Stadia died because no one trusts Google • Hacker News Board

Re: Stadia died because no one trusts Google

#591

Post by Thorrez » Mon, Oct 03, 2022, 5:23 AM UTC

mach1ne wrote: post #546

Thorrez wrote: post #505

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's required by company policy. Otherwise the comments could be seen as astroturfing. The policy is so strict that it specifically says you need to put a disclosure in every individual tweet, a disclosure in your Twitter bio isn't sufficient. I think that part of the rule is broken frequently though.

Interesting. Is it limited to Twitter? I can see the company fearing a backlash in social medias where you're operating under your own name (and thus can be traced back to Google) but what about anonymous and semi-anonymous forums like HN?

I re-read it, and it actually doesn't explicitly mention Twitter. It does mention how you can disclose using hashtags, which is why I misremembered it as talking about Twitter, because Twitter and hashtags are so linked in my mind.

It looks like it applies to basically any online post/comment, regardless of if it's anonymous.

Re: Stadia died because no one trusts Google

#592

Post by jillesvangurp » Mon, Oct 03, 2022, 5:40 AM UTC

llampx wrote: post #538

jillesvangurp wrote: post #319

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They kill so many products because they mismanage them and they then fail to get a lot of users. A lot of the things they kill simply aren't very good. Trust has nothing to do with it.

Lots of products they killed had millions of users. Reader, Orkut, Picasa are a few that come to mind.

Millions is not enough. A stagnating product with only millions of users is a failed product at Google.

Re: Stadia died because no one trusts Google

#593

Post by nottorp » Mon, Oct 03, 2022, 7:50 AM UTC

csydas wrote: post #330

_zgx0 wrote: 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…

I get what you're saying but I don't think it's about gamer focus so much as just gaming in general. I wrote this on another article comment but I don't think it's just about Google not understanding gamers, but gaming in general. - People who play games are fickle and distrustful (and rightfully so, cause gaming in general has a sordid history of screwing the player-base repeatedly). Google didn't understand this an…

> - People who play games are fiercely fanatic towards specific games/platforms (that the console wars still continue is very strange to me; preference sure, but the outright militant approach towards different platforms is just silly).

Well people who just care which console has MOAR FPS deserve what they get.

But as long as console exclusives still exist, there is an argument for a platform preference.

Re: Stadia died because no one trusts Google

#594

Post by nottorp » Mon, Oct 03, 2022, 7:52 AM UTC

echelon wrote: post #118

bitexploder wrote: post #104

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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

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…

> I'm sick that you can't buy ("license") something on one platform and then immediately use it on another.

Except on Steam. Never buy your games on the app store. Get them on Steam and you get all platforms* (at least most of the time).

* PC platforms of course. Hell will freeze over before you also get the console version.

Re: Stadia died because no one trusts Google

#595

Post by Krisando » Mon, Oct 03, 2022, 10:01 AM UTC

I tried Stadia, but the input latency was frustrating. I tried to play games that ran okay, but didn't want to upgrade my computer. Most noticeably to me, Destiny 2 and Cyberpunk 2077 ran poorer and worse input lag. I have gigabit fiber and sub 10ms latency to all the major datacenters in Europe.

I didn't stop using Stadia because I didn't trust Google, I stopped using Stadia because the experience sucked every time I tried it.

Re: Stadia died because no one trusts Google

#596

Post by Closi » Mon, Oct 03, 2022, 12:05 PM UTC

bannana2033 wrote: post #269

Closi wrote: post #266

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think Apple shows that it’s not really an inevitable problem with scale - they largely make products that stick around and are well integrated with each other while being huge in scale and scope. IMO from the outside the problem with Google seems to be a lack of saying ‘no’ to people - they start so many different offerings without enough/any cohesion, bring stuff to market quite fast, then seemingly strip resource…

Are you sure? I used to manage a department with over 100 Apple devices. Too many issues with sync on iCloud, iCal, keynote(etc). Sure works fine for 1-4 users (family). Even in hn people use fastmail, google maps in iPhone. There are so few suggestion to people move to apple email offering. People with Apple devices primarily use Google products.

