Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!

Google's Stadia Missed Targets For Monthly Active Users By 'Hundreds Of Thousands' Per New Report |

SystemSystem Member UncommonPosts: 7,110
edited February 26 in News & Features Discussion

imageGoogle's Stadia Missed Targets For Monthly Active Users By 'Hundreds Of Thousands' Per New Report | MMORPG.com

Google Stadia missed its internal targets for controller sales and monthly users by "hundreds of thousands" of users, per a new report from Bloomberg.

Read the full story here


«1

Comments

  • laxielaxie Member RarePosts: 1,110
    I'm curious what happens to people's libraries if the product shuts down in a few years. Would they just lose everything?
    ScotPalebane
  • QuizzicalQuizzical Member LegendaryPosts: 23,226

    laxie said:

    I'm curious what happens to people's libraries if the product shuts down in a few years. Would they just lose everything?



    Yes. Just like when an MMORPG shuts down, you lose everything you had in it.
    rojoArcueidtzervo
  • QuizzicalQuizzical Member LegendaryPosts: 23,226
    So basically, they had a target of hundreds of thousands of users, and missed by hundreds of thousands?
    FrodoFraginstzervoMcSleazcameltosis
  • FinvegaFinvega Member UncommonPosts: 230
    To busy crushing free speech and opposing views. Hard to focus on mundane things like gaming when you are trying to save the world from wrong-think.
    [Deleted User]FoolOfATook39MustikosGdemamiRungarMcSleazGobstopper3D[Deleted User]poobin420
  • TillerTiller Member LegendaryPosts: 9,416
    edited February 26

    Finvega said:

    To busy crushing free speech and opposing views. Hard to focus on mundane things like gaming when you are trying to save the world from wrong-think.



    WTF are you even talking about? What does Stadia have to do with free speech and saving the world, and why should we care? You need a reboot as your programing seems to have gone haywire. :D
    [Deleted User]TorvalRelampagotzervoMustikosAnskierMcSleaz
    SWG Bloodfin vet
    Elder Jedi/Elder Bounty Hunter
     
  • AeanderAeander Member LegendaryPosts: 6,706
    edited February 26
    I just don't know who the target audience is. Someone who can't afford dedicated hardware (but preferably can afford a $130 founder's edition) but is okay with paying a subscription fee AND renting (not buying - because they don't own shit) their games at a higher price than other platforms. And they have to live in an area with no data caps and reliable, lightning fast internet. Where are these unicorns, and why did Google think there were "hundreds of thousands" of them?
    rojoArcueidQuizzicalFrodoFraginsFoolOfATook39tzervoLydonGdemamiMcSleazGobstopper3DPalebane
  • FinvegaFinvega Member UncommonPosts: 230

    Tiller said:



    Finvega said:


    To busy crushing free speech and opposing views. Hard to focus on mundane things like gaming when you are trying to save the world from wrong-think.






    WTF are you even talking about? What does Stadia have to do with free speech and saving the world, and why should we care? You need a reboot as your programing seems to have gone haywire. :D



    You might want to get out more... big world out there.
    MustikosIceAgeLydonGdemamiMcSleazpoobin420
  • TorvalTorval Member LegendaryPosts: 21,410
    laxie said:
    I'm curious what happens to people's libraries if the product shuts down in a few years. Would they just lose everything?

    When Microsoft shut down their music service they provided downloads of everything I owned in my library. Not sure what Google will do. I never bought anything from them because I don't have much confidence in their apps and services outside of their core.
    Scotlaxie
    traveller, interloper, anomaly, iteration


  • TillerTiller Member LegendaryPosts: 9,416
    edited February 27
    Rhoklaw said:
    Tiller said:

    Finvega said:

    To busy crushing free speech and opposing views. Hard to focus on mundane things like gaming when you are trying to save the world from wrong-think.



    WTF are you even talking about? What does Stadia have to do with free speech and saving the world, and why should we care? You need a reboot as your programing seems to have gone haywire. :D
    To avoid the whole political discussion, he was merely taking a jab at Big Tech.

