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

1) The experience will be inferior compared to offline gaming.

2) One benefit I can see from Stadia is if you haven't played a game before, you are checking out a walkthrough on YouTube, and you want to play it yourself for a couple minutes to decide if you want to buy the game to play offline. After that, I would purchase the game on a traditional console if I liked it.

3) Gaming shouldn't require an internet connection to check if you have the rights to play it. Ever.



Around the Network
spemanig said:
PwerlvlAmy said:
I hope it flops and fails as badly as OnLive. Purely personal and selfish reasons really, mainly because I do not like Google from a business stand point and data sharing stand point. I also look at it like these are the same people that are trying to sell us this streaming concept with Stadia when they cant even make Youtube properly send notifications to our subscribers boxes properly.

"Can't even?"

I get that it's popular to poopoo on Youtube right now, I like to do it too sometimes, but you're grossly underselling how massive an achievement it is that a platform with as much content constantly being uploaded as Youtube, with as many users and creators, with as many things that could go wrong, has such a good handle on keeping the house from burning down that the biggest problem someone can complain about is some people not getting notifications sometimes. You make it sound like Youtube is run by inept imbeciles, and not literal mega-geniuses who have no right no have such a massive platform run as smoothly as it consistently does. 300 hours of footage is uploaded every minute dude. 300 hours a minute. Give them room to breath.

Daily reminder that YouTube was better before Google bought them.



ThatDreamcastTho said:
1) The experience will be inferior compared to offline gaming.

2) One benefit I can see from Stadia is if you haven't played a game before, you are checking out a walkthrough on YouTube, and you want to play it yourself for a couple minutes to decide if you want to buy the game to play offline. After that, I would purchase the game on a traditional console if I liked it.

3) Gaming shouldn't require an internet connection to check if you have the rights to play it. Ever.

I want to comment on point 2 - I don't think these streamed games are going to be free. In fact, I suspect they're going to cost just as much as everywhere else. I don't see any reason why say, Madden costs $60 on Playstation and Xbox online stores, and in Gamestop and in wal-mart etc.... and is suddenly going to be free on Stadia. Perhaps there will some kind of monthly subscription service like EA Access, but it definitely, definitely, wont be free.



KLXVER said:
FarleyMcFirefly said:
The day this takes off and becomes mainstream is the day I stop modern gaming. Hopefully Nintendo releases physical games for a long time yet.

Could you imagine if both Sony and MS followed Google and Nintendo was the only one releasing physical games? They would need to buy another building to hold the money. It would be massive for at least some years.

I could definitely see Nintendo being the lone holdouts of sticking to physical media/owning software in the long run. And they'll be rewarded for it. Game Pass shows that MS is also already starting to lean in the direction of streaming. Sony has PS Now, and I have a feeling will also lean more in that direction going forward.

I defintely see this Google model of streaming everything on multiple devices taking off and doing well, but at the end of the day, there will always be a significant % of gamers who wish to actually own and have control over the product that they shell out money for. 

It's for this reason I think there is room for both models. It's like, even though Netflix and Hulu are thriving, Blu Rays still sell, and will continue to sell.



 

"We hold these truths to be self-evident - all men and women created by the, go-you know.. you know the thing!" - Joe Biden

potato_hamster said:
ThatDreamcastTho said:
1) The experience will be inferior compared to offline gaming.

2) One benefit I can see from Stadia is if you haven't played a game before, you are checking out a walkthrough on YouTube, and you want to play it yourself for a couple minutes to decide if you want to buy the game to play offline. After that, I would purchase the game on a traditional console if I liked it.

3) Gaming shouldn't require an internet connection to check if you have the rights to play it. Ever.

I want to comment on point 2 - I don't think these streamed games are going to be free. In fact, I suspect they're going to cost just as much as everywhere else. I don't see any reason why say, Madden costs $60 on Playstation and Xbox online stores, and in Gamestop and in wal-mart etc.... and is suddenly going to be free on Stadia. Perhaps there will some kind of monthly subscription service like EA Access, but it definitely, definitely, wont be free.

It could still have utility as a 99 cent rental or something. No way would I play the entire game like that.



Around the Network
KLXVER said:
spemanig said:

The only thing that sucks is that when this thing takes off and changes gaming forever, it really is the beginning of the end for games preservation. That's really all I care about. Basically every Stadia exclusive will be lost to time in a few hundred years. That sucks.

How are you so certain this will be the future? 

People used to think flying cars would be the future, but we all know what a nightmare that would have been.

Yeah instead it's flying drones



Research shows Video games  help make you smarter, so why am I an idiot

crissindahouse said:

So much panic over nothing...

Did I even read that we might get broke in the future because of the costs of streaming?

We have even more movie options nowadays than before streaming got big with DVDs, Blu-Ray, UHD Blu-Ray as options...

We got much more and sometimes also better TV shows with streaming.

We have still CDs for music. Vinyl even has some comeback while most just stream.

But sure, game streaming will destroy everything...

Just forget about all the possibilities to give us even more games and options, just pretend as if the end is near.

