Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Google Stadia
#1
Google announced a new streaming games platform, Google Stadia, Tuesday.



I watched it, and have seen mixed reactions.  I am concerned about this as well. On the positive side, there is an appeal to it -- you can play games at very high graphical detail, without spending anything on hardware.    A lot of tech companies think streaming is the future of games, and it's easy to see why, if they can solve the biggest immediate problem streaming has, input lag -- it takes time for that data to get from your device to the data center where the processors are, and any game where quick reaction times are important will be very hard to get running as well streaming as they do on a local box, if it is indeed possible.  A lot of people may not care about that and streaming may well take off in a big way eventually, but you do need good internet in a way a lot of places still don't have, no data caps (unlike a lot of ISPs today), but those are big issues Google will be dealing with for at least the near future that probably will limit Stadia adaptation.  Maybe in ten years internet speeds, routers, and such will have made major strides forward, to the point where more kinds of games will run great remotely... though again there are limitations they will probably have a problem with -- games which require frame-perfect timing, are they ever popular remotely given the limits of the speed of light?  A lot of kinds of games should work and zero hardware costs is a nice thing for Google to mention because it does save people money and increase access... if people don't mind a probably laggier experience that will make some kinds of games worse.  Oh, and Youtube integration, since Google owns Youtube, is also something which should make it easy for them to push Stadia pretty hard.

Of course, there are other reasons to be worried about Stadia that aren't about the technology and hardware itself.  First, it's that this is being made by Google, one of the largest tech companies and one definitely not exactly known for caring about people or rights or anything of the sort.  For example, as I've seen mentioned repeatedly, Google's controller for the Stadia connects to your wi-fi itself, and then from there directly to Google's servers.  This controller has a microphone in it, which Google is sure to be listening to in order to sell you advertising and such at minimum.  The presentation claims that Stadia will also be usable with other controllers, but will voice be required or something?  We'll have to see.  Regardless, Google is definitely not a trustworthy company with private or personal data, and 100% of your data in Stadia is stored in Google servers.  I don't know that I'd want that...

And beyond that, as someone who loves classic gaming as well as modern, there are very obvious major issues with an all-streaming future -- in this future, there are no used games.  There is no classic game market beyond what companies allow you to play.  Once a game is removed from sale, it vanishes, permanently, unless someone on the developer side saved a copy themselves and leaks it... which would probably be unlikely for legal reasons.  So you want to play a great sports game from five years ago?  Sorry, the licensed expired, it's gone forever now.  Company went bankrupt?  All their games no one else wants to pick up go away forever!  This is the corporate-first, people-last future we are heading towards, and it is a very bad thing.

So yeah, I guess I think that this might be cool for some kinds of games, but I do not trust Google and am sad for a future of games where companies can choose what games remain in existence, and not game players.  A whole lot of the older games I like would not be able to be played, at all, ever, in the streaming future and that is horrible.

We'll see, though.  Fortunately for now physical media and local copies of games on a box you have yourself still exist.  I'm not opposed to streaming at all, but the rights and future-playablility issues are huge for me, and companies most definitely do NOT want them to be solved -- they don't make much money from people playing their old games, after all, only their newer ones!
My Games Collection (Always Updated) My Webpage!
Currently Playing: Various Stuff
[Image: logo_bos_79x76.jpg]
Reply
#2
So long as I can still purchase a local copy of a game, I'm ok with streaming.  The moment a game is released that is "streaming only", then I worry for all the reasons you listed.
"On two occasions, I have been asked [by members of Parliament], 'Pray, Mr. Babbage, if you put into the machine wrong figures, will the right answers come out?' I am not able to rightly apprehend the kind of confusion of ideas that could provoke such a question." ~ Charles Babbage (1791-1871)
Reply
#3
At minimum Google is setting up a games division, so they'll presumably be publishing exclusives...
My Games Collection (Always Updated) My Webpage!
Currently Playing: Various Stuff
[Image: logo_bos_79x76.jpg]
Reply
#4
(21st March 2019, 4:20 AM)Dark Jaguar Wrote: So long as I can still purchase a local copy of a game, I'm ok with streaming.  The moment a game is released that is "streaming only", then I worry for all the reasons you listed.

