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

Google Stadia shuts down internal studios, changing business focus

kotaku.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

611–620 of 834 posts

Re: Google Stadia shuts down internal studios, changing business focus

#611

Post by ThatPlayer »

riversflow wrote: post #496
baron816 wrote: post #394

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I bought an Xbox just so I could play Red Dead Redemption 2. Had Stadia been around, or had I been interested in Cyberpunk, I would certainly play on that. I still think it’s a good idea, with a lot of people falling into the “who is this for” camp, and very well could eventually be very successful. My impression is that it just needs more time to mature. If we were talking about some saas product, those rough edges…

I don’t think Stadia is truly an MVP. It’s a Google MVP, it doesn’t have to be truly viable, only viable to google middle management looking for a promotion. That’s what people are lamenting, you can’t role out a competitive gaming platform with such a small catalog of titles. >I bought an Xbox to play Red Dead Redemption 2 . . . lots of people falling into the “who this is for” camp Those people appear to be “casual…

Stadia doesn't have a $10/mo cost or $75 upfront cost though. Stadia Pro is optional, and the client runs in Chrome on almost any device (not sure about iOS yet).

I can go on the store and buy Cyberpunk 2077 and start playing on my phone if I wanted to.

Re: Google Stadia shuts down internal studios, changing business focus

#612

Post by baby »

coldtea wrote: post #595
baby wrote: post #585

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Like when your own computer starts lagging?

Yes, but more frequently and unpredictably, at whatever resolution...

I see. I guess you really need a good connection. To be honest I’m surprised at how well Playstation Now worked

Re: Google Stadia shuts down internal studios, changing business focus

#613

Post by stryan »

cwyers wrote: post #418
015a wrote: post #271

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> partnered with Valve and shipped something mind-blowing I tend to agree. In these cloud game streaming wars, Steam is a reservoir of totally untapped crude oil. Its the largest and most active western game platform, period, its beloved by its users, and Valve hasn't even remotely signaled an intention to compete. Companies and products like Steam are one in a million; Stadia, Luna, GeForce Now, xCloud, PSNow, are n…

Valve also has shipped exactly one first-party game since Dota 2 in 2013, outside of VR stuff, and it's a card game. I don't think they're tops on the list of studios that could give Google a big hit game to put on their new cloud console.

Since 2013 they're released three first party games: DOTA Underlords Artifact Half-Life:Alyx

The first was well received but died off the rest of auto-battlers, the second was terrible but is being reworked, and the third was critically acclaimed and the probably the most important VR game released besides BeatSaber. I know you said not counting VR but I feel like skipping Half-Life:Alyx, a game in a well beloved franchise that was very highly rated, is a little disingenuous

Besides that they've also: Trialed Linux-based Steam Machines Greatly contributed to Linux gaming through Proton Tested out two unique hardware systems (Steam controllers and Steam link)

Outside of them being essentially the biggest and most important game distribution service, as well as helping devs with any distrbution, multiplayer, DLC, etc services that they need.

So I'd say it's a toss-up between whether that would benefit Google or not.

Re: Google Stadia shuts down internal studios, changing business focus

#614

Post by asiachick »

ramphastidae wrote: post #563
palestine-tree wrote: post #533

Earlier quoted context omitted.

? What does OSS have to do with being it being profitable (to the tune of dozens of billions $ / year)?

Very simple: Google doesn’t sell Android. They sell mobile devices that run their version of Android. The profitability of their mobile business overall is unclear (we’ve only seen numbers for specific phones). Can you cite your billions in profit claim?

You're separating the fact that Android is OSS from the fact that google running Android allows them to run the Play Store which made billions last year. It also lets them have Google Search be the default on all those devices. Google themselves account Android this way, attributing some amount of the profit from those things to the fact that they run Android

Re: Google Stadia shuts down internal studios, changing business focus

#615

Post by ramphastidae »

asiachick wrote: post #608
jsploit wrote: post #535

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Perhaps I missed it, but that only seems to mention YouTube revenue - not profit.

Sure, so what evidence is there that youtube does not make a profit?

