If streaming takes off, does that mean I don't have to buy a new goddamn console every 6-10 years?
If so, I'm in and this is needed.
Depends, do you play fighting games? I doubt stuff like that will work out super well on this sort of thing.
0
BrodyThe WatchThe First ShoreRegistered Userregular
I'm not sure how relevant Shadow's setup is, but since it seems to be the closest option, Shadow lets you download and install any Windows 10 games. I think its basically a remote desktop setup? If Stadia does something similar, I could see it going fairly well. Its when companies start offering "Play your EA games from any location!" that its going to get weird. Although as long as EA games would still be purchasable normally, you could just play it elsewhere.
I guess when D3 becomes only on, and only playable through Activision's remote access system is what I'm worried about.
"I will write your name in the ruin of them. I will paint you across history in the color of their blood."
ChaosHatHop, hop, hop, HA!Trick of the lightRegistered Userregular
A subscription service that means I don't need consoles or to upgrade PC hardware or actually buy the games seems pretty fucking lucrative and I would probably pay a significant amount of money per month to do that. Like 50 bucks or more since I'd probably STILL save money in the long run.
On the other hand, it's unlikely that they get every game I want to play and then this is PART of my game budget and not replacing it entirely. That's where this would fall apart for me.
Also, $50 seems like it would make a lot of people balk at it so that's unlikely to be the price, but then also I don't see how you could charge less and reliably have a shitton of AAA titles, unless maybe publishers do a Taylor Swift and say "unplayable on Stadia for the first month."
Two major points of failure imo are (1) End user internet connection. I don't doubt Google has optimized their end better than anyone else could have. But there are two ends to this and any kind of internet problems on the users side means they have performance degredation. I have Google Fiber and sometimes can't get quality performance on Netflix. That would be bad for games. (2) The controller connects through wifi directly to the data center to control the games. This is bad, imo, since it prevents us from relying on hardwired connections that are almost always more reliable and faster.
I wonder if they'll have a separate service per game, that way if they get a surge of users it would be based on game and not overall service. I know Netflix has nodes all around the world, but Google knows this stuff better than anyone so they should be able to make it work.
So they greenlit a conference where they didn't reveal the design of the console, no pricing, no release date, no games, just lots of Youtube stuff.
This was a huge waste of money and they could have just issued a press release. :P
There is no console... and it was more than just lots of Youtube stuff. I'd recommend actually watching the entire presentation.
I had to 'watch' it while working so it was hard to give it my full attention.
As for a streaming platform, even if I still think this conference was a waste of time, I'm not against a streaming only platform. It's all in the matter of how well supported it'll be and how well it works. There are still large parts of the US without good or even decent online capabilities yet. Not to mention many parts of the world with pretty crazy data caps still. I'm looking at moving to Tennessee very soon and the area I'm moving to I'm still working to make sure I can get decent business class internet so I can continue to work from home like I do.
It'll be interesting and I hope they do talk about it more at E3.
the big difference as far as i can tell is that Stadia is proprietary, and as such games would need to be ported to it while Shadow can utilize already shipped binaries
0
KoopahTroopahThe koopas, the troopas.Philadelphia, PARegistered Userregular
edited March 2019
I'm more interested in how developers will use the framework and API in their existing engines to perform physics and game computations on the data center stack. They showed a few different things like rendering several different viewpoints at once for couch co-op, and for the multiplayer of a huge city that is 100% destructable, I want more polished examples of that.
The streaming service is cool, but definitely not for me. Until they show me the hard consumer facts, I prefer having the tech and running the games on my personal computer, and not over the internet.
Two major points of failure imo are (1) End user internet connection. I don't doubt Google has optimized their end better than anyone else could have. But there are two ends to this and any kind of internet problems on the users side means they have performance degredation. I have Google Fiber and sometimes can't get quality performance on Netflix. That would be bad for games. (2) The controller connects through wifi directly to the data center to control the games. This is bad, imo, since it prevents us from relying on hardwired connections that are almost always more reliable and faster.
I wonder if they'll have a separate service per game, that way if they get a surge of users it would be based on game and not overall service. I know Netflix has nodes all around the world, but Google knows this stuff better than anyone so they should be able to make it work.
Or they'll abandon it and life will go on.
Stadia uses the same datacenter infrastructure already in place at Google. There are 7500+ edge nodes allows for compute resources being closer to players for lower latency. Custom designed, purpose built hardware powers the experience. Interconnected racks have sufficient compute and memory for the most demanding games. The technology has been in development inside Google for years.
