134
Stadia's death spiral, according to the Google employee in charge of mopping up after its murder (www.pcgamer.com)
submitted 1 year ago by geosoco@kbin.social to c/games@sh.itjust.works
73 comments fedilink hide all child comments

A statement from a Google employee, Dov Zimring, has been released as a part of the FTC vs Microsoft court case (via 9to5Google). Only minorly redacted, the statement gives us a run down of Google's position leading up to Stadia's closure and why, ultimately, Stadia was in a death spiral long before its actual demise.

"For Stadia to succeed, both consumers and publishers needed to find sufficient value in the Stadia platform. Stadia conducted user experience research on the reasons why gamers choose one platform over another. That research showed that the primary reasons why gamers choose a game platform are (1) content catalog (breadth and depth) and (2) network effects (where their friends play).

...

"However, Stadia never had access to the extensive library of games available on Xbox, PlayStation, and Steam. More importantly, these competing services offered a wider selection of AAA games than Stadia," Zimring says.

According to the statement, Google would also offer to pay some, or all, of the costs associated with porting a game to Stadia's Linux-based streaming platform to try and get more games on the platform. Still, in Google's eyes, this wasn't enough to compete with easier platforms to develop for, such as Nvidia's GeForce Now.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[-] ezchili@iusearchlinux.fyi 6 points 1 year ago

I always loved the "hardware running 24/7" e-waste part of it

I owned a ps4 that I must have played 60 hours on for spiderman and horizon and now it's never going to be used anymore

Would've loved a streaming platform that doesn't cost a whole console in a year in subscription fees + makes you pay for the games

[-] Chozo@kbin.social 4 points 1 year ago

Would’ve loved a streaming platform that doesn’t cost a whole console in a year in subscription fees + makes you pay for the games

Stadia's subscription service wouldn't have cost more than a console for several years. It was only $10/month, and also not required to play the games or use multiplayer.

It would've taken over 4 years for Stadia Pro's subscription costs to reach the price of a PS5, not even including a PS+ subscription. And during that time, you'd have been able to claim ~150 free games. Realistically, Stadia had the potential to be more economic than buying a console.

[-] vaultdweller013@sh.itjust.works 1 points 1 year ago

I wouldnt call a PS4 e-waste, if the PS2 is anything to go by it will end up cycling about for a long time in some shape or form. Seriously PS2 parts are a solid mix of old new stock, newly manufactured parts, or spares taken from scrapped dead consoles.

[-] EnglishMobster@lemmy.world 3 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

PS2 was before the days of internet-based games.

Now a lot of games expect an Internet connection and a store to download things from. When those are gone, the PS4 will be scrap.

[-] vaultdweller013@sh.itjust.works 2 points 1 year ago

Eh, I will still be able to play the base game of say far cry 4 or assassins creed black flag. I have the disks, and even then you could always buy the versions that have all the dlc. Nobody talks about the fable 1 dlc but they existed.

Unless its a multiplayer focused game there will always be games to play on it, even if ya dont get the DLC.

[-] ezchili@iusearchlinux.fyi 0 points 1 year ago

Even for ps2 I don't know what percentage of it ends up seeing some regular use

It's a narrow long tail

[-] vaultdweller013@sh.itjust.works 3 points 1 year ago

Regular use is irrelevant so long as it doesnt end up in a land fill, what matters is that they get some continued use and survive in solid enough numbers.

[-] llii@feddit.de 0 points 1 year ago

But you don't need PS+ for Spider-Man and Horizon? And you could buy and sell the console + games after playing the two games you wanted to play on the platform.

It's not as convenient as just streaming the games, but it is possible.

[-] ezchili@iusearchlinux.fyi 1 points 1 year ago

I don't know what ps+ is so I'd say no

Maybe for multiplayer

this post was submitted on 19 Sep 2023
134 points (98.6% liked)

Games

16645 readers
910 users here now

Video game news oriented community. No NanoUFO is not a bot :)

Posts.

  1. News oriented content (general reviews, previews or retrospectives allowed).
  2. Broad discussion posts (preferably not only about a specific game).
  3. No humor/memes etc..
  4. No affiliate links
  5. No advertising.
  6. No clickbait, editorialized, sensational titles. State the game in question in the title. No all caps.
  7. No self promotion.
  8. No duplicate posts, newer post will be deleted unless there is more discussion in one of the posts.
  9. No politics.

Comments.

  1. No personal attacks.
  2. Obey instance rules.
  3. No low effort comments(one or two words, emoji etc..)
  4. Please use spoiler tags for spoilers.

My goal is just to have a community where people can go and see what new game news is out for the day and comment on it.

Other communities:

Beehaw.org gaming

Lemmy.ml gaming

lemmy.ca pcgaming

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
nanoUFO@sh.itjust.works