Support NeoGAF

[AJUMP23]

Phil did get to be the harbinger he even sent the email.

 

[JLB]

In terms of latency (i.e. input response) it's physically impossible, unless they put servers in the backyards of everyone who wants to use it. Doesn't matter how good your internet connection is, the latency to a server X km away will always be higher than to a console two meters away.

The rest, sure.

This is true, but theres a point where most users dont care, or even notice.
Wireless controllers add latency compared to wired ones, and no one apart from pros seem to care.

 

[RoadHazard]

That's not strictly true if you take into consideration the total latency from the entire stack (controller to your eye).

What is an acceptable latency for the entire stack?

I won't put a number on it because it will differ from person to person and game to game.

You get latency from the controller, through the console, latency from the game that's running and probably the largest from the TV itself. We went from superior CRT response times to LCD flat panel and not too many people complained that the games got less responsive even though it was a considerable increase.

If you can reduce the latency in these other areas whilst also improving latency from the stream itself then there is always the possibility that the total latency from the stack when streaming can get to a similar level to what we all find acceptable currently with native hardware. Ok, you could argue that if they can improve latency with controllers, consoles and TVs then native will always be superior and that is very true but it's about getting it down to a point where it's acceptable for the vast majority and I believe that this is possible.

It will still always come down to the physical distance to where the game is running in the end, and local will always win over remote at that.

Yes, if you live close enough to a server hall it might feel as good as local hardware to you, but what if you don't? They are never going to have wide enough coverage to make it flawless for everyone, that would be prohibitively expensive.

 

[AJUMP23]

You left off Breath of the wild. The greatest wiiU game. And Mario kart 8


Nintendo in the switch era made even more money because they just released wiiU ports for a while.

 

[Mibu no ookami]

They didn't have the leverage to make cloud gaming work.

They needed to get into the console market and THEN leverage cloud tech.

For a company like Google, they could have come in and purchased an EA, Activision, or Take 2, leveraged that towards a successful console, and leveraged the console success towards Stadia.

Microsoft similarly was late to going all in on a game development company of scale waiting 20 years to buy Bethesda.

 

[JCK75]

They should release a firmware for the controller that lets it work as a standard bluetooth controller.

 

[Topher]

This is true, but theres a point where most users dont care, or even notice.
Wireless controllers add latency compared to wired ones, and no one apart from pros seem to care.

Also depends on the game. I was out of town last week and played Octopath Traveler on xCloud and it was great on the hotel wifi. But the latency is much more noticeable in games like Forza Horizon. Entire game just feels sluggish and not enjoyable to me.

 

[Filben]

Google handling Stadia

 

[Kamina]

VoostKain where you at?

How long ago was it when there were rumors of them shutting down but Google claimed they wouldn’t? Half a year ago?

 

[nominedomine]

It will still always come down to the physical distance to where the game is running in the end, and local will always win over remote at that.

Yes, if you live close enough to a server hall it might feel as good as local hardware to you, but what if you don't? They are never going to have wide enough coverage to make it flawless for everyone, that would be prohibitively expensive.

Not to mention what would happen if people actually started to use the service. We've seen how hard it is to simply keep servers up when new games release, imagine a new game releasing over cloud streaming with a massive peak of users on release.

When xCloud released on Brazil you had to wait in line for a long time and that only got solved (I think) once most people lost interest in the novelty of the service. Are they really going to invest in having the infrastructure to handle that peak demand? How would that impact the financial viability of a service like this? Everything points to game streaming being at best a complementary service that is not going to actually substitute anything.

 

[CeeJay]

It will still always come down to the physical distance to where the game is running in the end, and local will always win over remote at that.

Yes, if you live close enough to a server hall it might feel as good as local hardware to you, but what if you don't? They are never going to have wide enough coverage to make it flawless for everyone, that would be prohibitively expensive.

Yes, that's why I kept it open ended rather than going into specifics.

If you can reduce the latency in these other areas whilst also improving latency from the stream itself

But if you want to get into specifics...

