I would like Stadia to be successful. I would like the games-as-a-subscription-service to be a viable option.
I very flatly do not, as someone who's watched the bullshit that Adobe is pulling. This shit is a leading edge in an attack on your ability to actually own the shit you use.
A quick explainer, as she does a better job then I would - but suffice to say, this model would deprive us of basically any protection from the companies.
This has the potential to be a worse disaster then the Wilson Lootbox.
The problem with the analogy being used in that thread (re: farm equipment/John Deere) is that we're talking about a frivolous thing like on-the-go entertainment and not somebody's livelihood. It's comparing tractors and game consoles and there's a big difference there. I don't depend on my PS4 to go till the crops and feed my family/make a living. It's something I do when I'm bored waiting at the gate for my next flight.
This thing is not going to upset the industry anymore than the only online Xbox One is.
I imagine the latency on this wouldn't be a problem for most of the games I enjoy, like turn-based RPGs.
Am I right in assuming that the subscription is kind of like PS+ where you get games to play every month? And there will be non-subscription games you have to buy? I don't find anything inherently offensive about that model.
My only concern is about what happens if Google drops the Stadia service, can I download my games? This is the same problem that other platforms have with digital copies though, it's not unique to Stadia.
I'm very confident that if Google drops the Stadia service, they'll offer redemption codes for other platforms for the games you fully own (not the free Pro ones). This has happened before with at least one other game marketplace IIRC, I forget the name.
I used to be extremely opposed to DRM, buying games digitally, and all that stuff. If I couldn't play it in a bunker after an apocalypse, why should I spend money on it?!
Gradually, my resolve weakened due to lack of options. Physical copies of PC games disappeared, DRM became pretty ubiquitous in one form or another, and I learned that my desire for video games greatly outweighed my strong moral stances.
At this point in time, as a tired and boring adult with no free time, I find myself interested in Stadia's subscription option as a sort of radio-style sampler platter. Yeah, for sure, I won't own those games - but I also haven't owned a PC game released since like 2010 or even earlier. There have been plenty of games that I've bought because I'm sorta interested in them, and then ended up either never installing them or playing them for 10 minutes and deciding that they're not for me or that I've had as much fun as I'm gonna have. Honestly and truly, there is no value in those games hanging out in my Steam list. If Stadia lets me - effectively - rent a game for a weekend? That's pretty cool, I'm on board for that.
I don't really see myself buying a brand-new game on there as long as Steam/GOG/whatever is an option.
In short, for myself, I see Stadia as something that can supplement my current gaming model, not replace it.
+1
AthenorBattle Hardened OptimistThe Skies of HiigaraRegistered Userregular
I would like Stadia to be successful. I would like the games-as-a-subscription-service to be a viable option.
I very flatly do not, as someone who's watched the bullshit that Adobe is pulling. This shit is a leading edge in an attack on your ability to actually own the shit you use.
A quick explainer, as she does a better job then I would - but suffice to say, this model would deprive us of basically any protection from the companies.
This has the potential to be a worse disaster then the Wilson Lootbox.
The problem with the analogy being used in that thread (re: farm equipment/John Deere) is that we're talking about a frivolous thing like on-the-go entertainment and not somebody's livelihood. It's comparing tractors and game consoles and there's a big difference there. I don't depend on my PS4 to go till the crops and feed my family/make a living. It's something I do when I'm bored waiting at the gate for my next flight.
This thing is not going to upset the industry anymore than the only online Xbox One is.
I'd agree with the argument about livelihood if there weren't many out there who do make their livelihood on playing video games. Or making games, for that matter. But that's likely way beyond the scope of a thread like this.
It occurred to me that running all of this in the datacenter means the chances for hacking and modding are virtually nonexistent, with the exception of injection attacks using the controller inputs. But that might be enough.
I would like Stadia to be successful. I would like the games-as-a-subscription-service to be a viable option.
I very flatly do not, as someone who's watched the bullshit that Adobe is pulling. This shit is a leading edge in an attack on your ability to actually own the shit you use.
A quick explainer, as she does a better job then I would - but suffice to say, this model would deprive us of basically any protection from the companies.
This has the potential to be a worse disaster then the Wilson Lootbox.
The problem with the analogy being used in that thread (re: farm equipment/John Deere) is that we're talking about a frivolous thing like on-the-go entertainment and not somebody's livelihood. It's comparing tractors and game consoles and there's a big difference there. I don't depend on my PS4 to go till the crops and feed my family/make a living. It's something I do when I'm bored waiting at the gate for my next flight.
