Stadia - new life for ESO?

therift

Nogawd wrote: »

GallantGuardian wrote: »

Nogawd wrote: »

Boy you can tell who the "old" people are....

And you can tell who the young people are ...

Old people (the ones who want to maintain as much control in their day to day life as possible)

Young people (the ones they are willfully giving up control of their day to day life)

Sorry I enjoy freedom

Are you the type that puts black tape over the cameras on their smartphone? I work in the smartphone industry and I come across these fear mongering paranoid types every now and then.

You must work in the shipping department. I confidently state that Mark Zuckerberg and the Director of the FBI are not "fear mongering paranoid types" for covering their computing device cameras with tape.

Daedric_NB_187

anitajoneb17_ESO wrote: »

OrdoHermetica wrote: »

The first proper smartphone was launched in Japan in 1999. Western audiences got their first proper smartphone in the form of the Sidekick and RIM's initial BlackBerry launches in 2002. BlackBerry's first huge launch was in 2006. We most certainly had smartphones 10 years ago. We in fact had smartphones 20 years ago.

Technology absolutely does advance quickly in technology, but it's not particularly easy to predict how or in which direction. So, while broadband penetration and quality might indeed improve quite a bit in the next decade, in many parts of the world - the United States included - that infrastructure hasn't really improved all that much in the previous decade, so that's far from a sure bet.

By "smartphone" I mean "full computer in the pocket". Just because the 1st Blackberries could connect to the internet doesn't mean they qualified as "computer in the pocket", which every smartphone, even low end, qualifies for nowadays.
And by "we had" I mean "most people had". Just because something was technically available 20 years ago doesn't mean it was "standard", "normal" or "mainstream". Nowadays, a "computer in the pocket" is normal, standard and mainstream. Sorry for Iphone addicts who think they're "special" :-)

Right or wrong, I firmly believe that in ten or twenty years from now, everything will be cloud.

I reformatted my hard drive last month (bigger SSD) and did a fresh reinstall. Given the amount of software and data I use/keep, this usually takes me 20 to 30 full hours. (Data transfers, settings, fresh install of each software, etc.). This time, it too me half the time. I realized it was because.. I went cloud. Even without really noticing it.

I agree with all the privacy concerns, but I still believe that cloud is the future and that Googleis going the right way and facing a smash hit with Stadia. Stadia is exactly what people need. (Sure, Nvidia and an few others offer similar services, but none of them has the marketing power and the investment capacity that Google has).

Let's talk about it again in 10 years.

Ummmmmm......I had the Google G1 in 2009. That is a smartphone by today's standards. Might want to get your facts straight.

Linaleah

anitajoneb17_ESO wrote: »

luen79rwb17_ESO wrote: »

The data requirements will make stadia a niche product to say the least. It will still have it's place and share on the market since there's obviously people that will have access with no problem but they can surely forget about reaching those 2 billion players they mentioned on that event.

The volume of data is surely an issue right now, but think further. Not that far, just ten years or so.
Ten years ago, we didn't even have smartphones, you see...
Therefore I'm confident that the data infrastructure will update accordingly in the coming years. At least in "rich" countries.

Thinking ahead is what makes businesses successful. Especially in the area of information technology. Remember how ALL (and I mean *ALL*) journalists predicted the downfall of Amazon 15 years ago. 15 years may sound like an eternity for the youngest of you, but all of us "older" know it was just yesterday.

10 years ago, we had proto smartphones. actualy we had those 20 years ago, I had one of those - palm pilot and I loved it to pieces. still miss it, becasue I'm honestly NOT a fan of current smarphone trend of onscrean keyboards (yes, I'm that person that has attachable keyboard for my tablet when I use it for anything other then reading books or wathching netflix in bed.) it took over a decade for smartphones get to the point where they are now and they have been stagnant recently. and YEs, it qualifies as pocket computer. in part becasue I essentially used it in much the same ways I use my smarphone today - reading books? check. listening to music instead of using separate music device? check. doing some writing? check. playing some early games? check. it was LITERALLY known as hend held computers and modern smarphones would NOT exist without them.

e have game streaming services already and they are... not great. so whatever google comes up with? will take them a while to refine and then there is the whole issue of infrastructure which SUCKS in US. and Australia. that will take even LONGER to upgrade, solely due to how vast the space is.

cloud computing may be the future - MAY be, but its far too far away to make any difference to current gaming and ESO especially.

VaranisArano

green_villain wrote: »

danno8 wrote: »

NeillMcAttack wrote: »

Kulvar wrote: »

@NeillMcAttack Cheat detect, a thing from the past ?
Let's anyone teleport, be invulnerable, hit you while hidden behind something, right...

