Google's Stadia Represents A Genuine, Real Threat To Xbox, PlayStation And Even Nintendo

There are many extant questions surrounding Google Stadia, but it seems that game streaming finally represents a genuine threat to Xbox, PlayStation, Nintendo and the idea of the game console that has largely held since the NES.

Oculus Quest Giveaway! Click Here to Enter
The story is too old to be commented.
Nitrowolf2209d ago (Edited 209d ago )

I’ll wait until it releases for it to be in more real world setting, cause unless they can overcome data speeds, caps and such here in the United States, it’s gonna have some big hurdles to go over

piroh209d ago

Not only that. Its all about games, there is no threat without games. Google should buy EA or Activision to stay in the business

Palitera208d ago

They surely can make a lot of partnerships.

But cloud gaming won't get rid of input lag probably for decades.

bouzebbal208d ago

No single player no couch coop I think home consoles still have a bright future.

darthv72207d ago

@bouz... you can play pretty much any game SP if you really wanted to. Some are just better with others though. couch co-op can still work with this. Two people playing in the same room, on their own screens, each with their own controller.

Baza207d ago (Edited 207d ago )

I wanna know what their solution is for connection drops. Nothing is more frustrating than when your hardwired 200MB/sec connection drops and your game lags then kicks you out. And WiFi is even more unreliable. Consistency will be a big problem for Stadia.

bouzebbal207d ago (Edited 207d ago )

@darth: you gotta be online to play.. You stream, you don't download. Games are all running on a data center somewhere.

I think you are missing something.

darthv72207d ago

@bouz, you are online right now commenting. You mean to tell me that when you play your ps4 or xb1 or pc that you are completely off the grid?

I play a lot of SP games but my systems are connected to the internet. We live in a connected world... it's just the way it is.

lazyboyblue207d ago

This is my fear. Google coming in and muddying the water for everybody.
Hypothetically, say they buy CD project red.
We still get whatever they make (after cyberpunk which is tied to a publisher I believe) but we have to play it with artefacts, compression and a ton of input lag.

F**k that.

fr0sty207d ago

Stadia is PlayStation Now with a crappy controller. It isn't threatening anybody but itself.

WombBat207d ago (Edited 207d ago )

All of you make great points.

My reasons why it will fail:
- Terrible input lag
- image quality drops
- abrupt stuttering/buffering
- distracting resolution dips
- lack of exclusives
- invasion of privacy (that's how theyll achieve a low price point)
- not necessarily owning your games library (they can lock your account if you post something against their ideology)
- pushing their leftist agenda (instead of remaining apolitical).

Overall, it is a fair statement to say that a streamed version of a game is an inferior version of the game. As it's base, a streamed game can only deteriorate more and more given the network circumstances, and to compensate for that, they bank on convenience, tangential features, and sharing to offset that. But, the game experience itself is what matters most. It's why Xbox changed Game Pass to allow for games to be downloaded and played instead of just streamed.

+ Show (6) more repliesLast reply 207d ago
rpvenom208d ago (Edited 208d ago )

Is it just me or the journalist at Forbes always has the dumbest opinions when it comes to gaming..

stuna1208d ago

No it's not just you who feels that way lol. Forbes should just stick to what they know best.....It definitely isn't gaming.

gamingunited208d ago (Edited 208d ago )

The thing with Forbes is it's an investment magazine. If you simply assume the person writing the article is just trying to increase the value of there portfolio Forbes articles will make a lot more sense.

Palitera208d ago

They are so bad in their articles that I resisted believing they are THE Forbes magazine...

rainslacker207d ago


Their gaming stuff is not really part of their financial magazine. It's a contributor type of deal, where people can post their articles, and get paid either by forbes, or based on the hits they generate. The writers are forbes are usually some of the most clueless people out there, and if they were trying to make a financial analysis based on it being forbes, they are extremely bad at their job, because they should have been saying at the start of this gen how MS screwed up, and Sony was running away with the show, as everything was obviously pointing to that. Instead, they instigated plenty of click bait to try and bring Sony down.

There is no impartiality in their gaming news or opinion pieces, and investors don't care about people's opinions, just facts.

So, when I think of forbes as a financial magazine, it actually makes no sense that this kind of crap is even on there. I doubt these writers are so successful they have a huge portfolio to begin with. They're just journalistic hacks who don't care about actual journalism.

demonicale207d ago

Why? they have a point with this!

indysurfn207d ago

@gamingunited Your point on! Finally someone else understands. And now maybe they will understand Patcher's articles and opinions too.

+ Show (3) more repliesLast reply 207d ago
tehpees3208d ago

I think people are underestimating Google when they compare this to On Live. Google have as much cash as MS and if they could make their brand successful Google can do the same. Beating out the others depends on how many embrace game streaming but I think anybody who thinks this will die is in for a rude awakening.

Chromebooks have been beating out other laptops in the past 2 years so do not underestimate the hype men from Google.

2pacalypsenow208d ago (Edited 208d ago )

Lol Chromebooks cost $200.

Google going against SONY/MS/Nintendo is like Chrome OS going against Mac OS and Windows.

