5 ms·

> Stadia is different, with this product Google is trying something really innovative. Genuine question: What is innovative here? There are at least a dozen at

by mbell 7y ago

> Stadia is different, with this product Google is trying something really innovative. Genuine question: What is innovative here? There are at least a dozen attempts at 'cloud gaming' that I'm aware of dating back about a decade.

jakebasile 7y ago
Now you can play games at lower quality and higher latency than ever before, and pay Google for the privilege of renting them! Plus, Google can control what games you play! Innovation!
heywoods 7y ago
I think I can help answer your question, but just watching the keynote will be best. https://youtu.be/hl-Y1QVhmcM https://youtu.be/hl-Y1QVhmcM. The tl;dr of the whole keynote is what's different about Google's attempt at 'Cloud Gaming' is their ability to leverage their infrastructure. Outside of Amazon and Microsoft I don't know of another company that will be able to match the latency and computation requirements to make this all work as marketed. What really stood out to me from their keynote this year was the number of edge nodes that Google has on top of their datacenter infrastructure. https://youtu.be/hl-Y1QVhmcM?t=1360 https://youtu.be/hl-Y1QVhmcM?t=1360
- AlexandrB 7y ago
  > What is different with Google's attempt at 'Cloud Gaming' is their ability to leverage their infrastructure. That's not innovation, it's just having a bigger stick than the other guy.
  - lonelappde 7y ago
    Yes,we know, nothing remotely similar to anything else is innovation. Airplanes are just bicycles with bolted on wings.
- deleted 7y ago
  [deleted]
- bhauer 7y ago
  Okay, but that's hardly what most would consider innovative. Applying their large scale is more of an evolution of or improvement to the established cloud gaming idea.
  - lonelappde 7y ago
    That's what the word "innovation" means. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Innovation https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Innovation
- hyperpallium 7y ago
  Google Suggest is low latency, and required a huge effort, driven from the top. Cloud gaming needs even lower latency. I don't think it's possible, but if google is doing the serious datacenter work, it must be a testbed for something else, because gaming isn't worth it anyway.
  - gilrain 7y ago
    "gaming isn't worth it anyway" > By 2018, the United States video game industry had matched that of the Unites States film industry on basis of revenue, with both industries having made around US$43 billion that year. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Video_game_industry https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Video_game_industry
    - hyperpallium 7y ago
      Google's revenue in 2018 was $137B... but you're right, a slice of $43B may be worth it to them.
- maest 7y ago
  All that compute and network power and yet GeForceNow performs better for me than Stadia. I'm just one datapoint, I know, but that's also just a keynote.
saynay 7y ago
AFAIK, there is a big difference in the backend. Something like the Playstation 'cloud gaming' gave you remote access to a playstation console. Others gave you access to a VM running the game. I think Microsoft was talking about giving you access to your own XBox running at home? The games were not re-engineered / ported specifically to run 'in the cloud' as Stadia is attempting. There are some interesting things that could allow, if a developer ever decides to utilize it.
- maest 7y ago
  My mental model is that Stadia is just like owning a PS/Xbox, but the hardware is in Google's datacentres. You pay the one-off cost to buy the console, you then maybe pay for the Pro subscription, but you have to buy your games and those games are locked to that platform - just like with PS/Xbox. All the other stuff about having games that deliver something unseen before because of "the cloud" are mostly promises and theoretical features at this stage, so I wouldn't bank too much on that.

by mbell 7y ago

jakebasile 7y ago

Now you can play games at lower quality and higher latency than ever before, and pay Google for the privilege of renting them! Plus, Google can control what games you play! Innovation!

heywoods 7y ago

I think I can help answer your question, but just watching the keynote will be best. https://youtu.be/hl-Y1QVhmcM https://youtu.be/hl-Y1QVhmcM. The tl;dr of the whole keynote is what's different about Google's attempt at 'Cloud Gaming' is their ability to leverage their infrastructure. Outside of Amazon and Microsoft I don't know of another company that will be able to match the latency and computation requirements to make this all work as marketed. What really stood out to me from their keynote this year was the number of edge nodes that Google has on top of their datacenter infrastructure. https://youtu.be/hl-Y1QVhmcM?t=1360 https://youtu.be/hl-Y1QVhmcM?t=1360

AlexandrB 7y ago
> What is different with Google's attempt at 'Cloud Gaming' is their ability to leverage their infrastructure. That's not innovation, it's just having a bigger stick than the other guy.
- lonelappde 7y ago
  Yes,we know, nothing remotely similar to anything else is innovation. Airplanes are just bicycles with bolted on wings.
deleted 7y ago
[deleted]
bhauer 7y ago
Okay, but that's hardly what most would consider innovative. Applying their large scale is more of an evolution of or improvement to the established cloud gaming idea.
- lonelappde 7y ago
  That's what the word "innovation" means. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Innovation https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Innovation
hyperpallium 7y ago
Google Suggest is low latency, and required a huge effort, driven from the top. Cloud gaming needs even lower latency. I don't think it's possible, but if google is doing the serious datacenter work, it must be a testbed for something else, because gaming isn't worth it anyway.
- gilrain 7y ago
  "gaming isn't worth it anyway" > By 2018, the United States video game industry had matched that of the Unites States film industry on basis of revenue, with both industries having made around US$43 billion that year. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Video_game_industry https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Video_game_industry
  - hyperpallium 7y ago
    Google's revenue in 2018 was $137B... but you're right, a slice of $43B may be worth it to them.
maest 7y ago
All that compute and network power and yet GeForceNow performs better for me than Stadia. I'm just one datapoint, I know, but that's also just a keynote.

saynay 7y ago

AFAIK, there is a big difference in the backend. Something like the Playstation 'cloud gaming' gave you remote access to a playstation console. Others gave you access to a VM running the game. I think Microsoft was talking about giving you access to your own XBox running at home? The games were not re-engineered / ported specifically to run 'in the cloud' as Stadia is attempting. There are some interesting things that could allow, if a developer ever decides to utilize it.

maest 7y ago
My mental model is that Stadia is just like owning a PS/Xbox, but the hardware is in Google's datacentres. You pay the one-off cost to buy the console, you then maybe pay for the Pro subscription, but you have to buy your games and those games are locked to that platform - just like with PS/Xbox. All the other stuff about having games that deliver something unseen before because of "the cloud" are mostly promises and theoretical features at this stage, so I wouldn't bank too much on that.