I would guess that average TVs have a latency of around 40ms. Some are <10ms whilst a lot are getting up towards 100ms but lets say 40ms for arguments sake as a rough average?

I just checked my latency to Azure (UK South) and i'm getting around 30ms multiply by 2 for the return journey and that puts it at 60ms for the round trip. Which is not too far outside the latency for an average TV, a bit on the high side but not too far away.

I understand what you are saying about physical distance but, I live over 250 miles away from the Azure UK South data centre so it's not like its just around the corner for me. Sure the mileage definitely will vary but low latency connections in and around the ballpark figure for what a TV adds are not too far fetched.

For me Xcloud works fine and it's not like I am using an ultra low latency TV and live very near to the data centre. Yes I fully understand that not everyone in the world can get as good a result as I can and conversely there are many millions of people who are getting way better. It's not going to take too much of an improvement with the entire latency stack to get streaming down to a point where its as good as native is today.

 

[JLB]

Also depends on the game. I was out of town last week and played Octopath Traveler on xCloud and it was great on the hotel wifi. But the latency is much more noticeable in games like Forza Horizon. Entire game just feels sluggish and not enjoyable to me.

yup, definitely depends on the game. But I've played AC Origins a lot in xcloud and was no perfect, but good. I asume that in a couple of years it will really close toa native experience.

 

[SmokedMeat]

Imagine being one of the suckers that bought games for this service?

I’ll think most people knew this was going to happen before it ever launched.

 

[RoadHazard]

Yes, that's why I kept it open ended rather than going into specifics.


But if you want to get into specifics...

I would guess that average TVs have a latency of around 40ms. Some are <10ms whilst a lot are getting up towards 100ms but lets say 40ms for arguments sake as a rough average?

I just checked my latency to Azure (UK South) and i'm getting around 30ms multiply by 2 for the return journey and that puts it at 60ms for the round trip. Which is not too far outside the latency for an average TV, a bit on the high side but not too far away.

I understand what you are saying about physical distance but, I live over 250 miles away from the Azure UK South data centre so it's not like its just around the corner for me. Sure the mileage definitely will vary but low latency connections in and around the ballpark figure for what a TV adds are not too far fetched.

For me Xcloud works fine and it's not like I am using an ultra low latency TV and live very near to the data centre. Yes I fully understand that not everyone in the world can get as good a result as I can and conversely there are many millions of people who are getting way better. It's not going to take too much of an improvement with the entire latency stack to get streaming down to a point where its as good as native is today.

Ok, but that server latency is in addition to the TV latency. It's not 40 vs 60ms in your example, it's 40 vs 100.

(40ms is rather high btw, a good gaming TV has 20ms or less. So the relative difference becomes larger (20 vs 80 in this case, or 10 vs 70 if you have a really good TV).)

 

[Fat Frog]

In terms of latency (i.e. input response) it's physically impossible, unless they put servers in the backyards of everyone who wants to use it. Doesn't matter how good your internet connection is, the latency to a server X km away will always be higher than to a console two meters away.

The rest, sure.

This is our first logical thought.

I thought the same until i tried Stadia and GFN...

You're right only with more or less similar hardware.

Yeah, at 60FPS a PS5 will have lower latency than Stadia.

On the other hand, Stadia at 60FPS has lower latency than PS4/Xbox One games at 30FPS.

Judgment on PS4 struggled to reach stable 30FPS, the result was noticeable lag...
The 60FPS Stadia version was more responsive.
Same for RDR2 which has been tested by DF. Stadia > One X on RDR2...

Conclusion: Latency depends of the console, FPS, distance to data center,etc...

With more than 30mbps fiber the result is often like this:
Master race PC > GFN3080 tier (due to 120FPS it often beats the PS5)> PS5 >PS4 at 60 FPS > Stadia/GFN free tier at 60FPS > PS4 at 30FPS.

With a non fiber internet i still had better results with Judgment on Stadia.(which means FPS are crucial). Because there were so many unstable 30FPS games on PS4, many casual players like me found Stadia and GFN very efficient in terms of latency and ease (no DL, no update, unlimited storage)

 

[CeeJay]

Ok, but that server latency is in addition to the TV latency. It's not 40 vs 60ms in your example, it's 40 vs 100.

obviously along with latency added on from the controller, the console and the game.

but, I'll say it again...