This thing is not going to upset the industry anymore than the only online Xbox One is.
I'd agree with the argument about livelihood if there weren't many out there who do make their livelihood on playing video games. Or making games, for that matter. But that's likely way beyond the scope of a thread like this.
It occurred to me that running all of this in the datacenter means the chances for hacking and modding are virtually nonexistent, with the exception of injection attacks using the controller inputs. But that might be enough.
Yeah there are also people who make their livings off of building said tractors and writing the software that people are against. The way in which people make their livings off of games does not change at all with the release of something like stadia. We'll still have developers, we'll still have streamers, and we'll still have reviewers.
0
jungleroomxIt's never too many graves, it's always not enough shovelsRegistered Userregular
I would like Stadia to be successful. I would like the games-as-a-subscription-service to be a viable option.
I very flatly do not, as someone who's watched the bullshit that Adobe is pulling. This shit is a leading edge in an attack on your ability to actually own the shit you use.
A quick explainer, as she does a better job then I would - but suffice to say, this model would deprive us of basically any protection from the companies.
This has the potential to be a worse disaster then the Wilson Lootbox.
In every respect this is exactly the same as streaming video services, as well as buying tv/movies digitally. We already know exactly how that works and what it looks like as a consumer.
I totally understand people's reservations about the lack of true ownership, and requiring complete trust in a company to be able to have access to your "belongings." But that ship has sailed, this is not the vanguard of that trend. Gaming is actually the only entertainment medium that hasn't gone that way already.
Streaming video services yes.
Purchasing digital movies allows you to download the movies in a one-time transaction, giving you ownership of the code required to watch the film in perpetuity.
If Stadia were only a subscription, then we'd have a similarity to streaming video sites since no extra cost is incurred when new content arrives.
I imagine the latency on this wouldn't be a problem for most of the games I enjoy, like turn-based RPGs.
Am I right in assuming that the subscription is kind of like PS+ where you get games to play every month? And there will be non-subscription games you have to buy? I don't find anything inherently offensive about that model.
My only concern is about what happens if Google drops the Stadia service, can I download my games? This is the same problem that other platforms have with digital copies though, it's not unique to Stadia.
I'm very confident that if Google drops the Stadia service, they'll offer redemption codes for other platforms for the games you fully own (not the free Pro ones). This has happened before with at least one other game marketplace IIRC, I forget the name.
I'm all for the Stadia but I really doubt they'd do this.
Well, that's not entirely accurate; from what I've heard, musicians don't hate piracy NEARLY as much as they hate all the subscription music services. From what I understand, it's nearly impossible to make a living from music alone, now; your income has to come from merch and live performances.
I don't know how a subscription-only model of game consumption would impact game development, but if we ever get there, it'll certainly impact it somehow. It's true that Stadia itself is probably not that, yet, because new games still have to be bought at full (or near full) price, but I'm curious to see where it goes.
I imagine the latency on this wouldn't be a problem for most of the games I enjoy, like turn-based RPGs.
Am I right in assuming that the subscription is kind of like PS+ where you get games to play every month? And there will be non-subscription games you have to buy? I don't find anything inherently offensive about that model.
My only concern is about what happens if Google drops the Stadia service, can I download my games? This is the same problem that other platforms have with digital copies though, it's not unique to Stadia.
I'm very confident that if Google drops the Stadia service, they'll offer redemption codes for other platforms for the games you fully own (not the free Pro ones). This has happened before with at least one other game marketplace IIRC, I forget the name.
I'm all for the Stadia but I really doubt they'd do this.
Still, I think Google could negotiate favorable deals with other storefronts to get keys to hand out to their customers. Those storefronts want to get the new users after all. It would be a really huge PR scandal if millions of people's purchases were just gone, they've never done that before. Maybe a startup that shuts down completely would let that happen, but Google can't afford the PR hit.
0
jungleroomxIt's never too many graves, it's always not enough shovelsRegistered Userregular
Well, that's not entirely accurate; from what I've heard, musicians don't hate piracy NEARLY as much as they hate all the subscription music services. From what I understand, it's nearly impossible to make a living from music alone, now; your income has to come from merch and live performances.
I don't know how a subscription-only model of game consumption would impact game development, but if we ever get there, it'll certainly impact it somehow. It's true that Stadia itself is probably not that, yet, because new games still have to be bought at full (or near full) price, but I'm curious to see where it goes.
Merch and live performances is how a lot of underground acts used to survive and make a living while only selling a few thousand albums. Now it's kind of spreading out everywhere.
