I think Microsoft may be in the best place to weather this storm, as it sounds like Google wants to do exactly the same thing Microsoft is looking to do. We will just see who does it best. Either way it seems like those 2 will have a leg up on everyone else.

A real threat lmao, that's funny. Remember when the Ouya was "a real threat"?

How is it a threat again? Maybe if Stadia released right around the time of PS Pro/X1X with a similar price then maybe. Remember when Mobile gaming was the trend and people thought console gaming was a dying breed? Yeah what are those casuals up these days.

It's a bit early for an April Fools article, Forbes

If it works as promised and they deliver exclusives then yes, it is a huge threat. I'll still pick up my PS5 of course though, but Stadia could be pretty awesome.

Only half the world has access to the internet and 10% of the ones that do have high speed 4 k internet so I don't understand this article its grade 2 math.

Please stop.

More of a threat to MS and Sony as they all have majority of the same games and features. Nintendo actually may stand out more because their different.

it doesn't, next.

It's another competitor. It has a lot of hurdles to get over in order to accomplish a feat such as mass domination/victory of the market. If it were to strive for such a goal, then the infrastructure would need to be vastly updated in a lot of places (perhaps they'd push for that), otherwise it'll only appeal to those with the proper data speeds, etc.

And this is before we get into the notion of the games themselves. Sony has proven to be a beast when it comes to 1st party games, alongside 2nd party exclusives (timed or otherwise). Nintendo has iconic IP's with the trait of always taking a new go at how we play our games - with the Switch being a successful endeavour.

If Microsoft does something with its latest studio acquisitions, it'll have its own pool of titles to market and grab gamers attention (Outside of Halo, Gears, Forza). Which leaves us with the third party market and how gamers will desire its consumption.

I do believe Google is powerful enough and positioned in a way for Stadia to be successful - at an increasing amount over the course of time, but success doesn't = doom for all others.

Edit: And truthfully it's not as if Nintendo, Sony and Microsoft will just let Stadia eclipse them. Competition breeds evolution, trial and error, etc. It'll shake things up, sure.

Stadia is definitely no threat to Sony or Nintendo.

This service has a shot. Google is becoming a 1st party with their own studios. That right there is enough to beat Microsoft. It seems the people are split on this 50/50. Reasonable people see the potential and the trolls just spout nonsense and parrot every thing they hear. So that is another sign that the video game consumers at large will give this a fair shake.

The real concern is whether Google will stay the course if the road gets bumpy. Do they have what it takes to see their vison through?

lol no it doesn't.

No it doesnt.

On WiFi I get 400 to 450mb with wired connect I get 1 gig

So I am definitely trying this out and I do not have data cap

I know it’s not the same for everyone but if the price similar to Xbox game pass, I am in there like swim wear......4K 60 frames sounds amazing evening if it was a bit compressed it still would not look that horrible that I would not want to play

If everything work well and it get Japan games too I won’t upgrade to ps5 I do not care for Sony first party as everyone mines a 3rd party only system so I have no ties to ps5 or Xbox two

Only thing that would make upgrade ps4 to Xbox two is if the Xbox and switch keep up this friendly situation going I kind of like it plus I have a switch so that would be only hidden ace Xbox have other then that Stadia is looking beautiful each day to me just hope the price is good

and the internet is a threat to Google Stadia

No, it doesn't, lol. Not that I expect Forbes to have any sort of insight into the state of the gaming industry.

It doesn't.. yet. Residential internet bandwidth speeds and quality are going to be the biggest barrier to entry. Streaming 4K/60fps takes a good amount of bandwidth and will need very good response time. It's one thing to watch a 4K HDR movie where it can buffer video, but a game needs to be able to respond to your actions and that needs to scale to millions of users without impacting individual performance. I mean hell I can tell whether or not my TV is on game mode or not, and that's a roughly 30-40 ms response time difference. The pitch of being able to play "any game on any device" is going to rely heavily on our cellular phone providers and their eventual roll out of high speed 5G networks. Once 5G technology is actually widely available we'll be looking at data cap issues, since cellular providers are relying heavily on selling chunks of data to maintain their profit margins.