It's not going to take too much of an improvement with the entire latency stack to get streaming down to a point where its as good as native is today.

The cloud naysayers always say, impossible, speed of light yadda yadda yadda and try to make out like the latency that is added to and from the data centre is insurmountable when in reality it's in the same ball park as the amount that the TV adds. Go back in time with TV technology to the CRT age and that TV latency is gone.

Even today you can get some ultra low latency TVs with LG having a range that get's that latency down to 1ms. Just switching TVs today can bridge the gap in latency that cloud game presents today!

 

[RoadHazard]

This is our first logical thought.

I thought the same until i tried Stadia and GFN...

You're right only with more or less similar hardware.

Yeah, at 60FPS a PS5 will have lower latency than Stadia.

On the other hand, Stadia at 60FPS has lower latency than PS4/Xbox One games at 30FPS.

Judgment on PS4 struggled to reach stable 30FPS, the result was noticeable lag...
The 60FPS Stadia version was more responsive.
Same for RDR2 which has been tested by DF. Stadia > One X on RDR2...

Conclusion: Latency depends of the console, FPS, distance to data center,etc...

With more than 30mbps fiber the result is often like this:
Master race PC > GFN3080 tier (due to 120FPS it often beats the PS5)> PS5 >PS4 at 60 FPS > Stadia/GFN free tier at 60FPS > PS4 at 30FPS.

With a non fiber internet i still had better results with Judgment on Stadia.(which means FPS are crucial). Because there were so many unstable 30FPS games on PS4, many casual players like me found Stadia and GFN very efficient in terms of latency and ease (no DL, no update, unlimited storage)

Yeah, of course the most basic retirement is to have low input latency in the game engine itself. But we've had extremely few PS5/XSX games without 60fps modes so far (any?). And I think not all Stadia games run at 60 either? Seems like many games on there run at about PS4 quality even though the hardware is closer to a PS5, which is strange.

 

[UnsanctionedBuffoonery]

Good riddance

 

[Fat Frog]

Imagine being one of the suckers that bought games for this service?

The "suckers" played for free for several years because of full refund (i would be a sucker if there wasn't refund)

Let's be specific.

Cyberpunk launch:
PS4 owners > crash fest, 15FPS.
PS5 > Good performances but paid 500 bucks.
Master Race > Excellent performances but high price + mega electricity bill.
GFN > good performances but long queues
Stadia > Good performance, no queue + free controller + free CCU.

How about that ?

 

[RoadHazard]

obviously along with latency added on from the controller, the console and the game.

but, I'll say it again...

It's not going to take too much of an improvement with the entire latency stack to get streaming down to a point where its as good as native is today.

The cloud naysayers always say, impossible, speed of light yadda yadda yadda and try to make out like the latency that is added to and from the data centre is insurmountable when in reality it's in the same ball park as the amount that the TV adds. Go back in time with TV technology to the CRT age and that TV latency is gone.

Even today you can get some ultra low latency TVs with LG having a range that get's that latency down to 1ms. Just switching TVs today can bridge the gap in latency that cloud game presents today!

But all those improvements can apply to local gaming as well, which doesn't have the server latency that physically cannot be overcome.

The cloud naysayers always say, impossible, speed of light yadda yadda yadda and try to make out like the latency that is added to and from the data centre is insurmountable when in reality it's in the same ball park as the amount that the TV adds.

But again, you still ALSO have the TV latency. Any server latency will always be in addition to that.

But sure, cloud gaming can be "good enough" as long as you're not too far from the data center. It can just never be AS good.

 

[Fat Frog]

Yeah, of course the most basic retirement is to have low input latency in the game engine itself. But we've had extremely few PS5/XSX games without 60fps modes so far (any?). And I think not all Stadia games run at 60 either? Seems like many games on there run at about PS4 quality even though the hardware is closer to a PS5, which is strange.