NotLikeThis

Edit,
Seriously though, how does one implement cheat software on a game in the cloud!!!?

Because the game in the cloud still requires a running program in your RAM. In this case it is Chrome.

People can currently use Cheat Engine to modify their Chrome client in RAM and cheat on things like all those .io games.

so lol you comparing full cheating when game data installed on PC like right now, and only software browser that will only register and sent to the Stadia your mouse and keyboard clicks?

The common way people cheat at ESO is to change factors that the server trusts the client. Its one of the reasons that PVP has more problems now than it did at launch - a bunch of stuff that used to be handled client-side got moved server-side because people abused it. And when ZOS did that, it created a host of performance problems for PVP because the game wasn't originally designed to handle all that on via the servers.

Now, I see that Stadia is being biilled as "cheat-proof" largely because its all server-side, and practically nothing except the video is client-side. I'll admit to not being very familiar enough with game cheating to hazard a guess as to how much of that is marketing hype vs how much Stadia will actually be cheat proof.

Nevertheless, it won't matter if its cheat-proof when it comes to ESO if the server/client interactions would take too much work for ZOS to untangle. If I understand it correctly, ESO would have to rebuild anything that's client side to be handled server side.

That's actually one of the things I'm really curious about with ESO and Stadia. Because ESO does handle certain things client-side. I know there's been detailed speculation that client-side issues are the cause of some restrictions on housing instances and item limits. Moreover, we know that some of PVP still gets handled client side because things like Cheat Engine still exist. It has the potential to be very good, but on the other hand we all know how ESO's spaghetti code works when ZOS makes massive changes (not very well, LOL).

I'd be very interested to see if its even possible for ZOS to untangle ESO's client-side stuff and convert to a full server-side model that Stadia can provide. But in any case, if the potential profits don't outweigh the benefits, I don't expect ZOS to experiment. I certainly don't expect them to pay a bunch of money to change their existing game to come out on an essentially untested new service.

Linaleah

also, something to note. we know have more and more companies switching to streaming vs traditional broadcasting. but have you noticed something else that is interesting? more and more of the streaming services - offer DOWNLOADS. so that you could in theory watch without having to be online. so that you could watching without buffering or interruption issues. all the while personal data storage is becoming progressively more affordable and accessible. now isn't THAT interesting?

and don't underestimate pc gamers and their attachment to modding. Skyrim lasted as long as it had NOT becasue it was that much of a better game than its competitors. it lasted as long as it has because of modding. becasue people kept adding content to it, among other things. to the point where they allowed mods on CONSOLES. so how do you deal with THAT and streaming? you think people will just give up their modding ability without a fight? after players managed to mod frostbite - Dragon age inquisition and Mass Effect 3 - and mod it significantly? no, I don't see PC gamers going along with anything that doesn't allow them this freedom, especialy for single player games. and no, the future, no matter how much companies are trying to make it so, becasue games as service are easier and in theory more profitable? is NOT in multiplayer only. at least not any time soon. it may be a thing once current generations of gamers die out, but that will take DECADES.

Vandril

VaranisArano wrote: »

Now, I see that Stadia is being biilled as "cheat-proof" largely because its all server-side, and practically nothing except the video is client-side. I'll admit to not being very familiar enough with game cheating to hazard a guess as to how much of that is marketing hype vs how much Stadia will actually be cheat proof.

It's totally marketing hype, but it's also completely true.

Something like Stadia, a service that streams ONLY the video of game software being run on a distant machine, is virtually cheat proof. Cheating nowadays is done primarily in two ways: editing client-side values to make the client believe certain things are happening and sending fake or altered data packets from the client to the game servers in a way that the game servers will accept. Both absolutely require you to have access to the machine the client is running on.

Stadia will run the game on a machine distant from the player. In the case of MMOs, it will run the game client. It will send only the video stream to the player, and receive only the control input for the game from the player. This means that the only thing the player can directly interface with on the machine running their client...is the client itself. And unless ZOS adds hex editing or internet packet editing software into the client software themselves, there's simply no way to cheat.

The only ways you could cheat on a service like Stadia would be if the service gave you the access required to do so, if the service officially supported cheating and intentionally built in ways to do so, or if you hacked their servers to illegally gain access and ran the cheating software on their machines.

green_villain

yeah i hope it will be really cheat proof
will see

zaria

anitajoneb17_ESO wrote: »

zaria wrote: »

And you need an system like an decent gaming pc in the farm, for each user so it will be expensive or it will be queues if lots of people use it at peak hour. Note that its way more expensive for an company to run an server than for you to buy an pc, even if they just uses stacks of off the shelf pc's they have to pay for rack space and people to maintain them.

