51–60 of 424 posts
>We aren’t in your country yet Sounds about right. By the time it comes to EU it will be abandoned by Google and shut down in a year or so
This is astoundingly cheap. In fact its too cheap, €10/month works out to €360 + €130 over a 3 year hardware cycle which is barely enough for a not-really-capable 4k GPU as it is, without costing all the additional services/hardware. And to put it bluntly, these games are second-rate titles from the last year. From this announcement I guess that this is mostly just another data farming play that will never generate a…
$10/mo was pretty much the only way they could price the service; however I didn't expect 4k to be the base resolution for the paid service. (thought it would be $10/1080p, $15/4k; having 1080p for free is interesting). Google needs to be more transparent about device support though. The stream highlighted Chromecast Ultra/Android, but not much else (e.g. if there is an iOS client, or compatibility with a base $35 10…
I doubt iOS is going to get access to Stadia. One of the primary perks for going with Android is that you’ll be have access to mobile gaming through Stadia that you can’t get with an Apple device.
I think that an underestimated benefit of game streaming is anti-cheat. It would benefit a lot games like Fortnite and Pubg.
Competitive games, at least competitive shooter games, are really the worst application for this though because they suffer the most from input-to-display latency. Games like League of legends might be fine though.
Surprised by the lack of an ad supported free version. Seems like applying the lessons they've learned from conquering internet search might be helpful, but apparently not.
How would an ad supported version fit into that model? I thought it was a fantastic model!
Can someone explain the tech here? Obviously the brains of this is a Google data center beaming the game through a Chromecast to your TV (or in-app on your Pixel/ whatever). Is there any tech in the controller? What "costs" $129 if there's a subscription model attached to this? If the controller is indeed "dumb" (just sending inputs), why wouldn't there be compatibility with Xbox or PS4 controllers? If the history of…
Yes. The controller connects directly to your game instance over WiFi. It doesn't need to go through a box first and be relayed (this can shave a significant amount of latency off controller inputs).
> What "costs" $129 if there's a subscription model attached to this?
For $129 you get a controller ($69), a Chromecast Ultra ($60), 3 months of Stadia Pro ($30), the full Destiny 2 game with all the DLC ($?? I forget).
You may be confused with how Stadia Pro works. It's just like PS Plus, you occasionally get a free game or two and it enables you to play at 4K in 5.1 surround sound. Without Stadia Pro you can still play any Stadia game you own, without a fee.
> why wouldn't there be compatibility with Xbox or PS4 controllers?
But there is compatibility with XBox and PS4 controllers. It was in the video and in their original announcement. You just can't really use them with the Chromecast AFAIK but you can with any computer and some tablets / phones.
> but why try and reinvent the wheel with a new controller?
You can bring your own or use theirs for the best latency / game experience possible on Stadia.
I think this is a pretty reasonable price and I fully expect to pre-order, but I'm disappointed that the games must be purchased a la carte. I'd much rather pay a higher monthly fee and be able to play any games I wanted. I'm not sure how much more I'd be willing to pay, but I just think that purchasing titles that I don't own doesn't fit well with the streaming paradigm.
I thought Google was just search and a few services like Drive, Docs, Gmail etc Shouldn't Stadia fall under the branch of Alphabet and omit all instances of using 'Google' in their marketing? Why use the Google name for something not remotely related to search?