,
35 tweets,
9 min read
Read on Twitter
So far, Google's "Stadia" presentation appears to be dancing very wide of the "does it scale!" issue, and instead doing a victory lap around tech we already proved last decade with OnLive.
This already worked. This literally all already worked. Last decade. This was a known.
This already worked. This literally all already worked. Last decade. This was a known.
"The networking back-end is easier!" - yes, duh. That's part of the point.
"It's cross-platform" - gee, no shit?
Etc.
"It's cross-platform" - gee, no shit?
Etc.
"Imagine being able to produce easy replays" - oh come the beep on, now they're talking about ShadowPlay / always-on replays.
We have this. We've had this. PS4 had this as a launch feature.
We have this. We've had this. PS4 had this as a launch feature.
This is Google taking a victory lap with tech we already had, in a new hat, and a lot of money.
"Look at what we can do with existing tech, since we have a lot more money! THIS IS REVOLUTIONARY!"
"Look at what we can do with existing tech, since we have a lot more money! THIS IS REVOLUTIONARY!"
"Look, NEVER BEFORE SEEN FEATURE, your console can now open YouTube for you and find the top result of how to solve this puzzle"
You mean alt-tab.
That is alt-tab.
You mean alt-tab.
That is alt-tab.
I'm turning this off. Someone beep me if they announce something that isn't an existing standard feature but now in a new hat (that we can gouge access to, since we control the servers).
Credit where credit is due, though. This is an extremely power-grabby move akin to Microsoft's original attempt with Xbox One, BUT, they're doing a better job of selling it as a boon to consumers. Showin dem pretty graphics! Try not think too hard about what this biz model means!
and for that reason, it could legitimately kill consoles, at least. Ain't nobody gonna compete with those graphics. They can compete in terms of control precision, accessibility (this will likely work for shit in the boonies) etc, but none of those can be sold in a YouTube video.
This is the thing. Google is making the shrewd judgement that if they can blanket the internet with FANCY VIDEO, people will buy into it and abandon consoles.
But if it... like... just controls for shit when they get it, it'll be OnLive all over again.
But if it... like... just controls for shit when they get it, it'll be OnLive all over again.
My gut is that Google is operating under "we market this so hard it doesn't matter if it doesn't work in the boonies". That won't work, likely.
What DOES work is if they spend shitloads to blanket the earth in data-centers to make it work in the boonies - temporarily.
What DOES work is if they spend shitloads to blanket the earth in data-centers to make it work in the boonies - temporarily.
That strategy could legitimately destroy consoles and shift the over-ton window on what mobile gaming is or is allowed to be.
It does not, however, do much about PC Gaming. Which Google, understandably, doesn't give a shit about. So that's pretty interesting.
It does not, however, do much about PC Gaming. Which Google, understandably, doesn't give a shit about. So that's pretty interesting.
The major take-away is that the model literally only makes sense for mega-AAA. It is incredibly dumb to use tech like this if you aren't planning on 24/7 raytraced water droplets out of pipes everywhere.
Which is why indie likely just won't care. We're way below their target.
Which is why indie likely just won't care. We're way below their target.
So side-step from that conclusion, and you can start to mark out the markets that this tech will serve, and thus the markets whose customers are even remotely likely to be swayed.
Where are you standing? Look down. Figure out if you're in that blast zone. (I'm very much not)
Where are you standing? Look down. Figure out if you're in that blast zone. (I'm very much not)
Because this is the rub. The MAJOR beepin' rub. This isn't tech for indie games, and they'd be complete idiots to try and host it as anything but a short-lived PR stunt, unless it's indie by way of No Man's Sky absurdly scaled proc-gen or building stuff.
Every minute you have tech like this burning away rendering some nonsense like any of my games is time you're burning money. You need to be constantly earning income of the sort that only the high-end GTA V games earn. They aren't running? That means they aren't selling IAPs.
This is why I'm comfortable drawing a line in the sand, shrugging, and accepting if these take over, my studio dies.
I refuse to make the games that platforms like this require. If it comes to that, I'd rather fold the studio and work for someone else.
(it won't come to that)
I refuse to make the games that platforms like this require. If it comes to that, I'd rather fold the studio and work for someone else.
(it won't come to that)
Why not?
