Testing Google's New 'Stadia' Cloud Gaming Platform on a Mac

[GeneralChang]

The "gamers" you know most not have GPUs since 1080p is very CPU-dependent. "Newish" video cards from the last several years have no problems running current titles at 2K and 4K. Your comment about no advantages of 4K leads me to believe you've never gamed at 4K.

While I believe it's fairly common knowledge that there's no competitive advantage to 4K, it's definitely true that's hardly fully representative, and if you've got a 4K capable rig there's no reason you can't play Overwatch at 1080 (for, just, all the frames) and Metro Exodus at 4K (for those gorgeous visuals). So each has its place.

Though I do kinda feel like the statement that "1080p is very CPU-dependent" is only true if your GPU is massively out-stripping your CPU. Like, if you're running an R5 3600 with an RX 460, you'll be able to game 60fps at 1080p low-to-medium details all day long just fine, but if you want more frames the limiting factor there is 100% not the CPU.
[automerge]1574454635[/automerge]

eSports gamers use things like the Intel i9 9900K because they can get 150+ FPS with the CPU alone. FPS isn't one of the reasons they game at 1080p, it's the only reason. The GTX 1080 can play most games just fine at 4K and exceedingly well at 2K. 1080p barely even uses current GPUs and is a very CPU-dependent resolution. 2K as the current sweet spot for general gaming. 1080p is atrocious. Do you even game on PC?

Aaaand the statement that "1080p is atrocious" kinda makes me wonder if you've ever seen a half-way decent 1080p display.

 

[Bandaman]

While I believe it's fairly common knowledge that there's no competitive advantage to 4K, it's definitely true that's hardly fully representative, and if you've got a 4K capable rig there's no reason you can't play Overwatch at 1080 (for, just, all the frames) and Metro Exodus at 4K (for those gorgeous visuals). So each has its place.

If you're playing a competitive game in which FPS matters like Overwatch then yes, you'll be playing at lower resolution. That's already been established. Until GPUs can run 4K at 100+ FPS, it won't be a competitive resolution.

Though I do kinda feel like the statement that "1080p is very CPU-dependent" is only true if your GPU is massively out-stripping your CPU. Like, if you're running an R5 3600 with an RX 460, you'll be able to game 60fps at 1080p low-to-medium details all day long just fine, but if you want more frames the limiting factor there is 100% not the CPU.

It is unless your rig is a dinosaur.

Aaaand the statement that "1080p is atrocious" kinda makes me wonder if you've ever seen a half-way decent 1080p display.

I've seen and used many 1080p displays over the years ... they're just terrible in comparison to 2 and 4K.

 

[GeneralChang]

Uh, the gamers I know are ALL using cards like the Radeon 1060, 1070 or 1080 or recent nVidia equivalents.

I'll just leave this link here as a pretty recently written article about 1080 vs 4K gaming:

https://www.wepc.com/tips/1080p-vs-4k-gaming/

"Using a monitor with a 1080p resolution is still the standard for gaming these days. In fact, professional eSports gamers prefer gaming on a 1080p monitor.

When referencing the professional eSports scene, players are deciding to go for 1080p over 4K for several different reasons which vary from higher FPS, overall monitor size, and general feel. Large 4k monitors sound great, but in general, require more computational power and (as silly as it sounds) give your eyes more work to do. This isn't a problem when you're gaming on a hobby level, but when your a professional gamer, everything makes a difference."

While this is all true for competitive games, there is a huge glut of beautiful single-player games that you don't need the added performance of 300fps to play through perfectly well but which do benefit from big screens with high pixel-counts. 4k might be overkill, especially in terms of value, but if you've got the cash to get a good 4k display and the horses to drive it? It'll look stunning on stuff like Metro Exodus or Rise of the Tomb Raider, and that's definitely an advantage it has over 1080p.
[automerge]1574455019[/automerge]

It is unless your rig is a dinosaur.