    I understood what he was saying, but for the sake of this discussion who cares about the other things Google may or may not be doing? They have no real political leanings other than money anyways. Everyone knows this. 

    As for Stadia it was bound to failure all along, and in this case the people spoke with their wallet.  This whole game streaming idea has been tried before and it has become apparent that most folks want to run games and software on their own hardware, and if they stream, do it from from their own hardware or libraries they can access with their own hardware. Even if it means they have to invest in said expensive hardware, people want control.

    I remember when MS kicked around this idea of getting rid of computer hardware for their OS and making Windows a streamed service, which would in turn take away all control of the user over their own OS and files; it never got off the ground.

    Maybe virtual machines work in corporate America, but at home people want to be able to access their property without worrying about whether a server will go down or need to be rolled back. I mean MMOs are about as close I'm willing to get to that concept.

    I have my doubts that all these companies trying out streaming services will ever capture enough gamers to make it worth the investment in the end. Just my opinion.
    MustikosGdemamiAnskier[Deleted User]
    SWG Bloodfin vet
    Elder Jedi/Elder Bounty Hunter
     
  • RidelynnRidelynn Member EpicPosts: 7,234
    I remember when the controller was required for access, and it was "Sold Out due to high demand"
    QuizzicalFrodoFraginstzervoScotTacticalZombeh
  • QuizzicalQuizzical Member LegendaryPosts: 23,226
    Tiller said:
    Rhoklaw said:
    Tiller said:

    Finvega said:

    To busy crushing free speech and opposing views. Hard to focus on mundane things like gaming when you are trying to save the world from wrong-think.



    WTF are you even talking about? What does Stadia have to do with free speech and saving the world, and why should we care? You need a reboot as your programing seems to have gone haywire. :D
    To avoid the whole political discussion, he was merely taking a jab at Big Tech.

    I understood what he was saying, but for the sake of this discussion who cares about the other things Google may or may not be doing? They have no real political leanings other than money anyways. Everyone knows this. 
    A fairly lengthy list of things that would be scandalous if you assume that Google is supposedly to be politically neutral strongly contradicts the claim that they're politically neutral.  Some big tech companies try to at least look (and possibly actually be) politically neutral, but Google abandoned that pretense years ago.
    MustikosMcSleazpoobin420
  • QuizzicalQuizzical Member LegendaryPosts: 23,226
    Tiller said:

    As for Stadia it was bound to failure all along, and in this case the people spoke with their wallet.  This whole game streaming idea has been tried before and it has become apparent that most folks want to run games and software on their own hardware, and if they stream, do it from from their own hardware or libraries they can access with their own hardware. Even if it means they have to invest in said expensive hardware, people want control.

    I remember when MS kicked around this idea of getting rid of computer hardware for their OS and making Windows a streamed service, which would in turn take away all control of the user over their own OS and files; it never got off the ground.

    Maybe virtual machines work in corporate America, but at home people want to be able to access their property without worrying about whether a server will go down or need to be rolled back. I mean MMOs are about as close I'm willing to get to that concept.

    I have my doubts that all these companies trying out streaming services will ever capture enough gamers to make it worth the investment in the end. Just my opinion.
    It's not just control.  I want something that works reliably.  I'm fond of saying that a computer that works 99% of the time is a computer that doesn't work.  Game streaming introduces a lot more things that can go wrong, and that's always going to make it far less reliable than running games locally.

    Thin clients do have legitimate uses.  They work well for reading documents or e-mails.  They work tolerably for writing e-mails or editing documents.  They can work fine for some types of games, though most of the games that a thin client can handle well take very little hardware to run locally.

    The other major problem with game streaming is that it's intrinsically an expensive way to run games.  Flops are cheap and bandwidth is expensive.  That's an iron law of computing.  It has been that way for decades, and to the extent that it has changed at all, it's only to become even more true than before.  That means that game streaming will always require a relatively high end price tag for a low end experience.
    GdemamiGobstopper3D
  • FrodoFraginsFrodoFragins Member EpicPosts: 5,165
    I remember reading an interview with an anonymous indie dev right at launch.  they discussed how platform owners tend to offer incentives for developers to publish on their platform. 

