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

[Mr Puggsly]

SvennoJ said:

Mr Puggsly said:

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.

It's hard to believe that $120 a year for gamepass, spread over I don't know how many games, can be a good source of income for publishers other than MS. Besides that, a lot of people just get it now and then at discounts. I played a bunch of games with gamepass for $1. Nobody made money off that lol.

Well if millions subscribe which has been claimed, that becomes hundreds of millions of dollars annually.

More importantly, you're looking at Gamepass as a sole revenue stream. If that was the case than it would have a massive number of subscribers.

I assume many games can be acquired for Gamepass cheaply because they arent making much money. Thats the same reason Steam sells countless games for like a dollar. Hence, Gamepass and PS Now are primarily a collection of many games not making much money. That peppered with a few notable 3rd party games and 1st party content.

I'm sure MS pays more for a 3rd party game to launch on the service. Which they do often for indie games and other modest budget stuff.

Even when Gamepss gets a major 3rd party game its often months or longer post launch. Im sure publishers figure out the math before deciding if they should do it. Gamepass also brings more attention to a game or IP while bringing in revenue. Gold and PS+ are used the same.

People keep speaking as if content on Gamepass means the entire userbase is getting access to it. Gamepass at best is probably just a few million users. I also doubt everybody subscribes for a dollar.