Project Xcloud has a much better chance of gaining traction because of XBL, IMO.
I'm not certain. Chromecasts and Google enabled TVs are already pretty common. This seems low barrier to entry and Google probably has way better infrastructure than MS to bring this to the masses.
I mean it's ultimately going to come down to service quality and games and Google has a leg up on one, Xbox on the other. I just feel like games is the easier one to fix.
Eh? Microsoft has Azure, which is a pretty big deal. Also, more importantly, Microsoft has inertia. Will gamers really want to abandon their Gamertags and all of that history, as well as the best-in-class online gaming service? Project Xcloud was revealed at the last E3. We'll likely see a working demo at this year's E3 (it's hard for me to believe that they would announce it without it being available 'soon'). It's not out of reason to think that the first Project Xcloud device will be the Nintendo Switch, or that Microsoft will partner up with TV manufacturers to have their own app.
I mean... while Bing isn't Google, it's still in that space. And last I checked (could be wrong), it powered Apple's Siri service. And Xbox has working experience providing the cloud backbone for games like Halo and Destiny, meaning they won't have to start on the ground floor. So, I don't really buy the narrative that Microsoft is somehow lacking in this capacity. They're pretty much neck and neck with Amazon's AWS for the number of cloud apps that they host, and have far more practical experience with games/gaming than Google.
Project Xcloud has a much better chance of gaining traction because of XBL, IMO.
I'm not certain. Chromecasts and Google enabled TVs are already pretty common. This seems low barrier to entry and Google probably has way better infrastructure than MS to bring this to the masses.
I mean it's ultimately going to come down to service quality and games and Google has a leg up on one, Xbox on the other. I just feel like games is the easier one to fix.
Eh? Microsoft has Azure, which is a pretty big deal. Also, more importantly, Microsoft has inertia. Will gamers really want to abandon their Gamertags and all of that history, as well as the best-in-class online gaming service? Project Xcloud was revealed at the last E3. We'll likely see a working demo at this year's E3 (it's hard for me to believe that they would announce it without it being available 'soon'). It's not out of reason to think that the first Project Xcloud device will be the Nintendo Switch, or that Microsoft will partner up with TV manufacturers to have their own app.
I mean... while Bing isn't Google, it's still in that space. And last I checked (could be wrong), it powered Apple's Siri service. And Xbox has working experience providing the cloud backbone for games like Halo and Destiny, meaning they won't have to start on the ground floor. So, I don't really buy the narrative that Microsoft is somehow lacking in this capacity. They're pretty much neck and neck with Amazon's AWS for the number of cloud apps that they host, and have far more practical experience with games/gaming than Google.
I mean yeah people will abandon that shit for greener pastures. I was a 360 person and went PS4. That stuff happens often. They go where the games and services are.
Bing also has to pay people to use it so saying it's in that space is generous. Providing the cloud backbone for Halo and Destiny is also substantially different from running the game and streaming the whole thing to the consumer.
Game streaming has been done before. Input latency makes it dead on arrival for every single game where tenths of a second matter.
I played Bloodborne on Sony's streaming service PSNow. There were times that the lag spiked and it killed me but not often. I've played Assassin's Creed Odyssey on Google's game streaming service and that worked about as well. I'm sure there are plenty of areas in the country where the internet isn't good enough yet, but it is viable in at least metro areas.
0
ChaosHatHop, hop, hop, HA!Trick of the lightRegistered Userregular
If streaming takes off, does that mean I don't have to buy a new goddamn console every 6-10 years?
If so, I'm in and this is needed.
Depends, do you play fighting games? I doubt stuff like that will work out super well on this sort of thing.
Also do you like owning games? Because streaming means youre basically paying a huge rental fee
What's the difference between this and Steam then?
You can download a game on steam and presumably if steam ever died they'd give you a way to continue playing those games.
If this flops you retain nothing
The thought that a dying company would give a shit about it's consumers is hilarious to me.
Yeah I'm sure if Steam is dying Gabe Newell will devote a lot of resources to helping you get your games as the company implodes.
The rental nature is fine to me. I'd say I probably get, on average, a game a month. Some of those I will play for a month or less and then never again. I probably come out ahead in a lot of those scenarios.
If streaming takes off, does that mean I don't have to buy a new goddamn console every 6-10 years?
If so, I'm in and this is needed.
Depends, do you play fighting games? I doubt stuff like that will work out super well on this sort of thing.
Also do you like owning games? Because streaming means youre basically paying a huge rental fee
What's the difference between this and Steam then?
