Live data from Hacker News

Stadia died because no one trusts Google

techcrunch.com

201–210 of 626 posts

Re: Stadia died because no one trusts Google

#201

I wonder if any Stadia tech will get rolled up into Chromebooks.

Probably not. Google has beta support for Steam on a handful of new (and new-ish) Chromebooks. Will probably make that mainstream on the Intel / AMD models eventually. Unsupported Chromebooks can install Steam via Linux as long as they're not ARM based.

Plus, much of the existing game streaming services works on Chromebooks. Either through a web interface or through an Android app. And there's a ton of games and emulators available via Android.

I think that gives enough gaming options for Chromebooks that Stadia tech won't continue in Chrome OS. I could be wrong though. Would be amusing if it was integrated somehow.

Re: Stadia died because no one trusts Google

#202

The thing that I find odd about Google is that it feels like they drink their own coolaid. Reports I've seen suggest that nearly no one knew this was coming. Teams who have been working on ports for months were blind-sided. Employees generally did not know. It just seems like a very poor way to run a business. It feels sloppy and needlessly messy. Especially when providing soft landings is so possible for a company w…

>they won't use one iota of their largess to help you deal with the consequences of their actions.

Google's refunding all Stadia game and hardware purchases.

Disclosure: I work at Google, but not on Stadia.

Re: Stadia died because no one trusts Google

#203

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Nevermind Steam, nevermind Google, nevermind Apple. I'm sick that you can't buy ("license") something on one platform and then immediately use it on another. I understand that the platform costs and taxes are meant to recoup development and upkeep (to a certain extent), but it still pisses me off as a consumer. If I buy ("license") a game or movie on Google, I should be able to watch it on Netflix or play it on Steam…

If you buy a movie on Google (or YouTube), you can watch it on Apple and Amazon and etc. It's called Movies Anywhere and it's existed for a long time. Were you not aware?

> Were you not aware?

Never heard of that before. Googled it, and it appears to be an american only thing. Any suggestions for the rest of the world?

Re: Stadia died because no one trusts Google

#204

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> As a gamer, I think Stadia failed because the system they created doesn't make sense. Google, Facebook, etc. are victims of early success. They made their billions on low hanging fruit, by throwing a lot of resources at problems with very high demand for a solution that weren't yet tackled well (e.g. query the internet, keep in touch with friends). So it's no wonder that in this day in age they are incapable of und…

At least for Google, I don’t think you can call what they did with search low hanging fruit. Their solution was anything but, and it was truly innovative (at the time) and their success was well deserved. I do agree that they’re victims of their early success, but rather that it proves that it’s rather difficult to make multiple successful products. When you own a whole ecosystem, like Microsoft and Apple do, it make…

Larry and Sergei decided they are not interested in the business anymore. That's probably why Google has failed to innovate much lately. How great would Tesla or SpaceX be without Elon? Companies without the founders become too cautious and status quo oriented.

Re: Stadia died because no one trusts Google

#205
post #170

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Nevermind Steam, nevermind Google, nevermind Apple. I'm sick that you can't buy ("license") something on one platform and then immediately use it on another. I understand that the platform costs and taxes are meant to recoup development and upkeep (to a certain extent), but it still pisses me off as a consumer. If I buy ("license") a game or movie on Google, I should be able to watch it on Netflix or play it on Steam…

How does this apply to Steam? They sell multi-platform games with a single licence which you can use on Linux/Mac/Windows. I don't really see the value in transferring my Steam games to GOG for example. So I don't really see what the criticism is here. Game store and some multiplayer integration is not that limiting. It's preferrable to every single game building their own awful mini-stores/platforms (like EAs and Ub…

If a game exists on PC and a console like the PS5 then ideally your license would let you play on both. It's the same product, just sold on a different store.

Re: Stadia died because no one trusts Google

#206
post #66

I feel like some of these perspectives are very tech industry focused rather than gamer focused. As a gamer, I think Stadia failed because the system they created doesn't make sense. You had to buy games at real $40-$60 prices but you could only play them through this limited service. I don't think anyone wants that. Compare that to paying the same price for a regular PC game which you can play via streaming using a…

Steam games I bought a decade ago are still in my library. Steam is trusty. Google is not.

[deleted]

Re: Stadia died because no one trusts Google

#207
post #175

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There is no requirement to use the App Store on a Mac. And yet those programs do not magically work on Windows or Linux because that's not how computers work. Developers have to specifically target and build their programs for the devices they wish to support. And many apps (in particular SaaS ones) allow you to buy one license and use their program on whatever device they support. App Store doesn't stop you.

If you get some windows app, it's possible that you will be able to run it on Linux. If I can get it to run, licensing shouldn't be another road block

That's emulation. Apps don't just run anywhere without you doing this.

Re: Stadia died because no one trusts Google

#208

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think some of Google's strategy is identifying new markets and potential rivals, and then throwing their resources at them until they dominate the market or buy/crush the competition. Building a sustainably profitable product is ancillary to that and not much of a factor initially.

But in this case they didn't do any of that?

I see it as a foray into the cloud gaming market and a way to stifle competition. Once Google throws its weight into the game, it might be harder for smaller companies to keep up or even secure enough funding to compete.

It's not always going to work out, but I do think Google's actions helped stifle competition in that market. Google could have successfully stopped another company from blowing up in that market and becoming a real competitor to worry about in other markets down the line.

Re: Stadia died because no one trusts Google

#209
It is kinda puzzling why Stadia was not sold off to Netflix.

It would be a win situation for all - Google makes money, Netflix doesn't have to start from scratch for their next strategic move, Stadia gamers are not left stranded.

Same as when Google sold Sketchup.

2012. Google’s sale of 3D modeling software SketchUp, to Trimble, is its first divestment in years, ..the search giant made a profit, as it sold SketchUp for more than it bought it for back in 2006.

https://techcrunch.com/2012/04/26/sketchup-google-first-dive...

Re: Stadia died because no one trusts Google

#210

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> As a gamer, I think Stadia failed because the system they created doesn't make sense. Google, Facebook, etc. are victims of early success. They made their billions on low hanging fruit, by throwing a lot of resources at problems with very high demand for a solution that weren't yet tackled well (e.g. query the internet, keep in touch with friends). So it's no wonder that in this day in age they are incapable of und…

Low hanging fruit ? There were 10 search engines when Google launched, and a megalith called Yahoo dominating the Internet.

IMO Google was the first search engine to execute successfully, and that launched them to the stars. Building something that does the job on the label is one thing - building a good product is another.

So they are big because they were there early. But being there early didn't guarantee you'd get big.

Post reply on HN