Making some big claims.
So yesterday, Google announced their game streaming service, Stadia, at GDC. And they’re making some big promises with it.
Right now, it delivers 1080p 60fps gameplay at 25mbs (with 4K expected at the same requirements soon), but they say that soon enough it’ll support 8K at 30mbs. It’ll run on any device with an internet connection, though TV’s will likely need a Chromecast. You can instantaneously switch devices on the fly, picking up right where you left off on another device. No installing, no patches, no wait time to play new games.
You can use any USB capable controller with PCs, laptops, and the like, but Google has their own controller as well. And it has buttons for both Google Assistant (used in the context of needing help with a game in a one screen solution) as well as a button for direct streaming of gameplay to YouTube. Moreover, their controller has the ability to connect directly to the data center you’re playing your game from to reduce input lag by some unstated amount.
They even tout a number of unusual features for the service. You can share a timestamped link that lets anyone play from a state in a game. There’s also the ability to view the game world from the viewpoints of your teammates in games. They also mention crowd play, where people can queue up to take over in a game after you die/lose/etc. The lattermost, of course, stressing the connectivity of content developers with their audience.
As for content, aside from Assassin’s Creed: Odyssey, one of the first games announced for the platform is Doom Eternal. Not to mention the fact that they’ve sent dev kits to over 100 studios. And they’re starting up their own i-house development studio, Stadia Games & Entertainment, headed up by Jade Raymond of Assassin’s Creed fame.
That said, there’s a lot left unanswered by their presentation, and it’ll remain that way until “the Summer”. Pricing, business model? Currently unknown. GDC typically is about the product, not the market.
And that’s not even mentioning the end-user experience, which is ALWAYS where this sort of thing gets hung up. That last mile is a doozy, and there’s never any consideration that infrastructure is the problem, not how whiz-bang your in-house tech is. And keep in mind, the US’s super spotty infrastructure isn’t the end of these worries. Places like Canada, for instance, may as well not even bother, due to just how much of the country is stuck with incredibly low data caps.
Speaking of, any time you’re playing things on such a service, you need an internet connection. It’s always on; this is literally what a number of developers have dreamed of for years. It’s absolute DRM, if you remember good old SimCity. Your rights, as a consumer, are basically nil. You own nothing but, perhaps, the license to play a game on a service. And if the service no longer provides that game, you own nothing.
And then there’s latency. They talk a good talk, but I’d be willing to bet that’s best-case stuff; controlled conditions. If the video below (around 11:30) is to be believed, in the wild, you won’t have it so good. They come up with latency of about 166ms; that may not sound like much, but out of your 60fps, that’s about 10 frames. In which case, I hope you’re not playing anything competitive.
I’ll be honest, unlike the majority of news outlets, I’m not optimistic about game streaming as a concept. Lord knows, none of them raise any of these issues; you’ll have to scroll down to the comments to see any of them brought up (assuming there even is a comment section). Sure, you’ve broken the barrier of hardware; unfortunately, you’ve replaced it with a barrier of internet service. One might be overcome by saving up money over time, the other, however is insurmountable if you have no reasonable options. I’ve been down on the concept since I heard about OnLive. That said, it’s still early days. So, Google: wow me. Prove that this is the future of gaming; something I’ve been hearing people say for a decade, and not once have I believed it.
About Author