The whole point is that it is streaming only. If you could purchase a local copy then you defeat the whole idea of a cloud GPU.
Reply
#5
(22nd March 2019, 8:38 AM)etoven Wrote:
(21st March 2019, 4:20 AM)Dark Jaguar Wrote: So long as I can still purchase a local copy of a game, I'm ok with streaming.  The moment a game is released that is "streaming only", then I worry for all the reasons you listed.

The whole point is that it is streaming only. If you could purchase a local copy then you defeat the whole idea of a cloud GPU.

How does me owning my own local copy defeat the whole idea? I buy blurays but that's not hurting Netflix any.
"On two occasions, I have been asked [by members of Parliament], 'Pray, Mr. Babbage, if you put into the machine wrong figures, will the right answers come out?' I am not able to rightly apprehend the kind of confusion of ideas that could provoke such a question." ~ Charles Babbage (1791-1871)
Reply
#6
Google doesn't want to sell you a console, and they've said the Stadia will be streaming only. That's a way that Microsoft should have the edge over Google; they also are working on a streaming platform, and have even more data centers than Google does, but also want to sell hardware to people who want lower lag connections, physical media, and such.
My Games Collection (Always Updated) My Webpage!
Currently Playing: Various Stuff
[Image: logo_bos_79x76.jpg]
Reply
#7
(23rd March 2019, 9:39 AM)A Black Falcon Wrote: Google doesn't want to sell you a console, and they've said the Stadia will be streaming only.  That's a way that Microsoft should have the edge over Google; they also are working on a streaming platform, and have even more data centers than Google does, but also want to sell hardware to people who want lower lag connections, physical media, and such.

I have a paycheck from Google, and have worked for YouTube and Android I promise you on the grave of my ancestors that who ever said to you that Microsoft has a bigger data center than Google deserves Japanese internment for a really stupid ass comment.

I also ran a 9 server microsoft farm over 13 states and can tell you first hand that Microsoft's Azure platform it a horrible litany of broken shit and bad decisions, and unfortunately XBOX is getting moved there soon as company is reorganizing.

In short I expect XBOX to be deep in the shitter soon if things continue as they are.

   
Reply
#8
(22nd March 2019, 8:44 PM)Dark Jaguar Wrote:
(22nd March 2019, 8:38 AM)etoven Wrote:
(21st March 2019, 4:20 AM)Dark Jaguar Wrote: So long as I can still purchase a local copy of a game, I'm ok with streaming.  The moment a game is released that is "streaming only", then I worry for all the reasons you listed.

The whole point is that it is streaming only. If you could purchase a local copy then you defeat the whole idea of a cloud GPU.

How does me owning my own local copy defeat the whole idea? I buy blurays but that's not hurting Netflix any.

The hole concept with them is that they can rent you a GPU that is cloud delivered that is 10 Teraflops of raw badass core a session. That's more than a XBox1 and PS4 fused together.
Reply
#9
To put it in perspective, the Nvidia Titan X GPU is a little over 10 TFlops and runs about $1100 a GPU. And google will be lending you one at the base package price to use as you see fit for the cost of a netflix sub. They promised that at the minimum. So that means they have $1000 of GPU available free unallocated for every google customer that comes along.

That's the spare horsepower they have just lying around, that's just bat shit crazy to even ponder.
Reply
#10
(23rd March 2019, 2:31 PM)etoven Wrote:
(23rd March 2019, 9:39 AM)A Black Falcon Wrote: Google doesn't want to sell you a console, and they've said the Stadia will be streaming only.  That's a way that Microsoft should have the edge over Google; they also are working on a streaming platform, and have even more data centers than Google does, but also want to sell hardware to people who want lower lag connections, physical media, and such.