I haven't personally tried a 1650, but my impression is that it's still only a good card for 1080p, maaaaybe 1440 if you're down with 60fps. And that's hardly a dinosaur. Pretty sure that if you were running an R5 3600 with a 1650, the limiting factor would still not be your CPU.

 

[forbegos34]

Stadia is utter rubbish imo, the sooner Google retires it the better. 4K @ 60fps my ass!!!

So you have it and you've tested it, right? Or are you just one of those people that hates everything?

 

[waquzy]

So you have it and you've tested it, right? Or are you just one of those people that hates everything?

No, but I’m one of those people who let respected gamers/reviewers test it out before I decide to buy it or not! And guess what? It turns out its rubbish, no offense

 

[neuropsychguy]

I personally give Google 18 months.

That's at least $180 they'd get out of you then.

There's no way this is getting cancelled that quickly. It's part of building their brand.

You are dreaming if you think google is gonna offer a free service without injecting their ads. Take a look at ALL Google services and it should be pretty clear what to anticipate.

You’re agreeing with me but not answering the question. I said there would likely be ads. I was asking if there was news about ads every 5 minutes or if that’s just (your) speculation.

 

[konqerror]

This problems are in the details though, most especially how fast you'll burn through your data caps.

I would like to see a comparison of data usage between Stadia and a console and a computer. The reason is that every week, there's easily 10-20 GB of game updates to be downloaded on a console or a computer, which are installed even for games you didn't play.
[automerge]1574460772[/automerge]

Also, there’s almost no mention of OnLive as comparison points with all the Stadia news related pieces, it almost feels like as if they haven’t existed and got erased from the internet.

I think the fundamental difference is the side effects. OnLive had to pay for their hardware. If you think about it, Google's idea is likely to make people buy GPUs for them. When people are at work or school in the daytime, Google has a ton of spare GPU capacity for AI/Machine learning tasks...

So even if the experience is sub-par they can sell it at a price that undercuts consoles and computer gaming. It's a core concept of the cloud: it's cheap because capacity is shared and oversubscribed.

 

[bchery21]

This all sounded great in theory. Rushed it so they got me first? If they can work out the kinks this'll be good for the casual gaming market.

 

[Coconut Bean]

It’s bizarre how Google is so well regarded when they have a tiny list of good products (all of which have competitors equal or superior to them), and then at least absolutely abysmal failures for each one of those successes.

I don’t think a streaming platform has to fail like this... multiplayer games work online despite ping times, so it seems like all that has to be done is crank up the bandwidth and stream rendered video + audio in addition to control input.

You mean like:
Google Search - market leading like the last 2 decades, owning so much EU wants to regulate it
YouTube - biggest video platform in the western world
Gmail - one of the most used email services
Chrome - most popular web browser
Android - most used mobile operating system
Gdrive/Gdocs - second most popular productivity application of this decade, only lately beaten by office 365
Google assistent (with home etc) - one or the two relevant household voice assistants
Gmaps - most used map worldwide

I think that's a pretty nice list of very successful products...

OnT:
I will have to see and try. For someone whose current gaming rig consists of a MacBook pro with a few years on the neck this will be interesting. I find it interesting, how no one seems to reflect on that most of these super negative reviews come from people who literally make money reviewing and recommending gaming stuff. It's the same people who make a big fuss about the MBP thermal throttling when running the newest games on 4k@max...

 

[Bandaman]

You mean like:
Google Search - market leading like the last 2 decades, owning so much EU wants to regulate it
YouTube - biggest video platform in the western world
Gmail - one of the most used email services
Chrome - most popular web browser
Android - most used mobile operating system
Gdrive/Gdocs - second most popular productivity application of this decade, only lately beaten by office 365
Google assistent (with home etc) - one or the two relevant household voice assistants
Gmaps - most used map worldwide

I think that's a pretty nice list of very successful products...