Still, I think Google could negotiate favorable deals with other storefronts to get keys to hand out to their customers. Those storefronts want to get the new users after all. It would be a really huge PR scandal if millions of people's purchases were just gone, they've never done that before. Maybe a startup that shuts down completely would let that happen, but Google can't afford the PR hit.
If there's anyone that CAN afford a PR hit and escape unscathed, it would be Google.
Yeah, everyone who just assumes bad intentions from Google here...it doesn't track. They're trying to break into the gaming market, they won't want to piss people off unnecessarily.
You can't make money from people if nobody buys your product because they think you're scamming them. The people who work at Google aren't idiots.
Steam: Spawnbroker
0
jungleroomxIt's never too many graves, it's always not enough shovelsRegistered Userregular
Yeah, everyone who just assumes bad intentions from Google here...it doesn't track. They're trying to break into the gaming market, they won't want to piss people off unnecessarily.
You can't make money from people if nobody buys your product because they think you're scamming them. The people who work at Google aren't idiots.
Yeah, everyone who just assumes bad intentions from Google here...it doesn't track. They're trying to break into the gaming market, they won't want to piss people off unnecessarily.
You can't make money from people if nobody buys your product because they think you're scamming them. The people who work at Google aren't idiots.
I know some people who work at Google (I live in the Bay Area). While I wouldn't call them idiots, I wouldn't exactly call them well-meaning benefactors of society, nor would I call them paragons of foresight. They are a tech company, just like any other tech company, and they fall prey to the same biases and ivory-tower thinking that a lot of other tech companies do.
The subscription + having to buy individual games thing seems like a non-starter. This was both PS Now and Onlive's model when they started out, and it didn't work then.
EDIT: I actually know some people who are working on Stadia! It's their first job at Google, too. I don't actually wish failure upon Stadia, since their livelihoods depend on its success.
Still, I think Google could negotiate favorable deals with other storefronts to get keys to hand out to their customers. Those storefronts want to get the new users after all. It would be a really huge PR scandal if millions of people's purchases were just gone, they've never done that before. Maybe a startup that shuts down completely would let that happen, but Google can't afford the PR hit.
If there's anyone that CAN afford a PR hit and escape unscathed, it would be Google.
Survive, yes. Unscathed, absolutely not, are you kidding me? They're having enough user trust issues as it is. Closing down the store without compensation would be an actual scam. Nobody would want to buy digital content from them ever again - they've got other digital platform products to worry about.
0
AthenorBattle Hardened OptimistThe Skies of HiigaraRegistered Userregular
Still, I think Google could negotiate favorable deals with other storefronts to get keys to hand out to their customers. Those storefronts want to get the new users after all. It would be a really huge PR scandal if millions of people's purchases were just gone, they've never done that before. Maybe a startup that shuts down completely would let that happen, but Google can't afford the PR hit.
If there's anyone that CAN afford a PR hit and escape unscathed, it would be Google.
Survive, yes. Unscathed, absolutely not, are you kidding me? They're having enough user trust issues as it is. Closing down the store without compensation would be an actual scam. Nobody would want to buy digital content from them ever again - they've got other digital platform products to worry about.
Just over the last few days we've been watching YouTube (Google) struggle with PR and such.
Yeah, everyone who just assumes bad intentions from Google here...it doesn't track. They're trying to break into the gaming market, they won't want to piss people off unnecessarily.
You can't make money from people if nobody buys your product because they think you're scamming them. The people who work at Google aren't idiots.
I know some people who work at Google (I live in the Bay Area). While I wouldn't call them idiots, I wouldn't exactly call them well-meaning benefactors of society, nor would I call them paragons of foresight. They are a tech company, just like any other tech company, and they fall prey to the same biases and ivory-tower thinking that a lot of other tech companies do.
The subscription + having to buy individual games thing seems like a non-starter. This was both PS Now and Onlive's model when they started out, and it didn't work then.
Those services required a base subscription, Stadia is a free product. The Pro subscription is for 4k and a selection of free games, something like Game Pass or maybe XBL Gold.
Still, I think Google could negotiate favorable deals with other storefronts to get keys to hand out to their customers. Those storefronts want to get the new users after all. It would be a really huge PR scandal if millions of people's purchases were just gone, they've never done that before. Maybe a startup that shuts down completely would let that happen, but Google can't afford the PR hit.
If there's anyone that CAN afford a PR hit and escape unscathed, it would be Google.
Survive, yes. Unscathed, absolutely not, are you kidding me? They're having enough user trust issues as it is. Closing down the store without compensation would be an actual scam. Nobody would want to buy digital content from them ever again - they've got other digital platform products to worry about.
