3 ms·

> However, both Shadow and GeForce Now leverage existing game libraries, look better, and are generally more approachable than Stadia's "rebuy everything, run

> However, both Shadow and GeForce Now leverage existing game libraries, look better, and are generally more approachable than Stadia's "rebuy everything, run at lower quality, and lack significant features" plan. The old joke when you read a fortune cookie out loud, is to say "in bed" afterwards - "Things will look up soon... in bed." When talking about the performance of game streaming services you need a similar qualifier at the end... "for me". "<x> streaming services performs better than <y>.... for me" That's because experiences with the various streaming services can't be generalized so easily. GeForce now is an absolutely miserable experience... for me. However, Stadia is fantastic... for me.

maest 7y ago
The "for me" caveat applies to some of GP's statements, but not all. In particular, leveraging game existing libraries and improved approachability are true for everyone. That being said, it does feel that GeForce is having a hard time keeping games on their platform. Anecdotically, ever since they launched the paid service, there's been lots of games pulled from their platform, which is a real shame. They also don't have a transparent way of discovering new games on their platform which is a huge issue.
- SmirkingRevenge 7y ago
  GeForce now is a pretty poor user experience compared with Stadia, IMHO - it is definitely not universally more approachable at all. And only PC gamers with existing steam libraries have existing content to play on GF Now. But the thing is... I'm not likely to already own a game in steam, that I can't play on my own hardware. So the fact that my existing library is available to play, isn't much of a draw, in and of itself. I keep looking for excuses to play one of my games on GF now, but I keep finding I have no reason to prefer it over my PC.
- drusepth 7y ago
  I don't want to be pedantic, but leveraging existing game libraries doesn't really matter to people who don't have existing game libraries (or existing game libraries that overlap with the games on the service). It seems like a "for me" qualifier should apply there when talking about how important that aspect is to users for a new service.

maest 7y ago

The "for me" caveat applies to some of GP's statements, but not all. In particular, leveraging game existing libraries and improved approachability are true for everyone. That being said, it does feel that GeForce is having a hard time keeping games on their platform. Anecdotically, ever since they launched the paid service, there's been lots of games pulled from their platform, which is a real shame. They also don't have a transparent way of discovering new games on their platform which is a huge issue.

SmirkingRevenge 7y ago
GeForce now is a pretty poor user experience compared with Stadia, IMHO - it is definitely not universally more approachable at all. And only PC gamers with existing steam libraries have existing content to play on GF Now. But the thing is... I'm not likely to already own a game in steam, that I can't play on my own hardware. So the fact that my existing library is available to play, isn't much of a draw, in and of itself. I keep looking for excuses to play one of my games on GF now, but I keep finding I have no reason to prefer it over my PC.
drusepth 7y ago
I don't want to be pedantic, but leveraging existing game libraries doesn't really matter to people who don't have existing game libraries (or existing game libraries that overlap with the games on the service). It seems like a "for me" qualifier should apply there when talking about how important that aspect is to users for a new service.