100GB per hour is like waaaaay higher than i thought it was going to be, and I thought it would be high already. There is basically nowhere in the US that could use that since most ISPs have data caps around 1TB, with some expensive option for 1-2 more TB. If I can afford that kind of internet Im just going to buy a beast computer and get way more bang for my buck.
If 100GB per hour is way higher than you thought it would be that's because it is way higher than it actually is.
For the highest quality it tops out at ~20GB/hour. It's still "high" for sure and I'm sure people with caps will still hit that so we'll see how that plays out once people are actually streaming for closer to a month. Fwiw, I live in the US and I don't have a cap so it's certainly not "basically nowhere", but yeah, not everyone, or even most, will have that option.
I think you may have a cap. There's quite a few ISP's who will soft cap you after a certain amount of data.
I think most ISP have some form of data cap, if not the overwhelming majority. Exceptions are just that, exceptional--for example, Charter under the name Spectrum doesn't have a formal data cap, though not necessarily by choice. I've been their customer coming on ten years now (not contiguously--I dropped the plan each time I moved to try and snatch promotional deals), and have never once accrued a fee attributable to actual data usage. But that doesn't mean they haven't gotten angry at me, and expressed it via letter, one way or another. Just that I haven't paid for a data cap.There was a time where my service looked like it was being throttled every evening, but it was 1) geographically local and 2) happened regardless of how much bandwidth I consumed. So Charter probably wasn't throttling me, so much as they just half-assed service where I lived, and took a long time to fix it.
Right now I get a pretty consistent ~220mbps down (this is their basic plan--they're pretty much the fastest game in town, and they know it), which actually makes Staadia viable, if not ideal? But I wouldn't be the least bit surprised if Charter took some preventive options, like throttling, if enough people warranted action on their part.
Synthesis on
0
jungleroomxIt's never too many graves, it's always not enough shovelsRegistered Userregular
100GB per hour is like waaaaay higher than i thought it was going to be, and I thought it would be high already. There is basically nowhere in the US that could use that since most ISPs have data caps around 1TB, with some expensive option for 1-2 more TB. If I can afford that kind of internet Im just going to buy a beast computer and get way more bang for my buck.
If 100GB per hour is way higher than you thought it would be that's because it is way higher than it actually is.
For the highest quality it tops out at ~20GB/hour. It's still "high" for sure and I'm sure people with caps will still hit that so we'll see how that plays out once people are actually streaming for closer to a month. Fwiw, I live in the US and I don't have a cap so it's certainly not "basically nowhere", but yeah, not everyone, or even most, will have that option.
I think you may have a cap. There's quite a few ISP's who will soft cap you after a certain amount of data.
Most of the rumored soft caps from pre-gigabit days don't exist anymore.
I know of 2 large companies who definitely do, though it's not expressed anywhere in writing.
100GB per hour is like waaaaay higher than i thought it was going to be, and I thought it would be high already. There is basically nowhere in the US that could use that since most ISPs have data caps around 1TB, with some expensive option for 1-2 more TB. If I can afford that kind of internet Im just going to buy a beast computer and get way more bang for my buck.
If 100GB per hour is way higher than you thought it would be that's because it is way higher than it actually is.
For the highest quality it tops out at ~20GB/hour. It's still "high" for sure and I'm sure people with caps will still hit that so we'll see how that plays out once people are actually streaming for closer to a month. Fwiw, I live in the US and I don't have a cap so it's certainly not "basically nowhere", but yeah, not everyone, or even most, will have that option.
I think you may have a cap. There's quite a few ISP's who will soft cap you after a certain amount of data.
100GB per hour is like waaaaay higher than i thought it was going to be, and I thought it would be high already. There is basically nowhere in the US that could use that since most ISPs have data caps around 1TB, with some expensive option for 1-2 more TB. If I can afford that kind of internet Im just going to buy a beast computer and get way more bang for my buck.
If 100GB per hour is way higher than you thought it would be that's because it is way higher than it actually is.
For the highest quality it tops out at ~20GB/hour. It's still "high" for sure and I'm sure people with caps will still hit that so we'll see how that plays out once people are actually streaming for closer to a month. Fwiw, I live in the US and I don't have a cap so it's certainly not "basically nowhere", but yeah, not everyone, or even most, will have that option.
