> We devoted an entire month of resources to this project and thought that was enough!

...is not just wildly inaccurate, but also disrespectful to the people who spent years working on it.

Even at the time of its death, crossplay, cross save etc. didn't work except for a tiny handful of games. The Stadia Plus Chrome extension made a bunch of improvements on their own. There was never a desktop app. No ultra wide support. No RTX. Never got vsync working right.

In the years it was alive, what did they add? How come GeForce Now saw such activity and Stadia got... nothing? I wouldn't blame the people working on it, but some manager in Google really screwed that up.

Having only OpenGL/D3D was like if the only way you could do network programming was via python. Python is easy enough to use but it’s not well optimized in every use case. Vulkan is like the C of graphics programming. It’s useful when you want to get in there at a lower level, because the higher level abstractions leave too much performance on the table.

OpenGL was a high level interface, so to speak. And due to this, it made some things easier and other things harder. Most notably, you didn't have the low level access some people/projects wished for. Some time ago, there was a push for a more low level interface and Vulkan was supposed to be the platform-independent, open solution. Naturally, when your interface is lower level, you also need to provide more boilerplate. So Vulkan is slower to get up and running but that's not a particular fault of Vulkan I'd say. The story around it is rather interesting. It is based on AMD Mantle which was discontinued on behalf of Vulkan. Unfortunately, not every vendor was pleased with an open interface. Microsoft released DirectX 12 and Apple released Metal as direct competitors with very similar (if not identical) goals, fragmenting the whole landscape in the process.

Today, Vulkan is supported on Linux and Windows. Apple provides GPU drivers for macOS themselves (not the GPU vendor) and never implemented Vulkan support to not cannibalize its own Metal (I suppose). However, there exists MoltenVK, an open project that creates a translation layer from Vulkan to Metal.

It’s very irritating.

And if they did want to stream a game from time to time (for me it was being able to play on a laptop anywhere, not just on my own LAN), Steam games were usually cheaper from sales and resellers, there was actual multiplayer, and the Steam ecosystem has a bunch of other advantages. It was just a better service.

And GeForce Now had better hardware, ray tracing, customizable graphics settings, vsync, etc.

If you don't need to stream a game, well, you don't need any of these services. But if you did, GeForce Now and Steam were just plain better than Stadia.

GFN is good especially if you live in an area serviced by it's RTX 3080 streaming "rigs" which make it reasonably good value for money vs the cost of building an equivalent PC. But it's still the most expensive service on the market PLUS you also have to BYO library which rules out entire groups of potential users - Nvidia knows this as well based on how hard they're pushing the free-to-play titles. On top of that a lot of titles aren't even playable on it; I have a steam library of ~700 titles and apparently only ~140ish of them can be played on GFN.

Personally I like the GFN idea of being able to "rent" hardware and that's a business model other companies have proven works to a certain degree since ~2015 (Shadow.tech being a good example). However I don't think it has the same mass market appeal of the other surviving services which give you the hardware + a huge library of content just like Netflix/Disney+/Stan etc.

Something being tragic doesn't make it not a waste of time. The writing was on the wall since day one. Nobody was going to pay full price for games that evaporate the moment the servers shut down being offered by the most ADHD company in existence. If you chose to spend your time and energy working on that and expected to accomplish anything other than being paid you were a fool.

Eh that's true for Steam, Epic, GoG, et al. If anything, regular people trust Google way more than those other companies since they use the browser/search engine/mail/youtube every single day

I do think it was doomed from the start, but only because the subset of people that have high speed internet, disposable income, like gaming and DON'T already own a PC or console is a very very small market

I think it's appropriate enough to interpret the commenter in jest and see that their point is that google spent 1/nth of the required time/resources necessary for it to succeed.

In that light, it reads to me more like having some understanding for the people working on it that they were set up to fail, and the failure is not a reflection of their effort.

Fortunately you are here to be anonymously offended on their behalf.

I didn't work on Stadia, but I did work on Google Fiber for a couple years only to have almost all that work cancelled, and I'm still sad about it many years later. At the time, I really wouldn't have appreciated people on HN rubbing salt in the wound.

In fact I think Google has some of the best engineers in the world. Sadly, they're handled by some of the worst management and leadership in history. Your CEO has no vision or charisma and the whole company is just spinning in place, waiting for something to happen. Your middle management looks like little fiefdoms actively working against each other in some eternal civil strife. Google is its own worst enemy.

From the outside it looks like you guys are a bunch of really smart lab rats stuck in some perverse maze, being forced to run little Hunger Games style competitions to entertain some higher power.

I wouldn't want to work there for a million dollars. It jumped the shark a decade ago.

Fiber was just another tragedy in a long long list, another fight Google picked and then chickened out of. Google hasn't had a major success in recent memory, just a graveyard of half-assed attempts. But that's a bigger cultural problem at your company, not the fault of any engineer or single team. I sincerely feel for you, and I hope you got out and found something more constructive.

Edit: Sorry, not Fi, Fiber.