It doesn't stand a chance, it might coexist, but will not replace it, plus the United Sates doesn't have the infrastructure for this to be mainstream, also Google seems to forget people have data caps.

tehpees3208d ago (Edited 208d ago )

"It doesn't stand a chance"
Said the Sony sceptics who believed trying to implement disc based media would never happen after Sega failed to do it (including Atari and Rare).
And the Xbox sceptics who believed a console from Microsoft would never work.

Yes, believe it or not Sony WERE being met with scepticism when they first entered here.

gamingunited208d ago

How much money they have doesn't matter if no one buys it.

UltraNova207d ago

So if money is the solution to everything , why hasn't MS won any console gens so far?

When will people learn...

demonicale207d ago

Exactly. someone who get's it!

DogJosha207d ago


I've never heard people say those things for Sony or Microsoft, but I've definitely heard it for Ouya, Steambox, Kinect, VR, and so on. Believe it or not, a lot of us actually analyze a product before bashing it. When some of us expect something to fail, there is a reason, and plenty of reasons have been listed that needs to be addressed.

SuperSonic91207d ago

BTW Shuhei Yoshida was there at the keynote which suggests that he has some official business there too unlike Uncle Phil who was not there.
Google and Sony are up to something.

+ Show (4) more repliesLast reply 207d ago
porkChop207d ago

Yeah, that's the key thing. Stadia has a ton of potential, and the capabilities are pretty cool. But it all comes down to how well it actually works in the real world. If Google's smart, they'll do a public beta during the summer.

HighPlayer28207d ago

Facts the company that executes cloud streaming will have an advantage in the stream wars and my money is on cloud azure master Microsoft.

rainslacker207d ago

If google's stadia represents a genuine threat to the console makers, then so does PC gaming, and even mobile. Both have more people playing games on them than all the console makers combined. Even if we discount mobile because it doesn't have the same kinds of games, PC gaming does get a lot of the same games as consoles, and even more.

But, PC and mobile haven't caused the console sales to go down. So, all the punditry about how they were going to take over was just wrong. Same way this is probably wrong, or at least it will be a good long while before the market shifts that drastically.

Nitrowolf2207d ago (Edited 207d ago )

I think the big difference here is that this is more so a shift in the kind of Media you play rather than what you play on. I mean we went from cartridges, to CD to dvd, than to blue ray and saw a significant leap in digital media. Maybe perhaps this is just the “next” step, take away the download and just stream it. Like we saw with movies- Film reels, VHS, DVD, blu-Ray, digital, streaming

That is probably where the concern is coming from tbh. They’re taking away any form of content that you can store locally either physical based of downloaded, and handing all ownership to the supplier.
Pc and Mobile is just another platform/device that offer games.
Sadly if this is where we are heading, I won’t have apart of it. I like having the option to own my content locally and hate the idea of streaming a video game. Even though I do have PS NOW, I’m in the market of rebuying a cheap PS3

We know Microsoft is gonna push for this, Sony without a question is gonna overhaul PS Now to compete.

Nintendo is semi doing it in japan already for third party games (assassin creed origin) so it wouldn’t be a surprise if they continue to expand on it either

rainslacker207d ago

It's a step in a new consumption method. It has it's advantages and disadvantages over other options.

I don't consider the move from carts to optical media, and in some cases back to carts, as a major change in the way people consume the media. It's just a different storage medium.

Streaming isn't a storage medium, but an actual new way to play games.

I think the concern is really just doom and gloom so people can get hits for their site. Streaming will have an audience. It may succeed wildly, it may fail miserably. It isn't going to replace traditional gaming for the foreseeable future, and with all the Big 3 making consoles for next gen, it's probably not something we have to worry about for at least another 5-7 years, if one wants to be pessimistic about it.

There can only be so many successful streaming services, and if say MS or Sony fail at theirs, or need to drop out, their only options are to try and keep the traditional alive, or go to software only.

AzakUK207d ago

In the UK we've got unlimited data caps and majority of places have decent internet, so that's not the issue for me. My big issue is button delay, I'm really not convinced they can eliminate it enough that it makes it worth playing games on over PS5.

Games I'm sure will be announced soon, people forget that it was revealed at GDC, a conference aimed at developers, not consumers. Other developers don't care about games, they just care about the tech and how they can get their game on the platform.

+ Show (3) more repliesLast reply 207d ago
SuperSonic91209d ago (Edited 209d ago )

Streaming games with low powered graphics found in switch is indeed a big threat to Nintendo on top of mobile gaming eating up its handheld market.
You will see handheld Android game devices dedicated to play Stadia games. This I guarantee.

Also Amazon, EA, Nvidia are also launching their own game streaming services.

Casepb208d ago

But if Stadia comes to Switch, then why would you ever buy new hardware?

optimus208d ago

that's not what he said at all. 🙄

FuckN4G_TrashSite209d ago

You can already play your games anywhere on Switch so no it no a threat.

indysurfn206d ago

I might add without having to have fast internet connection!

Interloper209d ago

It's also a real threat to my 1TB data limit. xD