I thought for sure I saw people talking about getting up to 35.
The 35 figure you saw probably is related to the bandwidth Google recommends for the best quality: 35 Mbps
100GB per hour is like waaaaay higher than i thought it was going to be, and I thought it would be high already. There is basically nowhere in the US that could use that since most ISPs have data caps around 1TB, with some expensive option for 1-2 more TB. If I can afford that kind of internet Im just going to buy a beast computer and get way more bang for my buck.
If 100GB per hour is way higher than you thought it would be that's because it is way higher than it actually is.
For the highest quality it tops out at ~20GB/hour. It's still "high" for sure and I'm sure people with caps will still hit that so we'll see how that plays out once people are actually streaming for closer to a month. Fwiw, I live in the US and I don't have a cap so it's certainly not "basically nowhere", but yeah, not everyone, or even most, will have that option.
I think you may have a cap. There's quite a few ISP's who will soft cap you after a certain amount of data.
I think most ISP have some form of data cap, if not the overwhelming majority. Exceptions are just that, exceptional--for example, Charter under the name Spectrum doesn't have a formal data cap, though not necessarily by choice. I've been their customer coming on ten years now (not contiguously--I dropped the plan each time I moved to try and snatch promotional deals), and have never once accrued a fee attributable to actual data usage. But that doesn't mean they haven't gotten angry at me, and expressed it via letter, one way or another. Just that I haven't paid for a data cap.There was a time where my service looked like it was being throttled every evening, but it was 1) geographically local and 2) happened regardless of how much bandwidth I consumed. So Charter probably wasn't throttling me, so much as they just half-assed service where I lived, and took a long time to fix it.
Right now I get a pretty consistent ~220mbps down (this is their basic plan--they're pretty much the fastest game in town, and they know it), which actually makes Staadia viable, if not ideal? But I wouldn't be the least bit surprised if Charter took some preventive options, like throttling, if enough people warranted action on their part.
Uhh, 220 Mbps down should be way more than enough for Stadia at its highest quality. They recommend at least 35, but I would say 50 is probably going to be a better experience.
100GB per hour is like waaaaay higher than i thought it was going to be, and I thought it would be high already. There is basically nowhere in the US that could use that since most ISPs have data caps around 1TB, with some expensive option for 1-2 more TB. If I can afford that kind of internet Im just going to buy a beast computer and get way more bang for my buck.
If 100GB per hour is way higher than you thought it would be that's because it is way higher than it actually is.
For the highest quality it tops out at ~20GB/hour. It's still "high" for sure and I'm sure people with caps will still hit that so we'll see how that plays out once people are actually streaming for closer to a month. Fwiw, I live in the US and I don't have a cap so it's certainly not "basically nowhere", but yeah, not everyone, or even most, will have that option.
I think you may have a cap. There's quite a few ISP's who will soft cap you after a certain amount of data.
I think most ISP have some form of data cap, if not the overwhelming majority. Exceptions are just that, exceptional--for example, Charter under the name Spectrum doesn't have a formal data cap, though not necessarily by choice. I've been their customer coming on ten years now (not contiguously--I dropped the plan each time I moved to try and snatch promotional deals), and have never once accrued a fee attributable to actual data usage. But that doesn't mean they haven't gotten angry at me, and expressed it via letter, one way or another. Just that I haven't paid for a data cap.There was a time where my service looked like it was being throttled every evening, but it was 1) geographically local and 2) happened regardless of how much bandwidth I consumed. So Charter probably wasn't throttling me, so much as they just half-assed service where I lived, and took a long time to fix it.
Right now I get a pretty consistent ~220mbps down (this is their basic plan--they're pretty much the fastest game in town, and they know it), which actually makes Staadia viable, if not ideal? But I wouldn't be the least bit surprised if Charter took some preventive options, like throttling, if enough people warranted action on their part.
Uhh, 220 Mbps down should be way more than enough for Stadia at its highest quality. They recommend at least 35, but I would say 50 is probably going to be a better experience.
Looking at Digital Foundry's service demonstration, it would definitely work--but not without hiccups. Of course, for a service still being ironed out, that might be as close to "ideal" as things get.
