Slashdot is powered by your submissions, so send in your scoop

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
×
Google Games

Google Stadia Promises More Than 120 Games in 2020, Including 10 Exclusives (theverge.com) 45

Posted by msmash from the for-what-it-is-worth dept.
Google said today that it's on track to bring more than 120 games to its cloud gaming service Stadia in 2020 and is planning to offer more than 10 Stadia-exclusive games for the first half of the year. From a report: That would be a pretty massive jump from the 26 games and one exclusive that are currently available, and all in a little more than a year after the service's launch, if those projections hold true. Previously, Google had only explicitly confirmed four games for 2020, so this news was much needed to let early adopters know there are a lot more games on the way. Google also announced other updates rolling out to Stadia over the next three months, including 4K gaming on the web, support for more Android phones (it's currently only available on Google's Pixels), wireless gameplay on the web through the Stadia controller (you currently have to plug in a cable), and "further [Google] Assistant functionality" when playing Stadia through a browser. We're asking Google for more details -- and we're particularly curious whether any of the new exclusive games are the kind that are only possible with the power of the cloud. The company said in October that it's building out a few first-party studios to eventually make that a reality.
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Google Stadia Promises More Than 120 Games in 2020, Including 10 Exclusives More

Google Stadia Promises More Than 120 Games in 2020, Including 10 Exclusives

Comments Filter:

  • And... (Score:5, Insightful)

    by The-Ixian ( 168184 ) on Thursday January 16, 2020 @05:12PM (#59627862)

    And they plan on phasing out the service in 2021, leaving all customers dumb enough to have purchased games on the service in the lurch... /s

  • no more exclusive games on any system but pc!

  • I wonder how many games are available on Steam, XBLive or PSN?

    • Re: (Score:1)

      by aliquis ( 678370 )

      They may have added 7500 some recent year / last / whatever. But it's hardly quality all through. But more of course.

      Then again the difference is PC gaming requires a PC preferably one good for gaming whereas this doesn't.

      • PC gaming requires a PC preferably one good for gaming

        Intel integrated graphics have been good enough for basic gaming since roughly 2012 when Ivy Bridge was released. Ivy Bridge could run Skyrim at acceptable resolution and frame rate, for instance. Modern AAA games require modern AAA solutions, but games for the current consoles (Xbox One and PlayStation 4) are designed to run on hardware comparable to AMD kit from 2013-2014 (Athlon 5150 and Radeon
        R7 265). AMD hardware since then has only become faster.

        Indie games are also PC-exclusive more often than AAA ga

    • Re: (Score:2)

      by Mashiki ( 184564 )

      There's 30k+ games on Steam now, everything from the most recent AAA to games from 40 years ago. As for Xbox and PSN? Around about 1k each.

  • It doesn't matter (Score:5, Insightful)

    by Dutch Gun ( 899105 ) on Thursday January 16, 2020 @05:19PM (#59627882)

    I don't care how many games they promise. This service is like the worst of all possible worlds: subscription fees AND purchasing individual games, plus bandwidth hogging, latency inducing streaming, all wrapped up in a cloud-based service that guarantees you'll have nothing to show for your "purchases" when it inevitably closes down in a few years. I'm still mind-boggled that anyone has actually signed up for this.

    • It is highly likely that customers have to purchase games at present because Google haven't been able to negotiate with game publishers. I expect in future it will be a subscription service with no purchase necessary. If not, then it will surely fail for the reasons you say.

      OnLive had the same hurdle, which they weren't able to overcome. Google obviously have a lot more clout when it comes to such negotiations.

      • Yep, that may have been the original plan. Streaming games on-demand makes sense as a rental model, like Netflix for gaming, in which it's clear you're just renting access. But I just can't see the attraction when you can buy and download the games and play them latency-free on a local console, free for as long as you own the hardware. And it's not as though Multi-GB-sized downloads are all that onerous with the bandwidth most folks have, so the only real attraction would presumably be not having to buy

        • Its the latency thats the biggest problem. Whats the point of having a 1ms gtg screen at 144hz when your input is lagged to a remote pc and your frames are lagged coming back. It has to be a worse experience unless you have a pc thats exactly good enough to do the streaming but not good enough to do the gfx locally.

          • Its the latency thats the biggest problem.

