There's been OnLive, GameFly Streaming, GeForce NOW, PlayStation Now, Shadow, GameCloud, starting in 2003, and none of them have really taken off. I could see PlayStation Now and an Xbox cloud based gaming platform slowly expand overtime, but I have 0 expectations from Google.
My buddy was in on the "google stream" beta, and he really liked it. He's not a gamer, but he decided to try it, and then couldn't stop talking about Assassin's Creed, and how smoothly it played. The only 'negative' was his data usage, which skyrocketed. Again, he wasn't much of a gamer, so most internet activity he typically had, was video streaming. This dwarfed it. Maybe Google was using extra data, to include info for debug purposes (doubtful)?
Basically, I'm not sure the infrastructure (in the US), is ready for this. Comcast always has periods of getting 'iffy' at my house, and they also currently have a 1TB data cap, which I almost reach monthly (I have two kids that game, in addition to myself). There are still large sections of the country, without decent internet speeds.
In the end, I'm impressed with what Google is offering (still waiting for pricing info), but I don't think the time is right. This may fail, simply by having a good product, introduced too early. Time will tell
An additional thought, it might be interesting if they make a Stalia app for the major consoles, so I can use my native controller. That may provide a good entry/intro for gamers (allowing them to still use the party systems). Gamers could still get their games from MS/Sony, if they want, but still have streaming options. It might be a reason for me to actually buy a switch too. That's the only thing they didn't demonstrate on stage (using a console).
Philip Oliver said "This a bold and exciting move by Google for the games industry. It will be very interesting to see how this pans out. The fact that it's so convenient (tiny friction to play awesome games and no updates) and doesn't require a large upfront investment by consumers makes this a revolution." 2019
Xbox Project
Scarlett details have just been announced and the details are on the table. It’s
good to finally know what we are aiming for with development specifications.
Scarlett Xbox specs Scarlett 8K gaming, Framerate -120fps Ray-Tracing, SSD GDDR6 RAM CPU based on AMD’s Zen 2 and Radeon RDNA architecture,
Also one talking head saying "8k" the other "up to 120fps" and some people put that together "up to 8k and 120 fps!". Iam pretty sure 8k was refering to media resolution. No way will they get 8k gaming started.
Also one talking head saying "8k" the other "up to 120fps" and some people put that together "up to 8k and 120 fps!". Iam pretty sure 8k was refering to media resolution. No way will they get 8k gaming started.
I will be more then happy with a 4K game running at 60fps any more then that is a bonus. Also fixing latency when you have more players will also be a huge improvement.
8k for gaming will not happen anytime soon At current GPU hardware progress of 30% gain per generation every 2 years With 4k 60 FPS being still a struggle for 10 TFLOPS GPUs such as a 1080 Ti, 8k requiring 400% as many pixels to be rendered and consoles clearly never using the latest GPUs, thats like 2030 at best
Probably that 8k/120fps/ray tracing wouldn't happen simultaneously. Probably you could play lowpoly indie games on 8k on 120fps, aaa games with one or two ray tracing features on 1080p on 30fps or some other combination of these. That would sound more realistic.
That just means it'll use HDMI 2.1 , which supports 4K at 120fps, or 8K at 60fps (Technically it also supports 10K though I'm not sure at what framerate). Raytracing tech is almost certainly going to be the biggest barrier to reaching higher resolutions/framerates in the coming generation, but games that forego that very well could pull it off (Some PC gamers are already running games like Rocket League at 8K).
Last I remember reading about cloud gaming were not technical limitations but rather commercial perspective. With consoles you are already get a hardware for a half of its real price and pay for it within game purchases. Now all the expensive gaming hardware + electricity + servers will be on Google side. It 's like render farms for movie rendering . I doubt it might be cheap enough to turn into mass market.
U4 struggles to support proper VR or multi camera rendering . How many gaming pc they are going to buy to provide such streaming .
Bet it would be like car sharing . Nobody is going to give up his/her own car in foreseeing future. It will be just a niche. At least till a special generation of super computers and game engines will appear allowing playing in parallel on same hardware
I see cloud streaming being great for demos and free trials of games before buying. Don't have to download anything, could really get people on impulse purchases.
Well Stadia is .. nothing.. there is not really anything there. Which brings the whole service thing to a new level. You buy games where you don't have access to the files and play on hardware you have no access to.
