5 ms·

Given Goog's history on this, I read this announcement as them soft-killing Stadia. They aren't going to admit defeat, but unless they put real resources behind

Given Goog's history on this, I read this announcement as them soft-killing Stadia. They aren't going to admit defeat, but unless they put real resources behind paying people to use it, they aren't going to see any use of it as an API and are effectively mothballing it.

Reason077 6y ago
I hope not. The Stadia platform is fantastic: the best streaming user experience out there. It’s just that much of the Stadia Pro content is mediocre, and the paid titles tend to be expensive. (Compare to GeForce Now with it’s awkward, clunky UX but near-unlimited library of content via Steam)
- aeturnum 6y ago
  Yah...I just don't see that developers have much incentive to use Stadia? Like, you can't rely on an established 'Stadia playerbase' right now, so there's no natural incentive for studios to integrate with it. Other platform owners solve this by paying for exclusivity or something, but as mentioned above, reports say that Google wants to pay insultingly small sums of money for that work. Unless that changes...no one is gonna use it.
dodobirdlord 6y ago
The article says that they’re reassigning 150 people who worked on internal games. If they were betting the future of the platform on the number and quality of games that can be turned out by 150 people, then this never made any sense. Major game studios are hundreds or thousands of people, so this is just Google admitting that nobody in-house can come up with any good games. I don’t think it says much about the future of the platform one way or another.
- CaptainZapp 6y ago
  I'm not sure that I would invest significant cash to buy games for a platform, which may be killed on a whim. That's apart from all its other disadvantages, namely a lack of choice. > I don’t think it says much about the future of the platform one way or another. We probably disagree here, but to me that's an ear piercing yell about the confidence Google puts into Stadia and its future.

Reason077 6y ago

I hope not. The Stadia platform is fantastic: the best streaming user experience out there. It’s just that much of the Stadia Pro content is mediocre, and the paid titles tend to be expensive. (Compare to GeForce Now with it’s awkward, clunky UX but near-unlimited library of content via Steam)

aeturnum 6y ago
Yah...I just don't see that developers have much incentive to use Stadia? Like, you can't rely on an established 'Stadia playerbase' right now, so there's no natural incentive for studios to integrate with it. Other platform owners solve this by paying for exclusivity or something, but as mentioned above, reports say that Google wants to pay insultingly small sums of money for that work. Unless that changes...no one is gonna use it.

dodobirdlord 6y ago

The article says that they’re reassigning 150 people who worked on internal games. If they were betting the future of the platform on the number and quality of games that can be turned out by 150 people, then this never made any sense. Major game studios are hundreds or thousands of people, so this is just Google admitting that nobody in-house can come up with any good games. I don’t think it says much about the future of the platform one way or another.

CaptainZapp 6y ago
I'm not sure that I would invest significant cash to buy games for a platform, which may be killed on a whim. That's apart from all its other disadvantages, namely a lack of choice. > I don’t think it says much about the future of the platform one way or another. We probably disagree here, but to me that's an ear piercing yell about the confidence Google puts into Stadia and its future.