4 ms·

Credit to Google, they didn't have to do this. Especially after issuing refunds for hardware already.

hbn 4y ago
It could also be a way of covering their asses. Big tech ends up in courts all the time these days, I wouldn't be surprised if creating a bunch of e-waste out of 1 to 3-year-old controllers would be brought up at some point
- sofixa 4y ago
  It's not e-waste because the controllers work over USB already.
myself248 4y ago
On the other hand, they made it a WebUSB process instead of a standalone firmware, so when they take this update server down, any further controllers found at a garage-sale or whatever can't be updated. A cookie for whoever's the first to snarf the firmware in-flight and whip up a standalone updater.
Ajedi32 4y ago
This is the most graceful shutdown of a Google product that I've seen in quite a while. Full, automatic refunds for game and hardware purchases, downloads for savegames, and software updates to remove hardware dependence on external servers before they shutdown. I can't think of much else they could have done to make things smoother for customers, short of not shutting it down at all of course. (And undoubtedly, the fact that they are killing yet another product is inescapable, and doesn't help their reputation for doing that.)
- sofixa 4y ago
  If only they had said beforehand that's going to be their shutdown process they probably wouldn't have had to shut it down..
  - ChildOfChaos 4y ago
    They did, they always said that they would refund the games if the service shut down, but i guess they didn't make it clear enough, marketing was horrible and onboarding / interface was awful. It's crazy how amazing the service was, but how terrible they handled everything else.
    - jefftk 4y ago
      > always said that they would refund the games if the service shut down Link? I remember lots of people asking about this at launch and I don't remember there being a public statement from Google.
    - AceJohnny2 4y ago
      It's amazing to see that, for how good Google is at software engineering, it's horrible at products & follow-through. Like, look at the ongoing train-wreck that is the messaging (Gtalk/Hangouts/Chat/RCS/...) strategy.
      - lima 4y ago
        They cleaned up the chat mess, at least. Only Chat and RCS ("Messages") now.
    - anonymousab 4y ago
      They were asked repeatedly, in several interviews starting from the day they announced it, and they always sidestepped the question entirely. At some points they even framed it as the customer or interviewer being afraid/not ready for the future and other patronising ways of saying "clearly we simply won't ever shut down" instead of answering the question.
    - crazygringo 4y ago
      Do you have a source for that, that they had said that from the start? This is the first I've heard of it.
    - ctvo 4y ago

hbn 4y ago

It could also be a way of covering their asses. Big tech ends up in courts all the time these days, I wouldn't be surprised if creating a bunch of e-waste out of 1 to 3-year-old controllers would be brought up at some point

sofixa 4y ago
It's not e-waste because the controllers work over USB already.

myself248 4y ago

On the other hand, they made it a WebUSB process instead of a standalone firmware, so when they take this update server down, any further controllers found at a garage-sale or whatever can't be updated. A cookie for whoever's the first to snarf the firmware in-flight and whip up a standalone updater.

Ajedi32 4y ago

This is the most graceful shutdown of a Google product that I've seen in quite a while. Full, automatic refunds for game and hardware purchases, downloads for savegames, and software updates to remove hardware dependence on external servers before they shutdown. I can't think of much else they could have done to make things smoother for customers, short of not shutting it down at all of course. (And undoubtedly, the fact that they are killing yet another product is inescapable, and doesn't help their reputation for doing that.)

sofixa 4y ago
If only they had said beforehand that's going to be their shutdown process they probably wouldn't have had to shut it down..
- ChildOfChaos 4y ago
  They did, they always said that they would refund the games if the service shut down, but i guess they didn't make it clear enough, marketing was horrible and onboarding / interface was awful. It's crazy how amazing the service was, but how terrible they handled everything else.
  - jefftk 4y ago
    > always said that they would refund the games if the service shut down Link? I remember lots of people asking about this at launch and I don't remember there being a public statement from Google.
  - AceJohnny2 4y ago
    It's amazing to see that, for how good Google is at software engineering, it's horrible at products & follow-through. Like, look at the ongoing train-wreck that is the messaging (Gtalk/Hangouts/Chat/RCS/...) strategy.
    - lima 4y ago
      They cleaned up the chat mess, at least. Only Chat and RCS ("Messages") now.
  - anonymousab 4y ago
    They were asked repeatedly, in several interviews starting from the day they announced it, and they always sidestepped the question entirely. At some points they even framed it as the customer or interviewer being afraid/not ready for the future and other patronising ways of saying "clearly we simply won't ever shut down" instead of answering the question.
  - crazygringo 4y ago
    Do you have a source for that, that they had said that from the start? This is the first I've heard of it.
  - ctvo 4y ago