Just over the last few days we've been watching YouTube (Google) struggle with PR and such.
They don't seem to be struggling with getting people to watch YouTube videos. *shrugs* It's not like we are all boycotting YouTube.
Yeah, everyone who just assumes bad intentions from Google here...it doesn't track. They're trying to break into the gaming market, they won't want to piss people off unnecessarily.
You can't make money from people if nobody buys your product because they think you're scamming them. The people who work at Google aren't idiots.
I know some people who work at Google (I live in the Bay Area). While I wouldn't call them idiots, I wouldn't exactly call them well-meaning benefactors of society, nor would I call them paragons of foresight. They are a tech company, just like any other tech company, and they fall prey to the same biases and ivory-tower thinking that a lot of other tech companies do.
The subscription + having to buy individual games thing seems like a non-starter. This was both PS Now and Onlive's model when they started out, and it didn't work then.
Those services required a base subscription, Stadia is a free product. The Pro subscription is for 4k and a selection of free games, something like Game Pass or maybe XBL Gold.
Not until they release the free tier (which is Soon(TM) Next Year, which seems unnecessarily vague). The November launch is subscription only, from what I read.
I imagine the latency on this wouldn't be a problem for most of the games I enjoy, like turn-based RPGs.
Am I right in assuming that the subscription is kind of like PS+ where you get games to play every month? And there will be non-subscription games you have to buy? I don't find anything inherently offensive about that model.
My only concern is about what happens if Google drops the Stadia service, can I download my games? This is the same problem that other platforms have with digital copies though, it's not unique to Stadia.
I'm very confident that if Google drops the Stadia service, they'll offer redemption codes for other platforms for the games you fully own (not the free Pro ones). This has happened before with at least one other game marketplace IIRC, I forget the name.
If this isn't a part of the user agreement when you create an account, then there's a 0% chance of this happening. The publishers I could see doing this, because they will need to maintain the goodwill - If google is getting out of the games market, they won't need to.
It's not like we haven't seen similar situations, like in mmos and other online only games - if you buy something in one of those, and the game shuts down, you're just out of luck. Or things like windows phone, that whole platform is gone (I believe).
+1
HenroidMexican kicked from Immigration ThreadCentrism is Racism :3Registered Userregular
I imagine the latency on this wouldn't be a problem for most of the games I enjoy, like turn-based RPGs.
Am I right in assuming that the subscription is kind of like PS+ where you get games to play every month? And there will be non-subscription games you have to buy? I don't find anything inherently offensive about that model.
My only concern is about what happens if Google drops the Stadia service, can I download my games? This is the same problem that other platforms have with digital copies though, it's not unique to Stadia.
I'm very confident that if Google drops the Stadia service, they'll offer redemption codes for other platforms for the games you fully own (not the free Pro ones). This has happened before with at least one other game marketplace IIRC, I forget the name.
Personal confidence is nice but we'd need concrete guarantee instead. Otherwise they aren't bound to it.
Still, I think Google could negotiate favorable deals with other storefronts to get keys to hand out to their customers. Those storefronts want to get the new users after all. It would be a really huge PR scandal if millions of people's purchases were just gone, they've never done that before. Maybe a startup that shuts down completely would let that happen, but Google can't afford the PR hit.
If there's anyone that CAN afford a PR hit and escape unscathed, it would be Google.
Survive, yes. Unscathed, absolutely not, are you kidding me? They're having enough user trust issues as it is. Closing down the store without compensation would be an actual scam. Nobody would want to buy digital content from them ever again - they've got other digital platform products to worry about.
Just over the last few days we've been watching YouTube (Google) struggle with PR and such.
afaik YouTube has always had this issue.
This one just got signal boosted into the mainstream.
Still, I think Google could negotiate favorable deals with other storefronts to get keys to hand out to their customers. Those storefronts want to get the new users after all. It would be a really huge PR scandal if millions of people's purchases were just gone, they've never done that before. Maybe a startup that shuts down completely would let that happen, but Google can't afford the PR hit.
If there's anyone that CAN afford a PR hit and escape unscathed, it would be Google.
Survive, yes. Unscathed, absolutely not, are you kidding me? They're having enough user trust issues as it is. Closing down the store without compensation would be an actual scam. Nobody would want to buy digital content from them ever again - they've got other digital platform products to worry about.
Just over the last few days we've been watching YouTube (Google) struggle with PR and such.
They don't seem to be struggling with getting people to watch YouTube videos. *shrugs* It's not like we are all boycotting YouTube.