Yeah, most of the time PS5 >Stadia.

But where Stadia did shine was a load of previous gen 60FPS games like RDR2 (not updated on PS5 so 30 FPS) and many that weren't optimized on Series S, for instance.(BC from Xbone and not One X, so a load of 30FPS)


STADIA didn't match PS5/Series X but there were many obvious choices for Series S owners. For instance, Sekiro BC was running at 30FPS on XSS, it was an opportunity to take the 60FPS version on Stadia and save precious space).

 

[CeeJay]

But all those improvements can apply to local gaming as well, which doesn't have the server latency that physically cannot be overcome.



But again, you still ALSO have the TV latency. Any server latency will always be in addition to that.

But sure, cloud gaming can be "good enough" as long as you're not too far from the data center. It can just never be AS good.

We are going round in circles here. If you read back to my post earlier in this thread where I originally challenged your opinion;

https://www.neogaf.com/threads/goog...loud-streaming-service.1642215/post-266647695

That's not strictly true if you take into consideration the total latency from the entire stack (controller to your eye).

What is an acceptable latency for the entire stack?

I won't put a number on it because it will differ from person to person and game to game.

You get latency from the controller, through the console, latency from the game that's running and probably the largest from the TV itself. We went from superior CRT response times to LCD flat panel and not too many people complained that the games got less responsive even though it was a considerable increase.

If you can reduce the latency in these other areas whilst also improving latency from the stream itself then there is always the possibility that the total latency from the stack when streaming can get to a similar level to what we all find acceptable currently with native hardware. Ok, you could argue that if they can improve latency with controllers, consoles and TVs then native will always be superior and that is very true but it's about getting it down to a point where it's acceptable for the vast majority and I believe that this is possible.

It comes down to;

That's not strictly true if you take into consideration the total latency from the entire stack (controller to your eye).

What is an acceptable latency for the entire stack?

I won't put a number on it because it will differ from person to person and game to game.

You get latency from the controller, through the console, latency from the game that's running and probably the largest from the TV itself. We went from superior CRT response times to LCD flat panel and not too many people complained that the games got less responsive even though it was a considerable increase.

If you can reduce the latency in these other areas whilst also improving latency from the stream itself then there is always the possibility that the total latency from the stack when streaming can get to a similar level to what we all find acceptable currently with native hardware. Ok, you could argue that if they can improve latency with controllers, consoles and TVs then native will always be superior and that is very true but it's about getting it down to a point where it's acceptable for the vast majority and I believe that this is possible.

Currently gamers have an amount of latency and can determine for themselves what level they can tolerate and at what level it becomes un-noticeable. Most people will already have a setup that is fine for them (a good chance it's with an average TV of 40ms latency) so, if you switch to cloud gaming and also change TV to one of the new LG 1ms or use a monitor it puts the latency back into a similar region as you had previously. If TV manufacturers put some development time into reducing latency on their game mode then it's been proven that this can be significantly reduced to near zero.

Which brings me back to;

Yes, that's why I kept it open ended rather than going into specifics.


But if you want to get into specifics...

I would guess that average TVs have a latency of around 40ms. Some are <10ms whilst a lot are getting up towards 100ms but lets say 40ms for arguments sake as a rough average?

I just checked my latency to Azure (UK South) and i'm getting around 30ms multiply by 2 for the return journey and that puts it at 60ms for the round trip. Which is not too far outside the latency for an average TV, a bit on the high side but not too far away.

I understand what you are saying about physical distance but, I live over 250 miles away from the Azure UK South data centre so it's not like its just around the corner for me. Sure the mileage definitely will vary but low latency connections in and around the ballpark figure for what a TV adds are not too far fetched.

For me Xcloud works fine and it's not like I am using an ultra low latency TV and live very near to the data centre. Yes I fully understand that not everyone in the world can get as good a result as I can and conversely there are many millions of people who are getting way better. It's not going to take too much of an improvement with the entire latency stack to get streaming down to a point where its as good as native is today.

and

obviously along with latency added on from the controller, the console and the game.

but, I'll say it again...