LoL... no. That's not how it works. Distant desktops aren't 1 machine per user. It's one gigantic machine shared by individual virtualized desktops.
The development of cloud computing is not good news for hardware manufacturers, but they've already stopped making money with PCs anyway. They've switch to the internet of things and all connected devices already.

Not entire sure how it works for remote gaming, yes virtual machines is standard but it will not help you much here.
And yes its racks of servers not one huge one even if it looks like one for users.

You need an decent CPU and GPU to run ESO, running multiple players on one machine you will need more beefy hardware who fast become more expensive than many small this is true both for desktops and servers.

Cloud computing is very nice for most tasks as you rarely use much computer resources, this has been known since long before the pc with mainframes and terminals. You also don't have to install and update software on client.

However gaming, at least games who require significant hardware to run is not one field its good at.

Wing

this reminds me of when credit cards first were becoming the new thing of the future and cash and physical money was all but done for. . .fast forward to now and. . .yeah.

zaria

anitajoneb17_ESO wrote: »

OrdoHermetica wrote: »

The first proper smartphone was launched in Japan in 1999. Western audiences got their first proper smartphone in the form of the Sidekick and RIM's initial BlackBerry launches in 2002. BlackBerry's first huge launch was in 2006. We most certainly had smartphones 10 years ago. We in fact had smartphones 20 years ago.

Technology absolutely does advance quickly in technology, but it's not particularly easy to predict how or in which direction. So, while broadband penetration and quality might indeed improve quite a bit in the next decade, in many parts of the world - the United States included - that infrastructure hasn't really improved all that much in the previous decade, so that's far from a sure bet.

By "smartphone" I mean "full computer in the pocket". Just because the 1st Blackberries could connect to the internet doesn't mean they qualified as "computer in the pocket", which every smartphone, even low end, qualifies for nowadays.
And by "we had" I mean "most people had". Just because something was technically available 20 years ago doesn't mean it was "standard", "normal" or "mainstream". Nowadays, a "computer in the pocket" is normal, standard and mainstream. Sorry for Iphone addicts who think they're "special" :-)

Right or wrong, I firmly believe that in ten or twenty years from now, everything will be cloud.

I reformatted my hard drive last month (bigger SSD) and did a fresh reinstall. Given the amount of software and data I use/keep, this usually takes me 20 to 30 full hours. (Data transfers, settings, fresh install of each software, etc.). This time, it too me half the time. I realized it was because.. I went cloud. Even without really noticing it.

I agree with all the privacy concerns, but I still believe that cloud is the future and that Googleis going the right way and facing a smash hit with Stadia. Stadia is exactly what people need. (Sure, Nvidia and an few others offer similar services, but none of them has the marketing power and the investment capacity that Google has).

Let's talk about it again in 10 years.

Nokia communicator was an smart phone you could download and install apps on and access internet on, had one 20 years ago.
Yes it was an brick and they was expensive, modern smartphones is much better. However smartphones has not gotten much better the last couple of years.
Same with pc's the last 7 years.
Electronic has kind of met an limit, yes you can improve but it becoming harder and harder and not so needed for most uses.

Cloud gaming itself is not new
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cloud_gaming
Will it become more popular, yes and see plenty of uses.
It will however always perform worse than an good gaming PC and next console generation for two reasons.
first is input and output lag, then you move aim or mouse this has to be sent to server who process the data like an standard pc then send video back to you, this will generate lag on movement who will come on top of the standard ESO lag.

performance will be weak because of cost, simply an modern game require lots of the system as cpu and gpu load, memory use and other resources, this does not go away.
Yes you have multiple users on one server, however this increases the load require you to use an more powerful server, prices here will fast scale faster than number of users you serve.

And all cloud systems including ESO mega server is racks of servers. Servers way more expensive than consoles.
It will not be an attractive option for active gamers playing fast paced games with good graphic and if it was it would be pretty expensive or you will get queues.

Cloud however is perfect for testing out new games, playing old games who don't run on new systems, playing on the move like eso on switch. or for casuals who don't play much.

nordic_two

Ratzkifal wrote: »

So PC users will have to wait for google to approve of updates made to the game, just like our poor console comrades have to endure right now with Sony and Microsoft?
So google has even our ingame data to analyse and sell to the highest bidding business/government for "running customized ads" and "improved service"?

I doubt it. They will likely patch the 'PC' games the same way every other PC game patches. I guess we'll have to wait and see though. In any case, I dont see it being that good a system for most to use due to the high data requirements.

LiquidPony

VaranisArano wrote: »

green_villain wrote: »

danno8 wrote: »

NeillMcAttack wrote: »

Kulvar wrote: »

@NeillMcAttack Cheat detect, a thing from the past ?
Let's anyone teleport, be invulnerable, hit you while hidden behind something, right...