If stadia dies then I'm fucked. Everything is gone because I never had anything.
If steam dies then I have everything that's still on my machine. Some games might be broken but we might be able to fix them. Who uninstalls games these days anyway when XBAWKS huge HDDS are so cheap and it's so easy to migrate games between archived space on an HDD and active use space on an SSD?
3DS Friend Code:
Armchair: 4098-3704-2012
+2
Casually HardcoreOnce an Asshole. Trying to be better.Registered Userregular
Here’s my money, now give me the last console I’ll ever own.
If streaming takes off, does that mean I don't have to buy a new goddamn console every 6-10 years?
If so, I'm in and this is needed.
Depends, do you play fighting games? I doubt stuff like that will work out super well on this sort of thing.
Also do you like owning games? Because streaming means youre basically paying a huge rental fee
What's the difference between this and Steam then?
Steam lets you play your games offline, for one. This is a pure streaming service, from what I'm seeing, with no option for local downloading. Also, once the game is downloaded, it only uses bandwidth incidental to activation or online play.
If streaming takes off, does that mean I don't have to buy a new goddamn console every 6-10 years?
If so, I'm in and this is needed.
Depends, do you play fighting games? I doubt stuff like that will work out super well on this sort of thing.
Also do you like owning games? Because streaming means youre basically paying a huge rental fee
What's the difference between this and Steam then?
If stadia dies then I'm fucked. Everything is gone because I never had anything.
If steam dies then I have everything that's still on my machine. Some games might be broken but we might be able to fix them. Who uninstalls games these days anyway when XBAWKS huge HDDS are so cheap and it's so easy to migrate games between archived space on an HDD and active use space on an SSD?
If Spotify dies I suppose I'm fucked...until I just subscribe to some other equivalent service. In the mean time I've paid less to listen to a lot more than I used to.
Music, tv/movies, and now games. People like all you can eat subscriptions.
0
reVerseAttack and Dethrone GodRegistered Userregular
If streaming takes off, does that mean I don't have to buy a new goddamn console every 6-10 years?
If so, I'm in and this is needed.
Depends, do you play fighting games? I doubt stuff like that will work out super well on this sort of thing.
Also do you like owning games? Because streaming means youre basically paying a huge rental fee
What's the difference between this and Steam then?
You can download a game on steam and presumably if steam ever died they'd give you a way to continue playing those games.
If this flops you retain nothing
The thought that a dying company would give a shit about it's consumers is hilarious to me.
Yeah I'm sure if Steam is dying Gabe Newell will devote a lot of resources to helping you get your games as the company implodes.
The rental nature is fine to me. I'd say I probably get, on average, a game a month. Some of those I will play for a month or less and then never again. I probably come out ahead in a lot of those scenarios.
Valve doesn't need to provide shit. I can rip my modem out of the wall if I'd like and play most of my games with steam in offline mode right now.
For games that require steam's infrastructure to work for server browsers and such, there is nothing stopping the pc community from making their own peer to peer system that that could emulate what valve has in place and trick legacy steam installations into thinking that they were connecting to valve's old network.
If streaming takes off, does that mean I don't have to buy a new goddamn console every 6-10 years?
If so, I'm in and this is needed.
Depends, do you play fighting games? I doubt stuff like that will work out super well on this sort of thing.
Also do you like owning games? Because streaming means youre basically paying a huge rental fee
What's the difference between this and Steam then?
You can download a game on steam and presumably if steam ever died they'd give you a way to continue playing those games.
If this flops you retain nothing
The thought that a dying company would give a shit about it's consumers is hilarious to me.
Yeah I'm sure if Steam is dying Gabe Newell will devote a lot of resources to helping you get your games as the company implodes.
The rental nature is fine to me. I'd say I probably get, on average, a game a month. Some of those I will play for a month or less and then never again. I probably come out ahead in a lot of those scenarios.
Valve doesn't need to provide shit. I can rip my modem out of the wall if I'd like and play most of my games with steam in offline mode right now.
For games that require steam's infrastructure to work for server browsers and such, there is nothing stopping the pc community from making their own peer to peer system that that could emulate what valve has in place and trick legacy steam installations into thinking that they were connecting to valve's old network.
That's accurate. I'm going to guess the majority of people don't have 100% of their games downloaded at once. Drives will fail eventually, and you're going to spend a lot of effort and time keeping redundant copies backed up etc etc.
