Google seriously needs to realize that a large part of Statia's failure is their reputation.
The question of "When is google going to kill it" was almost ways the first thing that was mentioned when someone brought it up. On basically every article, reddit post, etc.
Sure they were going up against 3 major players that already had the relationships. But asking someone to not only buy a piece of hardware, but then also buy games that you could not play on Steam when you have a reputation for killing products... that makes it DOA before its even announced.
At least Amazon's is subscription based so if they cancel it you would only be out the original purchase price really.
IMHO, they can't fix it. If products are priced cheap enough then some people will buy them despite the reputational problem, but no public commitment or flashy marketing is going to convince people that a new Google service is a safe bet for the long term.
The hardware is not the problem imho. You can even play it without any special hardware, just on any PC/Mac with Chrome. Even controllers are mostly optional. For me the problem is investing in a game library. Most AAA games have to be purchased at full price or a meagre discount. It's cheaper to wait a little and buy them on disc second hand. I bought a few games, but mostly cheap indy ones. The one full price game I bought was Cyberpunk, but that came with a free controller and Chromecast Ultra. So even if the game sucked or Stadia was not it, I would still have a decent controller and new Chromecast.
For me the most value is in the Pro subscription. I like to subscribe off and on when I feel like it or when there is a game added that I like. There are some decent games in there for the kids as well. If they focus on getting a better indy catalog with maybe even some AAA games in there. I would probably keep subscribed all year.
It's sad for me, because I actually did buy a Chromecast + Stadia controller and have been having a lot of fun playing Cyberpunk. Played GRID before too, during the 3 month free trial. The tech works, at least for me, and being able to get a "console like" experience with much lower initial capital cost has been great. Also great that you can play with absolutely no fan noise.
Google are insane to not double down on it. I’m not much of a ‘gamer’ but it’s amazing just to open up chrome and be able to play flawlessly, it works so much better than other streaming services, there are so many things they could do with it but they simply haven’t, it’s ridiculous.
Why invest in the tech anyway if you don’t have a plan for it afterwards? It seems they misunderstood what was needed in the space and then just walked away, instead of adjusting. The tech is great, the opportunity here for Google is huge, backing out is going to be a huge mistake.
The free Assassin’s Creed demo had me gawping in shock at my screen, so impressed was I at how smooth it was.
But when the details of the service came out, I had no interest: spending full retail prices for games to exist only on Stadia, ready to vanish with a poof when Google killed the service, made me stay far away.
I remember they did an AMA where the Stadia dev team’s response when beleaguered with concerns around that was: trust us, we’re not going anywhere. Surprise!
If I recall correctly, their answer was even worse, of the "we understand that some of you are not ready for the future" variety. Though perhaps I am thinking of a different AMA.
> it works so much better than other streaming services
Personally I've found Stadia, GeForce Now, and Microsoft's new offering, all work well.
> It seems they misunderstood what was needed in the space and then just walked away, instead of adjusting.
Agreed. Google seriously misjudged what people want, but they could just change course. Steam was hated when it was first released, after all. Specifically:
* No one wants their games purchases to be tied specifically to Stadia. GeForce Now does the obviously right thing here, running games bought through the 'normal' storefronts.
* Emphasising 4K makes no sense at all. Gamers who are seriously invested in graphical quality are unlikely to be interested in streaming.
* Commit to support for 'standard' (or at least, commonplace) game controller devices. Don't make yet another non-standard controller that no one asked for. OnLive did the same thing years ago, apparently many of those controller are now paperweights. [0]
* And of course when half the discussions about Google in general, and Stadia in particular, are about Google's inability to commit to projects for more than a couple of years, don't then go and prove them right.
It's only Stadia which is struggling. The wider business of game-streaming seems to be growing, with offerings from nVidia, Amazon, Microsoft, and Sony.