It's not going to take too much of an improvement with the entire latency stack to get streaming down to a point where its as good as native is today.

The cloud naysayers always say, impossible, speed of light yadda yadda yadda and try to make out like the latency that is added to and from the data centre is insurmountable when in reality it's in the same ball park as the amount that the TV adds. Go back in time with TV technology to the CRT age and that TV latency is gone.

Even today you can get some ultra low latency TVs with LG having a range that get's that latency down to 1ms. Just switching TVs today can bridge the gap in latency that cloud game presents today!

 

[Justin9mm]

We told them 3 years ago it was going to fail lol

 

[Kenneth Haight]

Gamers were wrong on this one though:

"You'll loose all your money"


I'll have full refund.
I played for free for several years and google offered me free controllers and CCU.

Not bad, huh ?

Enjoy your controllers I guess

 

[RoadHazard]

We are going round in circles here. If you read back to my post earlier in this thread where I originally challenged your opinion;

https://www.neogaf.com/threads/goog...loud-streaming-service.1642215/post-266647695


It comes down to;



Currently gamers have an amount of latency and can determine for themselves what level they can tolerate and at what level it becomes un-noticeable. Most people will already have a setup that is fine for them (a good chance it's with an average TV of 40ms latency) so, if you switch to cloud gaming and also change TV to one of the new LG 1ms or use a monitor it puts the latency back into a similar region as you had previously. If TV manufacturers put some development time into reducing latency on their game mode then it's been proven that this can be significantly reduced to near zero.

Which brings me back to;

and

Sure, but once I've switched to that 1ms TV I will get even better results for local gaming. And that's my point, that it will always be better. Not that cloud gaming can never be good enough.

But still, it will always depend on distance to the server, number of hops, etc. And that's not even getting into things like capacity. Stadia never had problems with that (I think?) because there were never enough people using it, but we know that other services have (Xcloud in certain regions, etc). For cloud gaming to have a chance to actually replace local gaming it will need to have capacity for everyone to play any game at any time, because hell no to waiting in a queue to play a game I've paid for. That means they will need a very significant overhead that most of the time won't be utilized. So latency is just one of the problems.

 

[Fat Frog]

Enjoy your controllers I guess

Great controllers (it works on PC), a load of chromecast ultra very useful and i played many games (not as much as gamepass i admit but on the other hand i didn't pay anything in the end).

So yeah, people can laugh but with cold facts some will understand i won hardwares and free game sessions for years.



The "sucker" narrative doesn't work.
On the contrary, with the full refund we saved monthly fees of Game pass like services and we won controllers, CCU...

 

[SportsFan581]

But all those improvements can apply to local gaming as well, which doesn't have the server latency that physically cannot be overcome.

Local will obviously have advantages. What he is getting at is streaming could easily improve to where we are today on console, which is deemed good enough by millions of users.

It wasn't that long ago that ps360 were the local option and streaming can likely already beat them as far as latency goes as it is. When people talk about streaming eventually being good enough, that's all they are talking about. Just good enough, not the greatest that has ever existed.

 

[The_Mike]

I see. I will check the account in a few days. Sounds too good to be true, tbh.

Not if they are locked to your Google account so you have to use it on android apps.

 

[CherryFalls]

Love fat frog's new tag

 

[RoadHazard]

Not if they are locked to your Google account so you have to use it on android apps.

You could use it for a Stadia subscription.

 

[SmokedMeat]

The "suckers" played for free for several years because of full refund (i would be a sucker if there wasn't refund)

Let's be specific.

Cyberpunk launch:
PS4 owners > crash fest, 15FPS.
PS5 > Good performances but paid 500 bucks.
Master Race > Excellent performances but high price + mega electricity bill.
GFN > good performances but long queues
Stadia > Good performance, no queue + free controller + free CCU.

How about that ?

They refunded all game purchases? If so then damn that’s crazy.

 

[SportsFan581]

Not if they are locked to your Google account so you have to use it on android apps.

Looks like you might be able to reverse this to your bank account.