NotLikeThis

Edit,
Seriously though, how does one implement cheat software on a game in the cloud!!!?

Because the game in the cloud still requires a running program in your RAM. In this case it is Chrome.

People can currently use Cheat Engine to modify their Chrome client in RAM and cheat on things like all those .io games.

so lol you comparing full cheating when game data installed on PC like right now, and only software browser that will only register and sent to the Stadia your mouse and keyboard clicks?

The common way people cheat at ESO is to change factors that the server trusts the client. Its one of the reasons that PVP has more problems now than it did at launch - a bunch of stuff that used to be handled client-side got moved server-side because people abused it. And when ZOS did that, it created a host of performance problems for PVP because the game wasn't originally designed to handle all that on via the servers.

Now, I see that Stadia is being biilled as "cheat-proof" largely because its all server-side, and practically nothing except the video is client-side. I'll admit to not being very familiar enough with game cheating to hazard a guess as to how much of that is marketing hype vs how much Stadia will actually be cheat proof.

Nevertheless, it won't matter if its cheat-proof when it comes to ESO if the server/client interactions would take too much work for ZOS to untangle. If I understand it correctly, ESO would have to rebuild anything that's client side to be handled server side.

That's actually one of the things I'm really curious about with ESO and Stadia. Because ESO does handle certain things client-side. I know there's been detailed speculation that client-side issues are the cause of some restrictions on housing instances and item limits. Moreover, we know that some of PVP still gets handled client side because things like Cheat Engine still exist. It has the potential to be very good, but on the other hand we all know how ESO's spaghetti code works when ZOS makes massive changes (not very well, LOL).

I'd be very interested to see if its even possible for ZOS to untangle ESO's client-side stuff and convert to a full server-side model that Stadia can provide. But in any case, if the potential profits don't outweigh the benefits, I don't expect ZOS to experiment. I certainly don't expect them to pay a bunch of money to change their existing game to come out on an essentially untested new service.

This seems to miss the point of Stadia and similar services.

I don't see what "conversion" would be necessary for ZOS to "untangle ESO's client-side stuff and convert to a full server-side model".

There's still a game client. It's running in a VM/container in a Stadia datacenter, accepting input from the user's thin client and streaming video to the user's thin client.

Not really any different from the local game streaming supported by nVidia Shield devices or Xbox/Windows, just over the internet instead of your local network.

Saltypretzels

ESO would probably never go to Stadia but a sequel could. The software will live at all the Google server stations and Zenimax will pay for them to host it rather than have their own servers.

I for one, welcome our Google overlords and look forward to never paying for a gaming computer again.

danno8

Saltypretzels wrote: »

ESO would probably never go to Stadia but a sequel could. The software will live at all the Google server stations and Zenimax will pay for them to host it rather than have their own servers.

I for one, welcome our Google overlords and look forward to never paying for a gaming computer again.

Pretty much everything in this thread is just personal guessing, but I can guarantee you one thing; the service will not be free.

If the service did realistically replace powerful gaming systems, you can bet you will be paying at least as much as that system would cost you over the course of a year or two in subscription fees. Google isn't going to leave all that money on the table.

Only, of course, after spending all that money on subscription fees, in the end you have no computer system you can keep playing on at your leisure, unlike if you simply purchased the system up front.

It seems a lot of people are cool with owning less and leasing more. That seems to work pretty well for certain types of streaming services like Netflix, Spotify etc.. where they are only streaming content. They don't require a powerful PC component to compute and stream that info to you. I am not convinced game streaming will work as well. It's a huge added cost to the service provider.

starkerealm

danno8 wrote: »

Saltypretzels wrote: »

ESO would probably never go to Stadia but a sequel could. The software will live at all the Google server stations and Zenimax will pay for them to host it rather than have their own servers.

I for one, welcome our Google overlords and look forward to never paying for a gaming computer again.

Pretty much everything in this thread is just personal guessing, but I can guarantee you one thing; the service will not be free.

If the service did realistically replace powerful gaming systems, you can bet you will be paying at least as much as that system would cost you over the course of a year or two in subscription fees. Google isn't going to leave all that money on the table.

Only, of course, after spending all that money on subscription fees, in the end you have no computer system you can keep playing on at your leisure, unlike if you simply purchased the system up front.

It seems a lot of people are cool with owning less and leasing more. That seems to work pretty well for certain types of streaming services like Netflix, Spotify etc.. where they are only streaming content. They don't require a powerful PC component to compute and stream that info to you. I am not convinced game streaming will work as well. It's a huge added cost to the service provider.

Part of the problem is that, the network infrastructure is just not there to support this technology. There's a whole policy discussion I'm not inclined to get into backing that one up, but we're still a long way out from being able to stream games at a playable rate.

