Why Google Stadia might or might not be the next big thing for gaming

Can Google Stadia — Google’s first entry into the world of mainstream gaming — hope to make a dent in a market that’s been dominated for more than two decades by three major platforms? Or is it just another OnLive in the making?

Even at this early stage, we can pretty definitively answer that second question: Not a chance. Between the leaps in high-speed internet capabilities over the past decade, not to mention Google’s own cloud infrastructure and overall reach, Stadia has advantages that earlier would-be competitors couldn’t have even imagined.

As for challenging the likes of Microsoft, Nintendo, and Sony … well that’s a much more up-in-the-air scenario. The odds are obviously stacked against Google. These are long-established players with the communities to match.

Just consider the history for a moment. The original Xbox launched almost two decades ago, in 2001. That was really the last major market disruption for the audience Google appears to be chasing with Stadia. 

It’s true that the lines between console/PC gaming and mobile gaming have blurred in recent years. But no one who’s observed the industry for any significant period of time is under any illusions: Microsoft, Nintendo, and Sony are the clear market leaders for a certain kind of gaming audience, and Stadia is another hopeful new kid on the block.

Of course, an effort spearheaded by Google is more than just “hopeful.” This is a company with the resources and reach to force its way into the conversation. So let’s consider what Stadia’s big promise actually looks like, and the various elements the work in the service’s favor, or against it.

Why is Stadia so exciting?

For those who don’t remember OnLive: Stadia is a gaming platform that moves all the expensive hardware you’d normally need for console/PC games into a data center. That data center delivers gameplay to the screen of your choice via high-speed internet while also receiving commands from whatever controller you’re using.

“Netflix, but for games” is accurate from a technical standpoint; same principle here (though the technology powering it all is much more complex). That comparison fails, however, at the content level: We know Google wants the latest mainstream games to be playable on Stadia, but whether you’ll pay for them individually or as a packaged subscription deal remains to be seen.

That comparison also fails because Stadia is so much more than Netflix. Remember, this is Google. In terms of what we know, that means integrations with YouTube and Google Assistant. But it’s not hard to see the possibilities with other popular Google services, like Hangouts or even Gmail (what if, say, your contacts list suddenly doubled as your friends list?).

“Netflix, but for games” is accurate from a technical standpoint.

Don’t forget, too: The delivery platform here is Chrome, the most-used web browser on the planet by a wide margin. It runs on pretty much everything, just like Stadia will. It’s hard to say at this point how Chrome extensions might factor in (if they do at all), but the idea of using them to customize your experience creates some exciting possibilities.

Google’s reveal also pointed to a number of service-specific features that will help differentiate Stadia. State Sharing, for example, could give players the ability to create a shareable link mid-game that would allow other users with access to the same game to click that link and pick up right in the same spot.

There’s also a Crowd Play feature that makes jumping into a game with someone who’s streaming a one-click process. That kind of access will of course be limited by the game in question’s lobby size (or online play support at all), as well as the streamer’s personal preference.

Those two features, the way they were revealed, feel like work-in-progress examples aimed at making a larger point. Google wants everyone to understand just how vertically integrated Stadia is as a platform. It’s your console, but it’s also your streaming platform, your community board, and your content sharing portal. 

On top of all that, it’s also completely portable. If you have a screen with high-speed internet access and Bluetooth or USB support, you’re good to go.

What’s working against Stadia?

For all the excitement and noise around Google’s Stadia reveal, it’s not a guaranteed winner by any stretch. Let’s set aside the industry competition that we’ve already acknowledged. It’s unquestionably a factor, but it’s a factor that depends in large part on how the service assuages these other, more platform-specific concerns.

For now, the biggest thing working against Stadia is the range of questions Google hasn’t answered yet. The games lineup is largely a mystery. Stadia’s beta program, better known as Project Stream, proved that even a hot, new game like Assassin’s Creed Odyssey can run well when it’s delivered from the cloud. And Google made it clear during the reveal that Odyssey represents the kinds of games the service will hope to deliver.

But in terms of specific titles that will actually be available at or close to launch? The list is very short. Marty Stratton, a creative lead at id Software, showed up to confirm that Doom Eternal will be available on Stadia. But that was notably the only high-profile title Google let slip. Ubisoft, Odyssey‘s publisher, pledged to support Stadia as well, but stopped short of listing specific games.

Google is assuming that more people have access to a stable high-speed connection than not.

