Google GDC 2019 gaming event coverage - Google Stadia unveiled

Ryan Warren · Mar 20, 2019

roastable said:
I'm seeing the pricing model something like this:

- 29.99/month for the service
- 39.99-59.99/AAA game
- 5.99-19.99/indie game

And at the end of the month, what do you have to show for it? Literally nothing in your name.

If the price was this they wouldn't get any traction since its more expensive than every other game service. Probably will start at $10/month and in the future get to that price range. They want to build a userbase first.

roastable · Mar 20, 2019

Ryan Warren said:
If the price was this they wouldn't get any traction since its more expensive than every other game service. Probably will start at $10/month and in the future get to that price range. They want to build a userbase first.

I mean, Google isn't really the best at building a userbase/properly supporting their services. See Google+, Hangouts, Allo, Google Play Music. The list goes on.

pedro702 · Mar 20, 2019

Ryan Warren said:
If the price was this they wouldn't get any traction since its more expensive than every other game service. Probably will start at $10/month and in the future get to that price range. They want to build a userbase first.

i highly doubt they will let you play their latest AAA games for 10$ a month, heck i doubt any AAA studio wants that imagine ubisoft making the latest assassins creed and people paid 10$ played it and be done with it, srs doubt it will be like that.

Also with this model company's will stop making dlc? because they gain nothing for it? i mean if you pay a fixed monthly fee, what do they gain on making more stages,characters and such? unless they charge you extra on top of the subscription to play the game with dlc? wich would be preety awkward to do so, this might kill every dlc, and company's will just make patches to fix some bugs if at all since for 10$ they will just skip to the next game.

SG854 · Mar 20, 2019

migles said:
the problem is the monopoly...
big companies will save plenty huge ammounts of money by not making games for other plataforms like a pc or console.. (also it costs money to test and porting the games to all the different systems)
they just need to develop a game for the stadia plataform and done..
exclusive titles for the stadia plataform will be definitely a thing, and people in bad areas can't play the latest AAA games because they where only developed for stadia..
all the other plataforms like pc and consoles will get a half done bad port..

So even if monopoly happens, then what’s your solution? Them not make a gaming streaming service? This is the future. This is a big money maker for them and it’s where it’s at. It’ll make them lots of money if many people like the idea of a streaming service. And anyways a monopoly is rare. We have Netflix, Hulu, Amazon Video, Crunchyroll, and on and on. New competition will enter the market. Just like many front end stores for pc gaming that people now complain about because too many new digital stores.

They won’t have monopoly on devices that plays games. I can see new TVs have this feature built in. And you won’t need to buy an expensive hardware to play graphically intensive games.

Them saving money is a huge benefit for them and a huge benefit for us. Any place you look at where they cut costs we get a better product and more reliable service. Food, like sugar, is one thing that they cut costs because of better production and we get it for extremely cheap now and it’s everywhere. Back then you had to pay premium to get sugar which only the rich wealthy had.

If there is enough people with bad internet then there will still be a market for non streaming. But this can open up opportunities for people to go into areas that have bad connections and open up their own internet service there because of demand for better internet, and they will make lots of money. This being internet demanding can help improve the current internet we have now. These 2 can affect each other like many new technologies in the past have. It’s a win win all around.

pedro702 · Mar 20, 2019

SG854 said:
So even if monopoly happens, then what’s your solution? Them not make a gaming streaming service? This is the future. This is a big money maker for them and it’s where it’s at. It’ll make them lots of money if many people like the idea of a streaming service. And anyways a monopoly is rare. We have Netflix, Hulu, Amazon Video, Crunchyroll, and on and on.

They won’t have monopoly on devices that plays games. I can see new TVs have this feature built in. And you won’t need to buy an expensive hardware to play graphically intensive games.