LiquidPony

starkerealm wrote: »

danno8 wrote: »

Saltypretzels wrote: »

ESO would probably never go to Stadia but a sequel could. The software will live at all the Google server stations and Zenimax will pay for them to host it rather than have their own servers.

I for one, welcome our Google overlords and look forward to never paying for a gaming computer again.

Pretty much everything in this thread is just personal guessing, but I can guarantee you one thing; the service will not be free.

If the service did realistically replace powerful gaming systems, you can bet you will be paying at least as much as that system would cost you over the course of a year or two in subscription fees. Google isn't going to leave all that money on the table.

Only, of course, after spending all that money on subscription fees, in the end you have no computer system you can keep playing on at your leisure, unlike if you simply purchased the system up front.

It seems a lot of people are cool with owning less and leasing more. That seems to work pretty well for certain types of streaming services like Netflix, Spotify etc.. where they are only streaming content. They don't require a powerful PC component to compute and stream that info to you. I am not convinced game streaming will work as well. It's a huge added cost to the service provider.

Part of the problem is that, the network infrastructure is just not there to support this technology. There's a whole policy discussion I'm not inclined to get into backing that one up, but we're still a long way out from being able to stream games at a playable rate.

Stadia streaming 4K HDR is no different from streaming Netflix or Youtube 4K HDR, which people already do.

Input latency is another, separate problem. But the infrastructure is certainly there for game streaming for *some* people. I have pretty standard Spectrum internet and I don't see why I'd have any trouble streaming a game. Anyone on gigabit fiber is almost certainly going to be fine as well.

danno8

LiquidPony wrote: »

starkerealm wrote: »

danno8 wrote: »

Saltypretzels wrote: »

ESO would probably never go to Stadia but a sequel could. The software will live at all the Google server stations and Zenimax will pay for them to host it rather than have their own servers.

I for one, welcome our Google overlords and look forward to never paying for a gaming computer again.

Pretty much everything in this thread is just personal guessing, but I can guarantee you one thing; the service will not be free.

If the service did realistically replace powerful gaming systems, you can bet you will be paying at least as much as that system would cost you over the course of a year or two in subscription fees. Google isn't going to leave all that money on the table.

Only, of course, after spending all that money on subscription fees, in the end you have no computer system you can keep playing on at your leisure, unlike if you simply purchased the system up front.

It seems a lot of people are cool with owning less and leasing more. That seems to work pretty well for certain types of streaming services like Netflix, Spotify etc.. where they are only streaming content. They don't require a powerful PC component to compute and stream that info to you. I am not convinced game streaming will work as well. It's a huge added cost to the service provider.

Part of the problem is that, the network infrastructure is just not there to support this technology. There's a whole policy discussion I'm not inclined to get into backing that one up, but we're still a long way out from being able to stream games at a playable rate.

Stadia streaming 4K HDR is no different from streaming Netflix or Youtube 4K HDR, which people already do.

Input latency is another, separate problem. But the infrastructure is certainly there for game streaming for *some* people. I have pretty standard Spectrum internet and I don't see why I'd have any trouble streaming a game. Anyone on gigabit fiber is almost certainly going to be fine as well.

Yah the main difference is you don't notice the compression lag when streaming at 4k since you only input once in a while (pause rewind, etc), although you can certainly notice the delay then!

Compression at 4k takes some serious CPU power to compress, and then again to decompress on the other end. If gaming streaming at 4k is to be usable (read responsive) at some point they will have to find a way to get around that.

Linaleah

danno8 wrote: »

LiquidPony wrote: »

starkerealm wrote: »

danno8 wrote: »

Saltypretzels wrote: »

ESO would probably never go to Stadia but a sequel could. The software will live at all the Google server stations and Zenimax will pay for them to host it rather than have their own servers.

I for one, welcome our Google overlords and look forward to never paying for a gaming computer again.

Pretty much everything in this thread is just personal guessing, but I can guarantee you one thing; the service will not be free.

If the service did realistically replace powerful gaming systems, you can bet you will be paying at least as much as that system would cost you over the course of a year or two in subscription fees. Google isn't going to leave all that money on the table.

Only, of course, after spending all that money on subscription fees, in the end you have no computer system you can keep playing on at your leisure, unlike if you simply purchased the system up front.

It seems a lot of people are cool with owning less and leasing more. That seems to work pretty well for certain types of streaming services like Netflix, Spotify etc.. where they are only streaming content. They don't require a powerful PC component to compute and stream that info to you. I am not convinced game streaming will work as well. It's a huge added cost to the service provider.

Part of the problem is that, the network infrastructure is just not there to support this technology. There's a whole policy discussion I'm not inclined to get into backing that one up, but we're still a long way out from being able to stream games at a playable rate.

