4 ms·

I don’t think Stadia is truly an MVP. It’s a Google MVP, it doesn’t have to be truly viable, only viable to google middle management looking for a promotion. T

I don’t think Stadia is truly an MVP. It’s a Google MVP, it doesn’t have to be truly viable, only viable to google middle management looking for a promotion. That’s what people are lamenting, you can’t role out a competitive gaming platform with such a small catalog of titles. >I bought an Xbox to play Red Dead Redemption 2 . . . lots of people falling into the “who this is for” camp Those people appear to be “casual/occasional gamers”? I am very doubtful that this group will really turn into a cash cow. $10.00/month is enough that few are going to keep a subscription after they are done playing. If you amortize a console over a lifetime of 4 years it would be considerably cheaper than paying for stadia if you consider the current $75 upfront cost. So the way I see it, for stadia to be viable there would have to be a steady stream of AAA titles(because otherwise the need for cloud compute is questionable) produced by 3rd party studios...this just doesn’t exist, titles like RDR2 & CP2077 are an exception. We only saw a handful of titles that demanding and hyped come from a non-Microsoft, non-Sony published studio in the last decade. I’m not in the game dev world, but producing these types of titles seems to be exceptionally difficult, and the trend seems to be less and less AAA titles per year as the complexity compounds. Combined with stadia’s limited selection, Google’s history of product abandonment, and that you often have to purchase stadia specific versions of titles to play them on the platform. It’s a difficult pill to swallow. Nvidia’s product, GeForce Now, where titles are portable seems like a much more viable product to me.

ThatPlayer 6y ago
Stadia doesn't have a $10/mo cost or $75 upfront cost though. Stadia Pro is optional, and the client runs in Chrome on almost any device (not sure about iOS yet). I can go on the store and buy Cyberpunk 2077 and start playing on my phone if I wanted to.
- Duralias 6y ago
  If we want to compare Stadia to current generation consoles then I think we need to include the 10$/mo, 1080p on stadia looks terrible on any somewhat large screen, "4k" is much better. And the 75$ upfront cost does exist, you need a controller. You could get a controller for cheaper, but it wouldn't be as easy to use or be usable with the chromecast ultra, which seems to be where the best experience is. Nonetheless you still need a controller and most people wouldn't settle for something that is terrible to use, so the cost is still a consideration.
  - ThatPlayer 6y ago
    But if we're comparing to a current gen console then do you include the subscription the console requires for online play? Stadia Pro also gives 'free games' the same way Playstation Plus and Xbox Gold Live do too. Especially in the 'casual/occasional' gamer market, where they don't care enough about the difference between 1080p and 4K. Most are probably just interested in being able to play the latest hot game. That's exactly the same market Microsoft is targeting with the Xbox Series S.
- akhilcacharya 6y ago
  > Stadia Pro is optional Last time I signed up the Stadia Pro upsell was mandatory (you had to provide a CC). This was annoying because I was interested just in Destiny 2, which is free.
  - riversflow 6y ago
    This was me last night when I received this comment. I went to go try the free experience and was prompted to give them a CC. I closed and deleted the app in response. I really wanted to try the free experience, but it appeared they were going to add the friction of, “and don’t worry, we’ll automatically renew your subscription.” No thanks. This seems like terrible UX.

ThatPlayer 6y ago

Stadia doesn't have a $10/mo cost or $75 upfront cost though. Stadia Pro is optional, and the client runs in Chrome on almost any device (not sure about iOS yet). I can go on the store and buy Cyberpunk 2077 and start playing on my phone if I wanted to.

Duralias 6y ago
If we want to compare Stadia to current generation consoles then I think we need to include the 10$/mo, 1080p on stadia looks terrible on any somewhat large screen, "4k" is much better. And the 75$ upfront cost does exist, you need a controller. You could get a controller for cheaper, but it wouldn't be as easy to use or be usable with the chromecast ultra, which seems to be where the best experience is. Nonetheless you still need a controller and most people wouldn't settle for something that is terrible to use, so the cost is still a consideration.
- ThatPlayer 6y ago
  But if we're comparing to a current gen console then do you include the subscription the console requires for online play? Stadia Pro also gives 'free games' the same way Playstation Plus and Xbox Gold Live do too. Especially in the 'casual/occasional' gamer market, where they don't care enough about the difference between 1080p and 4K. Most are probably just interested in being able to play the latest hot game. That's exactly the same market Microsoft is targeting with the Xbox Series S.
akhilcacharya 6y ago
> Stadia Pro is optional Last time I signed up the Stadia Pro upsell was mandatory (you had to provide a CC). This was annoying because I was interested just in Destiny 2, which is free.
- riversflow 6y ago
  This was me last night when I received this comment. I went to go try the free experience and was prompted to give them a CC. I closed and deleted the app in response. I really wanted to try the free experience, but it appeared they were going to add the friction of, “and don’t worry, we’ll automatically renew your subscription.” No thanks. This seems like terrible UX.