I didn't claim they made perfect products - but they do make products that tend to stick around and work well with each other.

I don't use iCloud with Keynote myself, but those sort of sync issues always happen in multiuser apps that also allow offline editing (e.g. I get the same conflicts in O365 with Powerpoint because they are inevitable if you are allowing offline editing).

Re: Stadia died because no one trusts Google

#597

Post by panick21_ » Mon, Oct 03, 2022, 12:20 PM UTC

impossiblefork wrote: post #576

panick21_ wrote: post #573

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yeah that company had no other costumers that were considering 6000+ machines. Tesla put down the money and the internal engineering to prove out that using huge casting as a structural member for the car was viable and then worked with a supplier to design the exact machines they needed. Machines that like still wouldn't exist today had Tesla not done the necessary investment. There is the machine and then the appli…

Tesla may also be unique in having a strong need for machines of this kind, which in a way, attempt to avoid assembling of complex metal parts. If the other manufacturers have that down, then their need for very large components of this kind is lower. It's like Germany and its heavy presses, during WWII. Lack of manpower, or in this case, something else that is wrong, leads to an player going for the most complete re…

> Tesla may also be unique in having a strong need for machines of this kind

All other car companies?

> If the other manufacturers have that down, then their need for very large components of this kind is lower.

This is not how this works. Tesla also 'has it down' with the Model 3 manufacturing line.

Its still lower CAPX and lower OPEX to use gigapress.

This is a large part why even the former CEO of VW said they were behind in some ways.

Re: Stadia died because no one trusts Google

#598

Post by killerstorm » Mon, Oct 03, 2022, 12:53 PM UTC

ddorian43 wrote: post #465

ktzar wrote: post #431

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Sporadic gamers who don't have the space or money to have a $400 console permanently using space in their living rooms. I played RDR2 on Stadia for 2 months. Then didn't use it again until I got my next game, a few months later. I rather pay a bit more for games without the burden of having a console, or a gaming pc to be honest. It solved a problem for me. Until my kids are not old enough to have a PS (whatever the…

> Sporadic gamers who don't have the space or money to have a $400 console permanently Do you not have a computer/laptop? That's supposed to also play games. Maybe you chose the wrong computer (apple).

Imagine people don't want a big expensive bulky hot laptop to play games, but want something smaller for work, and pay for a service to play a game without hearing fan noise.

Re: Stadia died because no one trusts Google

#599

Post by Terretta » Mon, Oct 03, 2022, 12:55 PM UTC

discardable_dan wrote: post #353

vermilingua wrote: post #301

Earlier quoted context omitted.

AAA games are targeted at casuals.

No, phone games are targeted at casuals. AAA games are targeted at people who have some 40-60 hours of spare time over the next three weeks to spend on video games. This is coming from someone who now has no free time for video games, and only plays indie roguelikes because AAA games are too much of a time commitment to ever finish.

> AAA games are too much of a time commitment to ever finish

AAA game industry agrees with you, releasing mega titles like Halo w/o a story to finish, just online "service game" that will always be there for you (until they shut the service off).

Re: Stadia died because no one trusts Google

#600

Post by Jochim » Mon, Oct 03, 2022, 2:21 PM UTC

eis wrote: post #335

_Algernon_ wrote: post #323

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Before Cyberpunk 2077's poor launch, I was looking into game streaming to play it and Geforce Now was the obvious choice. There really was no competition due to the lack of lock in. When users potentially have multiple thousands of dollars already invested in their game library over a period of >10 years, you better support playing with that library, especially when the competition already does.

I find it interesting that a service not having lock-in is actually a reason for people to adopt and stay with it. In an industry where lock-ins are common, these lock-ins also effectively become lock-outs. It is said the biggest motivator for people is fear and lock-in results in fear. It's powerful anti-marketing.

Consumers almost universally hate artificial industry lock-in though. I think it's pretty telling that the platforms that have endured either belong to a major publisher that can lock their catalogue behind the store, or are financed by another revenue stream.

Epic in particular basically forced their way in by using Fortnite/Unreal money to fund a combination of price dumping and exclusivity agreements.