Google's Rumored Console Could be Revealed March 19

[Scaff]

Wouldn't be much of a match. Sony has all the third parties, and well known first party, 40 million or so PSN subscribers and a brandname that everyone in gaming knows.

A position two companies that go by the madness of Sega and Nintendo were one in when an upstart with no past experience in the sector came along

Remind me how that went....

 

[flanylla]

The games will be free, but every few minutes it'll stop and you'll have to wait 5 seconds to skip the ads.

best post so far, as well Google will just use this to feed itself and Facebook with your data even more than they do already everywhere I guess

 

[GT6mebe]

A position two companies that go by the madness of Sega and Nintendo were one in when an upstart with no past experience in the sector came along

Remind me how that went....

Besides being a laughable analogy (gaming has changed massively since that gen: software dev, third party relations, online services etc), it's also false.

Sony had eyes and contracts with Nintendo an entire generation prior in game console development, SCE was founded a year prior to the PS1 launch to develop exclusive games, whereas nowadays big games take 3-6 years to make so Google's lack of 1st party is telling, and Sony effectively had the majority of third parties make exclusive games for the PS1 due the introduction of an entirely new data format, CD and its comparably easy architecture. This would never happen for Google.

In fact there isn't a single thing these two scenarios have in common in any meaningful detail, other than a new competitor is entering the gaming space

 

[Scaff]

other than a new competitor is entering the gaming space

And that's the key point. Sega and Nintendo had the same attitude your showing right now.

Complete the well known phrase, pride comes before a.......

 

[GT6mebe]

> ignores every single major difference in the markets
> goes with attitude

But thats also wrong

Nintendo at the time were incredibly harsh to third parties meanwhile Sony have incredibly close relations to both Japanese and Western third parties.

This comparison gets more laughable by the post.

 

[Scaff]

> ignores every single major difference in the markets
> goes with attitude

But thats also wrong

Nintendo at the time were incredibly harsh to third parties meanwhile Sony have incredibly close relations to both Japanese and Western third parties.

This comparison gets more laughable by the post.

And Sega were freindly to 3rd parties, guess which one still makes hardwear.

I can of course supply plenty of other examples from other market sectors.

 

[ImaRobot]

> ignores every single major difference in the markets
> goes with attitude

If your username wasn't attached to this, you'd think it was someone else describing how the vast majority of your attempts pan out.

 

[Northstar]

Besides being a laughable analogy (gaming has changed massively since that gen: software dev, third party relations, online services etc), it's also false.

Were you not the one arguing that Sony won't fall behind because they are currently on top? What makes you think the gaming market won't make huge leaps in the next 20 years opening the doors for potential competitors to surpass the current leaders?

PS1 due the introduction of an entirely new data format

You may want to research this one a little more (and by "a little" I mean "a lot").

 

[Novalee]

I do not see google having to make games, if they or someone else can solve latency i see the rest just falling into place .

By that i mean market share . If there ever was a company ready and willing to shake things up it is google.


If i am a game why would i not want most exposure to a audience ? Infact the real competition could turn out to be who between sony and ms get their games on googles platform first .


Should be interesting to see how it pans out . I know i tried psnow and the lag was horrible .

 

[Wolfe]

I get that this guy is a known instigator, but Sega and Nintendo basically paved the way for Sony's successful entry into the market in a way that isn't very comparable to the state of things today.

And although Google has plenty of clout and money to back up their project, it's still game streaming. Theoretically innovative as it is, I'm pretty sure it's never going to have a similar impact as the Playstation's adoption and popularization of the CD format. I mean, a CD drive works anywhere there's electricity, and loading screens are nowhere near as disruptive as input latency and mid-game hiccups or disconnections.

 

[Scaff]

I get that this guy is a known instigator, but Sega and Nintendo basically paved the way for Sony's successful entry into the market in a way that isn't very comparable to the state of things today.

The point isn't that it's a direct parallel, but rather that to dismiss a potential new entry into the sector on the basis that Sony is too big to fail is both shortsighted and arrogant.

The list of companies and brands that were to big to fail in a sector is long and full of what were household names. Blackberry, Nokia, Walkman, Kodak, Rover, the list goes on.

That aside I also disagree that Sony and MS haven't helped lay the ground work for this. As I will explain next.

And although Google has plenty of clout and money to back up their project, it's still game streaming. Theoretically innovative as it is, I'm pretty sure it's never going to have a similar impact as the Playstation's adoption and popularization of the CD format. I mean, a CD drive works anywhere there's electricity, and loading screens are nowhere near as disruptive as input latency and mid-game hiccups or disconnections.

