Quantcast
RDR2 and Destiny 2 on Stadia run at lower resolutions than they do on XB1 X

Forums - Gaming Discussion - RDR2 and Destiny 2 on Stadia run at lower resolutions than they do on XB1 X

"Bungie later confirmed that our eyes weren’t deceiving us. When streaming at 4K, we render at a native 1080p and then upsample and apply a variety of techniques to increase the overall quality of effect,” a Bungie rep said, adding that D2 runs at the PC equivalent of medium settings"

1080p, medium settings. Pretty damn terrible. Specs Wise Stadia shouldn't be far behind the PS5/Scarlett. Something very wrong here.

It's weird to see from this article that the problem isn't the streaming at all, it's the games themselves.

"What you’re looking at here isn’t bad streaming; the stream is 4K. Not only that, but it’s also some of the best streaming image quality I’ve seen, without loads of the nasty compression artifacts that make other cloud gaming services look like there’s an ugly haze between you and much of the game. Google told me that Stadia is designed to run games at the highest resolution with all of the settings turned up, but clearly, that isn’t happening here."

Last edited by Barkley - on 20 November 2019

LTD: PS4 - 125m, Switch - 110m, XBO - 51m

2020: PS4 - 9m, Switch - 22.5m, XBO - 2.5m, PS5 - 4.5m, XBX - 2.8m

Around the Network
Mr Puggsly said:
SvennoJ said:

Early days, early games and you conveniently ignore this

Destiny 2 is perfectly playable on Stadia and delivers the 60fps experience that Xbox One X cannot

60 fps for a streaming service is pretty good, that with lower latency than a lot of 30 fps games on console. (Yeah latency is still 44ms higher for this game compared to the console version, not bad but still noticeable)

I'm sure the CPU for Stadia is better than consoles. But were they not forward thinking in CPU power or is RDR2 poorly optimized?

I mean its kinda odd its already struggling on specs.

I think it would help clear up some confusion if we get more FPS information in other games.

Regardless, its disappointing on GPU as well.

They can always add new hardware when hardware gets better / prices go down. They don't have to replace everything, yet at some point the premium games will get to run on premium hardware. The RDR2 port is probably poorly optimized, early launch title.

The advantage of streaming is that when it starts making money hardware can be added / upgraded at a regular basis, thus the premium subscriptions get better running games year after year. Just like my download speed has been increasing year over year without needing a new modem.



SvennoJ said:
Mr Puggsly said:

I'm sure the CPU for Stadia is better than consoles. But were they not forward thinking in CPU power or is RDR2 poorly optimized?

I mean its kinda odd its already struggling on specs.

I think it would help clear up some confusion if we get more FPS information in other games.

Regardless, its disappointing on GPU as well.

They can always add new hardware when hardware gets better / prices go down. They don't have to replace everything, yet at some point the premium games will get to run on premium hardware. The RDR2 port is probably poorly optimized, early launch title.

The advantage of streaming is that when it starts making money hardware can be added / upgraded at a regular basis, thus the premium subscriptions get better running games year after year. Just like my download speed has been increasing year over year without needing a new modem.

Developing for Linux isnt entirely new and its likely fairly standard PC specs as well. With the specs boasted about games should be looking and performing better.

When OnLive launched those specs trounced consoles. Google is a huge company, made big promises on specs and its looking like bullshit. You're suggesting they will upgrade later...

Are we absolutely certain this will be financially viable going this direction? Im also curious to see if developers care enough to keep porting games to work on Stadia.

The advantage MS and Sony have is their platforms already get great support. MS also has a great edge by having the most supported PC OS.

Im a fan of the streaming concept, I actually completed a few games via OnLIve years ago. But I dont like Stadia.



Recently Completed
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)

So the compression is only for data cap purposes? Would they allow a full inmage for thouse who can handle it? Maybe reviewers could take another crack at it. I mean its still pointless cuz if this is already toping data caps on first World nations. But then they can say "see we are good. It's you lowlife peasants and crappy internets."



It takes genuine talent to see greatness in yourself despite your absence of genuine talent.

eva01beserk said:
So the compression is only for data cap purposes? Would they allow a full inmage for thouse who can handle it? Maybe reviewers could take another crack at it. I mean its still pointless cuz if this is already toping data caps on first World nations. But then they can say "see we are good. It's you lowlife peasants and crappy internets."

4K60 10 bit color is 14,238 mbps or 13.9 Gb/s, nobody can handle that!
You need 35 mbps for 4K 60 with compression. That kind of sustained speed (no buffering option) is pretty difficult already.

4K blu-ray goes up to 100 mbps, digital cinema up to 250 mbps, however those have the advantage of time to optimize the encoding for quality and use variable bit rate, more bits for fast scenes. So even going up to 100 mbps for stadia won't make it look near as good as 4K blu-ray. It will get better as encoding hardware gets smarter and faster.



Around the Network

what 99% of the people in this thread don't realise or dont wanna see is that this product can improve whereas a normal console cant

edit : if its economically viable the chance that it can improve after being dead in the water, is a different question



 "I think people should define the word crap" - Kirby007

Join the Prediction League http://www.vgchartz.com/predictions

Mr Puggsly said:
SvennoJ said:

They can always add new hardware when hardware gets better / prices go down. They don't have to replace everything, yet at some point the premium games will get to run on premium hardware. The RDR2 port is probably poorly optimized, early launch title.

The advantage of streaming is that when it starts making money hardware can be added / upgraded at a regular basis, thus the premium subscriptions get better running games year after year. Just like my download speed has been increasing year over year without needing a new modem.