100GB per hour is like waaaaay higher than i thought it was going to be, and I thought it would be high already. There is basically nowhere in the US that could use that since most ISPs have data caps around 1TB, with some expensive option for 1-2 more TB. If I can afford that kind of internet Im just going to buy a beast computer and get way more bang for my buck.
If 100GB per hour is way higher than you thought it would be that's because it is way higher than it actually is.
For the highest quality it tops out at ~20GB/hour. It's still "high" for sure and I'm sure people with caps will still hit that so we'll see how that plays out once people are actually streaming for closer to a month. Fwiw, I live in the US and I don't have a cap so it's certainly not "basically nowhere", but yeah, not everyone, or even most, will have that option.
I think you may have a cap. There's quite a few ISP's who will soft cap you after a certain amount of data.
Most of the rumored soft caps from pre-gigabit days don't exist anymore.
I know of 2 large companies who definitely do, though it's not expressed anywhere in writing.
Yeah I've not seen or heard that soft caps no longer exist.
If nothing else, at their most generous, it's likely you'd be throttled after a certain amount of usage, so technically you're not being charged more and you do have unlimited data, but you get slowed way down (possibly for just certain types of traffic like streaming).
Have any of you tried multiplayer extensively? Gambit / Crucible matches, Samurai Shodown / MK matches, etc.?
I did a few Crucible matches last night actually. It worked fine for me! Other than I sucked more than usual because I was using a controller but I don't think the added latency was to blame. I think in other shooters it would make a difference though. Generally, it felt the same as if I was playing on PS4, though. Including the being terrible with a controller part.
Apparently the tack they're taking here is blaming developers for not optimizing their ports better.
I think the problem lies somewhere in the middle. I think Google's tools probably aren't as good as they could be so it's tough for developers to really optimize games (which is not that weird since it's a new platform, but it wouldn't surprise me if Google's were even rougher than what you'd expect). On the other hand we do have a couple games running at [email protected] and many of the other high profile titles running at [email protected] so we know that the hardware is pretty capable.
Mostly, I don't think Destiny 2 running at [email protected] on medium settings is the best Bungie could have done. I also don't think Google has made anyone's job making these ports easier. I also think Google's entire marketing around Stadia needed to be reigned in and been A LOT less gun ho about the [email protected] pitch since it's clear now they meant everything will be streamed that way, not that games are actually running at that.
I vaguely recall certain promises or predictions that adapting software for stadia would be so easy, the most easiest, no effort at all, so of course there wouldn't be any difficulty caused by porting. That doesn't seem like it's been born out by reality.
0
-Loki-Don't pee in my mouth and tell me it's raining.Registered Userregular
I think Doom Eternal is already there in demos, but its also targeting 60hz on base current gen consoles.
It’s also being developed in house by id software. They might not have Carmack but Doom 2016 was incredibly well optimised on every platform, and I’d expect no less effort for a new platform for Eternal.
+6
jungleroomxIt's never too many graves, it's always not enough shovelsRegistered Userregular
I also feel that Stadia solves a problem which no longer exists. Like, 5 or 6 years ago games pretty much reached a plateau of prettyness and graphics cards requirements. Nowadays
100GB per hour is like waaaaay higher than i thought it was going to be, and I thought it would be high already. There is basically nowhere in the US that could use that since most ISPs have data caps around 1TB, with some expensive option for 1-2 more TB. If I can afford that kind of internet Im just going to buy a beast computer and get way more bang for my buck.
If 100GB per hour is way higher than you thought it would be that's because it is way higher than it actually is.
For the highest quality it tops out at ~20GB/hour. It's still "high" for sure and I'm sure people with caps will still hit that so we'll see how that plays out once people are actually streaming for closer to a month. Fwiw, I live in the US and I don't have a cap so it's certainly not "basically nowhere", but yeah, not everyone, or even most, will have that option.
I think you may have a cap. There's quite a few ISP's who will soft cap you after a certain amount of data.
Most of the rumored soft caps from pre-gigabit days don't exist anymore.
I know of 2 large companies who definitely do, though it's not expressed anywhere in writing.
Yeah I've not seen or heard that soft caps no longer exist.
