Is this going to kill steam?

U$10,00 but you still have to buy some games(probably all the newest releases, so you're effectivelly paying for the right to play older games for free)
U$70,00 for a worse version of the XBONE controller, which they could have sold at a loss to stabilish a huge install base.
Google has so much money that it could have gone for an extremely aggressive strategy to shake up the market, but they went for a conservative approach that makes their product look just ok.

>is it going to corner the market by automatically excluding a huge portion of people who dont have access to proper internet speeds
I think you're retarded

OnLive 2.0

>Google has so much money that it could have gone for an extremely aggressive strategy

Doesn't make business sense. The likelihood that Google would recoup their investment in an extremely aggressive strategy is low in the ultra competitive gaming market. If you're going to be stupid with investor's money, might as well just return it to the investors in the first place.

what kind of person thinks streaming is okay for gaming? just buy a fucking console you thick cunt, even in your favourite movie games latency will be annoying

>Stadia
>cloud based gaming
>literally a worsen versions of the "Game as a service"

>"Is this going to kill steam?"
Thanks OP, I needed to laugh

Attached: spiderman mocking 33e.jpg (600x448, 38K)

this desu, most of western europe/USA has shit internet and they're pretty much the only market where stadia would have a chance

>60 fps gamimg
kek

The same people who bought the Ouya are the ones buying this shit

Attached: 1547650327186.gif (342x227, 1.97M)

>shit prices
>won't even mention what the latency will be like because they know it's going to be shit
>if your internet goes down you literally can no longer play any game via Stadia

"muh steam killer" "muh gaming market killer"

Stadia had the opportunity to be just a straight up awesome console, but they went the retard route that nobody wants right now.

>You honestly think that $10 a month is expensive
When you consider that it's an alternative to a game console, and that in the lifespan of a console generation you'll pay a total of $840 to play Stadia, a console that can't play the competition's exclusives and will have shit quality, yeah it's fucking expensive.
>assuming it's like netflix
Netflix's library is complete shit.

10 years ago I would have said "it's Google, so I'm sure they know how to make it work where others failed", but then they went and rolled around in their own shit in Louisville so now idk.

I don't play enough games to justify even $10

This. America's ISPs sell bandwidith in an "up to" fashion and take full advantage of it. I get about 1/10th the bandwidth I pay for during prime time, and naturally that's when most people would want to be playing.

People think multiplayer games are laggy as is. This is going to be leagues worse.

10 bucks a month while having to still buy games is a bad deal.

It's not the price.
It's not the library.
It's not even the download speeds.

It's that Americans and most other countries have data caps. Playing a game for a week will be 1TB of data.

We've been over this already. Input lag and latency will be annoying enough for countries with decent connection, not to mention places like Australia or New Zeland are out of the question as markets for this shit. You wanna check out how it will go? Turn on your TV, exit the game mode and try playing games - it will be like that.

There is also another problem - who is the target audience? People who can afford games? They already have current gen consoles or pcs and steam, why would this group care and risk money for a gimmick if they can invest in what they know?

The poor because the service is 10$? The poor will not be able to save up for the stadia in the first place so it's retarded idea.

Besides, how will dlcs work, will everything be available to one subscription? What about cosmetics?

Google is just trying to do it because they can. They have so much money they won't care if it will not work, but they like trying to expand. Like they expanded when they bought youtube and how they tried to expand into social media with google+

Attached: OnLive_Logo_sm.png (415x320, 37K)

Stadia is aimed at the lowest common denominator that just wants to play the latest CoD, Ass Creed, Fifa, or other AAA game with no fuss.
Guess where that market is mainly seen in the modern era.
Protip: It's not on PC.

>alternative to a game console
More like a high end PC, so you would save Money (in case you buy a completely new PC every seven years)

>It's that Americans and most other countries have data caps.

what the hell
is this really still a thing? Let alone in USA? I live in the third world and if I remember correctly data caps were removed by the internet providers around 2006.

>When you consider that it's an alternative to a game console, and that in the lifespan of a console generation you'll pay a total of $840 to play Stadia
now count how much you'll pay for the PS4+all $60 games+PSPlus

You're still paying $60 for new games in the goolag, my man.

yes, Ivan, it is still a thing

call me when google finds a way to ignore physics laws

This makes by far the most sense for online games with lots of players in a single match, particularly where you want lots of interaction and persistence. Stuff like Fortnite/PUBG and MMORPGs. With the same running locally on essentially one instance you basically eliminate desync and any limits on interactivity you have now.

Because phone companies do it. I think it's like $1 per GB over the limit or some shit. So if you're on a low 250GB plan, that's $750 extra if you're mindlessly gaming or leaving the game on pause.

Retards will get fucked hard.

Attached: 21103074-mmmain.jpg (620x465, 47K)

People like to own what they buy. Not even zoomers are cucked regarding this

see

wait, am I missing something? I thought we were talking about "ethernet" connections (or whatever you call it, I mean the internet that you get from a wall socket at home) is stadia running on the mobile connection?

Stadia is running on whatever you have. Many phone-obsessed youngins scoff at cable connections nowadays.

Phone charges for overage. Internet charges for overage.

If Microsoft didn't make those recent statements regarding Steam, maybe. But they did, guaranteeing Steam being the dominant superpower.

Google is going to kill it like everything else

If I'm willing to spend $1500 on a PC every 7 years (which is unnecessary to maintain Ultra) I'm not interesting in something you can't mod on, you have streaming quality drops outside of your control, streaming compression issues inherently, massive input and display lag, one game storefront and no pirating, etc. This thing is not for me.

>streaming
1st worlders will experience a few seconds of input lag. Mutts and other 3rd worlders won't even be able to stream the games in the first place due to their shit connection.

Attached: ayy.jpg (944x655, 109K)

>200ms latency
what do you think, shill?

Kek. I can't wait to see these calicucks fail miserably with this

>all $60 games
You're assuming you won't have to buy games with a Stadia. All streaming libraries turn to shit after their initial launch period, Netflix being a relevant example. Considering how they didn't go into what that library looks like other than "You get Destiny 2!!!" I don't know why you'd be assuming it'll be extensive.
>PSPlus
$350 over 7 years, which brings the PS5 total up to $850 (assuming the $500 console price is correct). So you save $10 on a Stadia.