Exactly. Google will not be struggling with anything until people stop using google search (and to a lesser extent, youtube and chrome), because that's what drives its ad revenue, which is paid out by its advertisers. The idea that google would suffer monetarily from bad press from stadia is laughable. Unless every angry gamer in the world will switch over to bing, I don't see it happening. People have to remember that stadia is just another moonshot lark from google, they are testing it out because it COULD become the dominant force for gaming and make a ton of money. If it doesn't, and they shut it down, it will not affect their bottom line in any real way.
I don't plan on putting any money into purchases on Stadia, though I could see doing the monthly subscription from time to time. People should treat it as rentals and nothing more.
Also, these concerns over owning the games, people should also have about owning that controller. I'm betting that if stadia shuts down, those controllers will also become useless, if they are built to only connect over wifi to stadia servers.
+1
jungleroomxIt's never too many graves, it's always not enough shovelsRegistered Userregular
YouTubes been under constant criticism and struggles with PR a lot.
It's why a lot of creators are making subscription-based sites like Floatplane.
I imagine the latency on this wouldn't be a problem for most of the games I enjoy, like turn-based RPGs.
Am I right in assuming that the subscription is kind of like PS+ where you get games to play every month? And there will be non-subscription games you have to buy? I don't find anything inherently offensive about that model.
My only concern is about what happens if Google drops the Stadia service, can I download my games? This is the same problem that other platforms have with digital copies though, it's not unique to Stadia.
I'm very confident that if Google drops the Stadia service, they'll offer redemption codes for other platforms for the games you fully own (not the free Pro ones). This has happened before with at least one other game marketplace IIRC, I forget the name.
Personal confidence is nice but we'd need concrete guarantee instead. Otherwise they aren't bound to it.
The way I see it
If Microsoft or Sony or Apple or any other company on earth wouldn't do it, why would Google?
0
HenroidMexican kicked from Immigration ThreadCentrism is Racism :3Registered Userregular
It's not even just the recent troubles, YouTube has been under constant criticism for changing how paying channel operators works out. One of the hardest hitting is when it changed from view count to actual minutes streamed. They change the ratios of how much Google gets vs the channel operators, they increasingly make it easier for a video to be demonetized (and yet it will still play ads and Google still gets money), they have like zero recourse for fighting nonsense flags / reporting, and that's all aside from their terrible method of how to adhere to the DMCA. It even affects Twitch streamers who use YouTube as an archive of their streams; Nintendo is a big problem here because they seek copyright claims for music in their games all the time. And yet Twitch streamers still have an interest in operating their own channel lest someone take their streams and upload & profit off it until noticed.
And not every Google venture has been a smash hit. Remember Google Plus? Remember how wildly unpopular Google got when they heavy-handedly forced people into having a Google Plus page if they wanted to be active with their YouTube account in any way (plus the weird data-binding they did between the two)?
There's reasons to have a wait-and-see approach with Google. I'd argue that Apple has stronger clout to survive bad PR (particularly since manufacturers in China literally jump out of the building to suicide).
I actually pre ordered the founders edition cos I figure the $130 price tag is a low enough barrier to entry and the fact that I can play Destiny 2 off my phone at work is really alluring.
I preordered as well. I'm actually pretty surprised to see all the hate in the prior pages. With the proliferation of faster internet (see 5G and later), I can't imagine a scenario where gaming goes any other way. I don't want a movie collection, I have Netflix. I don't want a music collection, I have Google Play Music. If the library of games is good, I can't see how this isn't perfect for me. I'll still love the hell out of my PS4Pro and Switch but I'm on board this train into the future.
The EULA for Stadia is already up; I'm not a law-dog but it reads like any other EULA I've glanced at: "You license this, don't own that, we can change this. . ." etc. Someone more up on the lingo will have to specify how this is any different than similar services (other than being tied to Stadia existing of course).
"Get the hell out of me" - [ex]girlfriend
0
jungleroomxIt's never too many graves, it's always not enough shovelsRegistered Userregular
The EULA for Stadia is already up; I'm not a law-dog but it reads like any other EULA I've glanced at: "You license this, don't own that, we can change this. . ." etc. Someone more up on the lingo will have to specify how this is any different than similar services (other than being tied to Stadia existing of course).
I mean, this says it all:
"...nothing in this EULA gives you any rights in respect of any intellectual property owned by us or our licensors and you acknowledge that you do not acquire any ownership rights by downloading any Application or Download or any content from any Application or Download."
So if it goes away, tough shit, they don't owe you anything.
Don't digital downloads on Xbox or PS4 work the same way? This just doesn't have the option for physical media.
