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

621–630 of 698 posts

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

#621

Post by Crinus »

choward wrote: post #558
Wowfunhappy wrote: post #254

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Every Flash/Shockwave browser game is becoming increasingly hard to play. If you have the actual .swf file, you can run the game in Flash Projector, easy! > Games for ancient Windows versions can be devilishly hard to get running What doesn't work in Virtualbox? Luckily, games from the 90's generally don't need GPU acceleration. I'm also continuously amazed by how much just works in modern Windows. > games for Powe…

> If you have the actual .swf file, you can run the game in Flash Projector, easy! What if it depends on the page it was originally hosted on? https://help.adobe.com/en_US/as3/dev/WS5b3ccc516d4fbf351e63e...

AFAIK Flashpoint (or some other Flash preservation project) use an embedded server with an embedder browser to make these games work. Most of them were single player or relied on simple common (among game hosters) APIs that are easy to replicate.

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

#622

Post by Crinus »

vocatus_gate wrote: post #369
Jyaif wrote: post #162

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> i can imagine all the negative potential it has But you fail to imagine all the positive potential. Terabyte-sized games with 0 download time, more interactions between players, better graphics, no more cheating, no more piracy (which leads to more games or bigger games), and better utilized HW (which is good for your wallet and the environment), and obviously you can play wherever you want. Streaming games is the…

> Streaming games is the future, deal with it. So, so wrong. 1. Much of the world has heavy-handed data caps. Those aren't going away any time soon. Streaming two ways eats into that quickly. 2. Input latency is real, and super annoying. And it's not just that there's latency; that you can get used to. It's that there's highly unpredictable latency which is super frustrating when playing anything but turn-based games…

Honestly, these aren't issues that would block something like Stadia, the solutions will simply be games designed around these issues pretty much how many modern games are designed around the limitations of a console controller or a mobile phone touch screen.

These issues will be solved. The loss of control is not something that can be solved though and is IMO a much bigger issue.

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

#623

Post by smileybarry »

dwild wrote: post #273
touchpadder wrote: post #249

Earlier quoted context omitted.

As an author of a browser game https://bad.city I noticed that over the last 5 years browser performance became 10x faster. The game currently works at 60fps, even on 2 year old Galaxy Note and has 0ms lag. With web workers and web assembly soon we'll see AAA games running in the browser on any device. No need to download 50gb game when you can progressively stream the 3d models in real time while playing and it will…

> With web workers and web assembly soon we'll see AAA games running in the browser on any device. I heard something similar to that for the past 10 years at least. > you can progressively stream the 3d models in real time while playing People were amazed of the speed at which models loaded using an SSD instead of a mechanical hard drive... and that was when games were in the 5 GB range. Loading time is latency too.…

Streaming will never take off for competitive playing, because the physical latency will always be there. You already have people optimizing their display & input latency, not to mention GPU buffering tweaks, to shave anywhere from 5-20ms off the final result, and that's in _local_ gaming. Windows 10 1803 introduced a "fake fullscreen" mode to cut around the window compositor lag.

Assuming Stadia really does all these render path micro-optimizations perfectly, you then have the issue of datacenter location and speed of light creating more latency. And because in this case the end user needs to react in real time rather than offload operations or create autonomous behaviour (the stock market example), at some point they'll have to move closer to their nearest datacenter. (assuming the US ISP landscape is fixed by then)

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

#624

Post by smileybarry »

scarejunba wrote: post #436
TremendousJudge wrote: post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>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 Fi, the Nexus and Pixel lines, Google Play Music, Google Home, Protobuf, Guava, ReCaptcha, TensorFlow, Google Assistant, Android Auto, Chromecast, Google Tag Manager, Google Chrome, Google Flights, Google Translate, Google Domains.

Google Play Music is heading to the graveyard and replaced by the worse YouTube Music. Nexus is long dead.

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

#625

Post by Grue3 »

>and I've never heard of anyone other than Sun using it

Well, I happened to have used it. This entire post gave me flashbacks. I was studying in Moscow and was too poor to afford my own PC, and when I bought one I still didn't have an Internet connection, so I was mostly using a computer room in a certain educational organisation. And they had all those Sun thin clients, and that awful-looking UI and Opera browser (back when it had ads). There were some ancient computers with text-only displays as well. It was definitely an experience.

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

#626

Post by wruza »

krick wrote: post #583
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…

I'll suggest a longer term vision: no individual consumer will be able to afford any hardware needed to use anything more than a thin client. Games of the future will require more powerful hardware than what you are using now, but even your typical gaming computer of today will be not affordable in the future, simply because it won't be produced for mass market anymore. In effect, all your computations will be run on…

Before you get too scared, please watch this ads sponsored by Ad, Inc between your corridor transitions. Btw, your game developer didn’t intend that at all, its just for our platform to be profitable.

You can remove it by going premium (tracking not included) for only $RTX3080Ti/year.

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

#627

Post by diffeomorphism »

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

It is by far not the first (Onlive, Gakai, etc.) and it is not a subscription like Netflix but monthly fee + buying games.

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

#628

Post by diffeomorphism »

perennate wrote: post #136
tonmoy wrote: post #128

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This FAQ page DOSE NOT have this quote right now! From this FAQ page: > Do I need to use your Controller? (Stadia Controller) > No, you can use many popular HID compliant controllers when playing via USB cable on Chrome or mobile. To play on your TV you will need to use the Stadia Controller and Google Chromecast Ultra.

It is under "Which Chromecast devices are compatible with Stadia?". I refreshed and still see the quote. Is there a difference between playing in Chromecast vs playing in Chrome browser? And why do you need a controller at all if you're just playing desktop games?

IF you want to play on a chromecast specifically, THEN you need to use the Stadia one.

IF you want to play on a windows pc/chromebook/... you can use most controllers, e.g. dualshock, xbox etc, or choose to not use a controller.

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

#629

Post by akvadrako »

HeWhoLurksLate wrote: post #557
akvadrako wrote: post #263

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

You've also gotta get servers to put in there, and in a 42u rack with, say 9 4u servers, a 2u managed switch, and now you have 4 units left to handle power distribution, power backups, any kind of external remote management (say an out-of-band KVM, or a second network for IPMI traffic, or anything else). ALSO, all those servers? Say the fancy, high-speed switch you need to route all that traffic is $2000. You wind up…

I wasn’t suggesting doing it this way. I said to use the equivalent of having a system at home: no virtualization, consumer GPUs. That way it’s an apples to apples comparison - you just get higher utilization and cheaper power. The cost of the switch and rack are minor when divided over 20 systems.

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

#630

Post by ragequitta »

corodra wrote: post #416
ragequitta wrote: post #408

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm torn. Xbox game pass for PC is one of the greatest things to happen to gaming. Ps now let me play red dead 1 before #2 came out. EA access is great if you just want to play battlefield or Fifa for a month (those games don't typically last longer than that for me). But I also love my 500+ steam games. If these services keep getting better they'll definitely take over, though. Outer Worlds on Xbox pass comes to min…

Okay, but that's a little different. Stadia, you have to buy the game retail. Ps now (I have a ps4), 10 bucks a month to play how many different games when the hell ever I want. It totally works out for me because I normally don't care about most games after 10 hours of gameplay. I don't want to buy a game for $60 bucks and not actually have it. Generally, I don't buy a game until it's down to like $30, because I don…

Stadia Pro for $10 a month gets you a selection of games I believe. But it really is in it's infancy, and not very good. We'll just have to see if google throttles it before it can mature like most other things they do.
Post reply on HN