Stadia streaming 4K HDR is no different from streaming Netflix or Youtube 4K HDR, which people already do.

Input latency is another, separate problem. But the infrastructure is certainly there for game streaming for *some* people. I have pretty standard Spectrum internet and I don't see why I'd have any trouble streaming a game. Anyone on gigabit fiber is almost certainly going to be fine as well.

Yah the main difference is you don't notice the compression lag when streaming at 4k since you only input once in a while (pause rewind, etc), although you can certainly notice the delay then!

Compression at 4k takes some serious CPU power to compress, and then again to decompress on the other end. If gaming streaming at 4k is to be usable (read responsive) at some point they will have to find a way to get around that.

exactly. streaming non interactive content that is usually prebuffered (that's why you can keep watching a video for anywhere from 5 to 15 minutes after loosing internet connection) is VERY different from streaming content that requires actual more or less instantaneous imput.

as for the whole infrastructure for" some people" some people indeed. most people do NOT have gigabit internet. and the ones that do - prices can be all over the place (in my area for example - i have a single company unless I pay thousands to verizon to bring fiberoptic to our street, and becasue its essentialy a monopoly, that company charges $129 a month... for the FIRST YEAR, it goes up afterwards.). and with a game like ESO, you will have a cost of Stadia itself, cost of monthly subscription to google (if you think google is not going to charge it? i have a bridge in Brooklyn to sell you - cheap!) AND cost of ESO plus. their main shtick that they are trying to sell you is that you will be able to play as if you had a high end PC, but at a cost of a console. and since its what NVidia has been working on for a while, complete with Beta testing... google are just trying to catch up. and its STILL not going to replace tradictional at home hardware. not yet. not for a while yet. not until its ALL players, not SOME players that have acess to fast enough and affordable enough internet.

green_villain

Linaleah wrote: »

that company charges $129 a month...

so goverment must fight with monopoly
in my country average price for 1 gbit internet 200 UAH = 8 usd per month!

and first 3-6 months usually for free
and then you can switch to other ISP and this way have always free internet lol

Linaleah

green_villain wrote: »

Linaleah wrote: »

that company charges $129 a month...

so goverment must fight with monopoly
in my country average price for 1 gbit internet 200 UAH = 8 usd per month!

and first 3-6 months usually for free
and then you can switch to other ISP and this way have always free internet lol

tell me something. what's the average salary in your country? wait. hold on. you mentioned living in ukraine yes? according to cursory google search as of last year, a decent salary was just under $500 dollars. well equivalent of. puts things in perspective, doesn't it.

internet is actualy MORE expensive in your country, apparently. moreover. where do you live? city? countryside? becasue that makes a difference too. my cable company is only a monopoly for my specific area. which is relatively small and sparsely populated which is the ONLY reason they are the only game in town, at least when it comes to high speed internet. there are other internet options, just.. not high speed.

and THAT. is an issue, my dear with infrastructure for different size countries. people from Europe somehow don't understand the difference in distances and population density in Europe vs US. and even more so, people from Cities are completely oblivious to how it works in suburbs, and don't even get me started on actual countryside. in US, we have areas so relatively remote that its not cost effective for ISP's to bring internet to those areas. and so people are stuck with satellite. which let me tell you? is pretty awful still.

and then... then there's Australia. where even in Sidney, a freaking state capitol in Australia, as major of a city as you get... average internet speeds are more expensive AND slower then what I have in literally woods (I literally live in a middle of the forest, NOT an exaggeration - our road cuts the forest in half, and our street has precisely 6 houses on it, that are barely in view of each other becasue of all the trees and on either side - we have woods. with bears. and deer. and foxes and bunnies and all kinds of fun wild stuff. and we actualy have it better then most people in similar locations to mine. friend of mine? only gets satellite. but I digress)

we do not have infrastructure. and we are not going to have infrastructure for a while. and an irony of someone from Ukraine actualy being naive enough to think that government will fix it.. all the while defrauding internet companies essentially is just... precious.

and to add to the, or more like to reiterate. Stadia is not going to be free. you are going to have to buy the console itself, and pay for its monthly use on top of that. even assuming that it does everything it promise and actualy comes out within the next 2 years or so ... its not going to do much for ESO. is it going to be part of PC population? console? which console? will it be something separate? think. THINK for a moment, just for a single moment, please.

Nyladreas

green_villain wrote: »

cheifsoap wrote: »

only useful if you have unlimited data

90% of users have unlimited internet
or more

That is false. Especially in North America. More than majority has limited data plans. And internet there costs a fortune. Not to mention there are many areas where getting good internet if any is a problem.