As someone who owns a PS4 but doesn't have any actual physical discs, I view this as the same thing I'm already doing. If I decide to throw away my PS4, I don't have those games anymore.
Steam: Spawnbroker
+2
HenroidMexican kicked from Immigration ThreadCentrism is Racism :3Registered Userregular
I think Google’s success or failure might just wind up as a footnote to the trend. MS and Sony want this too.
MS maybe, given that a few years ago they tried the "you need to be online" thing and then it blew up in their face. Sony I don't suspect as such. I'd say we'll find out at E3 but Sony isn't showing up and I dunno if Microsoft is going to do a hardware announcement.
But for sure next console gen, yeah, we'll find out what the new trend is. God help us all.
I would like Stadia to be successful. I would like the games-as-a-subscription-service to be a viable option.
I very flatly do not, as someone who's watched the bullshit that Adobe is pulling. This shit is a leading edge in an attack on your ability to actually own the shit you use.
A quick explainer, as she does a better job then I would - but suffice to say, this model would deprive us of basically any protection from the companies.
This has the potential to be a worse disaster then the Wilson Lootbox.
In every respect this is exactly the same as streaming video services, as well as buying tv/movies digitally. We already know exactly how that works and what it looks like as a consumer.
I totally understand people's reservations about the lack of true ownership, and requiring complete trust in a company to be able to have access to your "belongings." But that ship has sailed, this is not the vanguard of that trend. Gaming is actually the only entertainment medium that hasn't gone that way already.
Apples to oranges. Videos and music are consumed as produced by the author. What you watch is what someone else watches. But many games allow for the consumer to configure and modify their enjoyment. For example, I love playing heavily modded skyrim and fallout. But you couldn't pay me to play the vanilla version released by Bethesda.
The EULA for Stadia is already up; I'm not a law-dog but it reads like any other EULA I've glanced at: "You license this, don't own that, we can change this. . ." etc. Someone more up on the lingo will have to specify how this is any different than similar services (other than being tied to Stadia existing of course).
I mean, this says it all:
"...nothing in this EULA gives you any rights in respect of any intellectual property owned by us or our licensors and you acknowledge that you do not acquire any ownership rights by downloading any Application or Download or any content from any Application or Download."
So if it goes away, tough shit, they don't owe you anything.
Right. Like any other subscription based service where the content is tied to the platform. Stadia is priced accordingly (at least the hardware). I'd like to see what these price discounts are and how expansive that free library is, but right now it's hard to get crippled by "what ifs" on a 130 dollar buy-in to possibly play Cyberpunk 2077 on my lunch and other breaks.
. . .also there is still a ton of details outstanding (which is both good and bad) between now and fall.
Don't digital downloads on Xbox or PS4 work the same way? This just doesn't have the option for physical media.
As someone who owns a PS4 but doesn't have any actual physical discs, I view this as the same thing I'm already doing. If I decide to throw away my PS4, I don't have those games anymore.
Only if you lose access to your account. In terms of having access, you'd just have to download the the software if you suspected SONY was going out of business. Don't need an internet connection for titles you own.
Don't digital downloads on Xbox or PS4 work the same way? This just doesn't have the option for physical media.
As someone who owns a PS4 but doesn't have any actual physical discs, I view this as the same thing I'm already doing. If I decide to throw away my PS4, I don't have those games anymore.
No its not the same. In your example, where you toss out your ps4, you can reclaim your games by logging into your account with a new ps4. But that's not very applicable since the same is true with logging in to a different device with stadia. You'll have your games so long as they keep the lights on and don't ban you.
A more applicable scenario is imagining that Microsoft or Sony dropped out of the gaming market. They're not obligated to provide you with any means to reacquire your games. However you still own hardware in your home, you still have a copy of the game on that hardware, and you can still play everything that does not require any additional infrastructure outside of your home. You are free to take great care to archive your data so that you don't lose it due to hardware failure. You can replace hardware by buying someone's old one from a garage sale or eBay. Eventually the hardware might be emulated by tomorrow's computers and you can restore your games from your archived hard drives.
The point is that once the data is in your hands, then nobody can stop you from protecting it and archiving it if you so choose. You can do whatever you want with it. But with stadia, your everything is gone the very moment that the Google execs decide that the venture isn't profitable enough to fund their gold plated hover yachts.
3DS Friend Code:
Armchair: 4098-3704-2012
+1
Casually HardcoreOnce an Asshole. Trying to be better.Registered Userregular
I have so many games that I spent 30 minutes and promptly forget I own. Who cares if I can’t pmay it 20 years from now.
