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

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

Spindel said:

I'll leave this here, my prediction is that Stadia will be a similar experience:

From WikiPedia:

"In examining latency, Eurogamer's Digital Foundry initial test found that in some of their test scenarios, users of OnLive could expect 150ms of latency over a consumer Internet connection; however, they also noted inconsistencies, in that some games had higher latency, and that this would also depend on the quality of the customer's internet connection.[72] Furthermore, they also noted that while acceptable, these values ran contrary to figures suggested by OnLive before release of lag "being under 80ms" and "usually... between 35-40ms".[72] In their later full-feature article on OnLive, Digital Foundry noted that "during intense gameplay, OnLive is hovering right at the boundary of what is acceptable lag and often exceeds it, resulting in a variable, often unsatisfactory experience", but that "the latency level is probably the most pleasant surprise with this system. Let's be clear: it is most definitely not a replacement for the local experience, but if the system can be tightened up and that 150ms becomes the norm, then it's clear there is potential here for the infrastructure to find a home with certain types of game or certain types of player".[73]

In terms of video quality, Digital Foundry noted that video compression meant image quality also varied depending on the title. Games with a lower number of frame-to-frame differences, or games where such changes were less important, such as Assassin's Creed II or Batman: Arkham Asylum fared well, with these games being "strongly suited to video compression" and "cut-scenes in particular can look very good". However, games that had a greater amount of motion or relied on fast reactions, such as Colin McRae: Dirt, Dirt 3 or Unreal Tournament 3 fared less well, with questions about the playability of the latter when video compression artifacts were taken into account.[74] Digital Foundry felt that the quality of rendering was mostly good, with high frame rates, but with less consistency than console counterparts and with screen-tearing in some scenarios.[75]

Gaming Examiner judged that the graphics were like "playing a PlayStation 3 on a 480p standard [definition] TV", that they thought that they experienced much lower framerates than expected, and that the controller was not working reliably.[76]

After the launch in United Kingdom, Computer and Video Games remarked that, after one month of use, the service was "working" and was adequate for trying or renting a game, but that it was not a substitute for owning a game on another platform due to the limitations imposed by internet connections (lag, freezing and smeary visuals, as well as high data usage for those on capped connections).[77]"

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/OnLive

For the supporters of this I hope I'm wrong. But I was sceptical before OnLive launched and in that case I was proven right and as I said Stadia will be simmilar.

While I'm highly critical on anything network related I have to point out that these reviews of the service are from 8 years ago. The internet has drastically improved since then. We're also talking about google here and not some startup. The circumstances are vastly different now and if google takes this service seriously it could become something great.

The fact that they're connecting the controller directly to the internet instead of just using a wifi connection to the device you're playing on shows me that they're approaching this service properly and are willing to improve the whole concept instead of just doing "another one".



If you demand respect or gratitude for your volunteer work, you're doing volunteering wrong.

Around the Network
shikamaru317 said:
Spindel said:

I'll leave this here, my prediction is that Stadia will be a similar experience:

From WikiPedia:

"In examining latency, Eurogamer's Digital Foundry initial test found that in some of their test scenarios, users of OnLive could expect 150ms of latency over a consumer Internet connection; however, they also noted inconsistencies, in that some games had higher latency, and that this would also depend on the quality of the customer's internet connection.[72] Furthermore, they also noted that while acceptable, these values ran contrary to figures suggested by OnLive before release of lag "being under 80ms" and "usually... between 35-40ms".[72] In their later full-feature article on OnLive, Digital Foundry noted that "during intense gameplay, OnLive is hovering right at the boundary of what is acceptable lag and often exceeds it, resulting in a variable, often unsatisfactory experience", but that "the latency level is probably the most pleasant surprise with this system. Let's be clear: it is most definitely not a replacement for the local experience, but if the system can be tightened up and that 150ms becomes the norm, then it's clear there is potential here for the infrastructure to find a home with certain types of game or certain types of player".[73]

