Deleted

All I see when I look at Stadia is a bunch of bad UX decisions, Google not understanding what gamers actually want and shipping an unfinished product. All of this is in contrast to the recent launch of Steam's Remote Play Together which also got me to finally try out the amazing Remote Play Anywhere + Xbox and Sony preparing to heavily expand on their cloud gaming solutions in 2020 makes me feel like Google doesn't really have too much chance to stay competitive if they don't rethink and change the business model for their service really soon which is extremely unlikely from a marketing point of view.

I used the code, thank you! :D
I don't have much of an opinion on Stadia yet, really looking forward to trying it. I don't like that it doesn't allow stuff like mods, but it could be great for online games like Destiny 2 (which I've never played, is it good?)

I have not really read much about Stadia. But If I get this right.. you have to pay for the starter package, then pay a monthly fee, and then pay again for the games? (With exception to a free title every now and then) If it's like this... I say hell no! My wallet is not a toy.

I'm all for cloud gaming (especially since I'm using an 7-8 years old computer), and the internet in Sweden is top notch, but it has to be done right.
I've been testing out "GeForce NOW" a bit here and there.. and even though it's a beta with horrible user interface, at least it lets me use my own steam library. And actually being able to run Witcher 3 on Max settings with an old i5, gtx 670 potato toaster is kinda cool ^_^

OnLive service was the peak of cloud gaming. They ended that era by ending the project. To me , stadia is just a cheap attempt to revive the cloud gaming industry .

The capabilities it claims to have or will have in the future all seem cool to me, and for the sake of remote & cloud gaming I want it to succeed, but I'm as pessimistic as other critics because I'm just totally confused by who their target audience is.

Its primarily because of their subscription model not being more like a game pass. Every target audience I guess at just has me scratching my head...

• Maybe Stadia is for gamers who prefer who don't have much of a PC rig, little to no PC backlog, and no/old console hardware. That seems really niche though.

• They could be targeting casual or non-gamers, but I don't recall much of their launch titles really targeting them either.

• Stadia could targeted the multiplayer gaming crowd since there's huge potential for handling large numbers of players in the same game area, but those aren't fleshed out yet.

• If Stadia is meant for streamers, then YT game streaming has a long way to go in being comparable to Twitch's capabilities. Seamless joining of a multiplayer gaming session being streamed as well as streaming from outside the player perspective is cool, but that's not going to sell streamers.

• If its meant for enthusiast PC gamers, then why no game pass so that hardcore gamers don't have to shell out even more money than they already do on their PC. Maybe this is their target audience but the hope is that they have disposable income to at least try Stadia, and Google hopes it will be so enjoyable that enthusiasts will stay with it?

Well... I'm from Germany.
There's no way I could be able to do Cloud Gaming in the near future - the connection is just too bad in many parts of Germany.
All I wish for are retail-games that are fully present on a DVD again lmao

I think in theory Stadia is very promising. Presumably, as gamers, we already own hardware capable of playing games. However, in the next few years, when it''s time to start upgrading, you may decide not to spend those hundreds or even thousands of dollars. Also consider that next gen consoles are aiming to ship next holiday season, both PC and console gamers have the option of skipping out on buying new hardware and switching over to a cloud based gaming service.

As of right now, latency seems to be the major factor holding it back. I think it would have been smarter if Stadia launched with a lineup that was more lenient with higher latency, such as turn based games like Darkest Dungeon or X-Com. These games aren't going to suffer from 200ms latency like a FPS would. Also, games that benefit from the mobility of Stadia are good choices, games that you're going to want to keep playing even when you leave your house. For instance, I own Bloons TD6 on both Steam and my phone so that I can play on the go, and because both are linked to the same account, I keep my progression regardless of which platform I'm playing on. These kinds of games can benefit greatly from the freedom Stadia offers.

I'm personally waiting for the free version of Stadia to release, since I'll be sticking with 1080p gaming anyways. Hopefully by then, they'll have also ironed out their latency issues and improved their lineup of compatible games.

I haven't tried it yet but I think online games that don't necesarily need super precise input is what the service seems ideal for. However Google seems to be interested in taking the same approach as traditional online stores, and that's kinda dumb in my opinion, they'll never be able to compete with games running localy and charging more for the same titles is how you scare away potential customers.

Even if the tech part would work flawlessly, they still would have to improve a lot regarding prices before I'd consider them. If they'd combine their monthly sub with a fee to connect their account to Steam profiles, I'd be on board.

If it had taken the Netflix route I might have been interested, but as-is it just looks like a complete waste of money to me. The worst part about it is that the second they take the servers offline you will lose all of your purchased content since it's impossible to back it up.

Even if I wanted to get it, I only have something like 16mb download, and my upload speeds are roughly that of dialup (takes over half an hour to upload a 30mb video to youtube).

no
bloody
way
!

game streaming is the true peasantry.