I guess for many people this is all they need (See the Amazon / Netflix crowd) So Sony and Microsoft will sooner or later jump on the same train but I guess currently the online access quality factor is still relevant enough that Stadia is not blowing them away right now - no matter how cheap the service will be.
But sooner or later big games will only sell (time) exclusive via streaming - as the new and perfect DRM solution.
Disclaimer: I'm not a fan or user of streaming (not video nor games) and most likely i'll never be
you still have to buy the games ontop of the subscription service. I really dont see the appeal here
Isn't the talk for the new PS5 & Scarlett being around £700? If so I can see the appeal as it will take a long time to equal the price. Definitely going to be interesting times ahead for the console market.
It's simple math: - assuming you answer the overall to-stream-or-not-to-stream question with 'yes' - and you already have a decent internet connection anyway
129 € for Stadia + 0 € for subscription (if you use the cost free none-pro model when it comes out) + ~60 € for a top tier game --------------------------------------------- ~200 € to get you going
Meh. I probably can't even use Stadia because while my connection has decent download speeds, the upload speeds are not much better then dialup. Even uploading a 30mb youtube video takes like 20-40 minutes. I guess its an ok offer for those with great internet connections though.
the difference between stadia and netflix is you dont have to pay extra for each title. Unless they change the current pricing model. I don't really see it becoming popular.
its really good that Stadia requires upfront payment
Establishing subscription models in games would be absolutely devastating to the Industry and would lead to a huge crash in revenue as upfront payment would essentially be thrown away (At mass adoption of course) and even games had to change drastically, as playtime would be the main measurement of value. Most Indie and AA studios would be crushed under a subscription norm. At start you could expect good upfront payment but that would slowly vanish at adoption of the platform and only subscription makers really profit in the end. Other Industries adopt subscription because people are not willing to spend upfront payment. In games they are still very willing, and it would be mental trying to change that.
Google Stadia & 5G phones - 'Google Stadia may be the first good use for 5G phones // it’s likely that Stadia will enable you to stream blockbuster games, which ordinarily would be exclusive to consoles or high-end PCs, on your smartphone or tablet.'
Is it just me that's finding the release very underwhelming or am I missing an amazing action plan. I would love to have a Stadia but I can not see any original content on the console.
I think Stadia desperately needs an original catalog of games. I don't understand why Google did not pay development costs for some exclusives and amazing ones at that, especially as it's Google we are talking about here who are not short of a penny or two. Exclusive's would have got me talking would have been games like Cyberpunk 2077, Gods and Monsters, Star Citizen, Golden Eye, Sky......anything, something that would have got people talking on social media.
Hats of to 'Tequila Works' for making Gylt I think you're the only original content on the new console from what I can see and its a great looking game.
Assassin’s Creed Odyssey
Attack on Titan: Final Battle 2
Destiny 2: The Collection (available in Stadia Pro)
Maybe the action plan is to bring new people to the market who don't normally have consoles/PC games and introduce them to the industry, some kind of slow burn market strategy. I would love to be a fly on the wall in Googles office, I guess time will tell. Review by C/NET https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wnneXKQFvwM
Here's
Digital Foundry's ray tracing expert Alex Battaglia with a complete breakdown
of the ray tracing effects and technologies we saw in the first reveal wave of
PlayStation 5 software. Gran Turismo 7, Ratchet and Clank: Rift Apart,
Pragmata, Stray and more.
Will there ever be a launch-event where we will see ground breaking new gameplay and not just more gpu-power?
What would you define as groundbreaking gameplay? Things like VR and AR, or something deeper than that?
People are pretty resistant to additional peripheral equipment (like VR headsets, wii-motes, etc), but I would love to see some innovation within existing hardware; the problem is, truly innovative gameplay is a big risk, and also, is just really hard to conceive of. Heck, people still call "Dear Esther" and games like it 'walking simulators', though they brought whole new levels of abstract narrative and artfulness to games that, before then, we just hadn't really seen.
Essentially: it's easier to make faster consoles and better engines than it is to truly innovate
Hi, I am not sure if this PS5 demo got posted anywhere, apologies if it has.