In terms of video quality, Digital Foundry noted that video compression meant image quality also varied depending on the title. Games with a lower number of frame-to-frame differences, or games where such changes were less important, such as Assassin's Creed II or Batman: Arkham Asylum fared well, with these games being "strongly suited to video compression" and "cut-scenes in particular can look very good". However, games that had a greater amount of motion or relied on fast reactions, such as Colin McRae: Dirt, Dirt 3 or Unreal Tournament 3 fared less well, with questions about the playability of the latter when video compression artifacts were taken into account.[74] Digital Foundry felt that the quality of rendering was mostly good, with high frame rates, but with less consistency than console counterparts and with screen-tearing in some scenarios.[75]

Gaming Examiner judged that the graphics were like "playing a PlayStation 3 on a 480p standard [definition] TV", that they thought that they experienced much lower framerates than expected, and that the controller was not working reliably.[76]

After the launch in United Kingdom, Computer and Video Games remarked that, after one month of use, the service was "working" and was adequate for trying or renting a game, but that it was not a substitute for owning a game on another platform due to the limitations imposed by internet connections (lag, freezing and smeary visuals, as well as high data usage for those on capped connections).[77]"

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/OnLive

For the supporters of this I hope I'm wrong. But I was sceptical before OnLive launched and in that case I was proven right and as I said Stadia will be simmilar.

Digital Foundry also tested Google Stadia when it was in beta known as Project Stream. They found Project Stream’s latency to be much faster than OnLive, and that was only a beta, latency will likely be even better on the final release. Will latency be amazing? Of course not, I would never use it for multiplayer games for that very reason, but it should be low enough for most single player games. I was in the Project Stream beta and barely noticed any additional lag while streaming AC Odyssey compared to playing it on my PS4 Pro.

Digital Foundrys latencies on Stadia and Google Stream:

  • Google Stadia: 166ms
  • Google Project Stream: 179ms



Spindel said:

Digital Foundrys latencies on Stadia and Google Stream:

  • Google Stadia: 166ms
  • Google Project Stream: 179ms

https://www.eurogamer.net/articles/digitalfoundry-2019-hands-on-with-google-stream-gdc-2019

Xbox 1 X: 166ms

PC 60fps: 100ms

PC 30fps: 133ms

withholding the other results makes you look like an ideologist, especially when you have so many good/good faith arguments in your favor



Nautilus said:
Lafiel said:

You seem to have a weird misunderstanding of what Stadia is. There is no "console" you have to buy to gain access (and "Stadia" is a _platform_, not a console), the controller is entirely optional aswell. Btw 60-80 dollars is "overpriced" for a 4k60 streaming access to atleast several PC AAA lvl games for a year? Gold/PS+ nearly costs that much for online gaming +24-ish games and you need to have the console hw.

There are still a price point entry for the main hardware.If Im not mistaken, Google will eventually offer a web based version(I think?), but they will push the hardware version, at least for now.And they are not giving it for free.

And yes, 60 to 80 dollars is overpriced in my opinion, in a world where you get a better service with gamepass at 10 dollars a month.The difference betwenn both, and why 60 to 80 dollars is overpriced for Standia while 100 dollars a year for gamepass is cheap is because how the service works.

First of all, gamepass is not necessary for your console to work.Either on Xbox and now on PC, you can simply buy the games and own them forever.Not paying the subscription wont make your console obsolete.Second of all, and most importantly, with gamepass you download the games.That basically throws out the window any kind of internet related problems, all the way from latency to controller input lag.You cant say the same for Standia. Even in places with really good internet it will still have those issues.Which are not many, by the way.

And Plus and Gold are as popular as they are because they lock multiplayer behind a paywall.People have to pay for it to play many games, or to play the modes the like the most.Hell, its the reason why the Nintendo online subscription is doing as good as it is doing.

Seems like you have very strong feelings towards something you lack the most basic knowledge on.

There is no "main" hardware to purchase. You can use your PS4 or Xbox controller and connect directly to their platform. All you need to have is good internet connection and you're good to go.

There's no point going into pricing and level of service because that's what the conference is all about, so we'll learn it then and there.

Anyway, good to see some disruption to the market, things were getting too stale and predictable in the gaming service space. It's no coincidence that 5G internet is just around the corner to help lowering the bandwidth restrictions we still feel nowadays. These services will benefit greatly from that.