If that's what you want to do and how you want to spend your time that's awesome and I mean that sincerely. But like I haven't owned a song in forever and it's fucking GREAT over here man. If we can export that experience to video games I'm all in.
If streaming takes off, does that mean I don't have to buy a new goddamn console every 6-10 years?
If so, I'm in and this is needed.
Depends, do you play fighting games? I doubt stuff like that will work out super well on this sort of thing.
Also do you like owning games? Because streaming means youre basically paying a huge rental fee
What's the difference between this and Steam then?
You can download a game on steam and presumably if steam ever died they'd give you a way to continue playing those games.
If this flops you retain nothing
How can you be sure that Steam will give you a way but Google will not give you a way?
Steam games are downloaded to your computer, even if they didn't give you an official way you could hax0r your games to work.
With Stadia, it's all in the cloud.
So how are you sure that they won't release the game to you if, for some reason, Google closes the service down?
Well, think of it this way - since it's a streaming service, devs could make the size of the the game as large as they want so long as they can pay Google enough to host it. So, what if the game's DL size is in the thousands of gigs? Could you download it? Sure! Would it be a giant pain in the ass? Probably!
0
BrodyThe WatchThe First ShoreRegistered Userregular
Did they state that games would be provided with the subscription service?
"I will write your name in the ruin of them. I will paint you across history in the color of their blood."
If streaming takes off, does that mean I don't have to buy a new goddamn console every 6-10 years?
If so, I'm in and this is needed.
Depends, do you play fighting games? I doubt stuff like that will work out super well on this sort of thing.
Also do you like owning games? Because streaming means youre basically paying a huge rental fee
What's the difference between this and Steam then?
You can download a game on steam and presumably if steam ever died they'd give you a way to continue playing those games.
If this flops you retain nothing
How can you be sure that Steam will give you a way but Google will not give you a way?
Steam games are downloaded to your computer, even if they didn't give you an official way you could hax0r your games to work.
With Stadia, it's all in the cloud.
So how are you sure that they won't release the game to you if, for some reason, Google closes the service down?
Well, think of it this way - since it's a streaming service, devs could make the size of the the game as large as they want so long as they can pay Google enough to host it. So, what if the game's DL size is in the thousands of gigs? Could you download it? Sure! Would it be a giant pain in the ass? Probably!
Games for Windows from the Microsoft store are already breaching 100GB so I suppose that is certainly something to worry about.
If streaming takes off, does that mean I don't have to buy a new goddamn console every 6-10 years?
If so, I'm in and this is needed.
Depends, do you play fighting games? I doubt stuff like that will work out super well on this sort of thing.
Also do you like owning games? Because streaming means youre basically paying a huge rental fee
What's the difference between this and Steam then?
You can download a game on steam and presumably if steam ever died they'd give you a way to continue playing those games.
If this flops you retain nothing
The thought that a dying company would give a shit about it's consumers is hilarious to me.
Yeah I'm sure if Steam is dying Gabe Newell will devote a lot of resources to helping you get your games as the company implodes.
The rental nature is fine to me. I'd say I probably get, on average, a game a month. Some of those I will play for a month or less and then never again. I probably come out ahead in a lot of those scenarios.
Valve doesn't need to provide shit. I can rip my modem out of the wall if I'd like and play most of my games with steam in offline mode right now.
For games that require steam's infrastructure to work for server browsers and such, there is nothing stopping the pc community from making their own peer to peer system that that could emulate what valve has in place and trick legacy steam installations into thinking that they were connecting to valve's old network.
I would wager a lot of money that it isn't trivial to reverse-engineer the Steam auth and server protocols. Maybe Valve open-sources it if they're going under.
+1
ChaosHatHop, hop, hop, HA!Trick of the lightRegistered Userregular
Did they state that games would be provided with the subscription service?
Monetization is unknown so this is all speculative. It could be a hybrid where you buy some, some come free with the sub.
0
ObiFettUse the ForceAs You WishRegistered Userregular
The pricing model on this is going to be so weird.
Devs will be charged by Google on how much of the cloud their game uses, which will be determined by how many people play their game. So like, I honestly can't see a static price being doable for games on this platform. I can't see a $60 to "play this game forever" price being attached to any games on Stadia. Everything will have to have a sub fee basically, right?
dipuc4life... In my own HeadRegistered Userregular
edited March 2019
For me, it comes down to the games. Nintendo and Sony have their exclusives and both could conceivably stand a console on their own (albeit with probably slower releases). Microsoft just invested millions of dollars to buy studios to provide them with games. Third parties like EA, Ubisoft, Activation ETC. will probably flock to this if the scaling pricing and license fees are good. SO if this works we will have potentially four systems with exclusives.
