Forums - Gaming Discussion - Google Stadia conference with pricing, games, and release details set for June 6th at Noon EST/ 9 AM PST

The Fury said:
jason1637 said:

But most of those are older games. How many games does PS Now have that released this year? If Sony changed PS Now to a srvice where you can buy new games while having the 650 games then that would be a killer service.

And how many older games can Stadia play, do you not like the older games? Sure PS Now could improve but if Sony felt releasing new games on it while stuff like PC support wasn't available (which it is now) would hurt their console sales they'd limit releases on it, especially as it is a streaming subscription only. The Netflix of gaming, you don't own anything on Netflix, you just sub.

I have nothing against older times. I own or have played most older games i'm interested in so a service that does not deliver on newer games does not interest me.



Around the Network
Shadow1980 said:
I really, really hope this fails. Not because I have any particular ill will towards Google, mind you, but because the entire prospect of streaming games offends me at a gut level. I simply do not like that even single-player games are dependent on a constant internet connection. Your internet goes out? Can't play anything. The service's servers go down for any reason? Can't play anything. The entire concept of "offline play" completely ceases to exist in a streaming service. For physical and downloaded copies, offline play is still very possible for single-player experiences, and your progress in a level or mission won't suddenly come to a screeching halt because of a disruption to your internet connection or what have you.

Also, if a game is removed from a streaming service, it's gone, perhaps for good if it was removed over some rights issue. At least with digital downloads, if you have a title downloaded before it's delisted it stays on your hard drive. And with physical, a title that has gone out of print is still available for purchase through the second-hand market, which makes it even better when it comes to long-term availability of titles. Think of all the titles that have been pulled from digital storefronts over the years. Now, imagine those games being gone forever because streaming was the only way to play them.

Of all the possible ways of distributing games, streaming has the most weaknesses and fewest strengths by far. I hope it does not succeed in the long run, because I don't want even the slightest possibility of it being the only way to play games in the future.

1 - It won't fail, if Sony, with a much lower datacenter infrastructure capability compared to Google's, managed to get 700 thousand subscribers for their PSNow streaming service, Google has potential to go beyond that.

2 - If electricity goes out, you can't play your local games either. This fear of having a temporary internet shut down is as baseless as fearing a temporary blackout.



CuCabeludo said:
Shadow1980 said:
I really, really hope this fails. Not because I have any particular ill will towards Google, mind you, but because the entire prospect of streaming games offends me at a gut level. I simply do not like that even single-player games are dependent on a constant internet connection. Your internet goes out? Can't play anything. The service's servers go down for any reason? Can't play anything. The entire concept of "offline play" completely ceases to exist in a streaming service. For physical and downloaded copies, offline play is still very possible for single-player experiences, and your progress in a level or mission won't suddenly come to a screeching halt because of a disruption to your internet connection or what have you.

Also, if a game is removed from a streaming service, it's gone, perhaps for good if it was removed over some rights issue. At least with digital downloads, if you have a title downloaded before it's delisted it stays on your hard drive. And with physical, a title that has gone out of print is still available for purchase through the second-hand market, which makes it even better when it comes to long-term availability of titles. Think of all the titles that have been pulled from digital storefronts over the years. Now, imagine those games being gone forever because streaming was the only way to play them.

Of all the possible ways of distributing games, streaming has the most weaknesses and fewest strengths by far. I hope it does not succeed in the long run, because I don't want even the slightest possibility of it being the only way to play games in the future.

1 - It won't fail, if Sony, with a much lower datacenter infrastructure capability compared to Google's, managed to get 700 thousand subscribers for their PSNow streaming service, Google has potential to go beyond that.

2 - If electricity goes out, you can't play your local games either. This fear of having a temporary internet shut down is as baseless as fearing a temporary blackout.

What are you smoking?Its not the internet going down, its the servers being shut down, or google simply deciding its not in their interest anymore to keep that game running on their servers because that, you know, has a cost.Or do you think they will keep their catalogue of games intact without taking a single game out for 10+ years, assuming this is successful?

Not only that, but its rather common for the internet to be out of service for a few hours every now and then.What happens then?You wouldnt play.Its not an advantage or something "Oh, thats normal", when everyone else dosent have that problem because they dont stream your games.



My (locked) thread about how difficulty should be a decision for the developers, not the gamers.

https://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/thread.php?id=241866&page=1

The business model is definitely a bit of a surprise. A la carte purchases and the cheap subscription are nice, but I was expecting a Netflix-like model where all titles in the library come with that sub. That controller is more expensive than I was hoping for, too.