I have a paycheck from Google, and have worked for YouTube and Android I promise you on the grave of my ancestors that who ever said to you that Microsoft has a bigger data center than Google deserves Japanese internment for a really stupid ass comment.

I also ran a 9 server microsoft farm over 13 states and can tell you first hand that Microsoft's Azure platform it a horrible litany of broken shit and bad decisions, and unfortunately XBOX is getting moved there soon as company is reorganizing.

In short I expect XBOX to be deep in the shitter soon if things continue as they are.

I've read that there are a lot more MS Azure server farms than Google server farms, that's all I meant. I'm sure you know a lot more about how well each one works than I do though... but as a consumer, while I have definite issues with both of them, I like Microsoft more than Google.
My Games Collection (Always Updated) My Webpage!
Currently Playing: Various Stuff
[Image: logo_bos_79x76.jpg]
Reply
#11
Thumbs Up 
(23rd March 2019, 10:43 PM)A Black Falcon Wrote:
(23rd March 2019, 2:31 PM)etoven Wrote:
(23rd March 2019, 9:39 AM)A Black Falcon Wrote: Google doesn't want to sell you a console, and they've said the Stadia will be streaming only.  That's a way that Microsoft should have the edge over Google; they also are working on a streaming platform, and have even more data centers than Google does, but also want to sell hardware to people who want lower lag connections, physical media, and such.

I have a paycheck from Google, and have worked for YouTube and Android I promise you on the grave of my ancestors that who ever said to you that Microsoft has a bigger data center than Google deserves Japanese internment for a really stupid ass comment.

I also ran a 9 server microsoft farm over 13 states and can tell you first hand that Microsoft's Azure platform it a horrible litany of broken shit and bad decisions, and unfortunately XBOX is getting moved there soon as company is reorganizing.

In short I expect XBOX to be deep in the shitter soon if things continue as they are.

I've read that there are a lot more MS Azure server farms than Google server farms, that's all I meant.  I'm sure you know a lot more about how well each one works than I do though... but as a consumer, while I have definite issues with both of them, I like Microsoft more than Google.
Reply
#12
(23rd March 2019, 2:45 PM)etoven Wrote: To put it in perspective, the Nvidia Titan X GPU is a little over 10 TFlops and runs about $1100 a GPU. And google will be lending you one at the base package price to use as you see fit for the cost of a netflix sub. They promised that at the minimum. So that means they have $1000 of GPU available free unallocated for every google customer that comes along.

That's the spare horsepower they have just lying around, that's just bat shit crazy to even ponder.

Ok then. I don't want it. We've hit diminishing returns. I honestly can't tell the difference between a game released this year and one released 4 years ago.  They all look "fine".  All I care about any more is art style.  Oh, and not having my button input delayed by more than a millisecond. Oh, and I don't want to rent computing. Ever, for any reason.
"On two occasions, I have been asked [by members of Parliament], 'Pray, Mr. Babbage, if you put into the machine wrong figures, will the right answers come out?' I am not able to rightly apprehend the kind of confusion of ideas that could provoke such a question." ~ Charles Babbage (1791-1871)
Reply
#13
Quote:Once a game is removed from sale, it vanishes, permanently, unless someone on the developer side saved a copy themselves and leaks it... which would probably be unlikely for legal reasons.

Nah bruh, they'll just put it up on teh d4rk w3bz, you'll just have to feel scummy going through the same channels as drug dealers and child pornographers.
Reply
#14
(27th March 2019, 2:44 PM)Sacred Jellybean Wrote:
Quote:Once a game is removed from sale, it vanishes, permanently, unless someone on the developer side saved a copy themselves and leaks it... which would probably be unlikely for legal reasons.  

Nah bruh, they'll just put it up on teh d4rk w3bz, you'll just have to feel scummy going through the same channels as drug dealers and child pornographers.