Lafiel said:
Spindel said:

Digital Foundrys latencies on Stadia and Google Stream:

  • Google Stadia: 166ms
  • Google Project Stream: 179ms

https://www.eurogamer.net/articles/digitalfoundry-2019-hands-on-with-google-stream-gdc-2019

Xbox 1 X: 166ms

PC 60fps: 100ms

PC 30fps: 133ms

withholding the other results makes you look like an ideologist, especially when you have so many good/good faith arguments in your favor

I don't see how the other results contradicts what I said/claimed eralier.

Those other results just solidify my opinion, that streaming games is not an viable option since those latencies are not for locally run games but for streamed games.



Around the Network
Lafiel said:
Spindel said:

Digital Foundrys latencies on Stadia and Google Stream:

  • Google Stadia: 166ms
  • Google Project Stream: 179ms

https://www.eurogamer.net/articles/digitalfoundry-2019-hands-on-with-google-stream-gdc-2019

Xbox 1 X: 166ms

PC 60fps: 100ms

PC 30fps: 133ms

withholding the other results makes you look like an ideologist, especially when you have so many good/good faith arguments in your favor

There's just something odd with Odyssey, the game just seems to have high ping built into the game, even 166ms ping is bad as even a French start-up beats them (shadow).

You really want 100ms for most games. 150ms people should feel a slight delay even for total beginners and you probably want <50ms for some games. I think just Odyssey was a perfect game for 150-170ms as people claiming it's a bit of a slow game and you won't notice much latency. Now this is with a controller, with keyboard and mouse you probably want lower ping. Just seems mouse movements is more sensitive to ping than controllers but it depends on the game from my experience.



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!!

setsunatenshi said:
Nautilus said:

There are still a price point entry for the main hardware.If Im not mistaken, Google will eventually offer a web based version(I think?), but they will push the hardware version, at least for now.And they are not giving it for free.

And yes, 60 to 80 dollars is overpriced in my opinion, in a world where you get a better service with gamepass at 10 dollars a month.The difference betwenn both, and why 60 to 80 dollars is overpriced for Standia while 100 dollars a year for gamepass is cheap is because how the service works.

First of all, gamepass is not necessary for your console to work.Either on Xbox and now on PC, you can simply buy the games and own them forever.Not paying the subscription wont make your console obsolete.Second of all, and most importantly, with gamepass you download the games.That basically throws out the window any kind of internet related problems, all the way from latency to controller input lag.You cant say the same for Standia. Even in places with really good internet it will still have those issues.Which are not many, by the way.

And Plus and Gold are as popular as they are because they lock multiplayer behind a paywall.People have to pay for it to play many games, or to play the modes the like the most.Hell, its the reason why the Nintendo online subscription is doing as good as it is doing.

Seems like you have very strong feelings towards something you lack the most basic knowledge on.

There is no "main" hardware to purchase. You can use your PS4 or Xbox controller and connect directly to their platform. All you need to have is good internet connection and you're good to go.

There's no point going into pricing and level of service because that's what the conference is all about, so we'll learn it then and there.

Anyway, good to see some disruption to the market, things were getting too stale and predictable in the gaming service space. It's no coincidence that 5G internet is just around the corner to help lowering the bandwidth restrictions we still feel nowadays. These services will benefit greatly from that.

Hmmmmmm, for some reason I was under the impression that they would offer a "box"(the one I was calling the console) that would help with the stream in some way.Seems I was wrong, my bad.

But especulating about the price and games is fun.Its tzhe whole point of the argument.Its not meaningless.I mean, if it is, then any kind of talk about future games that developers may develop are pointless, since only time would tell the true.

5G is still a ways until it is implemented, and decades until it reach a big enough audience to enable streaming in this capacity for most of society.And mantaining a good gaming service is very expensive.So thats it will fail.



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

http://bit.ly/ilOzBP
It's about to start



Only Pixel phones, that's kinda lame. They're totally limiting themselves with that.



If you demand respect or gratitude for your volunteer work, you're doing volunteering wrong.

Only 35mbps for 4K. That's impressive.