1588

I think the real power move would be to just include it in Game Pass Ultimate, which assuming the service works just as well, is basically FATALITY for Stadia.

1589

If they did that, yeah, Stadia would be kaput. Even at full-price for GPUltimate.

1590

Gamepass, the Xbox branding, Microsofts much larger set of owned studios, and a much better/longer relationship with developers means if XCloud is on par technically with Stadia they should be able to bury it.

1591

Yep. Been saying this all along. If Microsoft can nail the service quality, and just be at PARITY with pricing, then xCloud is basically just “Stadia, but better”.

  • Game Pass
  • More flexibility - buy a console in 2023? Your digital xCloud purchases follow you. Decide you dislike streaming, and buy an Xbox? All of your games come with you. Want xCloud for the road, and a console at home? All of your purchases work on both. First party games also come with PC cross-buy.
  • Larger userbase for multiplayer games, because you’re getting the entire Xbox ecosystem, plus PC and console crossplay in many cases, not Stadia’s current tiny, walled off island.
  • Actual heavy hitter exclusives, from an actual gigantic first-party studios organization. Jade Raymond has already admitted that Stadia is at least a few years away from getting any real “triple-A” exclusives.

Where does Stadia have a leg up on xCloud? In ANYTHING? Even Microsoft’s global cloud infrastructure is second only to possibly Amazon.

1592

XCloud isn’t out yet, so we don’t know what their offering will look like, you can’t compete with vapor. But if it comes out bundled with GPUltimate even at $25/month it would be very attractive, assuming you don’t need an Xbox to play. And there’s no reason to think they wouldn’t release apps for everything.

1593

They’re currently running a beta with Xbox One S performance and streaming at 720p. That seems like a pretty big step down from the original Project Stream a year ago, let alone what the actual production service is.

and just be at PARITY with pricing

Has there been any indication that they would have a free level of service, like Stadia will have? Even the most optimistic people about the pricing seem to be thinking that it might be bundled into Game Pass Ultimate. If it’s an Xbox One S, that doesn’t sound particularly appealing even compared to PS Now.

So indeed, if you just arbitrarily assume that MS will just automatically match every benefit that Stadia currently has, Stadia indeed won’t have a leg up on XCloud on anything.

1594

The current beta is 720p on mobile phones, yes - as it’s Xbox One S hardware. They’ve already confirmed the intention is to go much higher than that. I’m guessing they are testing with One S’s, because the hardware is dirt cheap

And of course, when the Series X launches, they aren’t going to have xCloud only offering previous-gen games alongside it.

Regarding pricing, Stadia doesn’t currently have a free tier either - they have plans for one at some point in 2020, and we don’t know the specifics of it. Will you be getting ads during gameplay, for example. Microsoft haven’t said anything one way or another on price yet, because their service isn’t ready yet.

1595

Plus you have to buy games full price on Stadia destined for Google Graveyard. There’s nothing free about Stadia free tier.

1596

We do know the specifics, it will be limited to 1080p30 and no surround sound. They haven’t commented on ads one way or the other but it’s Google, so I wouldn’t be too surprised.

If they nail the technology and give 4k60 with surround sound away with no subscription but show interstitial ads only before you start a game I could see it going OK, but not if MS xCloud offers the same resolution/framerate/etc at $25/month including everything in GPUltimate.

1597

Yeah, I meant the overall details of what the “free tier” entails - limitations, ads, access, etc.- not the basic fidelity that will be offered.

Is this where I make a joke about the paid tier also appearing to be 1080p30 right now? :)

1598

This is a major sticking point for people who own consoles but want to try Stadia. You’re asking someone to pay full price for a game that is forever trapped to Google Stadia, and whose entitlement does not follow you to anything but Stadia.

If you’re an Xbox owner, there’s zero risk in trying out xCloud streaming with your games. Your games aren’t trapped on xCloud. It doesn’t require you to go “all-in” on streaming as the present and future - you can dip a toe in, or dive in. Up to you. And more importantly, you can climb back out of the pool whenever you want, and you’re out nothing.

1599

I will allow it. Proceed.

1600

It would also be unsustainable, at least without cutting the legs of dev profit, which is unsustainable too. Streaming needs more investment in physical stuff, period.

1601

I don’t think putting the xCloud service in Game Pass Ultimate necessarily cuts the legs out from under discrete software sales, any more than Game Pass itself has. Microsoft have had at least two of their internal games on Game Pass, actually go on to EXCEED sales expectations.

But I’m not going to pretend I really understand the economic model behind Game Pass, or what makes sense for Microsoft.

1602

I think the economic model is that once a game pays for itself, by recouping the development and promotional expenses, then all sales going forward are virtually all net profit (especially with digital delivery). So they can sell the games dirt cheap to drive sales or make them part of a subscription service. Whatever. Most of the profits will be net profits anyway.

