Jump to content

Google Stadia - “now you can add Ubisoft+, if you’re missing tower climbing in your life”


Recommended Posts

1 hour ago, Rex Grossman said:

 

And people moaning about it.

 

To be fair it might seem that way because of the lag on the posts of the people who love it.

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Cyhwuhx said:

 

Yes, but they were not exactly gaming companies. Sony probably had more fingers in the pie at the time then I realised as a kid, but Microsoft's shitty OS was basically my work (ISP helpdesk) back then. They felt more like a liability than the next paragon of gaming. Both have earned trust by now, but if I was already sceptical with those two, Google would have an even worse time.

So the lesson you've learned is that your opinion on big corporates that enter the gaming industry can change?

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Stanley said:

Yeah but even those that love it are voicing concerns about whether Google will keep it running. 


Does that mean it’s not brilliant? I don’t get it.

Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, Anne Summers said:

So the lesson you've learned is that your opinion on big corporates that enter the gaming industry can change?

 

I think this is undeniable.

 

In the case of Stadia, though, Google has some unique problems to overcome that weren't faced by Sony or MS. First, they have a reputation (deserved or otherwise) for ditching products when they don't work out quite as they'd hoped. Second, they're asking users to give them money for a product that can only be accessed by the user as long as Google continues to run the service (with no ability to retain a local copy, a la Steam etc). They're basically asking users to place all their trust in them, but not really backing it up with anything concrete.

 

Don't get me wrong, I love Stadia and I'm blown away by the technology. I just don't envy the people at Google overcoming those marketing and perception hurdles :)

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
22 minutes ago, Anne Summers said:

So the lesson you've learned is that your opinion on big corporates that enter the gaming industry can change?

 

What else? It's more that they need time to show they have a good proposition and earn trust. They weren't exactly successful in those respects despite having the tech, whereas Sony and Microsoft did manage to do that when they launched their propositions back then.

 

See also Apple, who arguably already have a gaming platform, but are having difficulty upselling that into their Arcade service.

Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, Dr_Dave said:

 

I think this is undeniable.

 

In the case of Stadia, though, Google has some unique problems to overcome that weren't faced by Sony or MS. First, they have a reputation (deserved or otherwise) for ditching products when they don't work out quite as they'd hoped. Second, they're asking users to give them money for a product that can only be accessed by the user as long as Google continues to run the service (with no ability to retain a local copy, a la Steam etc). They're basically asking users to place all their trust in them, but not really backing it up with anything concrete.

 

Don't get me wrong, I love Stadia and I'm blown away by the technology. I just don't envy the people at Google overcoming those marketing and perception hurdles :)

 

 

 

I really like Stadia too, from the brief few goes I've had on it - most recently to play the Resi Village demo. I have no subscription or controller or anything, just played it on my phone with a generic Bluetooth controller and had a great time, so easy to jump into and start playing. This is why I think streaming is the future. 

On the other hand I totally agree with the concerns that you could end up spending a considerable amount of money on a library that then disappears if Google takes the service offline. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Anne Summers said:

 

I really like Stadia too, from the brief few goes I've had on it - most recently to play the Resi Village demo. I have no subscription or controller or anything, just played it on my phone with a generic Bluetooth controller and had a great time, so easy to jump into and start playing. This is why I think streaming is the future. 

On the other hand I totally agree with the concerns that you could end up spending a considerable amount of money on a library that then disappears if Google takes the service offline. 

 

I kind of have this outside bet with myself that the ultimate evolution of Stadia is that Google releases a "Stadia Home" version, which is a low powered PC-based console that sits under your TV and lets you download Stadia games to it to play offline... I only half-think this is unlikely :)

Link to post
Share on other sites
14 minutes ago, Dr_Dave said:

I kind of have this outside bet with myself that the ultimate evolution of Stadia is that Google releases a "Stadia Home" version, which is a low powered PC-based console that sits under your TV and lets you download Stadia games to it to play offline... I only half-think this is unlikely :)

 

I think that's basically a non-starter. How would it be lower powered? What makes it possible for Google to release a machine capable of playing the range of games on Stadia without needing the equivalent of a next gen console.