OnT:
I will have to see and try. For someone whose current gaming rig consists of a MacBook pro with a few years on the neck this will be interesting. I find it interesting, how no one seems to reflect on that most of these super negative reviews come from people who literally make money reviewing and recommending gaming stuff. It's the same people who make a big fuss about the MBP thermal throttling when running the newest games on 4k@max...

https://killedbygoogle.com/

 

[1098474]

You seemed to have a lot less issues than other people are having.

I got one, no issue no lag what so ever! My girlfriend and I are definitely enjoying it. I think when more games come up it will be killer
[automerge]1574525392[/automerge]

That comment is based on the cost of a game service. Two AAA titles on Stadia could cost up to $120, then you have to pay the $10/mo. There's an argument to be had there.

Only the pro version you pay, so if you just wanted the game on the regular version you don't pay, so your point is not valid

 

[eezing]

I have the founders edition. Three key points:

1. Consistent high quality 4K stream is achieved with Ethernet + better than average Internet. Aside from Samurai Showdown, lag is not noticeable. WiFi is absolutely not an option.

2. Game selection sucks. If Activision signs on, we’re all good.

3. Stream gaming is the future.

 

[szw-mapple fan]

To be fair, you're actually running the game software on Google's high end gaming systems. The $10/month is an alternative to spending $1500 on a gaming rig. Then the game which is running on google hardware is streamed through the service to view and control on your device at home. You're paying $10/month for compute time which is a bargain if the system works. For Macs in particular, there is no possible configuration of mac hardware that can run these games well. Streaming is the only solution.

Actually that is not true, as long as you're talking about titles that are available on Macs. If you set up a egpu you easily play AAA titles on high or ultra.

 

[Bandaman]

Actually that is not true, as long as you're talking about titles that are available on Macs. If you set up a egpu you easily AAA titles on high or ultra.

Exactly. You can hook up a Razer Core X to a 2080 Ti via Boot Camp and tear through any game you want.

 

[szw-mapple fan]

You mean like:
Google Search - market leading like the last 2 decades, owning so much EU wants to regulate it
YouTube - biggest video platform in the western world
Gmail - one of the most used email services
Chrome - most popular web browser
Android - most used mobile operating system
Gdrive/Gdocs - second most popular productivity application of this decade, only lately beaten by office 365
Google assistent (with home etc) - one or the two relevant household voice assistants
Gmaps - most used map worldwide

I think that's a pretty nice list of very successful products...

OnT:
I will have to see and try. For someone whose current gaming rig consists of a MacBook pro with a few years on the neck this will be interesting. I find it interesting, how no one seems to reflect on that most of these super negative reviews come from people who literally make money reviewing and recommending gaming stuff. It's the same people who make a big fuss about the MBP thermal throttling when running the newest games on 4k@max...

If you're only gaming on your Mac you might want to check out Nvidia GeForce Now. I've been using the service for free for the past 4 or 5 years and performs very well. Most major titles from the past 5 years or so are on the platform.

 

[ErikGrim]

That's at least $180 they'd get out of you then.

There's no way this is getting cancelled that quickly. It's part of building their brand.

https://killedbygoogle.com

 

[pankajdoharey]

It seems That whoever wins this game ends up winning Application streaming aswell. Which means no more heavy weight machines. You could edit your videos, Do Word processing and play games on the same,, not to mention Video streaming Netflix like streaming service. I wouldnt be surprised if Microsoft bundles games + Apps + TV Shows in one service. That would be a killer.

 

[HurtinMinorKey]

VR on Stadia is a non-starter because of latency, this will hurt in the long run. In the short run, the bit rates availble even over a good connection will mean quality degradation when trying to play traditional games at 4K and 60fps.

 

[Sarafay]

If Stadia worked as intended, it’s actually not a bad deal provided you are only interested in the games they’re offering and you have to have 4K 60FPS gaming.

A rig capable of handing that amount of pixels is going to cost around $2K (not including monitor/TV since you’d need that with Stadia too). Given the opportunity cost of that $2K, it would take over 20 years to break even on your purchase. And that’s not including the fact that you’re going to have to pay more every 3-5 years to keep up to date. So “renting” is better in this case.