Due to the way the whole idea is suppose to work, everything has to be online or you have no product. It's a issue of logistics.
Reply
#15
Sure, but the developers, at least, would still have to have copies of the game. Leaking that at some point later on would be very unlikely to be sure, but it's not totally impossible.
My Games Collection (Always Updated) My Webpage!
Currently Playing: Various Stuff
[Image: logo_bos_79x76.jpg]
Reply
#16
Fees just dropped
   

Will be free, you just buy games.. They plan on launching in november.
Reply
#17
Well, free if you're streaming it to your PC (Google Chrome browser window only of course!) or already own a Chromecast Ultra or whatever it's called, or a high-end Google phone. Otherwise you need to buy hardware too, to stream to.
My Games Collection (Always Updated) My Webpage!
Currently Playing: Various Stuff
[Image: logo_bos_79x76.jpg]
Reply
#18
Buy games? Right... Hard pass.

I "own" the games right up until some rights holder says I don't, then it's forcibly removed from MS's streaming. That won't happen with my unlicensed Doom mods, they're sitting pretty on my hard drive.

A Netflix model would be better, because it's honest.
"On two occasions, I have been asked [by members of Parliament], 'Pray, Mr. Babbage, if you put into the machine wrong figures, will the right answers come out?' I am not able to rightly apprehend the kind of confusion of ideas that could provoke such a question." ~ Charles Babbage (1791-1871)
Reply
#19
Yeah, having to "buy" games that you most definitely do not own isn't something I want to do either, not unless there is absolutely no alternative. I can understand why they're going this route, instead of just a subscription service, but it's easier to stomach having a constantly changing, impermanent library if it's just a subscription, versus something you pay for directly... then watch disappear forever later on once the service shuts down or if the publisher loses the rights, or what have you.
My Games Collection (Always Updated) My Webpage!
Currently Playing: Various Stuff
[Image: logo_bos_79x76.jpg]
Reply
#20
Google has the money to "buy" exclusives. I mean if Epic does, you KNOW Google could do it like it's nothing. I'm terrified they're going to start doing that.

Yes, sure, they can use server farms to pump up graphical fidelity until you're playing a Pixar movie in real time, but they're not going to do that. They're not sacrificing the computing power of an entire farm for ONE user.
"On two occasions, I have been asked [by members of Parliament], 'Pray, Mr. Babbage, if you put into the machine wrong figures, will the right answers come out?' I am not able to rightly apprehend the kind of confusion of ideas that could provoke such a question." ~ Charles Babbage (1791-1871)
Reply
#21
(6th June 2019, 7:26 PM)A Black Falcon Wrote: Well, free if you're streaming it to your PC (Google Chrome browser window only of course!) or already own a Chromecast Ultra or whatever it's called, or a high-end Google phone.  Otherwise you need to buy hardware too, to stream to.

It also works on your smartphone or existing PC without the need to buy anything. And most gamers already own a PC.
Reply
#22
(8th June 2019, 1:32 AM)Dark Jaguar Wrote: Google has the money to "buy" exclusives.  I mean if Epic does, you KNOW Google could do it like it's nothing.  I'm terrified they're going to start doing that.

Yes, sure, they can use server farms to pump up graphical fidelity until you're playing a Pixar movie in real time, but they're not going to do that.  They're not sacrificing the computing power of an entire farm for ONE user.

They have said that every session will get the equivalent of a titan PRO at minimum.
That's more polygon crunching power than a PS4 and XBOX ONE S mushed together.
Reply
#23
(9th June 2019, 7:32 AM)etoven Wrote:
(6th June 2019, 7:26 PM)A Black Falcon Wrote: Well, free if you're streaming it to your PC (Google Chrome browser window only of course!) or already own a Chromecast Ultra or whatever it's called, or a high-end Google phone.  Otherwise you need to buy hardware too, to stream to.

It also works on your smartphone or existing PC without the need to buy anything. And most gamers already own a PC.