            Don't worry. Competitive player, professionnal streamer, e-sport player (basically anyone playing at a level where a 10ms lag is CRITICAL!!!!(*) ), and big videogame nerds (who just love big iron) are still going to buy and build big giant overpowered custom battle stations.

            Stadia isn't for that crowd.

            Stadia is for the crowd of Joe 6pack who won't even notice that a whole frame was skipped and just want to have a laugh at some game, without needing to fork out the money for high range gaming PC for AAA game

        • But I just can't see the attraction

          ...let me point the answer to you....

          when you can buy and download the games and play them latency-free on a local console, free for as long as you own the hardware.

          Yup that's it...

          so the only real attraction would presumably be not having to buy a console or gaming-spec PC.

          ...spot on.

          As modern Joe 6-pack's everyday computing platform (outside of work) shifts to mobile internet machine (smartphone and tablets), the existence of a gaming spec PC at home (or a non-work issued gaming-spec laptop where games can trivially be installed) is going to dwindle.
          Causal games on mobile are a thing, yes. AAA-titles a lot less common.

          The whole purpose of Stadia is playing AAA PC games without needing to buy and maintain said PC.
          Just like

    • Re: (Score:1)

      by AHuxley ( 892839 )
      Re "subscription fees AND purchasing individual games, plus bandwidth hogging, latency inducing streaming, all wrapped up in a cloud-based service"

      The top quality ads will make all that feel better.
    • XBOX is like the worst of all possible worlds: subscription fees AND purchasing individual games, plus you have to spend hundreds on a console every few years, all reliant on a cloud-based delivery service that guarantees you'll have nothing to show for your "purchases" when it inevitably closes down in a few years. I'm still mind-boggled that anyone has actually signed up for this.
  • Gamers get more lag, worse controls, and a worse experience in general with worse graphics, while developers get less money and less control. The only one who benefits is Google. Make no mistake, Google doesn't care about video games, gamers, or developers. They just want to take all their money. What we need are open platforms that allow anyone to sell their games directly to customers. Except we already have those, and Google isn't a part of it, so Google wants to destroy it.

    • Re: (Score:2)

      by dstyle5 ( 702493 )
      There is also the problem with Chromecasts overheating preventing you from playing. Good job Googles!!!!!! Unless they have somehow magically fixed that gong show. Google: "Please place your Chromecast in ice water when playing games with Stadia. Thanks, your good buddies and Google!" lolol

    • Re: (Score:1)

      by AHuxley ( 892839 )
      Rent the games, get ads and censorship for free.
    • I think they know Stadia will tank, but the long-term bet here is that they develop a platform that companies like EA and Ubisoft can license. They can sell the platform to those companies as cheaper than dedicated console development, with zero-piracy and usage based pricing. I would be shocked if they really think they can pull off their own branded service, but why not take the long-shot chance it works out, while letting a small group of customers pay to beta test..?

  • Terrible service (Score:5, Informative)

    by darkain ( 749283 ) on Thursday January 16, 2020 @05:39PM (#59627944) Homepage

    The service thus far is terrible. A friend brought his Stadia stuff over to test at my place. I have symmetrical gigabit fiber internet with ~3ms latency to Google's servers. Game response time was absolutely terrible (200+ ms input latency), and it would never let us actually play in 4k despite his pro account.

    nVidia's service an entire year ago that came free with the nVidia Shield by contrast, I was able to play Overwatch without issue. On top of that, nVidia's service gives you a basic Windows desktop with Steam and Battle.net access, so the library is literally thousands of games compared to next to nothing on Stadia.

    • Re: (Score:2)

      by Hodr ( 219920 )

      This seems odd, I have a modest internet connection (25mbit down, 8mbit up, my ping to the stadia server was around 25-30ms) and I ran the beta very well from my Chromecast of all things.

      Of course I was only running 1080p, not 4k. But it ran smooth and looked as good as the game did on my gaming rig with a GTX 980TI, which I was able to compare as they gave us a free copy after the beta was over.

