5 ms·

nvidia has a competing service that supports that title, and it honors your steam account instead of needing you to re-buy it https://www.nvidia.com/en-us/gefo

nvidia has a competing service that supports that title, and it honors your steam account instead of needing you to re-buy it https://www.nvidia.com/en-us/geforce-now/games/ https://www.nvidia.com/en-us/geforce-now/games/

akiselev 6y ago
Unfortunately Stadia is the only one that supports 4K (I'm a casual user of Nvidia's service since it was in beta)
- Agingcoder 6y ago
  Does 4k matter? The way you state it makes it sound like it's a major issue (disclaimer: I've never seen a 4k game) This is an honest question, since I don't game much (witcher 3, death stranding and a few point and click) , and regular 1080 doesn't bother me, so I'm genuinely curious.
  - Duralias 6y ago
    Would describe Stadia 4k to be inline with native 1080p, at least when playing stadia in a browser. Stadia 4k may look better using a chromecast ultra, but I haven't tried that. And It is weird how resolutions are the focus in streaming when the most important thing is bitrate, feel like we need some kind of standard, because bitrate means nothing to most people.
    - Ruthalas 6y ago
      At least with game streaming services, I suspect advertising resolution serves the double purpose of being understandable to most consumers, while specifically obfuscating bitrate, which is the sacrificed statistic.
    - bscphil 6y ago
      > It is weird how resolutions are the focus in streaming when the most important thing is bitrate Yep. I see a good example of this when I watch gameplay videos on Youtube in the highest available 1080p bitrate, and regularly see results that look far worse than playing the game in 720p, maybe even 480p. For example, it's obviously very common to pan the camera through a high-detail scene, which is trivial for a GPU to do, but incredibly information dense for a video encoder. So anything with a lot of detail blurs (in a very ugly way, not like motion blur) when there's movement. And Youtube has the advantage that the video has as much time to record as Youtube will allow it, it doesn't need to be done with low-latency settings as Stadia does. Of course, cable TV is even worse, but ordinary consumers don't seem to have noticed or cared about that either.
      - Tijdreiziger 6y ago
        YouTube's bitrates are atrocious. I don't understand why they can't at least offer a higher bitrate to their paying Premium customers. > Of course, cable TV is even worse, but ordinary consumers don't seem to have noticed or cared about that either. According to Wikipedia, a DVB-C stream can be between 6-65 Mb/s [1], certainly higher than YouTube's 3-9 Mb/s (assuming 1080p video). The situation for resolutions above 1080p seems to be a bit better [2]. [1] https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/DVB-C https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/DVB-C [2] https://www.androidauthority.com/how-much-data-does-youtube-use-964560/ https://www.androidauthority.com/how-much-data-does-youtube-...
        bscphil 6y ago
        I'm not sure about Europe, but in the US it's very rare to see bitrates even a large fraction of that. (I don't see a minimum bitrate on the ATSC Wikipedia page, and it wouldn't surprise me to find out that it's often lower than 6 Mbps.) Worse still, in a bunch of places the cable companies still deliver MPEG-2 video, which is going to look pretty atrocious at anything other than an extremely high bitrate. It's a big disadvantage compared to Youtube. Plus a whole bunch of programs are in 60 fps, which need a higher bitrate anyway. I plugged in my cable box for the first time in months to watch the Super Bowl, and was shocked at how terrible the video was. I could see obvious artifacts without glasses on, and I can't even tell 720p from 1080p at that distance. Some of my relatives have those MPEG-2 channels, and I remember them being significantly worse. Not trying to say that cable TV can never be better than Youtube's quality, of course, just trying to give a general impression of my experience with various American cable companies.
  - int_19h 6y ago
    It depends on the game. Anything that has a lot of text or small icons - e.g. many strategies - benefits from high DPI in the same way desktop apps do.
- myko 6y ago
  It's also much more performant and user friendly than GeForce Now
xyzzy_plugh 6y ago
Yeah I don't see how nVidia doesn't dominate this market. Their product just makes way more sense. To even get on Stadia you have to port to their custom Linux distribution, which is a pretty huge ask for most games.
- hnick 6y ago
  Publishers specifically pulled out of Geforce Now because they didn't like the idea of people not having to buy the game again.
bogdan314 6y ago
I used both. When time came to Play cyberpunk, I went for Stadia. It runs a lot better (streaming quality, glitches, start-up times) are incredible. Using Stadia in general is a polished (yet basic) experience. In contrast Nvidia very much felt like a hack. Log-in in my steam account, seeing weird window glitches. I see a lot of comments negative on stadia here,based on bias rather then actual experience. Stadia is nothing short of tech star even with its downsides compare to the rest of the market.
- glenneroo 6y ago
  I can't speak about Nvidia, but we just hosted a ~25 person LAN party at work and decided to go with Stadia... never again. Some people couldn't even make an account because they didn't have a credit card (even though we planned to mostly play free titles). Literally every game needed 20-40 minutes before we finally got everyone in - we never pinpointed the root cause, but a combination of restarting Chrome (emptying cache), relogging into Stadia, rebooting PCs and re-hosting a match, we managed to play a few titles. In a couple cases, we just gave up trying to get more than a handful of people in the game. Some people couldn't ever get their keyboard or mouse working in some titles (myself included, one game in particular was fine for awhile, then suddenly my mouse stopped registering in-game - rebooting and having the host restart the server didn't help - googling my issue says I'm not alone). Some of these titles I've played multiplayer via Steam without any of the related issues, granted Steam/Stadia is an apples/oranges comparison. At the end I suggested we try Armagetron. 2.7MB download and runs on Mac/Win/Linux/Potatoes. I started up a private server and we were running a 16-player game without any issues in literally 5 minutes.