The thing about TV, and movies is that we went from having to wait for a broadcast to just watching it whenever. We went from shows not being popular enough to put on cable, to shows finding their audiences through the internet, and services like crunchyroll. 

TV got better because internet distribution replaced timed broadcasts. Games already saw the benefits of that once digital distribution became big years ago. That's where all these great Indie games came from. 

How would the option of being able to stream a game give us more games? How would it give us more options? 



Cerebralbore101 said:

How would the option of being able to stream a game give us more games? How would it give us more options? 

New genres, subgenres, mechanics, or franchises, for one. With so much processing power in the network, imagine what this could do for MMO's. I fully expect SGE to leverage all those data centers to create experiences that weren't possible before, thereby differentiating the service from its competitors. Ever wish for massive battlefields where each soldier is an individual player? That might be possible in the near future.



Cerebralbore101 said:
crissindahouse said:

So much panic over nothing...

Did I even read that we might get broke in the future because of the costs of streaming?

We have even more movie options nowadays than before streaming got big with DVDs, Blu-Ray, UHD Blu-Ray as options...

We got much more and sometimes also better TV shows with streaming.

We have still CDs for music. Vinyl even has some comeback while most just stream.

But sure, game streaming will destroy everything...

Just forget about all the possibilities to give us even more games and options, just pretend as if the end is near.

The thing about TV, and movies is that we went from having to wait for a broadcast to just watching it whenever. We went from shows not being popular enough to put on cable, to shows finding their audiences through the internet, and services like crunchyroll. 

TV got better because internet distribution replaced timed broadcasts. Games already saw the benefits of that once digital distribution became big years ago. That's where all these great Indie games came from. 

How would the option of being able to stream a game give us more games? How would it give us more options? 

You still have to wait to watch TV shows. Instead of waiting for say.. an 8est broadcast, you’re waiting for whenever the network dumps the newest episode onto their streaming service or something like Hulu.

And streaming didn’t just give us shows “not popular enough for cable”. Netflix and Hulu have both designed their own amazing content for people to stream. CBS has entire shows exclusive to their streaming service. DD solves or replicates none of this. Digital distribution saves us from having to go to the store to buy a new game, or wait for it to ship to us. What streaming does is let you instantly play. 

The shows on Netflix and Hulu etc are popular because you can sit down and watch an entire series. You can watch one season of one series and switch to another season of something else, all with one subscription. Streaming games will allow you to play whatever they offer whenever you want. That’s nothing like digital, where you have to download it, and pay per title.

Also the extra options and games is pretty obvious. Google will have developers, Apple will to whenever they enter. Etc etc. More devs = more games.



PwerlvlAmy said:
I hope it flops and fails as badly as OnLive. Purely personal and selfish reasons really, mainly because I do not like Google from a business stand point and data sharing stand point. I also look at it like these are the same people that are trying to sell us this streaming concept with Stadia when they cant even make Youtube properly send notifications to our subscribers boxes properly.

I don't think it can fail as badly as OnLive. I mean its coming out of the gate better than OnLive ever was.

Personally though, I'm not a big fan of Google either and will likely opt MS and Sony. Assuming Sony wants to give me a service that isn't just old games for $20 a month.



Recently Completed
River City: Rival Showdown
for 3DS (3/5) - River City: Tokyo Rumble for 3DS (4/5) - Zelda: BotW for Wii U (5/5) - Zelda: BotW for Switch (5/5) - Zelda: Link's Awakening for Switch (4/5) - Rage 2 for X1X (4/5) - Rage for 360 (3/5) - Streets of Rage 4 for X1/PC (4/5) - Gears 5 for X1X (5/5) - Mortal Kombat 11 for X1X (5/5) - Doom 64 for N64 (emulator) (3/5) - Crackdown 3 for X1S/X1X (4/5) - Infinity Blade III - for iPad 4 (3/5) - Infinity Blade II - for iPad 4 (4/5) - Infinity Blade - for iPad 4 (4/5) - Wolfenstein: The Old Blood for X1 (3/5) - Assassin's Creed: Origins for X1 (3/5) - Uncharted: Lost Legacy for PS4 (4/5) - EA UFC 3 for X1 (4/5) - Doom for X1 (4/5) - Titanfall 2 for X1 (4/5) - Super Mario 3D World for Wii U (4/5) - South Park: The Stick of Truth for X1 BC (4/5) - Call of Duty: WWII for X1 (4/5) -Wolfenstein II for X1 - (4/5) - Dead or Alive: Dimensions for 3DS (4/5) - Marvel vs Capcom: Infinite for X1 (3/5) - Halo Wars 2 for X1/PC (4/5) - Halo Wars: DE for X1 (4/5) - Tekken 7 for X1 (4/5) - Injustice 2 for X1 (4/5) - Yakuza 5 for PS3 (3/5) - Battlefield 1 (Campaign) for X1 (3/5) - Assassin's Creed: Syndicate for X1 (4/5) - Call of Duty: Infinite Warfare for X1 (4/5) - Call of Duty: MW Remastered for X1 (4/5) - Donkey Kong Country Returns for 3DS (4/5) - Forza Horizon 3 for X1 (5/5)