Google did make it clear that there are plans to create first-party games that will be exclusive to Stadia. But the reveal suggested that the in-house studio effort is just getting started. Jade Raymond, a veteran of Ubisoft and Electronic Arts, is heading up the new team, but she only joined Google in March. Most modern games take 3 to 5 years to complete, from pre-production to release.

Cost is another major factor, and an unanswered question. We don’t know if games will be sold individually or as part of a subscription plan. Google confirmed that Stadia will allow for cross-platform play, but is there a cross-buy scenario as well where games you own on one platform or another are also accessible via Stadia?

Maybe that’s part of the business model here: You pay for a subscription that unlocks all the games you already own elsewhere. It’s a far-fetched (and very unlikely!) scenario, but that’s my point. It’s impossible to speculate about Stadia’s impact on the market until we know how Google intends to make money off of it.

There’s also the bandwidth concern. Yes, high-speed internet has improved immeasurably since the last push toward cloud gaming ended in around 2012. But Google is making a basic assumption with this service, that more people have access to a stable high-speed connection than not.

A 2018 report from the UK broadband company Cable (via BBC) found that the global average download speed at the time was 9.10 Mbps. Stadia is launching first in the U.S., Canada, the U.K., and “most of Europe,” according to Google. The averages for all of those countries hover in the 20-25 Mbps range, according to the report.

Of course, download speeds are only part of the equation here because of the way Stadia works; upload matters too. But a Google rep told Kotaku on Monday what the performance expectations are for a 25 Mbps download speed.

A Google PR rep tells Kotaku that Google’s Project Stream was able to provide 1080p, 60fps gameplay for users with 25 megabits per second connections. “When Stadia launches later this year, we expect to be able to deliver 4k 60 fps at approximately the same bandwidth requirements,” they said. 

“Approximately” is a key word there. The actual speed target for 4K resolution at 60 frames per second could come in higher or lower than 25 Mbps (but not by much, if Google’s estimate turns out to be accurate). It’s also worth noting: Not everyone will be playing on a 4K display. For a good chunk of people, 1080p will be all they need — and that should lower the bandwidth demands even further.

People still matter too. Someone who’s fully invested in a console ecosystem already isn’t necessarily going to be enthusiastic about jumping over to a new platform. Especially one like Stadia, where there’s no physical product you can hold in your hands or have access to even when there’s no internet.

There are even more obstacles for social gamers. Stadia may support cross-platform play, but that doesn’t mean you’ll be able to hop into voice chat with friends on Xbox Live or PlayStation Network. Online games have increasingly transformed into virtual hangout spaces (I’m thinking of examples like Fortnite and Destiny 2 here); where your friends are playing matters just as much as where you yourself play. For some friend groups, switching over to a new platform might feel like an all or nothing proposition.

The close integration of Stadia with YouTube could convince popular streamers to leap over and bring their communities along for the ride. But content moderation is already a tricky proposition on the more popular Twitch, and YouTube has struggled again and again (and again) to create a safe environment for all users. Google also hasn’t yet laid out the moneymaking advantages of being on Stadia, an important factor since this is a job for them.

Stadia’s closer integration of play with streaming and community features is all the more concerning when you remember that this is the video game scene we’re talking about. It’s been almost five years since the GamerGate hate group brought the most toxic elements of the gaming community to the forefront. Yet we continue to have front-and-center conversations about how to mitigate the still-rampant misogyny, racism, homophobia, transphobia, and all manner of other shitty, anti-society views that the worst offenders from the gaming scene tend to espouse.

Stadia still brims with potential

As much as it might seem on paper like there’s more working against Stadia than for it, I’m not here to be a killjoy. Personally, as someone who’s been working in this industry for the better part of 15 years (and who’s been gaming for more than twice that), I’m bowled over with excitement after this announcement.

The potential here to disrupt a market that often seems to run like clockwork — which isn’t necessarily a great thing! — is huge. Fresh competition breeds fresh ideas, and Google’s efforts with Stadia will inevitably push everyone to innovate and be bolder when trying out new things. 

That should be true even if the service itself ultimately fails. Google doesn’t always put out winners, but the company’s sheer size and influence as a global business all but guarantees that the industry’s existing big players will sit up and get to work on what their response looks like.

Also, don’t forget: Some of the heaviest concerns here could be wiped away once Google answers more of the still-unaddressed Stadia questions, price and catalog being the big ones.

Stadia won’t be the next OnLive, we can assume that much. But can it hope to disrupt an entrenched market where the most established players have carried the reins for almost two full decades? The ideas are there, the potential is evident. We’ll just have to wait and see what — and how — Google delivers.