How to Transfer Google Play Balance to your Bank Account

Have some money in your Google account but do not know how to transfer your Google Play balance into your bank account? Don’t Worry, we will help you!

www.techthirsty.com

Not sure if what is listed there still works or not.

 

[CeeJay]

Sure, but once I've switched to that 1ms TV I will get even better results for local gaming. And that's my point, that it will always be better. Not that cloud gaming can never be good enough.

But still, it will always depend on distance to the server, number of hops, etc. And that's not even getting into things like capacity. Stadia never had problems with that (I think?) because there were never enough people using it, but we know that other services have (Xcloud in certain regions, etc). For cloud gaming to have a chance to actually replace local gaming it will need to have capacity for everyone to play any game at any time, because hell no to waiting in a queue to play a game I've paid for. That means they will need a very significant overhead that most of the time won't be utilized. So latency is just one of the problems.

I think we can definitely agree that native will always be lower latency. I was just putting a counter argument that cloud can be as low latency as what people are currently getting natively by upgrading their gear and also as telecommunications infrastructure steadily improves.

I wouldn't go as far to say though that native will always be a better experience though. One thing data centres have an advantage with is that they can build things at scale so they can have huge hyperconverged GPU infrastructure and huge compute models running 24/7 that wouldn't be feasible to have natively in the home. We are already seeing the first signs of this with Flight Simulator that no matter how good your PC is will always be the best and most complete experience when you are streaming some elements such as the scenery close up, scenery in the distance, the realtime air traffic and the realtime weather. This is all stuff that runs in the data centre and then is streamed out to you so you end up with a kind of hybrid thing going on. Some of it (the scenery at distance) is actually streaming the rendered image directly, some of it just gets streamed as data points (the air traffic and the weather) and some streams down chunks to a local cache (the nearby environment). This is then stitched together into the final image by the local hardware. it's pretty impressive and ingenious how it all works together so seamlessly. My point though is that the cloud element is very much required to get the full experience even though it's hybrid rather than totally native or totally streamed. If you think ahead into the future the possibilities for this hybrid tech is really exciting to think of what they could do with it. Think about something like an RPG where every NPC is a chat bot on the cloud with an evolving personality who remembers each encounter they have ever had or an environment that grows and erodes naturally over time. We will be able to have really rich worlds packed with natural flora and fauna where each element can be run on a separate VM and be streamed from via an API instead of a sub routine running inside one monolithic program. Running games server side in the data centre allows for them to be deployed wider on dozens if not hundreds of separate machines with each element able to service multiple gamer sessions whilst also running on relatively cheaper hardware than the current vertical model where GPUs are starting to balloon in both size and cost. There will always be a place for native hardware but I think that the lines between native and cloud are going to blur a lot and eventually get to a point where full streaming makes the most sense for most people.

 

[StreetsofBeige]

Stadia struggles with the exact same issue that most other streaming service deal with: Who is this for? Cloudstreaming is a solution that is looking for a problem to fix. The fact of the matter is that video game consoles are, all things considered, not that expensive. If you are someone who has access to the high speed internet required to play streamable video games, then the price for a console probably isn't a big issue for you.

Streaming video games just isn't as good of an experience as playing them locally, and the few perks that streaming games do bring simply don't outweigh the compromises you have to make.

That said, another issue is the fact that the server blades for Stadia were fairly underpowered. They were more in the ballpark of PS4 pro and Xbox One X, rather than PS5/XSX. That said, Stadia port of Cyberpunk 2077 was quite good, actually.

The point of cloud is for people on the go too. You could stream games on a low powered piece of hardware or current cell phone, not have to install giant files, and just resume your game from any compatible piece of hardware that has the cloud streaming service. At least that's the theory. And it's a big bonus for people in poorer countries because just about everyone has a smartphone, but not everyone has money to buy a console or good PC rig. So just cloud it on whatever device you have.

Who knows how big cloud streaming is and what the potential is.

 

[Iced Arcade]

Oh wow, that's an interesting opinion.

Don't see how is that possible considering microsoft did buy the studios and it's not steamrolling the competition.