In short, regardless of how solid Google's Stadia tech is there'll be multiple barriers to consuming that amount of data for individual households/customers. This'll be a great product/solution for Google Fiber and Verizon FIOS users, but that's about it.

ah these articles again, no its really not a threat at all, its just an extra option that really won't affect those already in with all or one of the big 3. Forbes really misses the mark most of the time when it comes to gaming. too bad you can't post on these articles like a year later so you can gloat that you were right :)

Until it flops and hardly anyone buys it.

No. It does not. It's a different market. Sony is much more of a threat to Nintendo, and vice-versa, than a new streaming service.

One thing Microsoft or Google wants you to forget is that many things running down your bandwidth at home. Most people have a 50 mbits/ sec. Which always go down by half after 7 pm due to the high traffic on their servers at that time. Then if you live with friends, family, kids.... Etc, chances are they all use YouTube, Netflix.... Etc.
After all that, how much bandwidth do you think you would have left for a true stable experience and not a mess of a game changing resolution every minutes or so.
The other lie I noticed in their keynote, is when they claim the controller becomes your wifi signal provider and therefore gets right of the middle guy. Unless Google becomes a broadband provider, that is pure PR BS.

so was mobile gaming -_-

Possibly but even if (and that's a big if) it is a threat it will not be for another 20-30 years it's just too early for it.

dumb name like vita.

It has to sell first for it to be a threat. Call me if it turns out this system isn’t the next Ouya or Steam Box, because if it sells as well as those, it will “revolutionize” nothing.

No, no it doesnt

Still waiting on Google Fiber to be more mainstream....

Overconfident much? Panasonic, Philips, Nokia, SNK, Atari, NEC, Sega. Suddenly got déjà vu.

Could have ended the title sentence at Xbox.

Google can't compete without great new ip exclusives and a better controller design because that thing looks ridiculous. They do have the funds and tech to compete but it takes more than that to make a name for yourself in gaming like Nintendo Sony and Microsoft has accomplished. If they were smart they should have launched a physical console as well with great design.

Nah, not at all. Harrison is a smart guy, you can't underestimate him but, it's just because of him Sony has nothing to worry about. While at Sony, Harrison assembled a strong group of first-party developers, plain and simple. It just took the needed time to realize the potential they had and PS3 helped them see that. Microsoft has cause to fear because, look at their first-party. Gears has lost its identity and is trying to do what Microsoft does best, and can only do, and that's mimic others. In this case, Naughty Dog should be flattered. Gears 5 is going the Uncharted route because Rod Ferguson doesn't know what else to do, his plan failed. Rare? When did they last make anything good on Xbox, period. 343 Industries is now going to pick your pocket clean as they adopt the Games as a Service business model, which a horrendous move by the way, for Halo, which is the only plus to streaming, no more DLC or microtransactions and you get 100% what you pay for, no more developers rushing a game that'll be plagued with updates because they're lazy, and then disecting the game and selling it to you piece by piece after their vacation, that ends. No, Microsoft has cause to worry, even their acquisition of studios was poorly done. Ninja Theory have done anything worthwhile since Heavenly Sword, their latest games on psychosis was HORRRRRRIBLE! Nintendo doesn't have much of an online service to survive if it goes that way, maybe that's why they're letting their guard down a little, is to survive, they're going to need a ton of servers they don't have, they either yield or die but, again, Songs already done this.

Not at all.

I like the idea of Stadia and it will be a good product as Google usually makes decent products. XB is not at all threatened as they are going down a similar path and are farther ahead in gaming in general. Sony, still has key franchises that gamers love so they will be fine. And Nintendo could take a "can't beat them, join them" approach so they aren't in trouble either.

No.
No, it does not.
The only reason so many companies are pushing hard for this is because it represents a firm step towards an all-digital future, where companies control everything and consumers own nothing they've bought unless companies say otherwise.

The majority of major countries, heck even cities, in the world, don't have strong enough infrastructure to support this in the way people think they can.
This is targeted more towards the top 1% who can afford that super high bandwidth, and it is probably their hope that targeting this demographic will allow them to grow the number of people who rely upon it.

It's not gonna happen.
Stadia isn't a threat; it's a joke that big investors, desperate for control over consumers' product rights, want to take seriously.

In order to that they're going have to the one thing Sony and Nintendo do on their consoles and that's deliver when it comes to exclusives without those they have no chance I mean they might knock Xbox around but not Sony and Nintendo.

