Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'Console & PC Gaming' started by GTPNewsWire, Mar 15, 2019.
All the buzz about "console killer" brings me back to good ol' 2012. Everyone said mobile gaming will kill console/PC gaming back then. Good times.
It could be interesting if it works, but my internet is a fickle mistress that enjoys dying randomly, so I can't really say that the concept of always-online cloud gaming is setting my pants on fire.
Imagine if you had this stradia and had no internet for 3 weeks now going on 4 this week. Bet you couldn’t play offline like Xbox and PlayStation lol. I don’t like the idea of streaming services and also what about people with crap internet, where I am adsl can be lucky to get 10 mb a second lol. Optus sent me a 4 g dongle out with 50 gb of data which I’m sparingly using and that is quicker lol
Cloud gaming is useless for high precision input games like racing, fighting, online shooters and some others. It will be fine for slow paced games that don't require quick reaction times.
Once again, in the DF video I posted they measured the latency to be similar to that of an Xbox One X played locally. It’s truly incredible how narrow minded some people are.
Yes this tech is not going to be for everyone. Those with poor or intermittent internet would not be suited to this solution. And whilst that sucks for them there are many millions of people across the world who have excellent, reliable, super fast internet who this solution could be a game changer for. There are millions of people throughout the world who don’t have acccess to mobile phone coverage, does that mean mobile phone communication is a none starter for everyone else. Looking at some of the attitudes in this thread it’s amazing we have managed to get anywhere as a species.
While it’s true that the demonstration did well, I think you have to understand that it was performed under what amounts to lab conditions.
First off the Moscone Centre in SF has an exceptional network infrastructure with exceptional internet connectivity, as it should as it hosts a hell of a lot of tech presentations.
Secondly SF and the surrounding area has probably the best internet infrastructure in the entire USA
Thirdly it wouldn’t take a massive leap of faith to assume that the server for this demo was located at Google HQ in Mountain View, which If remember rightly is only around 30 mins drive from SF international, so any distance based latency would be negligible and you can bet the Google engineers optimised the hell out that routing.
The proof of the pudding is really how this is going to work for average Joe in Average-Ville. My experience with the tech guys that inhabit Silicon Valley is that they are incredibly out of touch with what the rest of the world has to deal with for internet connectivity.
Im concerned how they will earn from this, googles' platforms have all got in service advertising this would be a disaster. I can forsee Ads before a game starts & in game too becoming the new norm, all using their shady agorithms that monitor your every step. Dont worry folks it will have a free to play option, who would not want to play a game for free with their character sporting the logos of fast food or gambling companies... I like to peruse the second hand market for games, that would be out the window if this becomes the norm... I really dont want any of my media stuck behind a paywall either...
Google seems forget that AAA games are basically made for hardware based systems and the ecosystem inside. I think there is something quite wrong in its presentation of Stadia: like wanting to change the way of playing games as a whole with their steaming device, in the near future. Looks what android games look like, and how many years has it been since Android was born!? Most of its AAA games are also ported from other game systems.
Android has played a lot in the gaming world, which is to change the game into something mainstream. But only that. Until now mobile gaming is even still not accepted as "gaming" by enthusiasts. I am sure cloud gaming is not the future of gaming, at least 10 years from now. So it looks like Google Stadia will be an epic failure.
I like the Google services in general but I have serious doubts about this one. It is too early for such a platform (look at VR on consoles as an exampe). I expected them to launch a console with it so people can play even if the connection fails. Like we already can with Google Drive, Gmail, Calendar etc etc. Those are all available offline and autosync when online. I think Sony will offer a cloudbased service as well with their next PS5 system but it won't be primary and the console (hardware) still will be main focus. With that said, items bought on PSN will probably work on PS5 and with the investment I made in the PSN store I probably won't switch that easy.
I’m kinda with Jeff from Giantbomb on this one, where he’s excited about what this tech can do and what it’ll allow to happen... but also has this deep sense of dread that actually this is the end of the world, but he’s not sure how or why
I fully appreciate that. However, technology will not stand still, has it ever? And I'm fairly confident that if it can work like that in lab conditions that it will eventually work like that for average Joe. It's more the lack of vision that is prevalent from some in this thread that is so disappointing. We wouldn't have made it out of the caves if we all had the attitude some are displaying in here. I applaud them and will be watching closely, hoping that they can pull it off as if they can it could be huge, rather than sitting, sneering from the sidelines.
Erm console VR seems to be doing just fine...
3 million isn't that much compared to how many PS4 there actually are on the market. I wouldn't call that a success. Intrigued by VR as I am I find it way to early to adapt to such a device. To many cables, clunky headset and quality isn't up there to what I want.
Stadia is such a good name, I love it. So far Google has me interested and the presentation was spot on - expected trepidation and immediacy to discredit what they're trying to achieve but that's the usual when it comes to gaming.
Hopefully Google do an E3 conference.