If nothing else, at their most generous, it's likely you'd be throttled after a certain amount of usage, so technically you're not being charged more and you do have unlimited data, but you get slowed way down (possibly for just certain types of traffic like streaming).
And like, it doesnt matter whether you are formally capped or not. The bandwidth just straight up isn't there for your data use to jump to 30 GB/hour. There's not enough fiber bandwidth to deal with people pulling down that much. Youd get lag just because of cumulative load.
"That is cool" - Abraham Lincoln
0
jungleroomxIt's never too many graves, it's always not enough shovelsRegistered Userregular
edited November 2019
I can probably do 30gb an hour. Source: Sustained 25-30 MB/Sec steam downloads.
I dunno, if it's a parody it's indistinguishable from a real console wars fanboy.
Don't worry, I checked out the Stadia subreddit, which is literally run by people from Google, and it appears Stadia is perfect and is also the future of gaming. I assume the account is a genuine fan, as it is a perfect product. Thank you for your time.
They also posted this on their update thread today:
We know that some users have recently purchased these two games for their collection. Because of the proximity between the launch of the platform, and the announcement of these titles in Stadia Pro, we are happy to assist you if you'd like to request a refund if you have purchased either or both of these titles, even if it's outside of our normal policy.
So, that's actually pretty cool.
Anyway, I'd never bother to try Farming Simulator even if it were free on other platforms because it's not really my jam but the fact that I can just press play and go means I might at least check it out.
Edit: Dammit Vanilla, get your crap together and stop making posts look like garbage.
Wait pro games are coming from the buyable library? That's... not great.
I figured the list of free games was going to be completely separate and free in perpetuity. I.E. new Stadia Pro subs next year get Destiny 2. But instead this is sounding more like Games with Gold or such, you need to be subbed in the month that they drop. And then stay subbed forever to retain. They really do seem to have zero interest in buildling a netflix-like library that someone could access instantly with a subscription.
0
-Loki-Don't pee in my mouth and tell me it's raining.Registered Userregular
I was under the impression Pro games were going to be like Gamepass, where you don’t get them in perpetuity but instead until they are removed from the Pro subscription and new games cycle in.
I was under the impression Pro games were going to be like Gamepass, where you don’t get them in perpetuity but instead until they are removed from the Pro subscription and new games cycle in.
Wow that's even worse than what I'm thinking! But they did say you keep the games as long as you remain subbed, so that seems unlikely.
By the fact that there are instructions on how to claim a game, it seems the process is that you have to be subbed to Stadia Pro, then go through a process to claim whatever games are free for the month. Claimed games stay in your library forever, but they can only be played while you have an active pro subscription. Every month the games available to claim will cycle. So it sounds more or less like PS+ or GWG.
rahkeesh2000 on
0
-Loki-Don't pee in my mouth and tell me it's raining.Registered Userregular
Fair enough.
Curious they’re cycling new games in already, given their limited library.
Yes, Stadia Pro is exactly like GWG/PS+. It was always advertised as such.
Stadia is not the Netflix for games. Their pricing structure has not once implied this. I can imagine them having to come up with something for that sooner or later, Xbox's game pass is quite nice and once xCloud is a little more tangible to most people it'll be tough to not have some answer, but none of this was a mystery.
Anyway, afaik Destiny 2/Samurai Shodown aren't actually being rotated out yet, these 2 will be in addition to those so anyone that gets Stadia before the end of December should get all 4. But yes, it's expected that these will rotate out as games you can claim.
I've just read 4+ backlog of pages of people throwing specs and test back and forth..... But very few personal opinions.
Got mine a few days ago and I have to say I'm pretty impressed. Destiny 2 has been rock solid for me in single player and the crucible with zero issues so far. Crucible matchmaking did take a while to find a group though.
Purchased Tomb raider for my girlfriend and got a message from google saying I would be credited since it's the free game next month so that was nice.
Controller is solid but not really a huge fan of the triggers but serviceable.
