By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close

Forums - Gaming Discussion - Stadia is Everything Money Grubbing "AAA" Publishers Could Ever Ask For

Cerebralbore101 said:
BasilZero said:
As long as I can play games, I'm fine with it.

What scares me most is that the majority of consumers in the USA feel the same. I'm really on the fence as to whether it succeeds or not, but damn I really hope it doesn't. At least not until PS5 has come and gone. 

Give it time my dude. Casuals literally will ruin everything with given time. I mean, look how long it took the casual in the mobile industry to grow and then explode, getting those some money grubbing AAA pubs, to go and seek out just what made them wads of cash on that platform. If Stadia takes off with flying colours, that's it for gaming. All streaming, absolutely zero ownership, and a netflix style fee, guaranteeing them insane amounts of cashflow. 

I gotta say, I really loathe how nearly every industry is trying to steadily move into this "you pay me per week/month/year" model, rather than buy once, get a good sales, it's almost like these industries don't want anyone even paying once, let alone getting a good deal (I can say the same to artists who keep raising their prices, gate-blocking those who want to support them)



Step right up come on in, feel the buzz in your veins, I'm like an chemical electrical right into your brain and I'm the one who killed the Radio, soon you'll all see

So pay up motherfuckers you belong to "V"

Around the Network
Darwinianevolution said:
melbye said:
I hope it fails. I don't trust publishers to do what is right for consumers especially when it is online-related, just look at games like Fallout 76 and Anthem

This has happened time and time again. First digital was promised to offer more flexible pricing and ending the 60$ per game model, only to barely change the prices (and in most cases, retail games ending up cheaper than digital). DRM and always online functionality was supposed to end piracy and offer better features, only for many games to end up bloated and slown down as a result of the DRM, with many pirated versions running better. Paid online on consoles was supposed to be there to improve the infrastructure, and yet none of them really offer anything better online than free PC online. Microtransactions were there to support small and/or struggling projects with a Free to Play model, only to be added to every big AAA game, often with lootboxes and with no regards of initial price.

I can only imagine what EA, Activision or any other big publisher could get away with on a platform like Stadia.

We're already heading there, since we've been seeing Netflix style sub fees to play all these games, for a limited time (as in, limited when you stop paying a constant fee). All these big pubs easily want to move us onto a platform and turn gaming entirely into an ongoing service, where they churn out as little effort, but requiring you to pay a constant fee. It's their end-game dream. I feel like this has always been their dream,since the early days of the net. 



Step right up come on in, feel the buzz in your veins, I'm like an chemical electrical right into your brain and I'm the one who killed the Radio, soon you'll all see

So pay up motherfuckers you belong to "V"

KLXVER said:

So if this is a subscription thing, then how will they pay third parties? If its like 20 bucks a month, then Capcom would get 10 cent a month for their support or 1 cent per game people play per month? I just don't get how this would work.

They agree on an amount of money.  Square enix put Shadow of the Tomb Raider/Just Cause 4 on gamepass very fast after it's release so the deals must be fine and also  third party games sometimes go on the day of release on game pass.      You make a deal for 3 months. After 3 months they will renew the contract for less money and publishers can decide if they want to go on with it.  Gamepass is a bit more interesting because you can also buy the games + DLC etc for a cheaper price if you have gamepass.  In the summer we will know Google's answer.






I swear some people not specifically on this thread complain about anti-consumer/negative companies, and yet they seem to praise this service which google have created. I won't support google, dodgy as fuck and have just been fined 1.5 billion euros for shady practices.



KLXVER said:

So if this is a subscription thing, then how will they pay third parties? If its like 20 bucks a month, then Capcom would get 10 cent a month for their support or 1 cent per game people play per month? I just don't get how this would work.

Just like Youtube keeps track of views, Stadia can keep track of playtime.



Around the Network

Streaming is the future.
I'm looking foward to see how this tech evolves.



To the extent that it works like they claim, and I can play AAA games on various devices, without the need for big investments in hardware, I see it as a huge positive. I'd be happy to subscribe to a couple streaming services.



A lot of comments in this thread demonstrate that gamers are just scared of change.



VAMatt said:
A lot of comments in this thread demonstrate that gamers are just scared of change.

Why would i want change when it works perfectly now?



Woah woah woah, you’re telling me that an online streaming service where you use your Internet to stream video games, REQUIRES Internet? What in the actual fuck. How has Google not solved what Netflix solved years ago, where you can stream quality Netflix programming anywhere in the world even if you don’t have Internet. It reminds me of when GameFly started to lend out video games but oh of course, you needed an address for them to ship it to. There’s always a catch!

Also can you please provide a source for the stuff about ads and microtransactions?