Google tries to reassure gamers about Stadia speed and latency concerns

Google's Phil Harrison tells Ars that Stadia game streaming should provide a smooth, full-resolution experience on Internet connections above a threshold of 20 to 30mbps, a level that should allow for "hundreds of millions of potential players in the markets that we're talking about."

Read Full Story >>
Srhalo1942d ago

No thanks.

Your not fooling me.

AnthonyDavis1942d ago

Hehe I like Phil Harrison especially when he was the SCE exec. But he likes to dodge questions and cherry coat things. Latencey will be an issue and the controller being WiF doesn’t fix it because WiFi slow and not completely reliable as Bluetooth.

Segata1942d ago

Phil is the one who spouted garbage like rumble is last gen tech.

boing11942d ago

Yeah, but controller doesn't connect to the console. It connects to the server that is streaming a game for you. That's why it's wifi. It cuts out the middle man (console) for lower latency. Also, you will be able to use this controller on any device without pairing because it pairs with your account, not hardware. Still though, there has to be some lag because physics.

wakeupcall41942d ago

Did you play Project Stream?

Timesplitter141942d ago (Edited 1942d ago )

If anyone wants to get a taste of how poor the input responsiveness will be with Stadia, here's a free game that lets you simulate it: https://phil-sa.itch.io/inp...

Spoiler: aiming at things becomes nearly impossible with a 100ms lag

Melankolis1942d ago

Thanks. I'll try it later when my wife & kids are sleeping.

thexmanone1942d ago

Have you tried Stadia? You seen sure of yourself, trying too make your opinion seem like a fact.

Timesplitter141942d ago (Edited 1942d ago )

Well I'm not saying I know how much network lag there will be with Stadia; but I'm saying if it's near 80ms or more (like the kind of ping you have when playing a lot of online games), games become so unresponsive that they're either impossible to play or not fun to play at all

Digital Foundry measured Stadia's input lag in an "ideal" network setup at Google's GDC booth, and it came in at 166-188ms (that's the total lag with display taken into account). Usually, a 60fps console game with a decent TV has roughly 60-80ms input lag, so that means Stadia's network lag in an ideal setup is near 100ms

Either way, people who played DOOM have already said that the input lag and video artifacts are pretty jarring

rainslacker1941d ago

Input lag is merely the lag between when you press the button, and the time it takes to register in the program. It isn't measured against when the display actually updates based on that input, as that should be fixed, or at least pretty consistent, except in scenarios where frame rate isn't fixed, in which case, the input polling it timed differently. The input lag should never be higher than the input poll of the game loop. If it is, there's a chance that it will skip a pool, and be registered on the next poll, which in a 30fps game can be every 66ms. for a 30fps game, where the pooling is frame rate locked, it'll poll every 33ms. a 60fps game tends to use this same input timing, but skips every other frame, however, potentially it can poll ever 16ms.

What you're talking about is the perceived time that the user feels it registered their input, as an input may not immediately be registered in the next frame update, and ore often than not, any action associated with a button press doesn't have an immediate on screen representation. Fighting games for instance use strict timing on button presses measured on the frames of an animation or action event(Like you hit the character). If you miss that window, it doesn't register, or in some cases, it may lock you out of another action if it happens too late or too early in the sequence. Like DOA won't register the throw button for a combo throw if you press it too early, and it'll lock out that move again for a few frames, which is about all you have to do such a thing.

100ms lag just isn't acceptable for the kinds of games they're talking about putting up on the system. If people have that, then it's more likely their home network causing issues. 100-150 might be OK for most MMO's, as they aren't as strict on button input timing. Most games can run fine on 50-60ms lag, but some games may show less than desireable results if the lag goes up by even a few milliseconds.

+ Show (1) more replyLast reply 1941d ago
bloop1942d ago (Edited 1942d ago )

I'll believe it when I see it. I have 250mb wired and I still get lag in 2d fighting games. I did the free trial on PS Now, and while some games played fine, others were practically unplayable, like RDR that has high input latency to begin with. I can't imagine what it would be like streaming online MP games with high player counts. Average speeds just aren't there yet.

PurpHerbison1942d ago

" I have 250mb wired and I still get lag in 2d fighting games."

Majority of your opponents use wifi.

+ Show (1) more replyLast reply 1941d ago
2pacalypsenow1942d ago (Edited 1942d ago )

That's not something they can guarantee to everyone since it's not just about mbps.

"hundreds of millions of potential players in the markets that we're talking about."

What markets are these? Since majority of the country doesn't have a good enough connection or the data cap to make this their go to platform.

Nitrowolf21942d ago (Edited 1942d ago )

I think Google is betting on 5G in home services to be as good as providers are making it out to be

Either that or a work out some sort of new technology that allows This type of service to be possible on low speeds

I just hate This idea

A lot of big cable companies out there half the speeds to support it but the problem with their infrastructure is everybody shares the same connections versus fiber

I have 1gbps speeds and even then I’ll see Netflix drop in quality from hd to sd.

And let’s not get into lag for games with poor netcoding, and on top of latency this is going to add

2pacalypsenow1942d ago

I agree with the article, you will not be able to stream a game and play online, the experience will be horrible.

And with the biggest games right now being online games (Fortnite, Apex), I don't see this as being just another Onlive.

DaDrunkenJester1942d ago


Difference here is that OnLive didn't have the server infrastructure that Google can provide.

I'm not saying this will turn out to be perfect, it's almost certain to not work as well as Google hopes it will when the general public gets it's hands on it. But I won't damn them until I try it myself. Streaming will eventually be a bigger part in gaming... we are going to be seeing a lot of advancements in it within the next 5 years.

rainslacker1941d ago

I think 5G will be as good as they say it will be. The actual standard is good.

I wouldn't trust ISP's to be good about getting it to the customers at a reasonable rate anytime in the near future though.

RizBiz1942d ago

I imagine Google isn't as egocentric as the average Yank. There are a lot of people outside of the USA.

isarai1942d ago

Just PR BS, this is only going to have peoples attention till they play a games on it, and they made the grand mistake of picking DOOM to be one of their flagship experiences. Like you couldnt make a better game to point out the latency issues this WILL have.

Chexs19901942d ago

To be fair, IF, and I mean IF, the experience is as smooth as they say, they couldn't pick a better one to display it either :O

demonicale1942d ago

You've not even seen it working yet ffs!