".

On consoles this is even more of a non issue.

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

#265

Post by dawg- »

JohnFen wrote: post #253
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…

> Stadia is the first offering that matches my needs of a Netflix for games. Perhaps I misunderstand what Stadia is actually offering, but it doesn't look like a "Netflix for games" to me. Netflix's model is you pay a monthly fee and you get to watch anything in their catalog. With Stadia, you still have to buy each game separately, correct? >I don't care if gamers nor teenagers want it I am neither a gamer nor a tee…

I'm pretty sure the $10 a month gives you a service similar to Xbox Game Pass. You can play the games in their catalog, just like Netflix. You also have the option to purchase a game and own if even if it's rotated out of the catalog.

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

#266

Post by edna314 »

guitarbill wrote: post #262
edna314 wrote: post #230

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Doesn’t it make more sense if google buys this gpu and shares it among, say, 50 users who have maximum an hour of gaming every week? It almost certainly has to be cheaper sharing hardware among users instead of having each single user owning a piece of hardware which is idle almost all of the time. Unless of course hardware price is neglect-able with respect to game price.

i'm interested how this will work at peak times, when everybody gets back from work and wants to play? or for new releases. are they just going to throw money at it and be massively over-provisioned most of the time?

Sure, there are lot of scenarios how this could fail and I might be a bit optimistic, but the idea just makes sense. If stadia doesn’t work out sooner or later there will be a platform that will work.

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

#267

Post by mantap »

birdyrooster wrote: post #200
CoolGuySteve wrote: post #184

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Have you considered that you might not be the target audience for a $10/month game streaming service?

I don’t know what their target audience could possibly be. If the game is so visually unappealing that the customer doesn’t care about frame rate or resolution, then it’s likely they already have the capability to render that with the console they already have. Stadia needs to convince people they have a better product than what consumers have today. Instead it looks like a step down and you still have to pay full pr…

Most people game at 60fps or even 30fps. If 60fps is an unacceptable slide show you are most definitely not in the target market.

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

#268

Post by dawg- »

OedipusRex wrote: post #89

I said this in another thread about Stadia, the market for Stadia is vanishingly small. The people who have high enough internet speeds that either can't or won't get a "traditional" console or PC is extremely small. Too small to signal to Google that this is worth maintaining ( https://killedbygoogle.com/ ). For Stadia to survive, Google needs to bring in new "gamers", because existing "gamers" already have their ow…

I think they are probably betting that for $10 a month, people who already have a playstation or xbox would check it out and subscribe from pure curiosity. When the next generation of consoles come out in a couple years, here's the choice users will be looking at:

$500 for a new playstation/xbox? Or just keep paying that $10 a month subscription that I forgot about two years ago?

Imagine you are a parent and your 13 year old kid wants to play whatever the new popular game is. You can spend a few hundred bucks on a console, or you can spend $10 a month for them to play the same game. It's an easy decision.

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

#269

Post by plopz »

oefrha wrote: post #50
plopz wrote: post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I couldn't imagine how painful playing starcraft would be with an extra 100ms of latency.

There are plenty of high ping players on the ladder already. I myself have played on the NA server while physically in Asia. American pros train on Korean or European ladders too. It’s okay. Also, StarCraft doesn’t have to be ultra-competitive. You can enjoy the campaign or coop, or just play some unranked multiplayer for fun. A bit more latency doesn’t ruin the experience, and many/most human beings aren’t twitchy e…

You must be talking about sc2, in remastered theres only one global ladder and when you do hit koreans, if the turn rate drops due to latency, many will just leave the game.

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

#270

Post by dorgo »

JohnFen wrote: post #218
skybrian wrote: post #188

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Okay but why? When you walk out of a movie theater you don't have anything. Was it still a good movie? Maybe longevity is overrated? If you play a game for a month or two and enjoyed it, it's worth the price. Rental services make this explicit.

> Was it still a good movie? Sure. It might even be good enough that you want to have a copy of your own that you know you'll be able to watch at any point in the future. > Maybe longevity is overrated? If you play a game for a month or two and enjoyed it, it's worth the price It probably depends on what sort of games you enjoy, and why. I still pull out games that I bought 20 or more years ago and play them, and am…

>Sure. It might even be good enough that you want to have a copy of your own that you know you'll be able to watch at any point in the future.

Is this not possible with Stadia?

Post reply on HN