akiselev 6y ago

Unfortunately Stadia is the only one that supports 4K (I'm a casual user of Nvidia's service since it was in beta)

Agingcoder 6y ago
Does 4k matter? The way you state it makes it sound like it's a major issue (disclaimer: I've never seen a 4k game) This is an honest question, since I don't game much (witcher 3, death stranding and a few point and click) , and regular 1080 doesn't bother me, so I'm genuinely curious.
- Duralias 6y ago
  Would describe Stadia 4k to be inline with native 1080p, at least when playing stadia in a browser. Stadia 4k may look better using a chromecast ultra, but I haven't tried that. And It is weird how resolutions are the focus in streaming when the most important thing is bitrate, feel like we need some kind of standard, because bitrate means nothing to most people.
  - Ruthalas 6y ago
    At least with game streaming services, I suspect advertising resolution serves the double purpose of being understandable to most consumers, while specifically obfuscating bitrate, which is the sacrificed statistic.
  - bscphil 6y ago
    > It is weird how resolutions are the focus in streaming when the most important thing is bitrate Yep. I see a good example of this when I watch gameplay videos on Youtube in the highest available 1080p bitrate, and regularly see results that look far worse than playing the game in 720p, maybe even 480p. For example, it's obviously very common to pan the camera through a high-detail scene, which is trivial for a GPU to do, but incredibly information dense for a video encoder. So anything with a lot of detail blurs (in a very ugly way, not like motion blur) when there's movement. And Youtube has the advantage that the video has as much time to record as Youtube will allow it, it doesn't need to be done with low-latency settings as Stadia does. Of course, cable TV is even worse, but ordinary consumers don't seem to have noticed or cared about that either.
    - Tijdreiziger 6y ago
      YouTube's bitrates are atrocious. I don't understand why they can't at least offer a higher bitrate to their paying Premium customers. > Of course, cable TV is even worse, but ordinary consumers don't seem to have noticed or cared about that either. According to Wikipedia, a DVB-C stream can be between 6-65 Mb/s [1], certainly higher than YouTube's 3-9 Mb/s (assuming 1080p video). The situation for resolutions above 1080p seems to be a bit better [2]. [1] https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/DVB-C https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/DVB-C [2] https://www.androidauthority.com/how-much-data-does-youtube-use-964560/ https://www.androidauthority.com/how-much-data-does-youtube-...
      - bscphil 6y ago
        I'm not sure about Europe, but in the US it's very rare to see bitrates even a large fraction of that. (I don't see a minimum bitrate on the ATSC Wikipedia page, and it wouldn't surprise me to find out that it's often lower than 6 Mbps.) Worse still, in a bunch of places the cable companies still deliver MPEG-2 video, which is going to look pretty atrocious at anything other than an extremely high bitrate. It's a big disadvantage compared to Youtube. Plus a whole bunch of programs are in 60 fps, which need a higher bitrate anyway. I plugged in my cable box for the first time in months to watch the Super Bowl, and was shocked at how terrible the video was. I could see obvious artifacts without glasses on, and I can't even tell 720p from 1080p at that distance. Some of my relatives have those MPEG-2 channels, and I remember them being significantly worse. Not trying to say that cable TV can never be better than Youtube's quality, of course, just trying to give a general impression of my experience with various American cable companies.
- int_19h 6y ago
  It depends on the game. Anything that has a lot of text or small icons - e.g. many strategies - benefits from high DPI in the same way desktop apps do.
myko 6y ago
It's also much more performant and user friendly than GeForce Now

xyzzy_plugh 6y ago

Yeah I don't see how nVidia doesn't dominate this market. Their product just makes way more sense. To even get on Stadia you have to port to their custom Linux distribution, which is a pretty huge ask for most games.

hnick 6y ago
Publishers specifically pulled out of Geforce Now because they didn't like the idea of people not having to buy the game again.

bogdan314 6y ago

I used both. When time came to Play cyberpunk, I went for Stadia. It runs a lot better (streaming quality, glitches, start-up times) are incredible. Using Stadia in general is a polished (yet basic) experience. In contrast Nvidia very much felt like a hack. Log-in in my steam account, seeing weird window glitches. I see a lot of comments negative on stadia here,based on bias rather then actual experience. Stadia is nothing short of tech star even with its downsides compare to the rest of the market.

glenneroo 6y ago
I can't speak about Nvidia, but we just hosted a ~25 person LAN party at work and decided to go with Stadia... never again. Some people couldn't even make an account because they didn't have a credit card (even though we planned to mostly play free titles). Literally every game needed 20-40 minutes before we finally got everyone in - we never pinpointed the root cause, but a combination of restarting Chrome (emptying cache), relogging into Stadia, rebooting PCs and re-hosting a match, we managed to play a few titles. In a couple cases, we just gave up trying to get more than a handful of people in the game. Some people couldn't ever get their keyboard or mouse working in some titles (myself included, one game in particular was fine for awhile, then suddenly my mouse stopped registering in-game - rebooting and having the host restart the server didn't help - googling my issue says I'm not alone). Some of these titles I've played multiplayer via Steam without any of the related issues, granted Steam/Stadia is an apples/oranges comparison. At the end I suggested we try Armagetron. 2.7MB download and runs on Mac/Win/Linux/Potatoes. I started up a private server and we were running a 16-player game without any issues in literally 5 minutes.