Also, if this is going to work well it HAS to scale down to the lowest common denominator. Either that or they leave money on the table in all the countries with poor internet. Hey, eff those guys since they have less disposable income to spend on games anyway ... hey ... I'm one of those guys ... eff you too. So it will either be you buy the games but the subscription is free (with paid high speed 4k60 tier) or you subscribe and get the games (but then how do the developers get paid). Oh and if we (or any studio that releases a game on this service) decide that that game is going away poof ... sorry?
The part of me that thinks developer in intrigued, the part of me that thinks gamer is weary, and the part of me that thinks money is scoffing.
The pricing model on this is going to be so weird.
Devs will be charged by Google on how much of the cloud their game uses, which will be determined by how many people play their game. So like, I honestly can't see a static price being doable for games on this platform. I can't see a $60 to "play this game forever" price being attached to any games on Stadia. Everything will have to have a sub fee basically, right?
Yeah I can't wait to see where this leads. I'm not being sarcastic either.
Posts
Law and Order ≠ Justice
ACNH Island Isla Cero: DA-3082-2045-4142
Captain of the SES Comptroller of the State
Depends, do you play fighting games? I doubt stuff like that will work out super well on this sort of thing.
I guess when D3 becomes only on, and only playable through Activision's remote access system is what I'm worried about.
The Monster Baru Cormorant - Seth Dickinson
Steam: Korvalain
On the other hand, it's unlikely that they get every game I want to play and then this is PART of my game budget and not replacing it entirely. That's where this would fall apart for me.
Also, $50 seems like it would make a lot of people balk at it so that's unlikely to be the price, but then also I don't see how you could charge less and reliably have a shitton of AAA titles, unless maybe publishers do a Taylor Swift and say "unplayable on Stadia for the first month."
I wonder if they'll have a separate service per game, that way if they get a surge of users it would be based on game and not overall service. I know Netflix has nodes all around the world, but Google knows this stuff better than anyone so they should be able to make it work.
Or they'll abandon it and life will go on.
I had to 'watch' it while working so it was hard to give it my full attention.
As for a streaming platform, even if I still think this conference was a waste of time, I'm not against a streaming only platform. It's all in the matter of how well supported it'll be and how well it works. There are still large parts of the US without good or even decent online capabilities yet. Not to mention many parts of the world with pretty crazy data caps still. I'm looking at moving to Tennessee very soon and the area I'm moving to I'm still working to make sure I can get decent business class internet so I can continue to work from home like I do.
It'll be interesting and I hope they do talk about it more at E3.
Nintendo Network ID - Brainiac_8
PSN - Brainiac_8
Steam - http://steamcommunity.com/id/BRAINIAC8/
Add me!
The streaming service is cool, but definitely not for me. Until they show me the hard consumer facts, I prefer having the tech and running the games on my personal computer, and not over the internet.
Twitch: KoopahTroopah - Steam: Koopah
Ah, so Netflix but on crack.
Armchair: 4098-3704-2012
Eh? Microsoft has Azure, which is a pretty big deal. Also, more importantly, Microsoft has inertia. Will gamers really want to abandon their Gamertags and all of that history, as well as the best-in-class online gaming service? Project Xcloud was revealed at the last E3. We'll likely see a working demo at this year's E3 (it's hard for me to believe that they would announce it without it being available 'soon'). It's not out of reason to think that the first Project Xcloud device will be the Nintendo Switch, or that Microsoft will partner up with TV manufacturers to have their own app.
I mean... while Bing isn't Google, it's still in that space. And last I checked (could be wrong), it powered Apple's Siri service. And Xbox has working experience providing the cloud backbone for games like Halo and Destiny, meaning they won't have to start on the ground floor. So, I don't really buy the narrative that Microsoft is somehow lacking in this capacity. They're pretty much neck and neck with Amazon's AWS for the number of cloud apps that they host, and have far more practical experience with games/gaming than Google.
I mean yeah people will abandon that shit for greener pastures. I was a 360 person and went PS4. That stuff happens often. They go where the games and services are.
Bing also has to pay people to use it so saying it's in that space is generous. Providing the cloud backbone for Halo and Destiny is also substantially different from running the game and streaming the whole thing to the consumer.
Also do you like owning games? Because streaming means youre basically paying a huge rental fee
What's the difference between this and Steam then?
there's at least the possibility that if steam went away, purchases could be archived and stored locally
You can download a game on steam and presumably if steam ever died they'd give you a way to continue playing those games.
