General Gaming Stadia - Red Dead 2 runs at 1440p and 30 fps at X1X settings (Eurogamer) [Oh, and Google Stadia reviews are here]

[SaysWho?]

Where's my Stadia Prefix >:(

 

Quote

Our final game focus is the big one - Red Dead Redemption 2. Stadia is based on a Linux OS running the Vulkan graphics API, and we know from our recent PC testing that Rockstar supports both this and DirectX 12 with the latest iteration of the Rage engine. We also know that invoking the PC game's higher-end features comes at a cost, so the developer's choices here in how to use Stadia's power should be intriguing.

 

Again, the obvious takeaway from Stadia is that despite a 4K output from Chromecast Ultra, the game itself is rendering at a lower resolution. It took a bit of effort to figure out what's going on, but the evidence points to Red Dead Redemption 2 operating with an internal pixel-count of 1440p. Again, we'll be looking at the specific visual feature set of the Stadia port in future, but first impressions suggest a good level of similarity in terms of specific settings with the Xbox One X version. Meanwhile, the Stadia port of RDR2 also seems to be running at the same 30 frames per second frame-rate as well. It's Red Dead Redemption 2 in its entirety, it plays well, and even with the existing, very large latency built into the game, there are no issues whatsoever in progressing through the game via the streaming platform.

 

Stadia has a GPU that should be around 80% faster than X1X, yet it's running at 44% of the total pixel count with the same graphical settings and framerate.

 

One bright side I saw someone on Reset mention: On the plus side, if the service ever shuts down you'll lose access to it forever

[Paperclyp]

What a joke

[legend]

Less than console experience isn't exactly the experience they've been advertising.

[SaysWho?]

1 hour ago, legend said:

Less than console experience isn't exactly the experience they've been advertising.

 

 

[SaysWho?]

Reviews aren't too good overall, though there are some bright ones:

 

Vice: Stadia the Technology? Awesome. Stadia the Service? Not So Much

 

NY Times: Google Stadia Wants You to Replace Your Video Game Console. Don’t

 

Polygon: Stadia lands far from its potential

 

GameSpot: Too little, too soon

 

The Verge: The best of cloud gaming is still just a beta

 

The Guardian: The Stadia nailed the impossible, and then failed the possible. The single most important challenge facing Google – getting video game streaming on a par with local play – has been passed with flying colours. But on everything else, the company’s approach is baffling.

 

Engadget: Shockingly playable. And still potentially unstable.

 

Destructoid: You also have more monolithic, too-big-to-immediately fail entities entering the game, like Sony with its PlayStation Now service and Microsoft with Project xCloud; and now, Google with Stadia. Although Stadia is still really early (so early that several of its features aren't ready for the November Pro launch), it's one of the most promising experiments so far in this rollercoaster of a ride.

 

Eurogamer: The best game streaming yet, but far from ready

[Kal-El814]

That gif is brutal.

[legend]

1 hour ago, SaysWho? said:

 

 

 

Latency is easily the biggest concern I've had and that GIF looks like my worst fears being true. The only saving grace was that you get the most high-end rendered IQ. But if RDR2 is *worse* than what you get on console, then they're not even delivering on that promise. Which in turn means the services is (currently) a massive failure.

[SaysWho?]

Launch game pricing:

 

Stadia Launch Games Pricing
Assassin's Creed Odyssey - $59.99 $30.00 Stadia Pro Deal
Gylt - $29.99
Just Dance 2020 - $49.99
Kine - $19.99
Mortal Kombat 11 - $59.99 $41.99 Stadia Pro Deal
Red Dead Redemption 2 - Launch Edition - $59.99
Samurai Showdown - $59.99
Thumper - $19.99
Shadow of the Tomb Raider - $59.99
Rise of the Tomb Raider - $29.99
Tomb Raider 2013 - $19.99 $10.00 Stadia Pro Deal
Final Fantasy XV - $39.99 $29.99 Stadia Pro Deal

Special Editions:
Assassin's Creed Odyssey Stadia Ultimate Edition - $119.99 - $60.00 Stadia Pro Deal
Mortal Kombat 11 Premium Edition - $89.99 $62.99 Stadia Pro Deal
Red Dead Redemption 2 Special Edition - $79.99
Red Dead Redemption 2 Ultimate Edition - $99.99

 

 

I get the feeling that some will confused react this post.

[JPDunks4]

So if you have Stadia Pro you dont have access to the library? You buy the games separate?