Google is highly incentivized to show profitability to shareholders. It will drive stock value. If they are purposefully choosing to hide YT financials in quarterly statements, it’s probably not because they are good. Just search for YouTube and profitability on Google. It’s a loss leader.

Re: Google Stadia shuts down internal studios, changing business focus

#616

Post by ALittleLight »

thesandlord wrote: post #604
ramphastidae wrote: post #560

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Profit figures have never been released for Google Cloud.

Google Cloud is not profitable because they invest all revenue into growth, as they should be doing. If they focused on profitability they would have never caught up with AWS. (I'm ex-GCP)

GCP caught up with AWS? From what I've seen GCP isn't close to catching up to Azure, let alone AWS. Maybe I'm looking at wrong or out of date figures?

https://www.canalys.com/newsroom/worldwide-cloud-market-q320

Re: Google Stadia shuts down internal studios, changing business focus

#617

Post by GlennS »

riversflow wrote: post #534
ilikehurdles wrote: post #419

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If Valve fully backed cloud gaming, that would have downstream effects on publishers and PC gaming as a platform. Who would sign on to publish a competitive, reaction driven game if the market is segmented between the high-latency cloud where anyone can play, and physical hardware only purchased by a relatively diminishing market? The audience for tactical precise shooters, MOBAs, RTSs, etc would deteriorate and with…

> The audience for tactical precise shooters, MOBAs, RTSs, etc would deteriorate Maybe, but I tend to think that it wouldn’t diminish, and that this idea that very many will just “get over” latency is something VPs and PMs have convinced themselves of and not something that would bare out in the data. The first time I gamed on a 120hz display was life changing in a way, I was never totally satisfied playing any sort…

It's not that long ago people were playing with 300+ ms delays on 56k modems.

If you design lag-prediction into the game it isn't so bad. People even used enjoy working the "lag shield" (be erratic, change direction frequently).

It's the dropped packets and consequent stuttering that is really frustrating.

Re: Google Stadia shuts down internal studios, changing business focus

#618

Post by ThatPlayer »

oivey wrote: post #279
enos_feedler wrote: post #261

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The NVidia model sounds like more hassle than it's worth. Might as well continue buying PCs. If you could afford them before you can probably still afford them. Latency will be lower and experience will be better (no waiting in a queue). The benefit of Stadia is actually it's simplicity. It's about bringing in new gamers who may have come from console world, but don't have the Steam libraries, etc. I wrote this in an…

I’m unsure how Nvidia’s approach is worse. On GeForce now you can play games from Steam or Epic, right? Isn’t Stadia the same except you are locked into only Google’s store? That’s pretty significantly worse.

Nvidia has a monthly subscription costs if you don't want the free plan limitations like a queue time and a one hour session limit. Stadia's free plan limitation is only 1080p and stereo instead of 4K resolution, 5.1 surround sound, and HDR.

If you're just buying a single game, Stadia comes out ahead on price when you're only paying $60 for the game rather than Geforce Now where you pay $60 for the game and then a monthly fee for every month you're playing.

Re: Google Stadia shuts down internal studios, changing business focus

#619

Post by GlennS »

ahelwer wrote: post #326
015a wrote: post #271

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> partnered with Valve and shipped something mind-blowing I tend to agree. In these cloud game streaming wars, Steam is a reservoir of totally untapped crude oil. Its the largest and most active western game platform, period, its beloved by its users, and Valve hasn't even remotely signaled an intention to compete. Companies and products like Steam are one in a million; Stadia, Luna, GeForce Now, xCloud, PSNow, are n…

The 2008-2017 period was great for PC gaming. Now graphics cards alone cost as much or more than an entire console. The prices only seem to go up. Game streaming has the opportunity to dramatically decrease costs. I think it will work.

You don't need to buy a high-end graphics card. Those are for hobbyists who enjoy buying the latest kit and fitting water coolers etc. for its own sake.

17" Dell with a GeForce mobile whatever-it-comes-with will let you play everything fine for 5ish years if you're into the latest shooters, longer for other genres.

Post reply on HN