      There were occasional hiccups when my AC would kick on (screen would get visual artifacting for 1-2 seconds), but

    • The biggest problem Stadia has is its reliance on WIFI. Since you have gigabit fiber you are almost guaranteed to live in a large metropolitian area. From my apt in NYC I can pick up over 20 AP's in 5Ghz band with none but mine on DFS channels. With a mix of 40 to 80mhz means that there is probably close to 100 devices sharing just 6 channels. Collision are inevitable and that introduces wield swings in latency. For latency sensitive services like Stadia that's a absolute killer

      • Re: (Score:2)

        by darkain ( 749283 )

        Absolutely true. In my particular case, my building was pre-wired with wifi routers in every unit and turned on. So there is a LOT of wireless congestion. However, I'm aware of this, and run everything hardlined ethernet (including my testing of Stadia). I'm in the Seattle area, which you would think would be one of the absolute best places to try Stadia, being home to the majority of the North American video game industry (and again, 3ms latency to Google's regional data centers!) But it just fell terribly

    • Re: (Score:2)

      by gweihir ( 88907 )

      That bad? The mind boggles.

  • Where all content is censored for wrongthink, and players are randomly banned from their accounts without warning for violating vague and ever changing "community guidelines" centered around "hate speech" du jour.

    No thanks. I'll stick to Steam, and anticipate the day when silicon valley wokescolds go broke.

    • Have you been telling Bernie Sanders suppoters to believe all women? Yeah evidently they're calling Elizabeth Warren a lying bitch for speaking out about Bernie's misogyny. Hit them hard and often with this one. The sight of far left activists telling you not to believe a woman's accusations is delicious. Why "Believe Women" Means Believing Women Without Exception [bustle.com]. "Let's be clear: If you choose to believe women, you choose to believe every woman. Even when it's uncomfortable. (Especially when it's uncomfo
      • The 'believe woman' argument always seemed completely bigoted against woman to me. As if a woman is somehow physically or mentally incapable of choosing to lie about a situation to gain a leg up in life. And even worse now we have situations where being classified as a victim can be used as a form of social currency in society.

    • Re: (Score:2)

      by gweihir ( 88907 )

      Indeed. Though I still wonder whether "I hate hate speech" is hate speech.

      • Indeed. Though I still wonder whether "I hate hate speech" is hate speech.

        Depends on who is saying it, and whether Google or Youtube is already looking for an excuse to ban them.

  • Now you can lose your ability to play games as well, if you misgender someone.

    • The parent might get modded as a troll, but it's the truth. Violate some obscure rule buried in some 300 page TOS, and your investment goes bye-bye, I'm (not) sorry, but I don't need another "king": to have to keep happy.

      • You know, that's why I stayed away from Google Plus, despite being attracted to the concept. It seemed counterproductive at the minimum and potentially dangerous to link social networking to the same ecosystem I relied upon. The discussions would have to be heavily internally monitored, from too many perspectives. Further, multiplayer gaming is not a place where identities can be safely shared with others, and I just don't trust Google to keep private information, private. Nor do I trust their ability or de
  • Now that game platforms (like PSN and Xbox Live) are really social platforms and given Google's record on those... how long will Stadia be around? I'm thinking somewhere between Google Wave or Google Buzz (1-year each) and Google Friend Connect (4-years). I doubt they'll give it as long as Google+ or Orkut, since Google+ was a major initiative and Orkut's timeline includes a number of years pre-acquistion. So maybe 2?

  • I don't get it, do exclusives really drive sales?

    Why I would care about a game that's only available on one platform, even if I wan't to play it real bad it will not justify purchase of a console or whatever stadia is.

    I still haven't played last of us and I really want to since apparently it's good, will I purchase ps4 for it? hell no, so why do they bother?

    • Re: (Score:2)

      by gweihir ( 88907 )

      It is more a combination of arrogance ("our game is so great that you _must_ have it, regardless of where you can get it") and stupidity. I have ignored Stadia, not only because I think the tech is not ready, but mainly because it is by Google. First, If I can prevent it, I will not feed that manifestation of evil. And second, I sometimes like to re-play games years later. Stadia will just be another failed Google service in a few years, if that.

  • So, 10 more games that will completely vanish from existence when google either cancel Stadia or decide those games aren't worth the harddrive space on the Stadia server?

  • Anyway all this "game streaming" trend is not a good idea for _many_ people : bandwidth, transfer limits, latency, ...

  • Sad reality is this project was dead before it launched, and the end results sadly reflected most peoples fears about the service. The harsh reality is internet infrastructure as a whole is not ready for something like this to provide a low latency game experience that you get with a direct connected console/computer.

  • Well, too bad for them, Stadia is a lemon.

Slashdot Top Deals

To thine own self be true. (If not that, at least make some money.)

Close