Fresh off the announcement, how will the other companies react to this? Which companies do you think will partner with google, which will make their own competing service, and which will just shrug it off?
Started by Legend, Mar 19, 2019, 09:10 PM
previous topic - next topic0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
VizionEck Cube Royale is releasing this year "I'm Mike Armbrust" -Me |
so i'm mostly read up on the stadia now. i know not much is really known right now but my current impression is this seems doomed to fail.I kinda agree that stadia will struggle in the beginning. They did not mention how players pay and they did not mention how devs pay. If every game is part of a subscription (so that they can spam play now buttons across the web) then they better make sure they have a strong library.
unless this is 100% ad revenue driven,.. i can't see they breaking though the "chicken and the egg" problem. the required internet speed is even higher than psnow asks for. as of right now even i (wealthy guy from big city chicago) don't have the required internet speed to access stadia. i have the option to upgrade but lots of america does not have that even as a possibility. regardless,.. i wouldn't subscribe to a gaming service with no games. a gaming service with no customers and a requirement to port to linux won't lots of "good" games.
the reason netflix succeeded, imo, was when they introduced streaming it was a "free" add on to their existing disc library service. that was clutch and a thing no other streaming service was able to replicate.
i still think streaming will be the future. i still think sony is currently in the best position just so long as psnow is better leveraged with the ps5. ms is the next best positioned company. google/amazon/ect are going to struggle.
VizionEck Cube Royale is releasing this year "I'm Mike Armbrust" -Me |
Imagine having an internet platform where all trailers of games live. It's so pervasive that your competitors rely upon it to stream their press conferences and upload their video game trailers. Imagine every time someone wants to get information about a video game, they need to use your search engine to find it too. Now imagine also being able to instantly sell such video games as simple hyperllink, without a storefront, without hardware, and without an install. It simply exists in your browser. The browser is the hardware. The browser is the storefront. The opportunities to undermine your competitors under such circumstances are virtually endless.[/size]
This is a huge issue and I'm surprised that no one has written about it yet. Every time you Google a multiplatform game, Google will get the first opportunity to sell it to you. Every time you see a trailer for a game, Google will have the first opportunity to sell it to you. Heck, if Nintendo/Microsoft/Sony uploads a trailer for a new game on YouTube, Google can run a YouTube advertisement that plays for 30 seconds PRIOR to the trailer for a similar game or potentially the SAME GAME with a "play now" link before you ever see the competitor's ad.
This platform is, very clearly, designed in a way to undermine fair competition in the video game industry. It's really shocking that no one is at least questioning its legality or the ethics that surround it.
I have not seen a single journalist raise this issue.... (hint hint)
EDIT: I'm seeig a lot of confusion about what antitrust behaviors are present here.
THE ISSUE IS OF VERTICAL INTEGRATION - a type of monopoly that is different from horizontal monopolies people are referencing. The concern is that vertical integration may allow a dominant firm in one market to leverage market power into another market in such a way that undermines otherwise would-be horizontal competitors.
So, in this instance, a search engine, video platform, and browser that controls the information you see about video games, that also exists to sell you video games. Merging the functionality of these separate applications can be considered to be a VERTICAL integration that undermines competition.
The basic premise is: If your in the business of delivering search results, you should not be allowed to deliver such results in a way that undermines competition of non-search competitors in favor of your own non-search related products. In this case, the non-search product is access to video games.
Here's a link:
https://academic.oup.com/jleo/article-abstract/33/4/653/3091191?redirectedFrom=PDF
VizionEck Cube Royale is releasing this year "I'm Mike Armbrust" -Me |
I think however that stadia could easily build momentum fast. Google is in a position to push the service through youtube, play store, chrome, and even google itself. Millions and millions of casual gamers are just "one click" away from trying it out. The barrier for entry is practically nonexistent.is it though? is it really?
Responding to what Kitler said about internet speeds. It's a bit surprising to see how bad the situation is in the USA. You would expect them to have much better internet speeds and plans.Not when you see the president's priorities
is it though? is it really?When did I ever state something to go against your post?
i, like much of my immediate friend, don't have a personal computer at home anymore. i have a tablet. i'm never going to play "doom" on a tablet with touch controls. getting a controller to pair with a tablet is not as of yet a streamlined thing. i really can't think of a more inconvenient way to get my games than via a internet browser or tablet.
...and i have this to back me up:
http://www.businessofapps.com/data/netflix-statistics/
Netflix viewing devices
Netflix might have revolutionised the way we watch television, but that doesn't mean that we no longer use televisions themselves. While the most popular device used to sign up to Netflix is a computer, followed by a phone, 70% of streams are viewed on televisions (though users tend to go through a period where they uses their computers as well). This is even the case following the introduction of downloading content to view offline in 2016.
70% of netflix viewing is on a tv (aka via a game console or other device).
if the point of "cloud" is to break down the barrier of entry then i'll counter your argument and say that for casuals the technical difficulty of pairing a controller to an amazon fire is a more difficult barrier to overcome then buying a dedicated game console. pc is just not in fashion anymore. tablets and phone don't have the controller layout for games like doom and assassin's creed they they have shown so far. tablet games aren't direct ports of console games,.. they are dumbed down alternative versions.
i don't see any "benefit" to me gaming via stadia instead of on a console. i only see hurdles and inconvenience. and mostly likely a non-existent set of what i think is core gaming features these days like party chat and even worse,.. most likely a sub par selection of games.
VizionEck Cube Royale is releasing this year "I'm Mike Armbrust" -Me |
VizionEck Cube Royale is releasing this year "I'm Mike Armbrust" -Me |
Xcloud datacenter map
Will update
The devs can customize the layout
Developers can also use custom icons for buttons
Example of custom icons/controls:
Click to expand...
Example UI:
Matchmake players using Xcloud/using same datacenter
Other:
-Xbox devkit/sdk updated for game streaming
-Controller layouts can swap depending on player actions
-controls can be hidden by developers at anytime (for cutscenes, etc.)
-Devs don't need to modify their code.
It begins:
Testing now and bringing it to developers soon
VizionEck Cube Royale is releasing this year "I'm Mike Armbrust" -Me |
Page created in 0.340 seconds with 22 queries.