6 ms·
More than likely it they used some kind of proprietary communication stack for latency reasons or some such. Other reasons may include: - not having to deal w
by DistractionRect 4y ago
More than likely it they used some kind of proprietary communication stack for latency reasons or some such.
Other reasons may include:
- not having to deal with supporting other controllers on stadia
- not having to support their controller on other platforms
Not that it's defunct, they don't really have to deal with support aspect of things, and this is just a good will gesture so the controllers aren't paperweights.
- Hamuko 4y ago>some kind of proprietary communication stack for latency reasons It was in fact directly using Wi-Fi because of latency.
- LarryMullins 4y agoKnowing that latency was such a problem that they had to take extreme measures like this to save even the tiniest bit of latency really should have been the end of this project.
- izacus 4y agoOr you know, they could just avoid a whole class of compatibility issues due to not having to connect to a local device (which could be any of the mobile phones, Chromecasts, Android tvs or PCs with any of the four major OSes). But sure, tell us more with your expertise.
- pythonaut_16 4y ago"Having engineering problems to solve is proof that you shouldn't try to do anything." Why can't we just appreciate a creative solution to a problem?
- 8note 4y agoIt's the most straightforward solution to the problem, too. Your local machine doesn't need to know the input for stadia to work, so why redirect it there?
- VectorLock 4y agoAlso seems like a benefit for being able to use "any" screen to game on. The screen doesn't need to know how Stadia works or interface with the game controller, it just needs to receive video and display it.
- LarryMullins 4y ago> "Having engineering problems to solve Stadia had a fundamental physics problem, not an engineering problem. Their "solution" is little more than a bandaid that highlights the fact that the problem exists.
- iknowstuff 4y agoBetween USB polling rates, Bluetooth latency and OS processing, it's no wonder they wanted to avoid that entire stack and connected straight to Stadia. It's not a band-aid, those things together can easily result in 20ms of latency, which is an order of magnitude more than the latency of a fiber connection to Stadia servers.
- enneff 4y agoWhat fundamental physics problem? Plenty of gamers, even competitive FPS players, found Stadia quite a good experience from a technical standpoint. Best in class, as far as streaming game services go.
- justapassenger 4y agoSince when Wi-Fi is an extreme measure?
- LarryMullins 4y agoWhat's extreme is having to connect a peripheral directly to the internet because you need to eke out every last millisecond of latency. The fact that they felt this was necessary is directly related to the reason it failed; because the whole system was inherently susceptible to latency unless you lived very near to one of their data-centers. The product failed mostly for this reason. Everybody responding to me is acting like it was an obvious solution to the problem, but it wasn't a solution to the problem at all. It was an absurd bandaid placed over a gaping wound.
- enneff 4y ago> The product failed mostly for this reason. Citation needed. That doesn’t seem to be the case as far as I know. GeForce Now does the same thing and they’re making money.
- deleted 4y ago[deleted]
- justapassenger 4y agoI don’t know why this Bluetooth thing triggers you so much. Only you seem to think that Google spent all of their engineering and marketing towards that one feature. It added few ms latency to a product that requires low latency. It was easy to avoid it (having controllers talk Wi-Fi on top of Bluetooth is hardly a rocket science). It was likely one of many small projects to improve it.
- mmcnl 4y agoThe technology was actually never the problem. It worked great.
- Rebelgecko 4y agoI guess optimization really is the root of all evil
- lokar 4y agoIt worked well for me, very few issues
- ccouzens 4y agoI don't think it was your other reasons. You could use other controllers on stadia- they even made it a selling point that the only thing you had to buy was the game. And when connected via USB stadia controllers worked fine with Steam games (at least on Linux). Another possible reason is that it wasn't seen as a high enough priority compared to other things they wanted to do.
- water-your-self 4y ago>proprietary communication stack for latency reasons. How would it being proprietary reduce latency? That mostly sounds anticompetitive to me
- sudosysgen 4y agoThey connect directly to the Stadia servers over WiFi.
- aaronax 4y agoIn general, it would be because they can skip "things" that are required by a standard to support a wide variety of use cases, yet unnecessary for their specific use case. Skipped steps plausibly leads to higher performance.
- ethbr0 4y agoAnd specifically because they can skip entire components. Controller -> Stadia device -> router -> Stadia is a helluva lot slower than Controller -> router -> Stadia And also drastically simplified the "Stadia runs on all kinds of devices" requirements. It seems like a smart architectural decision.
- Nullabillity 4y agoOn the other hand, you're now stuck on wi-fi even when the client device is wired. And you've made the setup process a lot more complicated.
- ethbr0 4y agoYeah, but for low bandwidth use cases I'd guess that direct wi-fi still offers lower latency over wired-to-hardware-wired-to-router. The data trip through unoptimized stacks on the hardware would really hurt. And optimizing a diversity of different hardware devices (some of which predate Stadia) sounds like a support nightmare.
- 4y ago