So I ended up contacting Google store support, my controllers headset port doesn't work. I had tried 4 different headsets all into the 3.5mm jack cos I know the usb c port isn't allowing audio transmission yet, none worked on there but worked on my ps4. I chatted, got someone in about 5 seconds, and they're sending me a brand new BUNDLE, for some reason they want everything from the original bundle, including chromecast and wires back and to only use new wires even though it seems to be just a controller issue. But the nice thing is they offer doing an authorization hold on your card while they send you a brand new one and then you just send your stuff back and they remove the hold.
I think we're over the hump of big launch issues and Google has been fairly quick to resolve the major ones, though their communication took some time to get going. I know people were heated in the moment, but as far as the "soft launch" goes things have been pretty stable.
I've just read 4+ backlog of pages of people throwing specs and test back and forth..... But very few personal opinions.
Most of the in-person opinions I've seen here have been positive in terms of latency being fairly low. Founders may be self-selecting themselves based on confidence in their internet, though I'd say that would be the system working properly for now.
Destiny recently released sales by platform and Stadia is comically low. When you consider that its currently free for all Stadia owners that might well say something about platform adoption in general. But the relevant point is that there's good reason its so hard to get a group in the absence of crossplay.
I've just read 4+ backlog of pages of people throwing specs and test back and forth..... But very few personal opinions.
Most of the in-person opinions I've seen here have been positive in terms of latency being fairly low. Founders may be self-selecting themselves based on confidence in their internet, though I'd say that would be the system working properly for now.
Destiny recently released sales by platform and Stadia is comically low. When you consider that its currently free for all Stadia owners that might well say something about platform adoption in general. But the relevant point is that there's good reason its so hard to get a group in the absence of crossplay.
Do you have a link? I'm seeing only this tweet which says 19,400 active concurrent players, not sales. That number doesn't seem too unusual to me.
That's 19,400 players logging in over a 24-hour period, not concurrence.
As far as matchmaking goes, there may be a further effect of more people just starting the game fresh and being at various points of early story, rather than bringing over a high-level character from another platform, where most of the daily players will be pretty advanced.
rahkeesh2000 on
0
-Loki-Don't pee in my mouth and tell me it's raining.Registered Userregular
That's 19,400 players logging in over a 24-hour period, not concurrence.
As far as matchmaking goes, there may be a further effect of more people just starting the game fresh and being at various points of early story, rather than bringing over a high-level character from another platform, where most of the daily players will be pretty advanced.
Doesn’t the Stadia version start you at max level, ready to jump into Shadowkeep, with the old stuff accessed through an NPC?
That’s what happened on PC when Shadowkeep launches.
This isn't that surprising. Yes, Stadia has a long way to go to attract players, but 20k players is not nothing. I did a few crucible matches the other night, the wait time was definitely longer than it is on PC but it was maybe a couple minutes? I'll check it again over the next couple days.
Yesterday's numbers were 24.8k so the population is definitely growing. People are still just getting their premier editions and buddy passes started going out late last night. Though I expect D2 to only be a decent indicator for a short while longer as people check it out, decide it's not their type of game and move on, it doesn't really mean they've moved on from Stadia, though.
I don't know, anyone looking at Stadia like it's not going to have an uphill battle to get market share is probably kidding themselves. I'm not convinced Google has an answer for this either, other than when their free service goes live. Anyone expecting this paid one to suddenly be hopping right out of the gate was not reading the room. Heck, I'm not even sure Google wanted the servers to be flooded right out of the gate. I mean, they probably hoped for more, no doubt, but the relatively low numbers so far have likely done wonders for their stability.
This isn't that surprising. Yes, Stadia has a long way to go to attract players, but 20k players is not nothing. I did a few crucible matches the other night, the wait time was definitely longer than it is on PC but it was maybe a couple minutes? I'll check it again over the next couple days.
Well I guess its "nothing" if this was a new console launch, but that's not a fair comparison as you can't even buy this at retail. Still it wouldn't be great if this slow uptick spooks game devs, when they have to put in next to zero effort to get their stuff streaming on xCloud and PSnow.
That's 19,400 players logging in over a 24-hour period, not concurrence.
As far as matchmaking goes, there may be a further effect of more people just starting the game fresh and being at various points of early story, rather than bringing over a high-level character from another platform, where most of the daily players will be pretty advanced.
Doesn’t the Stadia version start you at max level, ready to jump into Shadowkeep, with the old stuff accessed through an NPC?