@GoogleStadia "Stadia is not shutting down. Rest assured we're always working on bringing more great games to the platform and Stadia Pro. Let us know if you have other questions." Jul 29, 2022

2 Months ago

I’ve seen a few developers (Ryan Gordon, IIRC?) saying that the Stadia SDK was actually great. It was basically just a bog standard Vulkan/Linux environment with much fewer unpleasant surprises than consoles.

In the 10 years I was at Google I never really had to face a "crunch" situation but there I was right before Christmas working til midnight on the very tiny bit of Stadia I had somehow been dragged into despite telling my manager I didn't want to be anywhere near it because it was radioactive (My rule learned the hard way was always stay away from the "hot" project at a company like Google. It just becomes a feeding frenzy of empire building and egos, and steady incremental contribution will get you nowhere.)

I had it much better than most though. If I recall: The original app setup (integrated into the existing Home app) was tossed at the last minute. The entire out of box process for the controller redone in the process. In literally the last few weeks before ship date.

The controller folks I knew were heroes. It's sad to see their hard work thrown away.

There's no way Stadia in its entire existence made enough revenue to cover the sheer number of SWE-hours put into it, especially the spent SWE-hours caused by last minute product changes; which nobody further up ever had to pay a consequence for.

https://partner.steamgames.com/doc/features/cloudgaming

VS the days/weeks/months it took you to port to Stadia, only to have the entire service shut down.

The point is that there are many PC streaming services that are basically "no porting required", whereas Stadia opted for a strange sort-of-console, sort-of-not model (despite PSNow and XCloud already being able to stream actual console games already) that required you to spend dev hours porting your game.

It backfired because most devs didn't want to (or couldn't afford to) port their x86 game targeting Windows to some tiny proprietary platform, ESPECIALLY when it's Google hosting it. Of the few that did (Orcs Must Die), Google arranged some exclusivity deal with them, lying that Stadia could do things no gaming PC or cloud streaming service could do due to Stadia's special scale or something. It was a lie. When the exclusivity expired, it showed up on Steam and GeForce Now and ran perfectly fine, and got a lot more players to boot.

Stadia had some really awesome tech -- namely the UX of being able to boot straight into a game without waiting for Steam Big Picture -- and some nifty (but relatively useless) side features like being able to capture a memory snapshot and resume that later, emulator-style. But I don't think their management really understood the PC gaming culture and what was truly important to its user base, and failed to take years of pleading and feedback into consideration. They just arrogantly did... something else (or nothing much? I can't really tell)... with Stadia and drove it into the ground. So sorry for all the engineers who worked on it and had to see it nosedive like that due to managerial incompetence.

None of this was a surprise to any gamer actually watching this space. Stadia came late, delivered less, and exited early. Google's product culture doomed it from the get-go.

Some consumers can be fickle like that.

Most people seem fine with that, and Steam totally killed the physical games segment. There's GOG if you want a copy without DRM, but they're tiny and the prices are often worse than Steam or a Steam reseller.

Besides, if the game rental model is bad, Stadia does it even worse than Steam: tiny library, horrible pricing, incompatible multiplayer, proprietary ports on a different update schedule, exclusivity deals, all from a company with a proven history of abandoning their customers.

Steam on the other hand is run by one of the oldest, most respected PC gaming companies in the history of the hobby, owned and run by a bunch of gamers (not advertising execs), who singlehandedly transformed the way people buy and get games, and worked tremendously hard to make the service better abs better every year in the service of players. They've earned our loyalty.

And furthermore, Nvidia is the provider of GeForce Now, not Steam directly. Their model is just way better, running off existing Steam and Epic games that don't require a new port or for customers to repurchase or lose their save games. Nvidia is also a gaming company. Not exactly as beloved as Valve is, but at least they're a long term player in the field.

Google just never really got it, at all. They arrogantly assumed they could just make a mediocre copycat and people would flock to it. Oh well.

I noticed that too. Google never adversises its producta. Google is almost like the startup founder who thinks their side project is so good it doesn't need marketing or sales.

It's not zero, because Chromecast doesn't block ads and that's the natural fit for Stadia. But it's definitely not 100% either.

How would an ad reach me? Youtubers? Can Google use its "contractors" to promote its own product? That just feels weird.

At first I was baffled why they would possibly need to advertise Chrome in the US. But in retrospect it might just be feather ruffling in Edge (Microsofts) backyard?

Anything else, not that important, even GCP which is their major bet doesn't really get any ads because it's a business product so not much sense in doing so.

They seem to believe word of mouth/viral marketing works because it worked for gmail and chrome, so they didn't double down on Stadia before product market fit, and that caused Stadia to fail(along with Google's short attention span reputation).

Not really true (e.g. Chrome) but it's probably true they advertise relatively little given their size.

For Google it's chump change, I'm sure, but I still appreciate it. I bought like two titles on there before realizing it was a doomed effort... meanwhile GeForce Now sees very active improvements and a much bigger library.

This is a company so obviously in love with its incredible success from ages gone by that it thinks we still owe it our brand loyalty. We do not.

(if you didn't know, though, xbox controllers do work great with geforce now)