The graphics clearly has made a huge leap forward, now I want the artificial intelligence to match it. I want NPC's to play more like a generation leap in technology. Somehow to become less clunky, not so predictable and when you put the settings on hard I don't want the NPC to simply aim at my head with greater accuracy while at the same time they still do the predicable head popping from behind a rock. I want them to do the random crazy stuff humans do in multiplayer games, then when you play on an easier mode they act a little more "traditional".
Is there a data bank of A.I code anywhere, to help get a good starting point?
Do you think there needs to be more emphasis and celebration on this aspect of gaming? maybe an award for the game with the best "A.I" and the teams get showered in kudos, awards, notoriety, wonga and so on. Or am I just getting old
The whole "Games need better AI" statement is a basically a meme atp, but yea I'd like to see more realistic npc/enemy behavior too. Racing games especially could benefit as almost all of them still use rubber banding to let the game cheat its way to victory. Its disappointing that the industry still hasn't fully embraced procedural animation, as I think that's a big part of making game worlds more believable (recommend checking out Makan Gilani's work if anyone here's interested in that topic).
The whole "Games need better AI" statement is a basically a meme atp, but yea I'd like to see more realistic npc/enemy behavior too. Racing games especially could benefit as almost all of them still use rubber banding to let the game cheat its way to victory. Its disappointing that the industry still hasn't fully embraced procedural animation, as I think that's a big part of making game worlds more believable (recommend checking out Makan Gilani's work if anyone here's interested in that topic).
As we where talking about AI I thought I would post this.
Replies
Talk about spot on predictions with Google unveiling Stadia cloud gaming service at GDC 2019 😆
Basically, I'm not sure the infrastructure (in the US), is ready for this. Comcast always has periods of getting 'iffy' at my house, and they also currently have a 1TB data cap, which I almost reach monthly (I have two kids that game, in addition to myself). There are still large sections of the country, without decent internet speeds.
In the end, I'm impressed with what Google is offering (still waiting for pricing info), but I don't think the time is right. This may fail, simply by having a good product, introduced too early. Time will tell
Xbox Project Scarlett
Xbox Project Scarlett details have just been announced and the details are on the table. It’s good to finally know what we are aiming for with development specifications.
Scarlett Xbox specsScarlett 8K gaming,
Framerate -120fps
Ray-Tracing,
SSD
GDDR6 RAM
CPU based on AMD’s Zen 2 and Radeon RDNA architecture,
Any guesses on the name?
I will be more then happy with a 4K game running at 60fps any more then that is a bonus. Also fixing latency when you have more players will also be a huge improvement.
I wonder how much it will cost?
At current GPU hardware progress of 30% gain per generation every 2 years
With 4k 60 FPS being still a struggle for 10 TFLOPS GPUs such as a 1080 Ti, 8k requiring 400% as many pixels to be rendered and consoles clearly never using the latest GPUs, thats like 2030 at best
4K is still something we can't afford nowadays unless if you pay a kidney.
£119
I would love to be a fly on the wall in the Sony and Microsoft offices, I bet the statisticians are crunching numbers on overdrive today.
https://store.google.com/product/stadia_games
I guess for many people this is all they need (See the Amazon / Netflix crowd)
So Sony and Microsoft will sooner or later jump on the same train but I guess currently the online access quality factor is still relevant enough that Stadia is not blowing them away right now - no matter how cheap the service will be.
But sooner or later big games will only sell (time) exclusive via streaming - as the new and perfect DRM solution.
Disclaimer: I'm not a fan or user of streaming (not video nor games) and most likely i'll never be
Arnt there several diffrent options. Like a flatrate or buy single games + a lower subscription?
List of best-selling game consoles 2019
PlayStation 4
Sony
2013
100 million
Xbox One
Microsoft
2013
41 million
Nintendo Switch
Nintendo
2017
36.87 million
- assuming you answer the overall to-stream-or-not-to-stream question with 'yes'
- and you already have a decent internet connection anyway
129 € for Stadia
+ 0 € for subscription (if you use the cost free none-pro model when it comes out)
+ ~60 € for a top tier game
---------------------------------------------
~200 € to get you going
Don't think there is a cheaper way around atm.