That’s what happened on PC when Shadowkeep launches.
You're "max level" under the old system. Which is basically Level 1 in Shadowkeep.
Posts
I think most ISP have some form of data cap, if not the overwhelming majority. Exceptions are just that, exceptional--for example, Charter under the name Spectrum doesn't have a formal data cap, though not necessarily by choice. I've been their customer coming on ten years now (not contiguously--I dropped the plan each time I moved to try and snatch promotional deals), and have never once accrued a fee attributable to actual data usage. But that doesn't mean they haven't gotten angry at me, and expressed it via letter, one way or another. Just that I haven't paid for a data cap.There was a time where my service looked like it was being throttled every evening, but it was 1) geographically local and 2) happened regardless of how much bandwidth I consumed. So Charter probably wasn't throttling me, so much as they just half-assed service where I lived, and took a long time to fix it.
Right now I get a pretty consistent ~220mbps down (this is their basic plan--they're pretty much the fastest game in town, and they know it), which actually makes Staadia viable, if not ideal? But I wouldn't be the least bit surprised if Charter took some preventive options, like throttling, if enough people warranted action on their part.
I know of 2 large companies who definitely do, though it's not expressed anywhere in writing.
The 35 figure you saw probably is related to the bandwidth Google recommends for the best quality: 35 Mbps
Uhh, 220 Mbps down should be way more than enough for Stadia at its highest quality. They recommend at least 35, but I would say 50 is probably going to be a better experience.
Looking at Digital Foundry's service demonstration, it would definitely work--but not without hiccups. Of course, for a service still being ironed out, that might be as close to "ideal" as things get.
PSN: Bizazedo
CFN: Bizazedo (I don't think I suck, add me).
Yeah I've not seen or heard that soft caps no longer exist.
If nothing else, at their most generous, it's likely you'd be throttled after a certain amount of usage, so technically you're not being charged more and you do have unlimited data, but you get slowed way down (possibly for just certain types of traffic like streaming).
?
I did a few Crucible matches last night actually. It worked fine for me! Other than I sucked more than usual because I was using a controller but I don't think the added latency was to blame. I think in other shooters it would make a difference though. Generally, it felt the same as if I was playing on PS4, though. Including the being terrible with a controller part.
It’s a parody Twitter account that defends the stadia . Dude is dedicated.
Indeed. Poe's Law exists for good reason.
Apparently the tack they're taking here is blaming developers for not optimizing their ports better.
I think the problem lies somewhere in the middle. I think Google's tools probably aren't as good as they could be so it's tough for developers to really optimize games (which is not that weird since it's a new platform, but it wouldn't surprise me if Google's were even rougher than what you'd expect). On the other hand we do have a couple games running at [email protected] and many of the other high profile titles running at [email protected] so we know that the hardware is pretty capable.
Mostly, I don't think Destiny 2 running at [email protected] on medium settings is the best Bungie could have done. I also don't think Google has made anyone's job making these ports easier. I also think Google's entire marketing around Stadia needed to be reigned in and been A LOT less gun ho about the [email protected] pitch since it's clear now they meant everything will be streamed that way, not that games are actually running at that.
I think Doom Eternal is already there in demos, but its also targeting 60hz on base current gen consoles.
It’s also being developed in house by id software. They might not have Carmack but Doom 2016 was incredibly well optimised on every platform, and I’d expect no less effort for a new platform for Eternal.
Obviously not the hardware, look at all the flops! I wonder if they calibrated the RAM to reverse polarity on the shader tubes.
And like, it doesnt matter whether you are formally capped or not. The bandwidth just straight up isn't there for your data use to jump to 30 GB/hour. There's not enough fiber bandwidth to deal with people pulling down that much. Youd get lag just because of cumulative load.
Don't worry, I checked out the Stadia subreddit, which is literally run by people from Google, and it appears Stadia is perfect and is also the future of gaming. I assume the account is a genuine fan, as it is a perfect product. Thank you for your time.
Farming Simulator 2019 and Tomb Raider: DE
They also posted this on their update thread today: So, that's actually pretty cool.
Anyway, I'd never bother to try Farming Simulator even if it were free on other platforms because it's not really my jam but the fact that I can just press play and go means I might at least check it out.