Because... frankly I'm still skeptical they can even begin to solve the scaling issues that will block them in the first place. Though if they do, it'll mean the whole world suddenly has actually-good-internet (yay!)
Because... frankly I'm still skeptical they can even begin to solve the scaling issues that will block them in the first place. Though if they do, it'll mean the whole world suddenly has actually-good-internet (yay!)
Please note:
If Google game to me with a bucket of money and said "hey we want a game!", I would happily make them a game. Sure, ok. New tech is neat to play with!
Just... for them to do that, it would have to be a PR stunt. Small indie games make no sense for them to support.
If Google game to me with a bucket of money and said "hey we want a game!", I would happily make them a game. Sure, ok. New tech is neat to play with!
Just... for them to do that, it would have to be a PR stunt. Small indie games make no sense for them to support.
Anyways, likely not worth thinking about, cus
Oh, right, and if you liked my blah blah, you can bing bong your dingy doos in this do-whoppa-diddly patreon.com/glassbottommeg
I am legitimately into the idea of Google Stadia becoming the rich-kid console, that the poors literally can't access because they don't live in an urban hub. And it just never expanding beyond that.
Lets bring the wealth gap into gaming! Literal graphics only the rich ever see!
Lets bring the wealth gap into gaming! Literal graphics only the rich ever see!
😎"Once, I visited my friend in SF and I got to see the Stadia"
😥"OH SHIT! Is it true there's a whole waterfall zone in Division 3?"
😎"No dude, that IS the starting zone. There are entire waterfalls we never even see"
😥"OH MAN"
😎"And the ladies all have like, 16 jiggly boobs"
😥"OH SHIT! Is it true there's a whole waterfall zone in Division 3?"
😎"No dude, that IS the starting zone. There are entire waterfalls we never even see"
😥"OH MAN"
😎"And the ladies all have like, 16 jiggly boobs"
They also marketed heavily toward Influencers, which I think means they're well aware of the limitations and are just being super shrewd.
Does it matter if 90% of gamers can't ever access a console, when the much-wider sphere of game-consumers never play games themselves at all?
Does it matter if 90% of gamers can't ever access a console, when the much-wider sphere of game-consumers never play games themselves at all?
BTW, it's gonna be Extremely Cool when in 1 year we're seeing THIS GAME COULDN'T POSSIBLY RUN BUT FOR THE POWER OF STADIA and then in 5 years that game just... releases, on a PC, in a totally normal fashion, because of course.
This deserves to be in the thread.
Newsweek:
We got 'em
We got 'em
Google Stadia: "requires a streaming rate of 15mbps, latency below 40ms, and data loss below 5%."
Everyone not living in a city core:
Everyone not living in a city core:
Oh, right, and to be clear, this is their MINIMUM spec. As in, if you have "only" 15mbps, latency below 40ms, and data loss below 5%, you can expect a sub-par low resolution, low FPS experience.
<cough> RIGHT, and we've got some bad news for all of you operating on wireless routers because you live in an apartment and reasonably don't want wires in all your hallways...
The saddest part of all of this will be that original games studio announcement. There's gonna be a thousand or so developers who end up making magnum opus-tier products that literally vanish inside a decade. Zero chance of emulation, due to how it works.
Imagine you made like an N-GAGE game, except instead of it being a kind of bad mobile game that did its best, it's like, "you could literally swim in the ocean and we did full fluid sim and we had full AI sim for 300,000 fish and-" - and never being able to show anyone ever again
Anyways, this isn't theoretical. They're already showing bad latency at their GDC displays, and this is absolute possible best-case, booth set up in the same dang city as their HQ, conditions.
At this point, someone is digging through the internet to find OnLive's best-case latency figures to compare. I'll throw them into the thread whenever someone does, heh.
I wanna say these compare favorably, but not like, drastically so.
(Remember, OnLive cheated at early shows)
I wanna say these compare favorably, but not like, drastically so.
(Remember, OnLive cheated at early shows)
and I just want to say, for the record, that
I CALLED THIS SHIT LAST WEEK
except it was in a gamedev Discord and god I wish I'd tweeted this so I could mic drop the shit out of it. Yea boy. Yeeee
I CALLED THIS SHIT LAST WEEK
except it was in a gamedev Discord and god I wish I'd tweeted this so I could mic drop the shit out of it. Yea boy. Yeeee
Boom.
Peace.
Peace.