Them saving money is a huge benefit for them and a huge benefit for us. Any place you look at where they cut costs we get a better product and more reliable service. Food, like sugar, is one thing that they cut costs because of better production and we get it for extremely cheap now and it’s everywhere. Back then you had to pay premium to get sugar which only the rich wealthy had.

If there is enough people with bad internet then there will still be a market for non streaming. But this can open up opportunities for people to go into areas that have bad connections and open up their own internet service there because of demand for better internet, and they will make lots of money. This being internet demanding can help improve the current internet we have now. These 2 can affect each other like many new technologies in the past have. It’s a win win all around.

there is a huge diference on streaming videos/musics to games, a video they just have the file and build a media player online that loads said file.

an an actual game specialy like 4k 60 fps ones you need a single pc running that game to stream, and that pc wont be able to do anything else or it will impact the game performance, while a server can be readed for multiple video files to play online.

so if they have a 10000 people playing assassins creed odissey for instance they need to have 10000 pcs just to play that game alone and have some spare to do the rest of the people games, so yeah its much much more expensive to stream games than having a server uploading several media files.

SG854 · Mar 20, 2019

pedro702 said:
there is a huge diference on streaming videos/musics to games, a video they just have the file and build a media player online that loads said file.

an an actual game specialy like 4k 60 fps ones you need a single pc running that game to stream, and that pc wont be able to do anything else or it will impact the game performance, while a server can be readed for multiple video files to play online.

so if they have a 10000 people playing assassins creed odissey for instance they need to have 10000 pcs just to play that game alone and have some spare to do the rest of the people games, so yeah its much much more expensive to stream games than having a server uploading several media files.

I don’t know why you would be concerned about their expenses. That’s for them to worry about and not you. All you have to worry about is getting a service you like for playing games you like.

If it’s an extremely expensive and costly thing with no benefit money wise then they won’t do this. So they are offering some service because they expect to make lots of money from it.

And we will still have the graphics wars but only in streaming services. I can see a new streaming service popping up that offers better graphics then the other streaming service. So they won’t have as much monopoly as people think. They would have to continue to update their own hardware to stay competitive.

pedro702 · Mar 20, 2019

SG854 said:
I don’t know why you would be concerned about their expenses. That’s for them to worry about and not you. All you have to worry about is getting a service you like for playing games you like.

If it’s an extremely expensive and costly thing with no benefit money wise then they won’t do this. So they are offering some service because they expect to make lots of money from it.

And we will still have the graphics wars but only in streaming services. I can see a new streaming service popping up that offers better graphics then the other streaming service. So they won’t have as much monopoly as people think. They would have to continue to update their own hardware to stay competitive.

the price affects us consumers lol so no its not for them to worry about its for us because they dont want to loose money so they put the price on you, or even worse you could be paying for a subscription and then you go to play a game and they say the game is not available on this moment please try latter, because all their pcs for running that high game are busy and so on.

SG854 · Mar 20, 2019

pedro702 said:
the price affects us consumers lol so no its not for them to worry about its for us because they dont want to loose money so they put the price on you, or even worse you could be paying for a subscription and then you go to play a game and they say the game is not available on this moment please try latter, because all their pcs for running that high game are busy and so on.

The prices won’t affect you if you don’t get the service. If it’s not worth your money then don’t get the service.

If enough people don’t buy the service then they’ll fail, which means physical hardware will reign supreme, and consoles will still be popular, and it was a bad service to begin with. If the streaming service is superior costs wise and hardware wise to where people see benefit in it then it will reign supreme.

comput3rus3r · Mar 20, 2019

SG854 said:
The prices won’t affect you if you don’t get the service. If it’s not worth your money then don’t get the service.

If enough people don’t buy the service then they’ll fail, which means physical hardware will reign supreme, and consoles will still be popular, and it was a bad service to begin with. If the streaming service is superior costs wise and hardware wise to where people see benefit in it then it will reign supreme.

physical hardware should always prevail when you look at the big picture. More control in the user's hand. Of course big corporations don't want this. Stadia needs to fail.