Quoted for truth. It gets very tiring.
Comparisons to OnLive seem rife but with Alphabet's money and technological clout it's like comparing Accrington Stanley to Manchester City. They may be both trying to achieve the same thing but one is certainly better equipped to pull it off.
The negativity was preempted as soon as Google hinted they were going to get involved. It just gets boring after a while.
I really dislike the name, but then I thought Vita and Wii where just as dumb...
The biggest issue is how you'll pay for these games. Will it be a subscription service?
As an MGS collector one thing I love is the ability to have all these old and weird versions of the various games that I can access forever. As games become more and more of a service that becomes less and less possible (look at Destiny for example, without a server it's worthless). Does something like this turn all games into services? And if this is the future does this also mean we'll no longer ever have the means of locally running games (as they are optimised for the server infrastructure etc)?
Just like OnLive the idea is amazing and it would have to be something as big as Google to make it work... but it's still scary to think how massive and everlasting an impact it could have on the industry.
You do make a good point about games ownership but as you've pointed out yourself, the seeds for this quarrel began as soon as this generation started prioritising digital ownership. There's no difference to buying a license for a product and simply renting it from infrastructure. The company can decide to pull support where and when they want so long as the Ts and Cs explicitly call it out.
I too love owning hard copy games and consoles - it feels like it gives the hobby a personality beyond the cloud. However, with the way all media is going, perhaps we should be happy that gaming is actually withstanding the tide so far. It won't be long until we're all like Abe Simpson:
Vinyl has increased in popularity massively since the birth of Spotify, Apple Music etc. I will expect a similar enthusiast wave for gaming once digital and cloud become all encompassing.
I think people above there 30ties have strong ties with ownership. The current young generation almost completely hasn't got any connection with it what so ever. They consume in a whole different way.
True, though the difference to music is that the physical bit of technology needed to play physical music is cheap and mass produced. With games you have very specific hardware that is expensive, look at video cards and the fact that most console manufacturers run at a loss when a new generation starts so they can build the install base and then sell them first party games.
Even now, if PSN goes down, I can still plug in my PS4 and fire up MGSV or something and play it quite happily. But if everything becomes cloud based, without that internet connection you have nothing. And when licences expire that's it. Look at MvC3 when the Marvel licence expired it disappeared digitally, as did all the DLC. In the future would via Google's Stadium thing would that mean that it'd become unplayable?
I don't think it's just a "in my day!" sorta thing, this change isn't incremental like how some games are shifting to be services, this is a whole 'paradigm' shift all at once.
Maybe I'm just getting old, but I like console gaming. I don't want it to go by the wayside.
I'm not too worried about input lag / latency and image quality. Sure, right now only 60 fps won't cut it for a lot of players, like myself, or indeed anyone with a 120Hz monitor. And certainly not for professional players who use 144/244Hz displays.
But these things will only get better over time. There are already plans to support 120 fps for instance.
But one thing nobody has mentioned here yet is modding. This is my main concern. Surely people won't be able to hack/mod games given the nature of this service? That alone would make it a no-go for me.
Where does the the disk go?
I need to catch up, I don’t even have one tie.
And the big corps are rubbing their hands together with glee that their marketing ploys are working and they can milk consumer subscriptions indefinitely while not having the expense of producing actual physical goods.
I pretty much always buy games on disc and always will, not least because it's almost always cheaper to buy the actual game with a disc from Amazon (other retailers are available) than to buy the digital download from the PS store.
Isnt this basically what Xbox and sony are already doing? I tried PSNow and the experience feels somewhat lacking with me experience lag. Also I found myself preferring purchasing seperate games then a large library for streaming. I am curious though how it actually differs compared to XBOX/Playstation's services. Ultimately its the developers who are going to decide the succes of this platform and not the consumers I think. Sony and Microsoft have built great relationships with developers and ultimately it will come down on which platform they will reach the most people and earn the most money.
Its a good addition though and will force Sony and microsoft to innovate as well. But seeing this it reminds me of the Fail called Google+.
The BBC's less than positive article on Strada and the dark possible future of games
Or it could lead game developers to develop immersive games that aren't complete and utter trash so you want to keep playing. Streaming games won't change the fact that gamers won't play something if it's garbage, this is especially true if they're subscribing to a service that gives them several options at any given time.
Stadia sends your controller input directly to the server, it's not mediated by a console or any type of peer to peer client structure. If the input lag from your controller to the server (and video output back) is less than the input lag of a peer to peer online game then this is a non issue.
It's funny seeing all of the negative comments. I understand the cynicism but this technology either works for your connection speed or it doesn't. It would be amazingly insanely easy for Google to allow people to play Apex Legends for FREE without having to subscribe in order to prove to consumers that this concept works as advertised.
Also the human brain can adapt very quickly to latency (to a certain degree) as long it stays consistent. I wonder though if the new service is going to have scaling problems.