 

Or of course that was sort of the point :)

Link to post
Share on other sites
27 minutes ago, Dr_Dave said:

 

I kind of have this outside bet with myself that the ultimate evolution of Stadia is that Google releases a "Stadia Home" version, which is a low powered PC-based console that sits under your TV and lets you download Stadia games to it to play offline... I only half-think this is unlikely :)

 

StadiOuya

Link to post
Share on other sites
50 minutes ago, Dr_Dave said:

 

I kind of have this outside bet with myself that the ultimate evolution of Stadia is that Google releases a "Stadia Home" version, which is a low powered PC-based console that sits under your TV and lets you download Stadia games to it to play offline... I only half-think this is unlikely :)


I can’t see how this would be possible - if the only thing that runs Cyberpunk better than Stadia is a £1500-£2K PC, how can they make it work?

 

Also if I needed to shell out console money to play Stadia, I’d just get a Series X instead.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Stadia’s got a lower spec than even the PS5 hasn’t it? 10 GTFLOPS GPU? I’d be surprised if it took £1500 of PC to beat it. Not that anything about it suggests it’s translate well to home use.

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Alex W. said:

I’d be surprised if it took £1500 of PC to beat it.

Depends. If you're speccing something today that will play Cyberpunk better than Stadia today, you might be ok with a Series X. Otherwise, yes, you're going to be paying upwards of £1500 on a PC.

 

Simply because of graphics card madness.

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Stanley said:

Well, I’d say it being cancelled is less than brilliant, yeah. 


That’s odd, I was just playing Resi 7 on it. Seems to be still brilliant.

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Alex W. said:

Stadia’s got a lower spec than even the PS5 hasn’t it? 10 GTFLOPS GPU? I’d be surprised if it took £1500 of PC to beat it. Not that anything about it suggests it’s translate well to home use.

Worth noting that the SeriesX/PS5 are yet to get their patch too. 

 

I imagine they'll increase the draw distance, add some extra raytracing and the whole thing will grind along somewhere between 60 and 11fps. But once that's patched 9 times, it'll be great.

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Alex W. said:

Stadia’s got a lower spec than even the PS5 hasn’t it? 10 GTFLOPS GPU? I’d be surprised if it took £1500 of PC to beat it. Not that anything about it suggests it’s translate well to home use.


It’s been widely observed that the closest thing available to the high end PC experience for Cyberpunk currently is Stadia (which may well change when PS5 / Series X get dedicated versions, the owners will feel pretty short-changed if not).


I’m not familiar with what is regarded as a high end PC cost, but in the Cyberpunk thread the figure given is £1500-£2000.

 

And as it’s always worth repeating - those of us who got the Christmas launch deal got Cyberpunk, the Chromecast Ultra and the Stadia controller for a grand total of £40.

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Stanley said:

Well, I’d say it being cancelled is less than brilliant, yeah. 

 

Sorry, lost track of the thread with all the activity today, what has been cancelled?

Link to post
Share on other sites
24 minutes ago, Jonny5 said:

 

Sorry, lost track of the thread with all the activity today, what has been cancelled?

Nothings been cancelled, but that’s the fear isn’t it, or at least part of it, that people don’t want to invest in a service that might be shut down no matter how good it is. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
38 minutes ago, ZOK said:


It’s been widely observed that the closest thing available to the high end PC experience for Cyberpunk currently is Stadia (which may well change when PS5 / Series X get dedicated versions, the owners will feel pretty short-changed if not).


I’m not familiar with what is regarded as a high end PC cost, but in the Cyberpunk thread the figure given is £1500-£2000.

 

And as it’s always worth repeating - those of us who got the Christmas launch deal got Cyberpunk, the Chromecast Ultra and the Stadia controller for a grand total of £40.

From the breakdown on DF Cyber Punk appeared closer to the Xbox One version running on Series X than it does a high end PC with all the bells and whistles, I mean for a start it doesn’t have ray tracing. 
 

No reason Google couldn’t get a next gen console out that does all that (although obviously not as well) though, for £350, which is what a PS5 costs, maybe even £250 if we’re considering Series S. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
50 minutes ago, ZOK said:


It’s been widely observed that the closest thing available to the high end PC experience for Cyberpunk currently is Stadia (which may well change when PS5 / Series X get dedicated versions, the owners will feel pretty short-changed if not).


I’m not familiar with what is regarded as a high end PC cost, but in the Cyberpunk thread the figure given is £1500-£2000.