Still waiting on that killer hook to sell me. Maybe when their first party games are revealed. In the meantime I'll be keeping an eye on the service's performance.



shikamaru317 said:
Trumpstyle said:
Can anyone check the american FAQ if you live there and see if it says 30 or 60fps? Maybe google haven't updated the FAQ yet to say 60fps.

www.stadia.com/faq

US FAQ says 1080p 60 fps for Free users:

-Non-subscribers may experience up to 1080p and 60 FPS.

kenjab said:
Trumpstyle said:
Can anyone check the american FAQ if you live there and see if it says 30 or 60fps? Maybe google haven't updated the FAQ yet to say 60fps.

www.stadia.com/faq

On American FAQ:

What is the quality Stadia will stream content at?
Stadia will be able to stream games up to 4K HDR and 60 FPS quality for Stadia Pro subscribers. Non-subscribers can stream games up to 1080p and 60 FPS. Like any other Internet streaming experience, higher quality connections will result in the best experience.

Thx for the responses, it says 1080p and 60fps for me too now. Wanna try Doom on the free service and see how good google streaming service really is :)



"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!!

Around the Network
jason1637 said:
The Fury said:

650 games. But sure, "select few". They wound't do a buy thing as it would directly compete with the PSN, if they did a joint service, so you guy it to download on console and can play it on PSNow, that's where they need to go with it.

But most of those are older games. How many games does PS Now have that released this year? If Sony changed PS Now to a srvice where you can buy new games while having the 650 games then that would be a killer service.

I got that it's going to take place on PS5.



God bless You.

My Total Sales prediction for PS4 by the end of 2021: 110m+

When PS4 will hit 100m consoles sold: Before Christmas 2019

There were three ravens sat on a tree / They were as blacke as they might be / The one of them said to his mate, Where shall we our breakfast take?


So, you have to buy the games? Like the poster above, I was expecting something more like Netflix, even if somewhat more expensive.

Not sure if this is worth even for the "free" 1080p gaming. It might do for someone on a pinch, but anyone would be better off spending less than $150 for a GPU able to do the same with far less input latency and internet use.



 

 

 

 

 

Cerebralbore101 said:
Shadow1980 said:
I really, really hope this fails. Not because I have any particular ill will towards Google, mind you, but because the entire prospect of streaming games offends me at a gut level. I simply do not like that even single-player games are dependent on a constant internet connection. Your internet goes out? Can't play anything. The service's servers go down for any reason? Can't play anything. The entire concept of "offline play" completely ceases to exist in a streaming service. For physical and downloaded copies, offline play is still very possible for single-player experiences, and your progress in a level or mission won't suddenly come to a screeching halt because of a disruption to your internet connection or what have you.

Also, if a game is removed from a streaming service, it's gone, perhaps for good if it was removed over some rights issue. At least with digital downloads, if you have a title downloaded before it's delisted it stays on your hard drive. And with physical, a title that has gone out of print is still available for purchase through the second-hand market, which makes it even better when it comes to long-term availability of titles. Think of all the titles that have been pulled from digital storefronts over the years. Now, imagine those games being gone forever because streaming was the only way to play them.

Of all the possible ways of distributing games, streaming has the most weaknesses and fewest strengths by far. I hope it does not succeed in the long run, because I don't want even the slightest possibility of it being the only way to play games in the future.

Agreed. It's funny how people had their pitchforks out not even seven years ago over XB1 needing to check in on you every 24 hours. Now though, people are going to jump right on Stadia, with all it's DRM and anti-consumer crap, without even blinking an eye. The times, they are a changin. :(

DRM? It's streaming. There's an obvious difference between having DRM with a console you physically own with discs you physically own versus a service which only works with an internet connection.



Stadia sucks.



haxxiy said:

So, you have to buy the games? Like the poster above, I was expecting something more like Netflix, even if somewhat more expensive.

Not sure if this is worth even for the "free" 1080p gaming. It might do for someone on a pinch, but anyone would be better off spending less than $150 for a GPU able to do the same with far less input latency and internet use.

Yes. And its likely that they will be fully priced, though nothing is confirmed as of right now.



My (locked) thread about how difficulty should be a decision for the developers, not the gamers.

https://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/thread.php?id=241866&page=1