    They stated that Google offered no incentives and just assumed devs would obviously to develop for Stadia.  Even though google has a track record of failing and then abandoning products rather quickly.
    tzervoTacticalZombehGdemami
  • FoolOfATook39FoolOfATook39 Member UncommonPosts: 70
    I think most of us gamers saw this coming. It was a self fulfilling prophecy it failed because everyone was afraid to buy in because they were afraid it would fail and Google would cancel it like they do with other products.
    I think the primary reason it didn’t catch on is because they had no awesome stadia exclusives at launch. If they had one or two really good exclusive games people would have jumped on it despite their fears. Then Google would have bought itself some time to build its library and customer base. The whole thing was botched.
  • QuizzicalQuizzical Member LegendaryPosts: 23,226
    I think most of us gamers saw this coming. It was a self fulfilling prophecy it failed because everyone was afraid to buy in because they were afraid it would fail and Google would cancel it like they do with other products.
    I think the primary reason it didn’t catch on is because they had no awesome stadia exclusives at launch. If they had one or two really good exclusive games people would have jumped on it despite their fears. Then Google would have bought itself some time to build its library and customer base. The whole thing was botched.
    It failed because doing what it needed to do in order to succeed was technically infeasible.  That everyone expected it to fail only made it fail faster, but wasn't the difference between failure and success.
    GdemamiMcSleaz
  • TorvalTorval Member LegendaryPosts: 21,410
    edited February 27
    Technically infeasible? I'm not sure how you're measuring that, but technically it works great. It uses a lot of bandwidth, which I have a lot of, but that's my only major criticism technically speaking.

    The management interface could have been a lot more robust, but it worked. No, the big reasons I didn't go all in is because...
    1. I don't trust Google to keep a fringe service running, even if it's popular.
    2. They had no real flagship title worth playing. Crayta and that was/is a piece of garbage.
    3. It doesn't offer me, a PC gamer, any real incentive to keep a sub going.
    4. Premium titles generally don't stay on the service long enough to add value to the subscription.
    5. No local play. The service is exclusively streaming and that isn't attractive to me. It ties in with point 3, but is a major point on its own.

    From that perspective the service just lacks value and interest to me.

    Compare that to Microsoft Game Pass for Xbox and PC...
    1. I can play titles locally which means I can leverage the power of my PC and it is much less of a bandwidth hog.
    2. It offers a mobile/streaming experience.
    3. Titles stick around long enough to play.
    4. Xbox isn't going anywhere.
    5. The management interface is robust and easy to use both for games and the account.

    Maybe another reason is that people who play on mobile devices really do want "mobile games" and not PC games on a mobile device. I'd be curious to know how many Game Pass users play on mobile compared to those who mainly play on Xbox and Windows 10.
    kitarad
    traveller, interloper, anomaly, iteration


  • WizardryWizardry Member LegendaryPosts: 19,288
    edited February 27
    The whole idea behind all of this goes way back with Microsoft and Bill gates claiming to one day have all of gaming on his platform.
    There were two schools of thought ,one no need for a good pc as you could play on anything with internet and two to perhaps have all games on a streaming platform that you could play for free after signing on with the platform.

    To me it just looks like a new marketing gig to profit yet again off of OTHERS hard work making the games.So they want us to pay to play on their service and buy the games,wtf,we already pay for internet and we can buy games fine without any streaming service.

    So to me it just looks like these streaming services are sticking their nose into the profit pie where they don't belong.

    I thought or hoped we would end up with something like we paid a monthly or package deal to get free gaming.I am not allowing any service to be my new store front,i already don't like Steam controlling my games,i want to get back to OWNING my games and not being bound to ANY service.

    Never forget 3 mile Island and never trust a government official or company spokesman.

  • WizardryWizardry Member LegendaryPosts: 19,288
    edited February 27
    Remember we used to cherish our boxed item games,well now gaming has turned into nothing more than renting a license to use,i feel like we don't own anything anymore.