 

Are there monthly free titles like XBL Gold or PS+?

[Mr.Vic20]

Its just launching and its already...over Stadia'd its welcome! 

[TwinIon]

It'll be interesting to see if Google stays the course on this. It's super hard to imagine them making any money from this at all while the service is still so limited and equally as expensive as the alternatives.

 

 

Best case scenario for Google is that in the next ~10 years streaming becomes the default (but not only) way to distribute games, and that they're the market leader in doing so, effectively putting them in a position to be the next Steam. Is that future really valuable enough to them to keep Stadia going for years while they figure it out? My best guess is no.

 

[Firewithin]

that gif lol

 

[Xbob42]

Man, I wish we could fast forward past all these baby steps and see where streaming as a whole will be in five years or so. The tech and internet in general (yes, internet has improved quite a bit since Netflix got big, although data caps were a big setback) have been steadily improving to where I'm pretty confident we can get to a fairly impressive compromise at some point, I mean people played on HDTVs with 200+ms latency during a generation where friggin rhythm games were all the rage, so customers aren't exactly demanding and exacting.

 

While it's fun to dunk on Stadia for being undercooked and oftentimes unimpressive, I'm not really interested in the details of this service or this launch anymore. I'm far more curious about when developers will start adding Netflix style apps to TVs and phones, with no dedicated hardware required except maybe a gamepad, and at that point will manufacturers start adding a generic gamepad with their TVs so you don't even have to buy that. Would add minimal weight, take up minimal space and add minimal cost while potentially raking in huge revenue.

 

A question I see a lot is "Who is Stadia for?" and that question makes sense, but I think misses the bigger picture that Google and other companies are asking, the one that REALLY matters: Who will Stadia be for in the future? 

 

And the answer is for anyone with a device that they do anything else on and decent internet. They're clearly wanting to reach the point where buying a big bulky box for several hundred dollars makes about as much sense as buying a big bulky sound system just to play music or a video player to watch movies. Not completely gone or anything, but an enthusiast hobby. While the masses can hear about a game, go to their game app and pay for it (like on demand video, I think Google is charging per game to get people used to the idea so they don't need to pull the band-aid off later, not everything can be Netflix, even Netflix isn't at this point) and be playing it in literally seconds, whether they're a dedicated gamer or not. No lengthy installs, confusing and expensive hardware, or even really generations to worry about. Of course, it brings in new issues, but since when has that not been true? And then you can still have the dedicated hardware if you want, or maybe even some sort of hybrid hardware that combines the two like Crackdown 3 kinda sorta vaguely alluded to, with something like local rendering of visuals for minimal latency with the server handling massive calculations that would bring a consumer CPU to its knees. I don't want to get too specific with ideas since I'm largely ignorant of the limitations of this kind of tech, but I see a possible future where this stuff can do amazing things we've never seen before that actually matter. Stadia and services like it are just the first large scale steps, I only hope we get a chance to see more steps before we push the toddler over for not walking fast enough, not to excuse a single one of the service's problems, just hoping people don't give up on the concept entirely as people try to solve some really significant technical hurdles.

[eggydoo]

1 hour ago, JPDunks4 said:

So if you have Stadia Pro you dont have access to the library? You buy the games separate?

If this is true, that is stupid AF.

[JPDunks4]

7 minutes ago, eggydoo said:

If this is true, that is stupid AF.

 

I dont remember from the initial announcment.  I think Stadia Pro allows you to play "4k 60fps", and regular Stadia limits you to 1080p.  I do think they promised a Free Games Library each month as well kind of like PS+ and XBL Gold, but obviously at launch that's pretty limited.  I could be wrong though.  

 

Edit - Yup

 

Stadia Pro - $9.99 a month.

Resolution: Up to 4K

Frame rate: 60 FPS

Sound: 5.1 surround sound

Buy games whenever you want: Yes

Additional free games released regularly: Yes, starting with Destiny 2: The Collection

Stadia Pro-exclusive discounts on select game purchases: Yes

 

Free Stadia - 

Resolution: Up to 1080p

Frame rate: 60 FPS

Sound: Stereo

Buy games whenever you want: Yes

Additional free games released regularly: No

Stadia Pro-exclusive discounts on select game purchases: No

[Keyser_Soze]

Latency on top of the RDR2 input lag should be a fun time.