The only thing that is required is a device that can run Google Chrome.
They even did a demo a while back, they ran the new Doom at Ultimate at a solid 60FPS on a P1 running windows XP.
Reply
#24
(6th June 2019, 12:49 PM)etoven Wrote: Fees just dropped


Will be free, you just buy games.. They plan on launching in november.

(9th June 2019, 7:41 AM)etoven Wrote:
(9th June 2019, 7:32 AM)etoven Wrote:
(6th June 2019, 7:26 PM)A Black Falcon Wrote: Well, free if you're streaming it to your PC (Google Chrome browser window only of course!) or already own a Chromecast Ultra or whatever it's called, or a high-end Google phone.  Otherwise you need to buy hardware too, to stream to.

It also works on your smartphone or existing PC without the need to buy anything. And most gamers already own a PC.

The only thing that is required is a device that can run Google Chrome.
They even did a demo a while back, they ran the new Doom at Ultimate at a solid 60FPS on a P1 running windows XP.

The new Doom is not a very graphics intensive game, and I run it at 120 on average with everything I care for enabled (I think chromatic aberation makes the game look worse, because in the real world it only appears in badly made lenses, so I turned that off).

I'll do you one better, I can run the OLD Doom at 120 with Project Brutality and Maps of Chaos installed.
"On two occasions, I have been asked [by members of Parliament], 'Pray, Mr. Babbage, if you put into the machine wrong figures, will the right answers come out?' I am not able to rightly apprehend the kind of confusion of ideas that could provoke such a question." ~ Charles Babbage (1791-1871)
Reply
#25
Even if it was "lower" detail, though, the advantage of local rendering -- in not having compression artifacts, in the quick reaction times of connecting to a local system and not a remote one, and such -- are so significant that streaming will never match local systems for any kind of game where reaction time matters, I don't think. There is a place for something like Stadia, but it's not for the best experiences.

Also, bandwidth is a huge problem for many -- Stadia uses a LOT of data, and a whole lot of people in this country have either data caps, or soft caps where if you use too much data you'll get throttled! Stadia is entirely incompatible with such things.

The same can be said, of course, for Microsoft's newly announced Xbox Play Anywhere service that's coming. But MS knows this, so they also have a local option. Not so for Google.
My Games Collection (Always Updated) My Webpage!
Currently Playing: Various Stuff
[Image: logo_bos_79x76.jpg]
Reply
#26
(9th June 2019, 10:03 AM)Dark Jaguar Wrote:
(6th June 2019, 12:49 PM)etoven Wrote: Fees just dropped


Will be free, you just buy games.. They plan on launching in november.

(9th June 2019, 7:41 AM)etoven Wrote:
(9th June 2019, 7:32 AM)etoven Wrote:
(6th June 2019, 7:26 PM)A Black Falcon Wrote: Well, free if you're streaming it to your PC (Google Chrome browser window only of course!) or already own a Chromecast Ultra or whatever it's called, or a high-end Google phone.  Otherwise you need to buy hardware too, to stream to.

It also works on your smartphone or existing PC without the need to buy anything. And most gamers already own a PC.

The only thing that is required is a device that can run Google Chrome.
They even did a demo a while back, they ran the new Doom at Ultimate at a solid 60FPS on a P1 running windows XP.

The new Doom is not a very graphics intensive game, and I run it at 120 on average with everything I care for enabled (I think chromatic aberation makes the game look worse, because in the real world it only appears in badly made lenses, so I turned that off).

I'll do you one better, I can run the OLD Doom at 120 with Project Brutality and Maps of Chaos installed.

How is this: 
   

in any way one better to this?
Reply
#27
I'm not talking graphics there. Modders have done so many amazing things to classic Doom that modern Doom is basically playing catchup on it's feature list.
"On two occasions, I have been asked [by members of Parliament], 'Pray, Mr. Babbage, if you put into the machine wrong figures, will the right answers come out?' I am not able to rightly apprehend the kind of confusion of ideas that could provoke such a question." ~ Charles Babbage (1791-1871)
Reply


Forum Jump:


Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)