RPG_FAN128 · Mar 20, 2019

Good thing the whole world has high-speed internet. Oh snap, it doesn't.

Glitchk0ud1001 · Mar 20, 2019

"Google will also be making their own controller which will connect through wifi to the host game session in order to reduce input lag" WHHHHY

Google Doesn't now about Bluetooth

the_randomizer · Mar 20, 2019

Glitchk0ud1001 said:
"Google will also be making their own controller which will connect through wifi to the host game session in order to reduce input lag" WHHHHY

Google Doesn't now about Bluetooth

Apple isn't any better with their peripherals, relying on proprietary, overpriced BS.

Deleted User · Mar 20, 2019

Well, this would not be interesting for me, because in Germany (where the internet is espcially slow) it would not work very well.

the_randomizer · Mar 20, 2019

Lol good luck, USA's crappy infrastructure

enjoy inconsistent speeds and bandwidth caps. Yeah, sorry, but streaming only? Pfft, screw that.

Depravo · Mar 20, 2019

Glitchk0ud1001 said:
"Google will also be making their own controller which will connect through wifi to the host game session in order to reduce input lag" WHHHHY

Google Doesn't now about Bluetooth

Bluetooth cannot connect directly to Google's data centres.

Captain_N · Mar 21, 2019

I wont be going near this gaming service. I dont do streaming games. How are some people calling this a console? You own nothing well except a controller. Its a bank of servers that stream video/audio of a game you control remotely. You cant mod nothing, you cant own anything. Noobs will love it because of the convenience of not having to be part of the pc master race to play a game on highest settings. As well as the fact that you can stream it on almost any device. (i want to see it streamed on a wii btw). The modern gamer seems to like the idea of owning nothing and paying a monthly fee to play any game on the service. They have no sense of longevity anyways. The true gamers like being to have something they can play with out having internet or having to pay a service. They actually understand the significance of being able to play their favorite games well after they are no longer modern. You cant even pirate their shit. The only way well be able to pirate it is if someone gains access to their server and downloads the games. Then creates a decrypted client to play them on

vstar950 · Mar 21, 2019

its called quad layer blu ray. and yes they can. they are lazy and know suckers wont stand up and stop buying their beta products and I will only accept finished and tested products. thats where I say no more. I am done with broken games. mcc is a great example. when they or if they release the mcc with all fixes and addons on disc I will buy it. if they dont i dont care either. gaming is dead.

Deleted User · Mar 21, 2019

Chary said:
The goal is to lower the barrier to entry, so that gaming is more accessible.

Min specs: South Korea or Japan Internet infrastructure of higher.

There's a reason Nintendo Switch game streaming is exclusive to Japan.

Tom Bombadildo · Mar 21, 2019

pedro702 said:
so if they have a 10000 people playing assassins creed odissey for instance they need to have 10000 pcs just to play that game alone and have some spare to do the rest of the people games, so yeah its much much more expensive to stream games than having a server uploading several media files.

100% wrong here. Not even remotely how it works, especially when you're taking about the high-end data servers that Google will have access to. See the 8 gamers 1 CPU build done by Linus Tech Tips for what is essentially how a game streaming service would work, except at a microscopic scale and without the whole streaming thing.

You're thinking in terms of consumer hardware, when you should be thinking in terms of high end servers.

the_randomizer · Mar 21, 2019

Snugglevixen said:
Min specs: South Korea or Japan Internet infrastructure of higher.

There's a reason Nintendo Switch game streaming is exclusive to Japan.

Because the internet infrastructure here sucks ass.

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Hail Mary

Well-Known Member

Hail Mary

Well-Known Member

Hail Mary

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

The Temp's official fox whisperer

Deleted User

Guest

The Temp's official fox whisperer

KALSARIKÄNNIT

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Deleted User

Guest

Dick, With Balls

The Temp's official fox whisperer

Similar threads

Popular threads in this forum