I have so many games that I spent 30 minutes and promptly forget I own. Who cares if I can’t pmay it 20 years from now.
Opposite side of the coin: some of us have semi regular games we've been playing for years and it would absolutely suck if something like Path of Exile or EVE got hosted by Stadia and they shut the shit down in a year.
Posts
The problem with the analogy being used in that thread (re: farm equipment/John Deere) is that we're talking about a frivolous thing like on-the-go entertainment and not somebody's livelihood. It's comparing tractors and game consoles and there's a big difference there. I don't depend on my PS4 to go till the crops and feed my family/make a living. It's something I do when I'm bored waiting at the gate for my next flight.
This thing is not going to upset the industry anymore than the only online Xbox One is.
I'm very confident that if Google drops the Stadia service, they'll offer redemption codes for other platforms for the games you fully own (not the free Pro ones). This has happened before with at least one other game marketplace IIRC, I forget the name.
Gradually, my resolve weakened due to lack of options. Physical copies of PC games disappeared, DRM became pretty ubiquitous in one form or another, and I learned that my desire for video games greatly outweighed my strong moral stances.
At this point in time, as a tired and boring adult with no free time, I find myself interested in Stadia's subscription option as a sort of radio-style sampler platter. Yeah, for sure, I won't own those games - but I also haven't owned a PC game released since like 2010 or even earlier. There have been plenty of games that I've bought because I'm sorta interested in them, and then ended up either never installing them or playing them for 10 minutes and deciding that they're not for me or that I've had as much fun as I'm gonna have. Honestly and truly, there is no value in those games hanging out in my Steam list. If Stadia lets me - effectively - rent a game for a weekend? That's pretty cool, I'm on board for that.
I don't really see myself buying a brand-new game on there as long as Steam/GOG/whatever is an option.
In short, for myself, I see Stadia as something that can supplement my current gaming model, not replace it.
I'd agree with the argument about livelihood if there weren't many out there who do make their livelihood on playing video games. Or making games, for that matter. But that's likely way beyond the scope of a thread like this.
It occurred to me that running all of this in the datacenter means the chances for hacking and modding are virtually nonexistent, with the exception of injection attacks using the controller inputs. But that might be enough.
Yeah there are also people who make their livings off of building said tractors and writing the software that people are against. The way in which people make their livings off of games does not change at all with the release of something like stadia. We'll still have developers, we'll still have streamers, and we'll still have reviewers.
Streaming video services yes.
Purchasing digital movies allows you to download the movies in a one-time transaction, giving you ownership of the code required to watch the film in perpetuity.
If Stadia were only a subscription, then we'd have a similarity to streaming video sites since no extra cost is incurred when new content arrives.
I'm all for the Stadia but I really doubt they'd do this.
I don't know how a subscription-only model of game consumption would impact game development, but if we ever get there, it'll certainly impact it somehow. It's true that Stadia itself is probably not that, yet, because new games still have to be bought at full (or near full) price, but I'm curious to see where it goes.
I guess I was thinking of Razer, which technically was selling keys for other platforms to begin with: https://www.pcgamesn.com/razer-game-store-shut-down
Still, I think Google could negotiate favorable deals with other storefronts to get keys to hand out to their customers. Those storefronts want to get the new users after all. It would be a really huge PR scandal if millions of people's purchases were just gone, they've never done that before. Maybe a startup that shuts down completely would let that happen, but Google can't afford the PR hit.
Streaming sites pay dick.
"Happy" by Pharrell got streamed 43 million times on Pandora and his payout was $2,700.
Merch and live performances is how a lot of underground acts used to survive and make a living while only selling a few thousand albums. Now it's kind of spreading out everywhere.
You can't make money from people if nobody buys your product because they think you're scamming them. The people who work at Google aren't idiots.
As with everything in the modern gaming era
The EULA will tell all
The subscription + having to buy individual games thing seems like a non-starter. This was both PS Now and Onlive's model when they started out, and it didn't work then.
EDIT: I actually know some people who are working on Stadia! It's their first job at Google, too. I don't actually wish failure upon Stadia, since their livelihoods depend on its success.
Survive, yes. Unscathed, absolutely not, are you kidding me? They're having enough user trust issues as it is. Closing down the store without compensation would be an actual scam. Nobody would want to buy digital content from them ever again - they've got other digital platform products to worry about.
Just over the last few days we've been watching YouTube (Google) struggle with PR and such.
Those services required a base subscription, Stadia is a free product. The Pro subscription is for 4k and a selection of free games, something like Game Pass or maybe XBL Gold.