 

..."widely observed":blink:...nope...its categorically, demonstrably, better on XsX than stadia. It runs at a higher res and framerate.

 

with regard to the the high end pc exp, that is RT on, on an nvidia card, with DLSS. As its the ONLY way to get RT AND 60! of course...getting one of those at the mo is impossible almost!

 

 

 

Fuck knows how they will get RT on in the "next gen" version, at best it will be 30! as the AMD cards are so far behind nvidia, even without dlss. vid in spoiler box showing frame rates for amd and nvidia

Spoiler

 

 

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

I think the Stadia and XSX versions are pretty close. The Eurogamer / DF review seemed to say that it was swings and roundabouts and that Stadia was actually ahead in some respects, while having a lower resolution: 1440 - 1584p, a bastard resolution that would shame a ZX81, as opposed to the crystal-clear god-res of 1620p - 1800p available on the XSX which offers similar clarity and scope to the vistas you would witness after taking a fatal overdose of DMT.

 

It's also the most stable version, which DF didn't cover but is presumably a worthwhile metric. I think mine crashed once in 120hrs+ of play, which seems pretty favourable compared to the console versions.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Indeed - do people still seriously suggest that frame rate / resolution is what tells you which version of a game is better, rather than how it actually looks and plays? I thought those kind of nerdisms were dead.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

The thing that excited me about Stadia was the possibility that Google may one day upgrade the hardware behind the scenes so we get better and better games with no upgrade cost. I can imagine they'd only do it if it was successful enough though. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, ZOK said:

Indeed - do people still seriously suggest that frame rate / resolution is what tells you which version of a game is better, rather than how it actually looks and plays? I thought those kind of nerdisms were dead.

 

 

trying to suggest that frame rate doesn't affect how it plays...now thats a hot take!! :P

 

and yes, in this case the game both looks and runs better on one system over an other, these affect how it plays...

Link to post
Share on other sites

What I’m getting from this is that the Stadia version runs about the same as a £450 console running an unoptimised version in backwards compatibility mode, and is not, in fact, equivalent to a PC costing almost two grand.

Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Mike1812 said:

The thing that excited me about Stadia was the possibility that Google may one day upgrade the hardware behind the scenes so we get better and better games with no upgrade cost. I can imagine they'd only do it if it was successful enough though. 

They’ve also discussed ganging Stadia nodes together for more demanding software, which is savvy.

Link to post
Share on other sites

The economics of Stadia are still a complete mystery to me, so while they potentially could upgrade Stadia hardware and/or cluster existing hardware together to increase quality, I don't know how this would work financially. Most consoles work on the razors & blades model, but Stadia is more like them giving away the razors while still charging the same amount for the blades as their competitors. The razors are also extremely complex and use of lots of electricity and bandwidth and cost the razor company shitloads of money because they have one couriered to you every time you use it, rather than the traditional model of just keeping one in your house.

Link to post
Share on other sites
19 minutes ago, Alex W. said:

and is not, in fact, equivalent to a PC costing almost two grand.


Did anyone say it was? I said this:

 

‘It’s been widely observed that the closest thing available to the high end PC experience for Cyberpunk currently is Stadia’ - which I stand by, and there was discussion over this in the Cyberpunk thread. 
 

‘The closest thing available’ does not mean the same as, which is why that wasn’t what I said.

Link to post
Share on other sites

It still sounds like it’s a lot closer to the Series X than a decent PC but clarification appreciated.

 

Thinking about the Series X price over dinner reminded me how hard it is to fuck up “the full next generation gaming experience but you only have to pay for the games”. Just top tier.

Link to post
Share on other sites
24 minutes ago, ZOK said:


Did anyone say it was? I said this:

 

‘It’s been widely observed that the closest thing available to the high end PC experience for Cyberpunk currently is Stadia’ - which I stand by, and there was discussion over this in the Cyberpunk thread. 
 

‘The closest thing available’ does not mean the same as, which is why that wasn’t what I said.

Yeah, it’s as close as Ireland is to New York, there’s literally nothing between them. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • footle changed the title to Google Stadia - “now you can add Ubisoft+, if you’re missing tower climbing in your life”

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue. Use of this website is subject to our Privacy Policy, Terms of Use, and Guidelines.