[Ghost_MH]

4 hours ago, TwinIon said:

It'll be interesting to see if Google stays the course on this. It's super hard to imagine them making any money from this at all while the service is still so limited and equally as expensive as the alternatives.

 

 

Best case scenario for Google is that in the next ~10 years streaming becomes the default (but not only) way to distribute games, and that they're the market leader in doing so, effectively putting them in a position to be the next Steam. Is that future really valuable enough to them to keep Stadia going for years while they figure it out? My best guess is no.

 

 

I don't even know if games is what Google is really thinking about. If they can get gaming down right there's a LOT they can do with a server farm that can handle top notch IQ and low latency 3D rendering.

 

I'm just imaging a world where 3D rendering tools like Maya and Blender become services you can run in a browser with no CPU or GPU hit to your local computer. If tools like that end up working there is, literally, nothing you couldn't do on a low power3d Chromebook that you currently can only do on a high end workstation.

[Dre801]

DOA.

[legend]

16 hours ago, Mr.Vic20 said:

Its just launching and its already...over Stadia'd its welcome! 

 

This is a 5/5 dad joke and I'd like to subscribe to your newsletter.

 

15 hours ago, Xbob42 said:

Man, I wish we could fast forward past all these baby steps and see where streaming as a whole will be in five years or so. The tech and internet in general (yes, internet has improved quite a bit since Netflix got big, although data caps were a big setback) have been steadily improving to where I'm pretty confident we can get to a fairly impressive compromise at some point, I mean people played on HDTVs with 200+ms latency during a generation where friggin rhythm games were all the rage, so customers aren't exactly demanding and exacting.

 

While the mean latency is far from ideal, it's the latency variance and length of the tails that's the big problem. The very long delay that only happens half a percent of a time will still largely ruin the game. Their biggest priority should be to tighten up the variance a lot. It will be interesting to see if we can better engineer the internet and server placement to facilitate that. It's a big challenge.

 

 

Another worry I have though is how this interacts with VR. Latency is still a major issue with VR with hardwired connections, and the extent to which VR becomes a significant chunk of our experience make for an odd interaction between these two technology vectors. I think the only way forward for streaming VR is if someone comes up with a hybrid rendering system where it's possible to relax the rendering on the headset while still having it do some of the basic rendering within small transformations of the camera. Not sure how feasible that is though. Seems like a nightmare to engineer.

 

 

[Keyser_Soze]

 

[Pikachu]

 

[Keyser_Soze]

Just like the GB video above, "It's here to stadia"

[TwinIon]

13 hours ago, Ghost_MH said:

I don't even know if games is what Google is really thinking about. If they can get gaming down right there's a LOT they can do with a server farm that can handle top notch IQ and low latency 3D rendering.

 

I'm just imaging a world where 3D rendering tools like Maya and Blender become services you can run in a browser with no CPU or GPU hit to your local computer. If tools like that end up working there is, literally, nothing you couldn't do on a low power3d Chromebook that you currently can only do on a high end workstation.

That's an obvious conclusion that I hadn't come to. Games are a great test case for high demand computing in a market that might be more forgiving. (In that if your $60 game doesn't work perfectly, you're annoyed, but if a company's $5k productivity software isn't working, it's a whole different issue.)

 

If Google is using this as a trojan horse to deliver application layer cloud computing, they might be willing to fund it longer than the revenue from games might support.

[XxEvil AshxX]

14 hours ago, Ghost_MH said:

 

I don't even know if games is what Google is really thinking about. If they can get gaming down right there's a LOT they can do with a server farm that can handle top notch IQ and low latency 3D rendering.

 

I'm just imaging a world where 3D rendering tools like Maya and Blender become services you can run in a browser with no CPU or GPU hit to your local computer. If tools like that end up working there is, literally, nothing you couldn't do on a low power3d Chromebook that you currently can only do on a high end workstation.

 

This is already a thing though. I mean, most companies do it via remote desktop into their own private servers, but MS has been offering services like this for a while. The only benefit would be for individuals, but even then, the cost of something like that would probably rival that of just building your own rig. Even 3D Studio MAX and Adobe utilize monthly subs now.

[SaysWho?]

 

[Ghost_MH]

1 hour ago, XxEvil AshxX said:

This is already a thing though. I mean, most companies do it via remote desktop into their own private servers, but MS has been offering services like this for a while. The only benefit would be for individuals, but even then, the cost of something like that would probably rival that of just building your own rig. Even 3D Studio MAX and Adobe utilize monthly subs now.