Edit: Dammit Vanilla, get your crap together and stop making posts look like garbage.
I figured the list of free games was going to be completely separate and free in perpetuity. I.E. new Stadia Pro subs next year get Destiny 2. But instead this is sounding more like Games with Gold or such, you need to be subbed in the month that they drop. And then stay subbed forever to retain. They really do seem to have zero interest in buildling a netflix-like library that someone could access instantly with a subscription.
Wow that's even worse than what I'm thinking! But they did say you keep the games as long as you remain subbed, so that seems unlikely.
By the fact that there are instructions on how to claim a game, it seems the process is that you have to be subbed to Stadia Pro, then go through a process to claim whatever games are free for the month. Claimed games stay in your library forever, but they can only be played while you have an active pro subscription. Every month the games available to claim will cycle. So it sounds more or less like PS+ or GWG.
Curious they’re cycling new games in already, given their limited library.
Stadia is not the Netflix for games. Their pricing structure has not once implied this. I can imagine them having to come up with something for that sooner or later, Xbox's game pass is quite nice and once xCloud is a little more tangible to most people it'll be tough to not have some answer, but none of this was a mystery.
Anyway, afaik Destiny 2/Samurai Shodown aren't actually being rotated out yet, these 2 will be in addition to those so anyone that gets Stadia before the end of December should get all 4. But yes, it's expected that these will rotate out as games you can claim.
I've just read 4+ backlog of pages of people throwing specs and test back and forth..... But very few personal opinions.
Got mine a few days ago and I have to say I'm pretty impressed. Destiny 2 has been rock solid for me in single player and the crucible with zero issues so far. Crucible matchmaking did take a while to find a group though.
Purchased Tomb raider for my girlfriend and got a message from google saying I would be credited since it's the free game next month so that was nice.
Controller is solid but not really a huge fan of the triggers but serviceable.
I think we're over the hump of big launch issues and Google has been fairly quick to resolve the major ones, though their communication took some time to get going. I know people were heated in the moment, but as far as the "soft launch" goes things have been pretty stable.
Legends of Runeterra: MNCdover #moc
Switch ID: MNC Dover SW-1154-3107-1051
Steam ID
Twitch Page
Most of the in-person opinions I've seen here have been positive in terms of latency being fairly low. Founders may be self-selecting themselves based on confidence in their internet, though I'd say that would be the system working properly for now.
Destiny recently released sales by platform and Stadia is comically low. When you consider that its currently free for all Stadia owners that might well say something about platform adoption in general. But the relevant point is that there's good reason its so hard to get a group in the absence of crossplay.
Do you have a link? I'm seeing only this tweet which says 19,400 active concurrent players, not sales. That number doesn't seem too unusual to me.
As far as matchmaking goes, there may be a further effect of more people just starting the game fresh and being at various points of early story, rather than bringing over a high-level character from another platform, where most of the daily players will be pretty advanced.
Doesn’t the Stadia version start you at max level, ready to jump into Shadowkeep, with the old stuff accessed through an NPC?
That’s what happened on PC when Shadowkeep launches.
Yesterday's numbers were 24.8k so the population is definitely growing. People are still just getting their premier editions and buddy passes started going out late last night. Though I expect D2 to only be a decent indicator for a short while longer as people check it out, decide it's not their type of game and move on, it doesn't really mean they've moved on from Stadia, though.
I don't know, anyone looking at Stadia like it's not going to have an uphill battle to get market share is probably kidding themselves. I'm not convinced Google has an answer for this either, other than when their free service goes live. Anyone expecting this paid one to suddenly be hopping right out of the gate was not reading the room. Heck, I'm not even sure Google wanted the servers to be flooded right out of the gate. I mean, they probably hoped for more, no doubt, but the relatively low numbers so far have likely done wonders for their stability.
Well I guess its "nothing" if this was a new console launch, but that's not a fair comparison as you can't even buy this at retail. Still it wouldn't be great if this slow uptick spooks game devs, when they have to put in next to zero effort to get their stuff streaming on xCloud and PSnow.
You're "max level" under the old system. Which is basically Level 1 in Shadowkeep.