FranXico
Member
Honestly, PUBG is one of the few games that would give you a pretty much identical experience on Stadia.cue massive rubberbanding
And to be clear, that's not a compliment to either.
Honestly, PUBG is one of the few games that would give you a pretty much identical experience on Stadia.cue massive rubberbanding
Next year, Stadia Base (1080p at 60fps) will be free for everyone. At that point, you can buy whatever game you like and just play it without paying a subscription - as long as you don't care about 4K.Are they offering a short free trial for Stadia so people can try it out? I don't see how this would work otherwise. They want you to pay money and buy a digital game to likely be disappointed anyway?
I'm all about the future of game streaming but the question is, does it work well now? Probably not, and I'm not paying money to be a guinea pig.
Next year, Stadia Base (1080p at 60fps) will be free for everyone. At that point, you can buy whatever game you like and just play it without paying a subscription - as long as you don't care about 4K.
I agree though - surely they have some sort of free trial offer in the works and just haven't revealed details about it yet. There are too many factors that will vary on a customer by customer basis for them to not have some sort of trial program.
I'd be kind of surprised that with Destiny 2 going F2P and being so tied to the Google Stadia branding (the "full version" is included with Stadia Pro) if Google maybe isn't planning on releasing some sort of Stadia limited trial using the F2P Destiny 2 game as the hook. Perhaps we'll see a return to the AOL days and see stuff like "10 free hours" or some such.So unless they reveal a free trial, you have to buy a game to see how it works. A game that you will never own. Maybe they'll just offer refunds no hassle for newcomers.
What he's saying from a technical point of view isn't necessarily wrong. It's more efficient and would be in theory faster to coordinate all the game instances through them then every player doing so through the Internet. In theory, assuming that it works, I think you will probably see less rubber banding and client side "issues". If the service is failing (from customer POV) I would assume you'd see nothing but if it was failing you probably wouldn't be in a great position for low latency online play anyways.
I don't think it's that big of a deal. I doubt Steve Ballmer, Satya, Howard Stringer or the current Sony guy or whoever are big gamers either. It's not like they need him to make decisions on game design. Plus at it's core Stadia is a tech solution with tech p[roblems to solve.
Also,
Don't be sad.Oh good, the tech illiterate have graced us with their dumbass opinions.
Why is he sad?Don't be sad.
People are being mean to GoogleWhy is he sad?
True.People are being mean to Google
Get fucked google.
- $9.99 per month
- Still have to buy the games
- Pay for internet
- Enjoy your bandwidth cap
Get fucked from space.
Apparently they're still really common in the US.Bandwith cap havent been a thing at developed countries since 90's
It doesn't really work like that. I have as a player to send the state of my game to the server, the server has to send back the data to the clients, and the clients has to interpret that data, synch it with what's going on on screen and send the data back.If you have enough bandwith to recieve 4k 60 fps video .. you have enough bandwith to recieve location data for all players around you .. even “thousands”.
It doesn't really work like that. I have as a player to send the state of my game to the server, the server has to send back the data to the clients, and the clients has to interpret that data, synch it with what's going on on screen and send the data back.
In stadia, I only send my input. It's the server the one who calculates the state for all the players, so there is no need for any kind of corrections and synch issues. If you play multiplayer you should know that most of the interactions are not "real" in the sense that the game has to predict, and whatever happens between your input and the reception of the state by another client is basically simulated and overall, fake to give the impression it's on real time.
On the contrary, what this exposes is the hypocrisy around stadia, because now one cares about the lag on multiplayer games, which is more than double than with stadia, but suddenly it becomes superimportant when talking about the new platform. Stadia removes the dependencies on the other player. Removes cheaters and any state hacks because it's played in the server and it doesn't depend on local machine interpretations of states that are comming from another client that could not even be legit, and it doesn't require double validation both by the client and the server.
Multiplayer in stadia will be not only easier to implement, but also more deterministic, cheater free and the state of the game will be updated faster, even with large pings. A player with bad connection will be the only one affected by that and the rest of the players won't depend on their connection to update the game state.
And this is not marketing. It's purely technical.
You are talking about local movement, but games are much more than that. The rest of the game depends on the other players. With stadia you are removing steps, so, independently of your ping, the game state will update faster. If you try to play fighting games or fps only, you are very aware of all those issues that will not exist in stadia. And you are also not counting that because you don't have to catch up with the game, you don't double the ping because you don't have to confirm data, you just stream your input. Which means you basically play with a delay equivalent to the ping, a delay that in a stable connection is lower than the delay you are actually having if you sum all the parts, because, for instance, the dualshock 3 buttons had already an input lag of +23 ms. If you add the 33ms of rendering time of a 30fps game and the lag of the tv, you already are already touching the 100s, and the games are still playable (and they still have to work without the tv game mode which, most of the players ignore). And with the stream of data is continuous, which means you can adapt to it. Rarely you will have situations where the anticipation time scores lower than 200ms beause that's basically the time it takes for the information to travel from your senses to your brain and offer a response (although because at those response times you become aware fof the lag, it creates unconfort, which does not mean "unplayable", just that you notice it). The average delay for players as an study was made (citation needed) from input to display was about 133ms, and although extreme games like fighting games may have reaction times under the 67 ms, the game still has to work for the broad public.Traditionally the game renders the next frame based on the local world simulation with predictions of the other clients and verified game state done on the server. Many games render frames ahead which gives extra lag ( which could be as high as google stradia ) but quality fps games dont .. the input goes to the console the console renders the frame, the tv shows the frame ... no communication to the server for local movement .. min input 60 ms response. ( at 60 fps)
For google stradia ( or any cloud game service) the input goes to the cloud then the game renders then the video encoder encodes then the frames transmitted back ...minimum frame input latency about 100 ms.
It works exactly as i described it. There are ineffeciencies in the way many older games were written .. especially those that are not server hosted ( ie the way many games were last gen) that google is pretending are still relevant now. in modern games the client dosent spend time syncronising the game state to find some middle ground, it accepts the authoritative server then renders that with prediction .. thats done on the server exactly like googles proposing ( It is not new).
if i hack my console and move another player in the local game state it dosent actually move the player in the server game state ( or for that player). It USED to if i was a server.. but most games are server in the cloud based so its exactly the same as google .. only with less lag for local movement and less consequences when packets are dropped ( rubber banding occursrather than whole video dropout).
Yeah.So tired of hearing how things will be, and could be better. Just release something that is better and then you will get the hype. Everyone is way to cynical of the game industry at this point to get hype over bold claims about something no one has actually seen yet.
US isn't a developed country?Bandwith cap havent been a thing at developed countries since 90's
Just came in here to slap everybody who agrees with Google on this.
Google is funny eh?
US isn't a developed country?
Lol, but naw man it's literally the opposite.
Localizing all of the client machines like this means swapping rubberbanding and other weird netcode behaviours for stream artifacts like macro-blocking, resolution switching and frame dropping instead.
Imagine perfect netcode, then run it through twitch.Crap im going to need a couple more college degrees to understand you.
Debatable.US isn't a developed country?