    How did this happen,how did we go from having a cool box with maybe some cool items and holding it in our hands to now owning err i mean RENTING with a TOS digital license,something we can't even touch.
    McSleazPureCalvinisetlar

    Never forget 3 mile Island and never trust a government official or company spokesman.

  • Morgenes83Morgenes83 Member UncommonPosts: 241
    Imho their main issue is their portfolio.
    I would use Stadia but not in my living room where I do have a PS and a gaming PC connected via LAN, but instead on the go on my work laptop, on the balcony, in the garden,...

    The issue I have is that those places often come with bad connection, or peripherals.
    There are only action like games (shooter, sports, action-adventures) in the shop which are a pain to play without a controller or good mouse keyboard setup.
    Plus the bad connection leading to artifacts stuttering, pixelation.

    Action games are the last ones which should be in the portfolio.


    If there would be games like XCom, Civilisation, Anno, Planet Zoo, Darkest Dungeon.
    Turn based JRPGs, or TCGs.

    But exactly this type of games are missing.
    This is the biggest failure in my opinion and what will break their neck.

    1997 Meridian 59 'til 2019 ESO 

    Waiting for Camelot Unchained & Pantheon

  • ScotScot Member LegendaryPosts: 15,660
    edited February 27
    MMORPG's Hardwares Editor Chris Coke was right on the ball with that one, we don't check the hardware articles as much as we should in my opinion. There is a lot there I would never get, but when I am getting a new device I always check out their reviews.

    As for this whole way of playing games, I do not see why something that is going to gobble bandwith is a good idea either for playing games or for gaming as a whole. We all know about the questions of prioritising internet usage that have come up before, what do you think is going to happen if gaming becomes a far bigger bandwith hog than it already is? I just don't see this as a wise place for gaming to be in, gaming does not have a good name with politicians, we would be first in the firing line.
    Gdemami
  • LydonLydon Member UncommonPosts: 2,935
    When they announced Stadia it sounded like the "Netflix of games." But you don't pay per title on Netflix and you certainly don't have to buy proprietary hardware to watch anything. It's like they were aiming for a half console half digital offering and didn't do any of those things well. I'm surprised at how very wrong they could get something like this.
    Gdemamilahnmir
  • kitaradkitarad Member LegendaryPosts: 6,602
    My worst nightmare will be if Steam goes belly up. I have close to 400 games on it. Yikes even the very thought  :#
    cameltosischeyane

  • QuizzicalQuizzical Member LegendaryPosts: 23,226
    kitarad said:
    My worst nightmare will be if Steam goes belly up. I have close to 400 games on it. Yikes even the very thought  :#
    You can demonstrate what that will be like with a simple experiment.  Unplug your Internet connection, then open Steam anyway.  It will say that it can only run in offline mode.  Single player games will still work just fine, though.

    Right now, Steam wants you to log into their servers at least once every few days in order for offline mode to still work.  But if Valve were going bankrupt, they'd remove that check and let the games you've bought just work forever, at least if they're single-player games.
    kitaradScotGobstopper3Detlarcheyane
  • kitaradkitarad Member LegendaryPosts: 6,602
    Quizzical said:
    kitarad said:
    My worst nightmare will be if Steam goes belly up. I have close to 400 games on it. Yikes even the very thought  :#
    You can demonstrate what that will be like with a simple experiment.  Unplug your Internet connection, then open Steam anyway.  It will say that it can only run in offline mode.  Single player games will still work just fine, though.

    Right now, Steam wants you to log into their servers at least once every few days in order for offline mode to still work.  But if Valve were going bankrupt, they'd remove that check and let the games you've bought just work forever, at least if they're single-player games.
    Thank you for posting that.
    cheyane

  • McSleazMcSleaz Member UncommonPosts: 158
    edited February 27
    Long Live Sega TV! Remember that sht? Mid 90's, 50 Sega games delivered to you every month via your cable connection & a massive cartridge plugged into the console, Good times.
Sign In or Register to comment.