Google Stadia: The Countdown


In case you were wondering how long it would be until Google shuts down Stadia:


Comments (15)

15 responses to “Google Stadia: The Countdown”

  1. wolters

    That's funny. I have the "Founders Edition" sitting in front of me right now...plastic removed but I've not opened and used it. I am strongly considering sending it back...and main reason...I don't need another gaming platform...I'm firmly in XBOX and PC (Steam and GOG.)...I did try Stadia via Chrome and played Tomb Raider and I have to say it was excellent...used Keyboard and Mouse and it played impressively. But considering the $9.99 a month doesn't really get you anything, it isn't worth it.

    • Vladimir Carli

      In reply to wolters:

      today you pay for the opportunity to get a limited edition controller, be among the first to pick a name and try it out. Google should have said explicitly that this is some sort of "early access". I prefer the approach of paying for it instead of microsoft's approach of giving access to the beta on the basis of unknown and frankly suspicious criteria. However google has not been strightforward about it and many people today are disappointed. In the future, everything will depend on internet connectivity and availability of games. I was holding off on buying RDR2 and I immediately purchased it for stadia. The ability to play it on any laptop (including macs and chromebooks) + tv + gaming desktop is nice. It's a glimpse at the future. It's what microsoft promised with play anywhere but never really took off as the majority of AAA titles don't support it. Obviously today the 10 bucks a month look like a burden. When the time comes to fork out 800 dollars on a new graphics card or CPU+motherboard it will seem much more appealing. I opened the box and I'm very curious about how it will develop. We will all switch to the platform that has the titles we want. If there will be a way to stream your entire steam library, it will be a no-brainer for me to switch to it.

      • wolters

        In reply to Vladimir:

        Excellent points. And very positive outlook on it. You may have convinced me to hold on to my "Founders Edition."

        • Vladimir Carli

          In reply to wolters:

          well... you do pay 130 dollars for an incomplete early access experiment with hiccups. If you have to be upset about it, better to return it. If you accept it for what it is (and you have a great internet connection), it's nice. I wasted more money in the past on tech that revealed to be way worse than stadia

  2. Bdsrev

    it will be shut down in less than 5 years

  3. HirishoSenju

    This Stadia thing is cool. It hasn't been out long and I already was given 4 games. Now they are going to give me two more games, for a total of 6, soon.

  4. madthinus

    For all the trouble that people give Google, they have some solid cloud offerings. It is not as vast as that of the other two big players. If the tech works, and they offer it to other partners as a white box solution, then they have a shot at making this work. Their biggest issue is that you have to port to this platform, vs just running on X-cloud. I am also curious to see what Amazon is doing in this space. Their approach has been to enhance a game engine to run natively on their cloud and offering things in-engine that is only possible using a hyper scaler. So three very different approaches to the same problem. I am curious how nVidia did it. Another question is Steam? What are they doing? They seem to focus more on using your own hardware to provide the server. The other big cloud player that we never talk about is Baido. What are they building? My best guess is that some of these cloud providers will move into more specialised niches. The market is so huge, you don't have to be all things to all people and businesses starting to understand it too. They are picking their cloud solution for a specific problem, no longer thinking of a all in one solution at one provider.

    • jimchamplin

      In reply to madthinus:

      Nvidia runs on blades I believe. For games with their own launcher, that launcher runs first.

      For example, Steam and clients load, then you run your Steam or Blizzard game as you normally would.

      Seems because of that, it’s just running the games natively. In the end though it’s bandwidth, not the hardware that matters most.

  5. Lordbaal

    The're wrong. I'll say 750 days.

  6. Lordbaal

    $10 a month, + have to pay for the game. NO.

    With XCloud, you don't have to buy the games to play. It's just part of the monthly subscription.

    • Vladimir Carli

      In reply to Lordbaal:

      that's not necessarily an advantage, if the games you want to play are not included in the subscription. Waiting for Microsoft to clarify this matter but what they said until now it's not promising at all

  7. helix2301

    This is my issue I thought about getting Stadia but I am afraid its going to be a waist cause google going to just let it sit like google music. I hate be that guy but in this case I might just go with the XBox cause its a safe bet.

    • Vladimir Carli

      In reply to helix2301:

      The Stadia community is pretty active, just check their discord server and google, for now, is invested. If in a couple of years they close down the service and everyone loses access to the games they bought, their reputation would be really very badly damaged. I don' think it's going to happen.

      For now, Stadia works pretty well and they are giving two games for free every month, a bit like with the old xbox live subscription. If, as it seems, xcloud, will be limited to gamepass only, Stadia will be a serious competitor. Many people here see Gamepass as a big advantage but the gaming community sees it as a huge limitation. Nobody wants to be limited to the gamepass titles. Out of a hundred games, less than five are viable. Only a couple are AAA titles and they are even some sort of niche AAA titles (Forza Horizon, Sea of Thieves). Moreover, Stadia will have a free tier. Many users, especially in the young gamers target group, prefer to buy a game once instead of paying for a monthly subscription.

      The huge caveat in the whole story is connectivity. Of course this applies to every streaming service but until now, it has been a big problem. Many people just don't have the connectivity to use game streaming technologies. Even those who do (like myself) are limited to playing at home and that removes the entire portability promise. Until now, I tried Stadia in at least ten different locations and it never worked. If I can use it at home only, of course I prefer my own hardware. This may change with time when one needs to upgrade and connectivity becomes better. But it's a slooooow process. Upgrade cycles are becoming longer and longer, connectivity improvements over time are minimal. It could be a thing for ten years from now.

  8. jimchamplin

    I think that there’s a lot of people wringing their hands over this and it’s not really that big a deal. Everyone is really down on the spottiness of streaming quality with Stadia, but nobody is thinking about the last yard.


    I’ve been an Nvidia GeForce NOW tester for about six months now, and there’s one thing that any service like this needs more than anything else: Bandwidth.

    For 1980x1020 60Hz, it requires around 10GB per hour. That’s 10 GigaBYTES. When I use 5GHz WiFi, GeForce NOW warns me that my connection is “spotty.” And I’m in the same room as the router. I see the occasional dips in video quality, sometimes the input lag issues appear (but not often), and generally, the experience is mediocre at best. Even dropped to 720, it’s still not great.

    On Gigabit Ethernet, it’s a different story. 99% smooth, but I’ll still get the occasional stutter. No discernible change in video quality, and no discernible input lag.

    If Google is sending a 4K image - as they claim - the bandwidth will need to be adjusted accordingly. Remember that 1920x1080 was drinking 10 sweet GB an hour. If you’re trying to run this on WiFi, you will see issues.

    If you’ve tried it wirelessly and found it to be crap, try it with real networking. I’m sure you’ll have a much better experience. ?

    • Vladimir Carli

      In reply to jimchamplin:

      sure but what you describe is a gigantic problem that hinders the whole concept. If to make it work decently I need complex gear and setup, spotless connection and I can use it only at home, why should I not stick with my gaming PC or console?