....did google just closed down stadia?

I think you might have misread something here.

 

[A.Romero]

....did google just closed down stadia?

I think you might have misread something here.

I mean, yes. Google did close Stadia but if I'm understanding correctly what you are saying is that if Google had bought the studios Stadia wouldn't need to shut down. Sorry if I misunderstood.

My argument is that it wouldn't have made that much of a difference because the issues with Stadia is not only the lack of games (TBH I don't even know who extensive is their catalogue). And my supporting argument is that if purchasing studios was the definitive solution to success in this industry then Microsoft would be steamrolling the competition which is not the case.

Nobody wants to use Stadia because their business model is crap and because they didn't come through with everything they promised. They only have 6 million users if I remember correctly, what was the last console that sold less than 10 mil?

I mean, it's really just beating a dead horse. I thought that opinion was interesting and decided to share mine. That's all

 

[Azelover]

The free tier was probably a big mistake too. Likely one of the things that lead them to set prices as high as they did for software that was available everywhere else for less. I guess the big Fifa cloud exclusive didn't last for long.

Yes, that's true. But only if it had some amazing custom games. For example Netflix, it was an excellent streaming service from the start, but it didnt gain any particular momentum until Stranger Things came on.

The service and technology is worthless without the content. This is an entertainment business, not a technology business.

 

[Draugoth]

 

[anothertech]

So yeah, people can laugh but ...

The "sucker" narrative doesn't work.
On the contrary, with the full refund we saved monthly fees of Game pass like services and we won controllers, CCU...

Bro. It over. No more need to advertise my friend.

 

[Syphon Filter]

The Fat Frog guy was always trolling you guys, i'm surprised you guys took him serious.

 

[Topher]

I can understand giving a "warning" about changes to a service, but not when we are talking about closing the service permanently.

 

[bender]

 

[NickFire]

I genuinely feel bad for anyone who loses their job for no fault of their own. But I would think studio people follow video game centric forums. And if I'm right, I would think they had ample notice when the business model was announced. And then again when it seemed the company dropped plans to make first party games.

 

[CeeJay]

I can understand giving a "warning" about changes to a service, but not when we are talking about closing the service permanently.

I don't know why devs think they should have been told it was shutting down in advance of all the Stadia teams and all the public. To be fair Google couldn't have done it any other way. Closed with immediate effect.

If anyone had advance notice it would have been all over the Internet within hours if not minutes. At least this way Google were in control of the message rather than being forced to either confirm or deny before they were ready.

Is tough on the devs and it's tough on the Stadia team but I don't see they could have done it any different.

 

[OmegaSupreme]

Google couldn't make streaming happen but someone else will. Totally. It's going to happen. Maybe not next year or the next decade but it's going to happen. Lmao. We'll be underwater before streaming is adopted.

 

[DeepEnigma]

Such a garbage company.

 

[jm89]

Great controllers (it works on PC), a load of chromecast ultra very useful and i played many games (not as much as gamepass i admit but on the other hand i didn't pay anything in the end).

So yeah, people can laugh but with cold facts some will understand i won hardwares and free game sessions for years.



The "sucker" narrative doesn't work.
On the contrary, with the full refund we saved monthly fees of Game pass like services and we won controllers, CCU...

No need to be upset

 

[DeepEnigma]

The Fat Frog guy was always trolling you guys, i'm surprised you guys took him serious.

Nobody took him or Stadia seriously, clearly.

It's why we're here where we are with this news, today.

 

[The Stig]

The "suckers" played for free for several years because of full refund (i would be a sucker if there wasn't refund)

Let's be specific.

Cyberpunk launch:
PS4 owners > crash fest, 15FPS.
PS5 > Good performances but paid 500 bucks.
Master Race > Excellent performances but high price + mega electricity bill.
GFN > good performances but long queues
Stadia > Good performance, no queue + free controller + free CCU.

How about that ?

dude, just let it go.

 

[oldergamer]

Saw this coming after it launched. We all saw this coming. google is notorious for not sticking with things. its why I wouldn't want them to purchase any studios. They will just be killed.