If this isn't a part of the user agreement when you create an account, then there's a 0% chance of this happening. The publishers I could see doing this, because they will need to maintain the goodwill - If google is getting out of the games market, they won't need to.
It's not like we haven't seen similar situations, like in mmos and other online only games - if you buy something in one of those, and the game shuts down, you're just out of luck. Or things like windows phone, that whole platform is gone (I believe).
This one just got signal boosted into the mainstream.
Exactly. Google will not be struggling with anything until people stop using google search (and to a lesser extent, youtube and chrome), because that's what drives its ad revenue, which is paid out by its advertisers. The idea that google would suffer monetarily from bad press from stadia is laughable. Unless every angry gamer in the world will switch over to bing, I don't see it happening. People have to remember that stadia is just another moonshot lark from google, they are testing it out because it COULD become the dominant force for gaming and make a ton of money. If it doesn't, and they shut it down, it will not affect their bottom line in any real way.
I don't plan on putting any money into purchases on Stadia, though I could see doing the monthly subscription from time to time. People should treat it as rentals and nothing more.
Also, these concerns over owning the games, people should also have about owning that controller. I'm betting that if stadia shuts down, those controllers will also become useless, if they are built to only connect over wifi to stadia servers.
It's why a lot of creators are making subscription-based sites like Floatplane.
The way I see it
If Microsoft or Sony or Apple or any other company on earth wouldn't do it, why would Google?
And not every Google venture has been a smash hit. Remember Google Plus? Remember how wildly unpopular Google got when they heavy-handedly forced people into having a Google Plus page if they wanted to be active with their YouTube account in any way (plus the weird data-binding they did between the two)?
There's reasons to have a wait-and-see approach with Google. I'd argue that Apple has stronger clout to survive bad PR (particularly since manufacturers in China literally jump out of the building to suicide).
I mean, this says it all:
"...nothing in this EULA gives you any rights in respect of any intellectual property owned by us or our licensors and you acknowledge that you do not acquire any ownership rights by downloading any Application or Download or any content from any Application or Download."
So if it goes away, tough shit, they don't owe you anything.
Don't digital downloads on Xbox or PS4 work the same way? This just doesn't have the option for physical media.
As someone who owns a PS4 but doesn't have any actual physical discs, I view this as the same thing I'm already doing. If I decide to throw away my PS4, I don't have those games anymore.
But for sure next console gen, yeah, we'll find out what the new trend is. God help us all.
Apples to oranges. Videos and music are consumed as produced by the author. What you watch is what someone else watches. But many games allow for the consumer to configure and modify their enjoyment. For example, I love playing heavily modded skyrim and fallout. But you couldn't pay me to play the vanilla version released by Bethesda.
Armchair: 4098-3704-2012
Right. Like any other subscription based service where the content is tied to the platform. Stadia is priced accordingly (at least the hardware). I'd like to see what these price discounts are and how expansive that free library is, but right now it's hard to get crippled by "what ifs" on a 130 dollar buy-in to possibly play Cyberpunk 2077 on my lunch and other breaks.
. . .also there is still a ton of details outstanding (which is both good and bad) between now and fall.
Only if you lose access to your account. In terms of having access, you'd just have to download the the software if you suspected SONY was going out of business. Don't need an internet connection for titles you own.
No its not the same. In your example, where you toss out your ps4, you can reclaim your games by logging into your account with a new ps4. But that's not very applicable since the same is true with logging in to a different device with stadia. You'll have your games so long as they keep the lights on and don't ban you.
A more applicable scenario is imagining that Microsoft or Sony dropped out of the gaming market. They're not obligated to provide you with any means to reacquire your games. However you still own hardware in your home, you still have a copy of the game on that hardware, and you can still play everything that does not require any additional infrastructure outside of your home. You are free to take great care to archive your data so that you don't lose it due to hardware failure. You can replace hardware by buying someone's old one from a garage sale or eBay. Eventually the hardware might be emulated by tomorrow's computers and you can restore your games from your archived hard drives.
The point is that once the data is in your hands, then nobody can stop you from protecting it and archiving it if you so choose. You can do whatever you want with it. But with stadia, your everything is gone the very moment that the Google execs decide that the venture isn't profitable enough to fund their gold plated hover yachts.
Armchair: 4098-3704-2012
Armchair: 4098-3704-2012
Opposite side of the coin: some of us have semi regular games we've been playing for years and it would absolutely suck if something like Path of Exile or EVE got hosted by Stadia and they shut the shit down in a year.