Europe and Eastern world... Perhaps. 90% is still overkill though.

anitajoneb17_ESO

Linaleah wrote: »

and to add to the, or more like to reiterate. Stadia is not going to be free. you are going to have to buy the console itself, and pay for its monthly use on top of that.

There is no "Stadia console" and there will not be any "Stadia Console". It will all be playable with what we already have (mouse, controllers, keyboards, touchscreens, etc.)
They will offer an optional Stadia gamepad, which will only differ from the gamepads we already have because of the "OK Google" voice command button. That's all.

I agree with the infrastructure issue. Everything will depend on the availability of broadband, highspeed internet. And it's far from being everyone's option. But companies (or states) will never push high speed internet everywhere unless there are enough high demanded services that require it, so in the end Google is doing everyone a favour by investing in cloud gaming.

As to the input lag issue (sorry I respond to several other people too), obviously this has been solved already. I had a friend who was playing ESO on a remote rented "cloud" PC. I don't remember the name of the specific service he was using, but there are several of those already. He was playing with his WiFi tablet, with a game controller attached, and said it was working fine including in vet dungeons.

I remember when I was younger so much younger than today, someone told me that in the near future everyone would have a computer on their desk. I answered "Now that's silly, we will never be quicker with those machines than with a pen and a paper".
This thread makes me think of that ;-)
It suprises me, though, that a population (I mean, PC gamers in general) allegedly more computer literate and more versed in technology than average, is so sceptic about the cloud gaming issue. I know vaporware is a thing, but I don't believe Stadia to be vaporware.

FlyingSwan

zaria wrote: »

anitajoneb17_ESO wrote: »

zaria wrote: »

And you need an system like an decent gaming pc in the farm, for each user so it will be expensive or it will be queues if lots of people use it at peak hour. Note that its way more expensive for an company to run an server than for you to buy an pc, even if they just uses stacks of off the shelf pc's they have to pay for rack space and people to maintain them.

LoL... no. That's not how it works. Distant desktops aren't 1 machine per user. It's one gigantic machine shared by individual virtualized desktops.
The development of cloud computing is not good news for hardware manufacturers, but they've already stopped making money with PCs anyway. They've switch to the internet of things and all connected devices already.

Not entire sure how it works for remote gaming, yes virtual machines is standard but it will not help you much here.
And yes its racks of servers not one huge one even if it looks like one for users.

The GPU resource is pooled and supplied using an other Hypervisor API; i.e. in Hyper-V it's RemoteFX, or Nvidia use GRID. This is already done with pooled GPU being supplied as a high power compute resource. e.g. I've just designed a system for a major aviation company who want to do some predictive weather analysis in a DevOps/scaleset way. So we supplied a number crunching microservice that scales out a load of GPUs in the cloud on-demand, then scales them back when not in use.

That's how I'd deliver remote GPU capability for gaming, as you are still getting the economies of scale. With a game like ESO, which is CPU bound, my GTX1080Ti runs max 50% and most of the time it's not even doing that, so it could service other clients as our spikes are unlikely to align.

JinMori

danno8 wrote: »

Article says it would need around 25 Mb/s to play at just 1080p60. Run the math on that.

That would be 90,000 Mbits per hour of gaming. divide by 8 turn it into 11,000 MB or 11 GB of data per hour.

And for what exactly? To pay Google some large fee to use their proprietary platform? No thanks, I'll keep control over my own software.

Pretty much this.

While i can see the benefits of this, i also see a lot of negatives, too many, i am not looking forward to this as it stands.

This could be also used to monitor user data, which as it stand we already know this happens, and now they could even use the game you like to play against you, so no thanks, it's not like it's going to be free anyway, and even if it was, remember people, there is ALWAYS a price to pay, you just don;t know what it is.

JinMori

green_villain wrote: »

Linaleah wrote: »

that company charges $129 a month...

so goverment must fight with monopoly
in my country average price for 1 gbit internet 200 UAH = 8 usd per month!

and first 3-6 months usually for free
and then you can switch to other ISP and this way have always free internet lol

The government will do *** all to fight the monopoly, and it should stay out of the economy as much as possible, every time it interferes it makes it worse.

Narvuntien

well considering I have 4 mb/s internet its never going to be a usable thing for me

green_villain

so all guys with poor internet must wait for that Mask project - free internet from satellites all over the world xD

idk

anitajoneb17_ESO wrote: »

MLGProPlayer wrote: »

Why would a streaming service improve ESO performance? How does that make any sense?

A streaming service just lets you stream a game off of someone else's computer. You would still be connecting to the same ZOS servers you connect to now, except you'd be doing it while connecting through a streaming server first. This will always add latency, not reduce it.