If this flops you retain nothing
I played Bloodborne on Sony's streaming service PSNow. There were times that the lag spiked and it killed me but not often. I've played Assassin's Creed Odyssey on Google's game streaming service and that worked about as well. I'm sure there are plenty of areas in the country where the internet isn't good enough yet, but it is viable in at least metro areas.
The thought that a dying company would give a shit about it's consumers is hilarious to me.
Yeah I'm sure if Steam is dying Gabe Newell will devote a lot of resources to helping you get your games as the company implodes.
The rental nature is fine to me. I'd say I probably get, on average, a game a month. Some of those I will play for a month or less and then never again. I probably come out ahead in a lot of those scenarios.
If stadia dies then I'm fucked. Everything is gone because I never had anything.
If steam dies then I have everything that's still on my machine. Some games might be broken but we might be able to fix them. Who uninstalls games these days anyway when XBAWKS huge HDDS are so cheap and it's so easy to migrate games between archived space on an HDD and active use space on an SSD?
Armchair: 4098-3704-2012
How can you be sure that Steam will give you a way but Google will not give you a way?
Apparently, you don't even need to buy a controller. You can use an existing one, hooked up to your PC or tablet or phone.
We've seen nothing about pricing schemes or monetization yet.
If Spotify dies I suppose I'm fucked...until I just subscribe to some other equivalent service. In the mean time I've paid less to listen to a lot more than I used to.
Music, tv/movies, and now games. People like all you can eat subscriptions.
Steam games are downloaded to your computer, even if they didn't give you an official way you could hax0r your games to work.
With Stadia, it's all in the cloud.
Valve doesn't need to provide shit. I can rip my modem out of the wall if I'd like and play most of my games with steam in offline mode right now.
For games that require steam's infrastructure to work for server browsers and such, there is nothing stopping the pc community from making their own peer to peer system that that could emulate what valve has in place and trick legacy steam installations into thinking that they were connecting to valve's old network.
Armchair: 4098-3704-2012
So how are you sure that they won't release the game to you if, for some reason, Google closes the service down?
Are you sure about that? The last time I tried to boot up in offline mode it required me to go online before I could play my games offline.
That's accurate. I'm going to guess the majority of people don't have 100% of their games downloaded at once. Drives will fail eventually, and you're going to spend a lot of effort and time keeping redundant copies backed up etc etc.
If that's what you want to do and how you want to spend your time that's awesome and I mean that sincerely. But like I haven't owned a song in forever and it's fucking GREAT over here man. If we can export that experience to video games I'm all in.
Well, think of it this way - since it's a streaming service, devs could make the size of the the game as large as they want so long as they can pay Google enough to host it. So, what if the game's DL size is in the thousands of gigs? Could you download it? Sure! Would it be a giant pain in the ass? Probably!
The Monster Baru Cormorant - Seth Dickinson
Steam: Korvalain
Games for Windows from the Microsoft store are already breaching 100GB so I suppose that is certainly something to worry about.
They didn't say anything about the pricing model at all. We're just speculating.
I would wager a lot of money that it isn't trivial to reverse-engineer the Steam auth and server protocols. Maybe Valve open-sources it if they're going under.
Monetization is unknown so this is all speculative. It could be a hybrid where you buy some, some come free with the sub.
Devs will be charged by Google on how much of the cloud their game uses, which will be determined by how many people play their game. So like, I honestly can't see a static price being doable for games on this platform. I can't see a $60 to "play this game forever" price being attached to any games on Stadia. Everything will have to have a sub fee basically, right?
Also, if this is going to work well it HAS to scale down to the lowest common denominator. Either that or they leave money on the table in all the countries with poor internet. Hey, eff those guys since they have less disposable income to spend on games anyway ... hey ... I'm one of those guys ... eff you too. So it will either be you buy the games but the subscription is free (with paid high speed 4k60 tier) or you subscribe and get the games (but then how do the developers get paid). Oh and if we (or any studio that releases a game on this service) decide that that game is going away poof ... sorry?
The part of me that thinks developer in intrigued, the part of me that thinks gamer is weary, and the part of me that thinks money is scoffing.
Playstation: Dipuc4Life
Warframe_Switch IGN: ONVEBAL
Yeah I can't wait to see where this leads. I'm not being sarcastic either.
I'm on 40 Mbps with 11/27 ms latency (unloaded/loaded) according to fast.com.
Would that be good enough for something like Stadia?