I've used various game streaming services and have found parsec[0] to be the best in this domain. Their service prioritizes latency above all else and it performs well though there's alot of artifacts. It runs on top of amazon services so server placement is a non issue.
Google gets into game streaming with Project Stream
11–20 of 117 posts
Re: Google gets into game streaming with Project Stream
#12I hate that Google can pour money from its infinite ad revenue into other things and beat out competitors by virtue of being able to sustainably run unsustainable (for others) businesses. EDIT: For people who are interested in this, I would recommend studying the history of AT&T, especially the 1956 consent decree.
> beat out competitors by virtue of being able to sustainably run unsustainable (for others) businesses. Is there other providers of similar services?
Re: Google gets into game streaming with Project Stream
#13Have you checked out my company https://parsecgaming.com ? We offer this but also the ability to connect to your own computer and invite your friends to connect to your computer too.
I think you're being down-voted because the comment is kind of advertise-y (maybe that'll be different in an hour).
Since it is your company, do you have any insight into potential challenges that the average reader wouldn't consider? I understand that a benefit to "game streaming" is that a game originally not networked (like splitscreen only) can be played by multiple people over a streamed connection.
Re: Google gets into game streaming with Project Stream
#14Have you checked out my company https://parsecgaming.com ? We offer this but also the ability to connect to your own computer and invite your friends to connect to your computer too.
I've really been enjoying Parsec, for whenever I wanna casually drop into a Windows game (am mainly using macOS).
Great job!
Re: Google gets into game streaming with Project Stream
#15Whoo another streaming service that will be bad
Re: Google gets into game streaming with Project Stream
#16Oh good, the company that constantly bails on it's ventures is starting a new one in a space that is far from being realized still.
Seriously, if what's the goal? Being a supporting network for gaming infrastructure?
Re: Google gets into game streaming with Project Stream
#17I hate that Google can pour money from its infinite ad revenue into other things and beat out competitors by virtue of being able to sustainably run unsustainable (for others) businesses. EDIT: For people who are interested in this, I would recommend studying the history of AT&T, especially the 1956 consent decree.
As a user I am strictly better off that way.
Not necessarily. It'll always be a small project for a company like Google and will eventually be merged into some larger corporate structure (YouTube Game Stream or whatever). It'll take product cues from that larger entity, so won't be as dedicated to propose as a small start-up would be (already in this thread we've discovered the site is Chrome only). But it'll still dominate enough of the market that the small start-up will not be viable.
Re: Google gets into game streaming with Project Stream
#18I hate that Google can pour money from its infinite ad revenue into other things and beat out competitors by virtue of being able to sustainably run unsustainable (for others) businesses. EDIT: For people who are interested in this, I would recommend studying the history of AT&T, especially the 1956 consent decree.
The other player at the moment happens to be Amazon. So any competition is a good thing.
Amazon? Are you thinking of Twitch, because this isn't that.
Parsec, Paperspace, GeForce Now, Shadow, ...
Re: Google gets into game streaming with Project Stream
#19How is this different from https://www.nvidia.com/en-us/geforce/products/geforce-now/ or http://onlive.com/ ?
Re: Google gets into game streaming with Project Stream
#20I hate that Google can pour money from its infinite ad revenue into other things and beat out competitors by virtue of being able to sustainably run unsustainable (for others) businesses. EDIT: For people who are interested in this, I would recommend studying the history of AT&T, especially the 1956 consent decree.
As a user I am strictly better off that way.
A fundamentally better service may be strangled in the cradle by Google operating at a loss for years and then shuttering the service, raising prices, or making some other negative trade off.