Developing for Linux isnt entirely new and its likely fairly standard PC specs as well. With the specs boasted about games should be looking and performing better.

When OnLive launched those specs trounced consoles. Google is a huge company, made big promises on specs and its looking like bullshit. You're suggesting they will upgrade later...

Are we absolutely certain this will be financially viable going this direction? Im also curious to see if developers care enough to keep porting games to work on Stadia.

The advantage MS and Sony have is their platforms already get great support. MS also has a great edge by having the most supported PC OS.

Im a fan of the streaming concept, I actually completed a few games via OnLIve years ago. But I dont like Stadia.

onLive launched in 2011 when there were no pro consoles and console games ran in sub 720p. Stadia does look better than the base PS4. Diminishing returns also play a factor, which is actually helping streaming services. As long as it doesn't look much worse, most people won't care. Switch will soon be the most played console, xbox one x and ps4 pro users are a niche.

Anyway onLive was not financially viable, it's dead. I have no clue if PS Now is even profitable with the benefit of using their own hardware and games to save costs. Game pass certainly can't be profitable for publishers but it has put price expectations low.

It seems more like Stadia is here since Google has all these data centers with processing time left over :/
MS has Azure so they are good for hardware.
Sony has the most first party titles, they can save on that.

It will be interesting.



eva01beserk said:
So the compression is only for data cap purposes? Would they allow a full inmage for thouse who can handle it? Maybe reviewers could take another crack at it. I mean its still pointless cuz if this is already toping data caps on first World nations. But then they can say "see we are good. It's you lowlife peasants and crappy internets."

Stadia needs to make money too.... so NO.

So the compression isnt just for peoples benefits (with compression 4k, can use more than 20GB+ pr hour).
1 TB data cap / month cant even play a game for 50 hours at 4k.

Those mobile phone plans.... yeah this doesnt make sense for streaming to phones.

Without data caps, and with insane bandwidth.... google still wouldnt do it I suspect, its a matter of the costs.
They need to take a cut of that 60$, and still be able to pay off the price of the PC power consumption + maintaince + bandwidth costs.

Spending even more on un-compressed data sent, would eat away at their profits.



If Google is splitting the GPU performance in half (2 users per gpu) we should see games running at 1080p/60fps, 1440p/30fps or 4k/30fps with checkerboard rendering. This is PS4 games running at 1080p/30fps. The gpu in Stadia should be more capable than I listed but should be close enough.

The cpu is 2-3x stronger than the PS4 CPU depending how well games are optimized for multicores, this if it's a Intel Xeon 4core, 8thread cpu. We don't have a good way finding this out as the GPU will probably be the bottleneck in almost all scenarios. We should see it in Red dead redemption 2 though, performance should land around 52 average fps in more demanding cpu scenes in that game.

Soon eurogamer will probably have analysis of several games.



"Donald Trump is the greatest president that god has ever created" - Trumpstyle

6x master league achiever in starcraft2

Beaten Sigrun on God of war mode

Beaten DOOM ultra-nightmare with NO endless ammo-rune, 2x super shotgun and no decoys on ps4 pro.

1-0 against Grubby in Wc3 frozen throne ladder!!

SvennoJ said:
Mr Puggsly said:

Developing for Linux isnt entirely new and its likely fairly standard PC specs as well. With the specs boasted about games should be looking and performing better.

When OnLive launched those specs trounced consoles. Google is a huge company, made big promises on specs and its looking like bullshit. You're suggesting they will upgrade later...

Are we absolutely certain this will be financially viable going this direction? Im also curious to see if developers care enough to keep porting games to work on Stadia.

The advantage MS and Sony have is their platforms already get great support. MS also has a great edge by having the most supported PC OS.

Im a fan of the streaming concept, I actually completed a few games via OnLIve years ago. But I dont like Stadia.

onLive launched in 2011 when there were no pro consoles and console games ran in sub 720p. Stadia does look better than the base PS4. Diminishing returns also play a factor, which is actually helping streaming services. As long as it doesn't look much worse, most people won't care. Switch will soon be the most played console, xbox one x and ps4 pro users are a niche.

Anyway onLive was not financially viable, it's dead. I have no clue if PS Now is even profitable with the benefit of using their own hardware and games to save costs. Game pass certainly can't be profitable for publishers but it has put price expectations low.

It seems more like Stadia is here since Google has all these data centers with processing time left over :/
MS has Azure so they are good for hardware.
Sony has the most first party titles, they can save on that.

It will be interesting.

Stadia has launched a few years into premium consoles and they boasted specs well above them. Even if there is a poor optimization thing happening, I suspect the reality is users arent getting the advertized specs.

PS4 and X1 basically share the same market, given their library is very similar and they have similar games as top sellers. So I generally  lump them together as an audience. Therefore I dont see premium consoles them as a niche separate things per se. Frankly, Stadia is aiming for the exact same type of gamers that enjoy Playstation and Xbox.

Switch in comparison has a more unique audience. When you look at the games that really thrive on it, it has no direct competitor.

PS Now is probably profitable, but I doubt its making a big profit. I cant recall the exact amount but I think they said it had like 700k subscribers in a report before the price change and some major PS4 games were also added. Its also limited to 720p/60 fps so they arent sending out data like Stadia.

Gamepass cant be profitable for publishers? What is that based on?

Sony has a strong 1st party, but they come to PS Now late. I believe I read xCloud is going to have the enitre X1 library. Hence, xCloud is more like a real console being streamed versus a more curated experience of the competitors. If xCloud is ultimately curated, it will atleast have 1st party games at launch.

Last edited by Mr Puggsly - on 21 November 2019

Recently Completed
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)