Some new games nowadays appear in subscription service on day 1. They are betting that people will stay with the subscription long enough in order to recoup the expense. This is true especially if the subscription is bundled with a huge library. So if you, say, subscribe Game Pass just to play The Outer World on day 1, while it is cheaper to subscribe than to buy, they are betting that you won’t stop subscribing after you finished The Outer World. You will keep subscribing because of the huge back catalogue. It just takes longer for them to recoup the expenses, but eventually they will earn just as much if not more with the subscription model.

IMO.

PS: I don’t know wtf is the Stadia’s economic model, I’m just talking about Game Pass/Origin Access/Uplay+.

1603

Sure. But it means they’re beta-testing in 2019 something on par with what Sony has had with PS Now since 2014. I don’t think it should be taken for granted that they’ll just automatically have the best tech given that what they’ve shown so far is lagging by half a decade.

I’m also quite worried that the XCloud terms of service might require human sacrifice. Nowhere is it stated that it’s not the case, so I think it’s a pretty valid concern.

Look, the Stadia business model is incredibly simple. You buy games. Then you either stream them for no additional cost at 1080p, or buy the Pro subscription to stream at 4k and get some other minor goodies like free games / discounts. There is absolutely zero indication anywhere that ads are involved,

It doesn’t make any economic sense for the to introduce ads either. Google’s goal is to get $20 when somebody buys a $60 game that they’ll probably play for 20 hours. Serving $0.10 worth of video ads to them during that play-time would be totally insignificant.

Listen to Phil Spencer’s Giant Bomb interview from last E3. It’s pretty clear what they were thinking the model would be, back then. It was basically “pay us for XCloud or stream for free from your existing console”. Obviously the plans could have changed since then, and in particular there’s now a lot of talk of bundling with their other subscriptions. But that doesn’t mean that the business model could be literally anything at all.

One can construct a model where Stadia’s free tier makes economic sense. I.e. the cut from the store sales is almost certainly enough to subsidize the cost of hosting the games and still leave them with a tidy profit. I think it’s impossible to make a free tier work for a service that’d allow playing arbitrary games in your Xbox library. The problem is that it’s really easy for people to get games into their Xbox library in ways that won’t provide Microsoft anywhere near enough revenue to cover the hosting costs. (Game Pass, Gold, lower floor on prices on old games, and most importantly F2P games.)

Yes, Microsoft has a bunch of massive advantages over Google. But some of those advantages don’t come for free, there are actual tradeoffs involved in merging streaming and physical consoles. And the one thing in particular that will be really hard for them to do is provide an actual free tier.

So, that price point seems like it’d definitely be viable for MS. But seems like it’s effectively valuing the streaming at $15/month (comparison should be to Game Pass rather than GPU, since somebody using the streaming has no use for the PC games). Is that really such a tempting deal for the consumer?

1604

That isn’t how capitalism works. You aren’t happy making a million dollars when you can make a million and one.

1605

So why doesn’t Stadia Pro already show ads? Or Netflix? Because people hate ads to start with, but really despise ads on something they’ve paid for. In this case, the revenue numbers from selling games vs. from showing ads are going to be incredibly lopsided. Like a difference of a factor of 100 or 200. If the hypothetical ads put off 1% of the paying player base, they’re a loss.

I think there’s 0% chance that Stadia base will be showing ads when playing games you’ve bought. (Putting in those weasel words about games you’ve bought, since I could imagine there being some ads on e.g. a demo version of a game). Will happily take a bet on that.

1606

https://www.eurogamer.net/articles/digitalfoundry-2019-project-xcloud-beta-analysis

My thoughts.

It seems xCloud is going to be aimed at mobile screens. 720p is more forgiving on tiny displays, even high-res ones. And Microsoft is able to render games on Xbox One S hardware at 120hz.

Moreover, it’s going to be cost-effective for Microsoft. Scarlet will use GDDR6, and gobs of it. That’s not cheap, and filling a worldwide network of datacenters with tens of thousands of GPUs is expensive. By using Xbox One S silicon, Microsoft is able to optimize the shit out of it, and it’s very cost-effective.

I think the tiers are this. If you want to be a hardcore gamer, you buy the high-end Scarlet. If you’re a gamer, but more on a budget, you get the low-end Scarlet or an Xbox One/S/X. If you’re the rest of the world and just want to game on your mobile device, you have xCloud.

There will probably be a split in libraries, especially once developers design Scarlet games that simply can’t run on Xbox One/S/X, even scaled down. But you can’t imagine third-party publishers abandoning that market for a while. And we’re still talking about a massive library of games. Imagine for a modest, Netflix-sized fee, you get to play hundreds of quality video games on your phone. More importantly, these games are unlike mobile games which are constantly trying to milk you dry.

In a year or two, when GDDR6 prices finally drop, expect MS to upgrade their blades, and expand the xCloud lineup.

It’ll be interesting to see how Sony approaches this, especially since they’re relying on Microsoft for the Cloud Infrastructure.

1607

That exact model hasn’t worked for PS Now (stream a library of 800 games at 720p for $10/month). Why will it work for XCloud?