As for control being taken from the user (even more than the norm with retroactive removal of content, locked-down consoles, widespread hostility to modding, etc), that's only an issue if games are available only by streaming. Otherwise, it's offering more options, rather than withdrawing any.
I believe Stadia has one or two exclusives, but that's all.
16 comments
[ 3.1 ms ] story [ 58.6 ms ] threadThe question of "When is google going to kill it" was almost ways the first thing that was mentioned when someone brought it up. On basically every article, reddit post, etc.
Sure they were going up against 3 major players that already had the relationships. But asking someone to not only buy a piece of hardware, but then also buy games that you could not play on Steam when you have a reputation for killing products... that makes it DOA before its even announced.
At least Amazon's is subscription based so if they cancel it you would only be out the original purchase price really.
For me the most value is in the Pro subscription. I like to subscribe off and on when I feel like it or when there is a game added that I like. There are some decent games in there for the kids as well. If they focus on getting a better indy catalog with maybe even some AAA games in there. I would probably keep subscribed all year.
Google has no clue about game development.
When Apple, Sony, Microsoft, Nintendo talk to game developers, most talks are about what can be done with the platform regarding game development.
Most Google talks are about how to use Play Store and Google cloud for analytics and KPIs.
It took them until Android 12 to even have something like a game SDK, a barebones one, and most likely Stadia SDK isn't much better.
It's sad for me, because I actually did buy a Chromecast + Stadia controller and have been having a lot of fun playing Cyberpunk. Played GRID before too, during the 3 month free trial. The tech works, at least for me, and being able to get a "console like" experience with much lower initial capital cost has been great. Also great that you can play with absolutely no fan noise.
I visited Stadia sub on Reddit couple times. The people there were always in denial.
Google are insane to not double down on it. I’m not much of a ‘gamer’ but it’s amazing just to open up chrome and be able to play flawlessly, it works so much better than other streaming services, there are so many things they could do with it but they simply haven’t, it’s ridiculous.
Why invest in the tech anyway if you don’t have a plan for it afterwards? It seems they misunderstood what was needed in the space and then just walked away, instead of adjusting. The tech is great, the opportunity here for Google is huge, backing out is going to be a huge mistake.
But when the details of the service came out, I had no interest: spending full retail prices for games to exist only on Stadia, ready to vanish with a poof when Google killed the service, made me stay far away.
I remember they did an AMA where the Stadia dev team’s response when beleaguered with concerns around that was: trust us, we’re not going anywhere. Surprise!
If I recall correctly, their answer was even worse, of the "we understand that some of you are not ready for the future" variety. Though perhaps I am thinking of a different AMA.
That’s the reason. Despite hardware shortages, nothing beats your own PC and Steam.
PC is better but chains you to the desk
Personally I've found Stadia, GeForce Now, and Microsoft's new offering, all work well.
> It seems they misunderstood what was needed in the space and then just walked away, instead of adjusting.
Agreed. Google seriously misjudged what people want, but they could just change course. Steam was hated when it was first released, after all. Specifically:
* No one wants their games purchases to be tied specifically to Stadia. GeForce Now does the obviously right thing here, running games bought through the 'normal' storefronts.
* Emphasising 4K makes no sense at all. Gamers who are seriously invested in graphical quality are unlikely to be interested in streaming.
* Commit to support for 'standard' (or at least, commonplace) game controller devices. Don't make yet another non-standard controller that no one asked for. OnLive did the same thing years ago, apparently many of those controller are now paperweights. [0]
* And of course when half the discussions about Google in general, and Stadia in particular, are about Google's inability to commit to projects for more than a couple of years, don't then go and prove them right.
[0] https://www.reddit.com/r/pcgaming/comments/317hqh/onlive_con...
As for control being taken from the user (even more than the norm with retroactive removal of content, locked-down consoles, widespread hostility to modding, etc), that's only an issue if games are available only by streaming. Otherwise, it's offering more options, rather than withdrawing any.
I believe Stadia has one or two exclusives, but that's all.