That said, I can’t see many people only wanting to play games on Stadia, so the fact that most people are going to want something more reliable and also want to play a lot of free competitive games then it definitely doesn’t make sense. Steam sales and just the fact that there’s so many more ways to game on a PC tilts the equation in its favor as well. Also the fact that you don’t own the games or have the option to rent or resell physical copies hurts the situation as well. And finally, it’s just unreliable right now.

Just like AWS and Google Cloud have basically made it cheaper to outsource computing power rather than companies having to buy tons of physical servers, the same will eventually happen for gaming. There’s a lot of latency and general reliability problems to overcome first though.

AND you have to consider how much you have to pay for power consumption running 4k graphics on a pc system.

 

[Sokratesagogo]

We have a measly 35Mbps connection. My son most evenings is on his Switch playing Fortnite with YouTube streaming on his iPad to one side, and my wife watching her period dramas on YouTube on her iPad. Playing Destiny 2 on my 65" TV with Stadia was most enjoyable, with only an occasional glitch, and resolution looked fine to me. Samurai Shodown seemed to suffer more from glitches. Store prices are a little high for my taste, and not enough game selection at the moment.

However ... being able to play wherever you may be through a Chrome tab is fantastically useful. No installing client software (e.g.GeForce Now), which avoid us messing with GrandPa's computer when visiting.

If only the Stadia Library worked along the lines of GeForce Now i.e. Steam library integration.... I would pay for that!

 

[HarryWarden]

It’s bizarre how Google is so well regarded when they have a tiny list of good products (all of which have competitors equal or superior to them), and then at least absolutely abysmal failures for each one of those successes.

I don’t think a streaming platform has to fail like this... multiplayer games work online despite ping times, so it seems like all that has to be done is crank up the bandwidth and stream rendered video + audio in addition to control input.

Google's list of failures keeps growing. And couple that with their reputation for dropping support for stuff that doesn't sell to their expectations, you'd be nuts to get Stadia only for them to take away your access in a few years should they pull the plug on the project.

 

[ArtOfWarfare]

Google's list of failures keeps growing. And couple that with their reputation for dropping support for stuff that doesn't sell to their expectations, you'd be nuts to get Stadia only for them to take away your access in a few years should they pull the plug on the project.

Years? How long did it take them to pull the plug on Google Glass? I thought that was only a few months.

Edit: Just checked. Apparently it was in production for about 21 months from early 2013 to the end of 2014, then they resumed production in the middle of 2017 and have been producing it for the last 2.5 years exclusively for businesses. Interesting. I knew I heard about some companies that liked the prototypes, but I also knew consumers hated them - I heard Google stopped producing them at the end of 2014 and thought that was the end of that.

 

[Abazigal]

Google's list of failures keeps growing. And couple that with their reputation for dropping support for stuff that doesn't sell to their expectations, you'd be nuts to get Stadia only for them to take away your access in a few years should they pull the plug on the project.

Stadia is starting to feel more and more like the galaxy fold. Both companies evidently had this ultra cool piece of tech that they then tried to build a product around, rather than start with the desired end experience in mind and working backwards from there.

Suffice to say I won’t have much hopes for Google’s wearables push after acquiring Fitbit.

 

[mandoman]

I ended up returning my Stadia Founder’s Edition. Too much anxiety about going over my 1tb datacap.
I also don’t like the pricing model. This device needs to be a Gamepass Ultimate/Netflix like all content available to play style subscription service. You know, a model like every other frickin’ video and music streaming service offers.

The latency, while noticeable, was surprisingly better than expected. OK for casual but not competitive gaming. Video Quality was decent enough for me even at 720p, what I ended up playing at due to datacap and ensuring smooth gameplay. Controller is comfortable to use, but I didn’t like the ChromeCast.

Switch the subscription model and work out a cheap unlimited data addon with the major ISP’s, and maybe I will take another look. As it stands, this platform for me is a pass.