541–550 of 633 posts
Remember the constant rumours that Google Cloud was being shut down? Ahh, good times. What ever happened to those rumours and the suckers that propagated that rumour?
"there'd be no license transfer of any sort, which means that any purchases made on Stadia would effectively be nullified as the service closes down." It lasted less than three years and will leave players with nothing to show. This is what people were predicting when Stadia lauched and part of the reason why it had poor adoption.
Three sure bets in life: * Death * Taxes * Google shutting down services Admittedly, google stadia was kind of a joke since the beginning, but I feel for consumers who buy into googles promises and even a bit for the google engineers who may be out of work soon.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Q: If the Stadia service is discontinued, do we know what (if anything) will happen with game purchases? > Andrey Doronichev, then Stadia Director of Product: > We get this a lot. I hear you. Moving to the cloud is scary. I felt the same way when music was transitioning from files to streaming. I still have all my old CDs in the garage… although it's hard to find a CD player these days :) > The same happened to Mov…
Funny as stadia might have seen huge adoption IF they didn’t have a reputation of killing services and leaving the service user to hang. Killing of stadia only reaffirms peoples fear to use google products. This includes GCP.
Those people don't exist in any significant numbers.
Every self-identifying gamer (me included) knew this service was DoA.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Goolge Stadia twitter account is saying the rumour is false: https://twitter.com/GoogleStadia/status/1552989433590214656
Google's denial takes nothing away from the credibility of this rumor. Google isn't going to deviate from their own preplanned PR campaign on any product's demise just because a rumor leaked. That doesn't mean this rumor is true, only that the denial has no informational content for evaluating the rumor. Yet on the other hand, if Google really wanted to refute the rumor , they'd say "It's not true, we have a firm roa…
In my experience roadmap promises are an acknowledgement you’re already borked.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It is highly unethical to take away copies of the game that players had to pay full price for. Stadia owes them a retail copy of the games they purchased.
That is how all of this works. If Valve went out of business then you wouldn't have any legal right or way to get the games you purchased on Steam. If Amazon shut down Prime Video then you couldn't watch the movies you purchased on it. This is not a unique problem to Google Stadia.
However is it the right thing to do? Will it damage their reputation to do that?
If they wanted to dodge that beating they'd offer steam/epic/xbox/ps5/switch keys to their customers to claim. Any game their customer bought is probably over a year old at this point and they can cut a deal with the publishers to get deeply discounted keys and eat the costs.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I doubt they'll credit anyone. Why would they? You purchased a license to play a game through their service. Their service is no longer there. I haven't gone through any terms of service for Stadia but I can't imagine that they aren't covered for this.
How many game sales did stadia even have. If it’s less than 100m usd just issue full refunds for all game purchases. Might sound crazy but the 100m would be more effective to the brand than spending 100m on marketing.
Further, Google exited this market. Do they really care about marketing to these people anymore? Their main revenue is non-consensual tracking, it's not like being mad at Google is going to matter unless you really go out of your way because of it.
Fire everybody involved.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
>Anonymous sources providing nothing but a statement are baseless. To the parent commenter's point, you said, "This is absolutely false". Do you have actual evidence otherwise, or are you making baseless conjecture based on, well... baseless conjecture?
Me not having evidence doesn’t mean it’s not true. Indeed my statement is equally dubious as the Twitter one. However you’ll see that I’m correct by just coming back to this thread in October. Proving a negative is generally difficult to begin with.
>Believing baseless conjecture is dumb imo.
So, it's dumb to believe baseless conjecture, but we should believe your baseless conjecture that someone else's baseless conjecture is wrong.