Maybe in 10 years, they can try again.

How is this a threat when not every country has fast internet speed.

It wont get the competitive scene so therefore it wont steal users. What it will do is bring in people who , up until now, would not have purchased a console.

Yeah it might work, in controlled conditions. You put netflix in to the mix, you tube and then streaming a game. lets see it work on a 40mb average UK home speed.

Gameinformer tested Doom on Stadia on a controlled environment and they said...

"More to the point, I was missing shots, and it was initially difficult to time melee hits against enemies. It's not that the input lag makes Doom unplayable, but it makes it harder, and it makes you worse at the game. It's the kind of thing that would make you reboot your console and check your TV settings."

Is this a threat to consoles? I would say... Today's real world internet infrastructure represents a threat to Stadia.

Studios acquisition is the real threat.

Ugh. Please stop with these stupid articles. It’s as much of a threat as your iPhone App Store.

Yeah, for the 20% (not an actual number) of gamers that have high speed internet and unlimited data caps.

Except it doesn’t, like st all. This is up there with any cloud gaming service before. Depending on price and exclusives I don’t see this crippling any of the big 3.

Edit: ok I had to come back because I just saw an article from GameInformer stating that they played Doom on Stadia and input lag is noticeable... so there ya go, guess the threat ain’t real.

No it does not. I was in a weekend stress test for this and the input lag alone made me lose interest.

If they fix it, maybe we can talk again.

Ya it does.

Nope, the internet still isn't fast enough, most people around the world YES lots of them are connected but most of them their bandwidth effing sucks!, not to mention the ridiculous billing costs of monthly payments and restricted GB plans, the video showing that you see a video about a videogame in YouTube and then right away you play that game withing that video is pure PR BS!, for that to happen you need a ridiculous high bandwidth in order to perform that way and that's something the world is not ready for, is still on diapers, this PR nonsense is kinda of similar like that one of Crackdown 3 cloud physics thing.

Who wants to play laggy BS? At least with XCloud I can still have an Xbox with the games.

Yea, no. The only thing Stadia threatens is boring everyone to tears at this E3 if that's all anyone talks about.

It's a good and bad idea. I can see this working out really well for streamers, casual players and anyone with a good internet connection that isn't bothered by the lack of graphic fidelity. For the most part, this could work and work well. The downside is if you're a pixel pusher, or want to play a game with minimal input lag, the service won't offer you what you're looking for. Of course, people can adapt to input lag, but it's not ideal. Long story short, I think it might work for them. We adopted MP3's and they're way lower quality than CD audio. We grew to love streaming tv shows and movies and again, they're way lower quality than Blu-ray. Consoles and hardware is expensive and this takes that initial hit out of the equation. It's not ideal, but it could take off. I'm not against this idea. Not really jumping for joy about it either, but I can see this being viable.

*Edit* An always-on connection could be an issue on metered connections and poor connection areas. That's a real world struggle ideas like this will always have to fight against. Also, what if you want to play a game but your internet is out? It'll be time to break out Monopoly and Battleship, I guess.

What is in it for Google when millions start using Stadia?

They get lots and lots of personal gaming-data (they already have all your user data) - they can analyze your gameplay with their AI and probably try to determine things about you as a person. Determine your IQ, your reflexes, your attention to details, your pacing, how you communicate with other players etc etc etc.. So many new possibilites in privacy exploitation!

Eh not to much because it streams games. Streaming games is only good for citys in the u.s. as most rural areas dont even have anything better then dsl

according to digital foundry, with 100mbits/s internet you can play 4k and 60fps games with only 170ms latency and that means almost no input lag.but the problem is most people in the world, even in US don't have such a fast connection.

We all know this not a threat. The gaming world will naturally shift to streaming once the conditions are right (no latency, no data caps, worldwide network improvements, etc.).
If this happens, everyone will offer this service and the quality of the games will be the decision factor and on that matter Google has shown ZERO .
Guys, enjoy your console/PC for at least 20 more years.

Yeah, good luck with that article.

maybe shouldn't have fired those in house devs you had. fuck you wotc and fuck you hasbro, you didn't deserve this amount of succes, only Larian did. I'm glad that Larian has some dignity and doesn't just make BG4 to maximize profits, even though I would want them to make a new BG game.