Establishing subscription models in games would be absolutely devastating to the Industry and would lead to a huge crash in revenue as upfront payment would essentially be thrown away (At mass adoption of course) and even games had to change drastically, as playtime would be the main measurement of value. Most Indie and AA studios would be crushed under a subscription norm. At start you could expect good upfront payment but that would slowly vanish at adoption of the platform and only subscription makers really profit in the end. Other Industries adopt subscription because people are not willing to spend upfront payment. In games they are still very willing, and it would be mental trying to change that.
So thankfully subscription is not a thing.
'The Arrival Of 5G Will Unlock The Full Potential Of VR And AR'
By Sol Rogers, CEO Rewind
Interesting article - https://www.techradar.com/uk/news/google-stadia-may-be-the-first-good-use-for-5g-phones
Is it just me that's finding the release very underwhelming or am I missing an amazing action plan. I would love to have a Stadia but I can not see any original content on the console.
I think Stadia desperately needs an original catalog of games. I don't understand why Google did not pay development costs for some exclusives and amazing ones at that, especially as it's Google we are talking about here who are not short of a penny or two. Exclusive's would have got me talking would have been games like Cyberpunk 2077, Gods and Monsters, Star Citizen, Golden Eye, Sky......anything, something that would have got people talking on social media.
Hats of to 'Tequila Works' for making Gylt I think you're the only original content on the new console from what I can see and its a great looking game.
Maybe the action plan is to bring new people to the market who don't normally have consoles/PC games and introduce them to the industry, some kind of slow burn market strategy. I would love to be a fly on the wall in Googles office, I guess time will tell.
Review by C/NET
The PlayStation 5 Has Finally Been Revealed
https://www.unilad.co.uk/gaming/the-playstation-5-has-finally-been-revealed/?fbclid=IwAR204GipszbNFb2WrwGi7xRO-DkuJ_Ac_EZF5la6ne09okNrK2x9ytVYrZg
Horizon Forbidden West
Marvel's Spider-Man: Miles Morales - Announcement Trailer | PS5
Ratchet & Clank: Rift Apart - Announcement Trailer | PS5
Here's Digital Foundry's ray tracing expert Alex Battaglia with a complete breakdown of the ray tracing effects and technologies we saw in the first reveal wave of PlayStation 5 software. Gran Turismo 7, Ratchet and Clank: Rift Apart, Pragmata, Stray and more.
Digital Foundry: - https://www.digitalfoundry.net
People are pretty resistant to additional peripheral equipment (like VR headsets, wii-motes, etc), but I would love to see some innovation within existing hardware; the problem is, truly innovative gameplay is a big risk, and also, is just really hard to conceive of. Heck, people still call "Dear Esther" and games like it 'walking simulators', though they brought whole new levels of abstract narrative and artfulness to games that, before then, we just hadn't really seen.
Essentially: it's easier to make faster consoles and better engines than it is to truly innovate
The graphics clearly has made a huge leap forward, now I want the artificial intelligence to match it. I want NPC's to play more like a generation leap in technology. Somehow to become less clunky, not so predictable and when you put the settings on hard I don't want the NPC to simply aim at my head with greater accuracy while at the same time they still do the predicable head popping from behind a rock. I want them to do the random crazy stuff humans do in multiplayer games, then when you play on an easier mode they act a little more "traditional".
Is there a data bank of A.I code anywhere, to help get a good starting point?
Do you think there needs to be more emphasis and celebration on this aspect of gaming? maybe an award for the game with the best "A.I" and the teams get showered in kudos, awards, notoriety, wonga and so on. Or am I just getting old
KFConsole, hey its 2020 after all?
As we where talking about AI I thought I would post this.Take-Two Registers A New Patent For Smarter NPCs
Article - https://80.lv/articles/take-two-registers-a-new-patent-for-smarter-npcs/?fbclid=IwAR1jopRX24oGIc9-jARYmDaHo1NAO_BmQCHXdGLPUTrC9JHVgJhH2hGqAQU
Tensorflow - An end-to-end open source machine learning platform
https://www.tensorflow.org/
Quite an interesting read.
Article - https://www.theguardian.com/games/2021/feb/03/amazon-google-and-why-you-cant-just-invent-a-blockbusting-games-developer?CMP=Share_iOSApp_Other&fbclid=IwAR2pNOLBx_hDE47cjLgZpH5__TlIrg4sZkdeFbmSKwbmYB8Wbo94Bra0QDk