Yes and no.
As it is now, ZOS (or any game developer for that matter) must tweak the game for a huge variety of Hardware and Software specs and combinations. Often having to adjust to the lowest. If the game is streamed from one big datacenter, they have only one spec to adjust to. And a very high end spec at that. That's a huge plus.

This is correct, but it does not cover the entire picture.

Most of the lag we get is server side. Cyrodiil lag is most certainly server side and would have very little, if any, reduction if Zos moved the client to the cloud.

All the cloud would affect is the latency between the PC and server and even then it will not eliminate all of that.

Then there is the issues when there are issues cloud side. Zos would be helpless and would be at the mercy of Google to remedy issues. Google would not have the same priorities at fixing issues as Zos has. Anyone who has worked on an expansive network with both leased and owned circuits sees the very slow response service providers have compared to the in house response to owned lines.

Linaleah

anitajoneb17_ESO wrote: »

Linaleah wrote: »

and to add to the, or more like to reiterate. Stadia is not going to be free. you are going to have to buy the console itself, and pay for its monthly use on top of that.

There is no "Stadia console" and there will not be any "Stadia Console". It will all be playable with what we already have (mouse, controllers, keyboards, touchscreens, etc.)
.

are you SURE about that? well ok, lets assume ts not a console, but rather an app. which you'll have to have something to install it on (hello, google pushing more chrome casts on people) . but ok. lets say you have a device decent enough to run that app. its NOT going to be free, and neither will the service itself.

as for pushing the infrastructure, gaming while a very large industry is still a relatively small industry compared to video streaming. so you can thank Netflix and youtube, not google for any infrastructure advances we get. that said. none of those companies are doing US any favors. they are doing for profit, not out of the goodness of their hearts. so we WILL be paying for it, one way or another. the question is - is that worth it? and personaly I think no. no its not. and second question is - is this replacing traditional computing any time soon no. no its not.

P.S. I'm not sure how old you are. but me personaly, I never though that we'd be quicker with pen and paper then computers. why? cause at the time i was already using calculators. computers were still too expensive to have one at home and us getting a small computer lab in school was a BFD. becasue not every school got those either. and having precedent of other machinery speeding me up, heck I mean... we had typewriters for decades and we had them becasue it was faster and cleaner then writing by hand. however. this is something very different. this is a similar trend that is trying to convince people that renting your housing is soooo much better then ownership. ownership just sucks, its a headache, bla bla bla. done by people who profit more from you renting.

zaria

Linaleah wrote: »

anitajoneb17_ESO wrote: »

Linaleah wrote: »

and to add to the, or more like to reiterate. Stadia is not going to be free. you are going to have to buy the console itself, and pay for its monthly use on top of that.

There is no "Stadia console" and there will not be any "Stadia Console". It will all be playable with what we already have (mouse, controllers, keyboards, touchscreens, etc.)
.

are you SURE about that? well ok, lets assume ts not a console, but rather an app. which you'll have to have something to install it on (hello, google pushing more chrome casts on people) . but ok. lets say you have a device decent enough to run that app. its NOT going to be free, and neither will the service itself.

as for pushing the infrastructure, gaming while a very large industry is still a relatively small industry compared to video streaming. so you can thank Netflix and youtube, not google for any infrastructure advances we get. that said. none of those companies are doing US any favors. they are doing for profit, not out of the goodness of their hearts. so we WILL be paying for it, one way or another. the question is - is that worth it? and personaly I think no. no its not. and second question is - is this replacing traditional computing any time soon no. no its not.

P.S. I'm not sure how old you are. but me personaly, I never though that we'd be quicker with pen and paper then computers. why? cause at the time i was already using calculators. computers were still too expensive to have one at home and us getting a small computer lab in school was a BFD. becasue not every school got those either. and having precedent of other machinery speeding me up, heck I mean... we had typewriters for decades and we had them becasue it was faster and cleaner then writing by hand. however. this is something very different. this is a similar trend that is trying to convince people that renting your housing is soooo much better then ownership. ownership just sucks, its a headache, bla bla bla. done by people who profit more from you renting.

You could run it as an app on an smart tv as long as you can use an controller or mouse and keyboard on it.
You could run it on an old console as long as controller is compatible. same with weak pc's.
This is the upside together with no install of games and you have no comparability issues client side.

Server side you are obviously limited to the games the system support who is limited compared to total number of games for most systems.
Main downside is that if you have weak internet it will not work or work horribly.

And it cost money obvosly.
playstation now actualy have eso so you can test how it work.
Plastation now is not that expensive a bit more than eso+ but you get access to lots of games.
Pretty sure Sony assume most will install the game rater than stream it for days so performance will be worse than an PS4, PS2 and 3 games must be streamed but they require less resources on server.