 

Those are monthly subscriptions for software you still have to run locally. You don't want to do 3D modeling on a remote desktop instance unless you like pissing off your artists and engineers. Most of that work is still done on high end workstations from Apple or the like. The entire Quadro line of graphics cards exists for this space. Even then, it's still a large upfront investment. I'm more thinking about a world where smaller studios can subscribe to some cloud-based tool like this one for literally no upfront cost since all the software you need would run just as well on anything with a functional browser or even just a dongle plugged into you monitor.

 

We're still a long way from there, but I have to imagine this is where Google is thinking of Stadia going.

[XxEvil AshxX]

1 hour ago, SaysWho? said:

 

 

I just got accepted into the XCloud beta.. I'm playing Forza Horizon 4 right now, and when I logged in it synced my play status immediately... 

 

Some things to note:

My bandwidth is 1Gb but my wifi is significantly slower.

My phone I'm playing on is an unlocked Moto G6.

FH4 seemed to load faster on xCloud than it does on my X.

Latency is definitely there, audio is choppy at times, but the picture looks good and I was able to do an event where I couldn't wreck the car and completed it without much trouble; the damage I did do was my own fault and not because of lag/input latency.

 

I did play a little bit of Soul Calibur VI and it also played really well, but it was my first time playing it so I have no basis for comparison with local play.

 

From what I can gather, MS's beta is already better than Stadia (which I haven't personally tried, and probably won't due to its high barrier for entry).

 

EDIT: For the app itself, fairly responsive, but notifications can be a bitch. I had a friend that kept texting me during a play session and it kept throwing up the message over my game. Super annoying. Might have to go on Do Not Disturb while I play.

[Ghost_MH]

2 hours ago, TwinIon said:

That's an obvious conclusion that I hadn't come to. Games are a great test case for high demand computing in a market that might be more forgiving. (In that if your $60 game doesn't work perfectly, you're annoyed, but if a company's $5k productivity software isn't working, it's a whole different issue.)

 

If Google is using this as a trojan horse to deliver application layer cloud computing, they might be willing to fund it longer than the revenue from games might support.

 

That's the only reason Stadia even makes sense for Google. I imagine Google would love to jump in bed with, say Adobe and offer a new Photoshop subcription tier where your Photoshop experience on a Chromecast would be no different than if you had a Xeon with gobs of RAM. Team up with Autodesk and it opens the doors for who has access to the tools they need to create anything and with all that data already being in Google's cloud, it would be a simple mouse click to send it all over to a vast render farm with no need to transfer anything.

[TwinIon]

27 minutes ago, Ghost_MH said:

That's the only reason Stadia even makes sense for Google. I imagine Google would love to jump in bed with, say Adobe and offer a new Photoshop subcription tier where your Photoshop experience on a Chromecast would be no different than if you had a Xeon with gobs of RAM. Team up with Autodesk and it opens the doors for who has access to the tools they need to create anything and with all that data already being in Google's cloud, it would be a simple mouse click to send it all over to a vast render farm with no need to transfer anything.

 

I suppose that's the real rub though, partnerships. Google doesn't have any software worth pushing through this kind of tech. As @XxEvil AshxX pointed out, companies can already setup RDP servers for demanding software. Photoshop/Lightroom/Premier/etc all rely on a whole lot of local disk stuff. Now, as part of their creative cloud thing they want you to push all your media to them anyways, so maybe that's a benefit (for Adobe). Still, that cloud storage stuff is primarily for cross platform use. Put a photo in the cloud so you can edit it on your tablet and then your PC and then share it on your phone. None of the actual processing has been abstracted to the cloud. I suppose it could be, but for the moment that would be a very expensive subscription. 

 

Looking farther into the future, it's also a real question as to how software gets built. Office is an easy example, because it's already in the middle of this. The web versions of Office remain very much second class citizens. Is the future building out the web versions, allowing them to access more local resources, and bringing them up to par, or would it be better to stream the "full version" from the cloud? Or does the current paradigm just live on?

 

Whatever the case, the question of if Google has plans for Stadia tech beyond games is interesting. Games likely make up a good majority of demanding applications individuals run. 

 

[AbsolutSurgen]

 

[CitizenVectron]

[DarkStar189]

That comic is amazing

[Dre801]

DF said OnLive was more feature complete basically, LOL.

[Mr.Vic20]

Renaming this platform to SADia! 

[AbsolutSurgen]