5 ms·

I mean it's super impressive but there is still a noticeable lag. I don't fully get the vision behind it. GPUs - even mobile ones - can power these kind of gra

I mean it's super impressive but there is still a noticeable lag. I don't fully get the vision behind it. GPUs - even mobile ones - can power these kind of graphics for comparable or less power consumption. And the future is even brighter with M1/M2 chips and progress in the like. But the lag issue to have server side rendered graphics will never be solved. As it's a physics constraint. Maybe for a new kind of massive multiplayer games made possible by having everyone on server side graphics? But it doesn't seem to be the way these services try to work on.

deleted 4y ago
[deleted]
daenz 4y ago
It seems like Google really underestimates the experience of lag. It's a deal breaker for many gamers. Yes, this is a super impressive demo, but having your screen glitch and lag frequently is infuriating enough to quit.
Shank 4y ago
> I don't fully get the vision behind it. GPUs - even mobile ones - can power these kind of graphics for comparable or less power consumption. And the future is even brighter with M1/M2 chips and progress in the like. From a cynical point-of-view, I actually kinda see the thinking. Aside from latency, this is actually a pretty good demo. If you look at games like gacha games and more recently Diablo Immortal as not video-games, but value extraction systems, getting it in the hands of as many people as possible is the thing you want. If you can deliver a compelling experience without needing the user to invest upfront in hardware, you can immediately start charging them and getting them in the funnel. Honestly, the chip shortage is a pretty compelling argument for Stadia, on its own. The catch is that Stadia didn't invest heavily in GPU power, so it doesn't deliver quite the compelling vision that's needed to compete with latest generation GPUs. If Stadia was the equivalent of a datacenter of 3090 Ti cards though, I think it would've actually done quite well when GPUs were extraordinarily expensive for people who just wanted to play a couple hours of games every week.
shadowgovt 4y ago
The latency is so low that a lot of gamers don't notice it, which is low enough.
solardev 4y ago
The latency is only really an issue for twitchy shooters and action games. For a lot of titles it's low enough to be entirely usable, and is often times LESS laggy than trying to play the same game on a low-end computer. Only high-end mobile GPUs can play recent AAA games. The average laptop still ships with integrated GPUs that don't really work very well, especially with hidpi resolutions that many now come with. Most computer users just aren't gamers, so it doesn't make sense to invest a dedicated GPU (especially when Xbox and Playstation offer similar graphics for MUCH cheaper). But Stadia, GeForce Now, etc., let you play on any web browser with a reasonably fast connection (10 Mbps? sometimes less), doesn't heat up your laptop or drain the battery, doesn't require semi-annual hardware upgrades, etc. M1 chips still can't really keep up with the latest games, especially at Retina resolutions. I tried many games and could not run most of them past 720p or so. Nevermind trying to play on a 4k or ultrawide screen. And on M1, you can't emulate Windows games and only precious few Mac titles were/will be ported to M1; the rest will be emulated through Rosetta. It's just a far more complex, and inferior, setup to a good streaming solution.

deleted 4y ago

[deleted]

daenz 4y ago

It seems like Google really underestimates the experience of lag. It's a deal breaker for many gamers. Yes, this is a super impressive demo, but having your screen glitch and lag frequently is infuriating enough to quit.

Shank 4y ago

> I don't fully get the vision behind it. GPUs - even mobile ones - can power these kind of graphics for comparable or less power consumption. And the future is even brighter with M1/M2 chips and progress in the like. From a cynical point-of-view, I actually kinda see the thinking. Aside from latency, this is actually a pretty good demo. If you look at games like gacha games and more recently Diablo Immortal as not video-games, but value extraction systems, getting it in the hands of as many people as possible is the thing you want. If you can deliver a compelling experience without needing the user to invest upfront in hardware, you can immediately start charging them and getting them in the funnel. Honestly, the chip shortage is a pretty compelling argument for Stadia, on its own. The catch is that Stadia didn't invest heavily in GPU power, so it doesn't deliver quite the compelling vision that's needed to compete with latest generation GPUs. If Stadia was the equivalent of a datacenter of 3090 Ti cards though, I think it would've actually done quite well when GPUs were extraordinarily expensive for people who just wanted to play a couple hours of games every week.

shadowgovt 4y ago

The latency is so low that a lot of gamers don't notice it, which is low enough.

solardev 4y ago

The latency is only really an issue for twitchy shooters and action games. For a lot of titles it's low enough to be entirely usable, and is often times LESS laggy than trying to play the same game on a low-end computer. Only high-end mobile GPUs can play recent AAA games. The average laptop still ships with integrated GPUs that don't really work very well, especially with hidpi resolutions that many now come with. Most computer users just aren't gamers, so it doesn't make sense to invest a dedicated GPU (especially when Xbox and Playstation offer similar graphics for MUCH cheaper). But Stadia, GeForce Now, etc., let you play on any web browser with a reasonably fast connection (10 Mbps? sometimes less), doesn't heat up your laptop or drain the battery, doesn't require semi-annual hardware upgrades, etc. M1 chips still can't really keep up with the latest games, especially at Retina resolutions. I tried many games and could not run most of them past 720p or so. Nevermind trying to play on a 4k or ultrawide screen. And on M1, you can't emulate Windows games and only precious few Mac titles were/will be ported to M1; the rest will be emulated through Rosetta. It's just a far more complex, and inferior, setup to a good streaming solution.