Rumors raise the doubt that Google Stadia service will last much longer.

[chrcoluk]

This makes no sense. Your comments was specific about investing. If you buy $1000 in GOOG shares, you don't get to allocate where your investment goes for how long. You give the money to Alphabet for them to decide where it is best used.

Yes, the consumer can decide on how much to spend on Stadia. Of course, one can choose to spend nothing now and wait for the service to mature.

And remember that spending money on Stadia, GeForce NOW, Apple Music, whatever isn't investing in GOOG, NVDA, AAPL. Those are all expenses. Buying a Radeon RX 6800 XT graphics card isn't an investment in AMD. It's an expense.

Again, the problem is that Alphabet's commitment to Stadia is highly suspect and isn't particularly encouraging.

It's worth pointing out that most of Google's failed products and services had a free tier. I've tried most of them (Picasa, Wave, Plus, whatever). It's up to each individual to decide how much time to spend on any given service (Facebook, Instagram, TikTok, Myspace, Path, Periscope, Flickr, Vimeo, whatever).

One thing for sure, Alphabet has a lot of financial resources and can keep services running far longer than some tiny little startup with almost no money. I use quite a few services today that might not be around had Alphabet/Google not acquired them. Did you use YouTube before Google's acquisition? I did.

And money doesn't guarantee success either. Look at Siri, Apple's personal assistant, arguably neglected compared to Amazon Alexa and Google Assistant.

The point of this thread discussion is Google Stadia's viability as a competitive cloud gaming service and Alphabet business unit with future revenue generation prospects.

My comment was relevant as I felt gogole history of abandoning things when they not immediately successful impacted my faith in the Stadia product.

 

[lexluthermiester]

my wall says "for a good time call..."

Ok lets speculate some, granted Stadia is going down one way or another, I'll stick to my guess (stadia gets rick rolled) and you to your guess its going to a be a complete shutdown.

Credit where it's due, I've tried all three of the big boys out(NVidia, Sony and Google) and Stadia seems to allocate the most bandwidth to stream connections. The kicker is that latency is a problem that can never be overcome. Even with an optimal internet connection(2Gbps fiber - 20 to 25ms), the response time can never be less than 110ms to 120ms. Data transit time to the server, processing of game data, processing of frame data, compression of same, transmission of data back to the client, decompression, processing and finally display to the user. And all of that assumes a consistently stable and fast internet connection. Most of the world does not and will not have that. Many people have at best 50 to 60 ms latency, so less than 150ms latency is laughable. Stadia has the bandwidth edge thanks to Google, but it's still a lacking experience for almost all of the fast-paced gaming many gamers aim for.

My comment was relevant as I felt gogole history of abandoning things when they not immediately successful impacted my faith in the Stadia product.

That's a fair point. I love Google because they're willing to try new things and take risks. Doesn't always work out, but when it does, they take it to the max!