I disagree and again we have parallels to look at here, one of which is a groundwork laid by Sony and MS. That's the widespread adoption of online gaming for a mass audience. Both have proven that not only can it be one of the biggest entertainment mediums on the planet, but also that people are willing to pay simply to access it.

The second way that they (and others) have laid the groundwork for this is the acceptance of digital content. Now I can remember being told back in the PS3 release days by a member here that a 60gb hard drive was ony needed by pirates, as no one would ever need that much for games. That was untrue then, and with the slow and ongoing death of physical copies has been a massive shift in the market.

Lastly we have the issue of bandwidth and streaming, it being a poor way to access content was the argument used by a very large global company when Netflix turned up. Now when was the last time you saw a Blockbuster? Compare that to how much music, TV and film is accessed across Sony TV, Apple TV, Hula, Netflix, BBC iPlayer, Amazon Prime, etc, etc. That was once an impossible distribution route, only a few years later its now the norm.

One thing that the last example also shows (and this also has parallels to Sony's first PlayStation) is that the company that invests entirely in the new medium for distribution and has the money to weather to initial challenges, will often end up in a dominant position.

 

[GT6mebe]

And Sega were freindly to 3rd parties, guess which one still makes hardwear.

Almost as if there are multiple reasons.....almost like I already mentioned PS1 have the better architecture for making games.

I can of course supply plenty of other examples from other market sectors.

You couldn't even supply a valid comparison within the gaming sector, let alone talking about other industries

If your username wasn't attached to this, you'd think it was someone else describing how the vast majority of your attempts pan out.

I would take you more seriously if your posts had an ounce of substance

If there ever was a company ready and willing to shake things up it is google.

Google have a long list of failures.

 

[Scaff]

Almost as if there are multiple reasons.....almost like I already mentioned PS1 have the better architecture for making games.

You couldn't even supply a valid comparison within the gaming sector, let alone talking about other industries

You really should read all of the posts made in a thread before replying, it would save the embarrassment of clearly having not read the one directly above yours.

But by all means lets take a look at your points:

1. Sony had eyes and contracts with Nintendo an entire generation prior in game console development,
And you know that Google have not been doing something similar how?

2. SCE was founded a year prior to the PS1 launch to develop exclusive games, whereas nowadays big games take 3-6 years to make so Google's lack of 1st party is telling,
And you contradict yourself....

3. and Sony effectively had the majority of third parties make exclusive games for the PS1
...right now. IF google gets 3rd parties involved then it doesn't need 1st party at launch (not that they haven't already started investing in that), and they have a number of 3rd parties alreasy involved, with a lot more (including Sega) rumoured to be involved.

4. due the introduction of an entirely new data format, CD
Not even close to being accurate

5. and its comparably easy architecture.
Are you not aware that the Google machine is based around PC architecture, it about as straightforward to develop for as it can be in comparison to consoles.

6. This would never happen for Google.
Seems it already is, but then you never have let reality get in the way of a good bit of bias.

Will it succeed? Who knows, but they have the clout and money to give it a good chance, to simply argue that Sony can't fail because they are too big and sell too much is absurd, yet that (once you remove all your nonsense) is all you have.

Google have a long list of failures.

So do Sony, so your point is?

 

[Novalee]

Stadia will also include new tools for streamers and content creators. Streamers will be able to invite viewers to join in on their game using Stadia's Crowd Play feature.


I found this feature to possibly be very important. How cool for say fans of shroud or jimmy b to be able to join in on a race. Or battle with your favorite streamers?

Add in the stream quailtys , lots of ps4 streams end up pixalating , while most the pc streams are crystal clear.

With esports getting bigger. A platforms stream friendlyness will become in my mind more important,

 

[GT6mebe]

And you know that Google have not been doing something similar how?

Unlike Sony, Google have had 0 presence at any console based gaming venture or manufacturer.

And you contradict yourself....

You just can't understand a simple point:

SCE had a first party 1 year prior which was fine at the time as they were able to churn out exclusive games in 1-2 years.

Google showed 0 1st party titles in a time where big games take 3-6 years to make, and is launching this year.

Anyone can see the difference but of course you won't admit it

...right now. IF google gets 3rd parties involved then it doesn't need 1st party at launch (not that they haven't already started investing in that), and they have a number of 3rd parties alreasy involved, with a lot more (including Sega) rumoured to be involved.

Google has the biggest third party games exclusive to their platform? Thats what the PS1 had.

They can't even get a fraction of the support PS4 has atm let alone have them exclusive lmao

Not even close to being accurate

What I meant was the CD was widely accepted by majority of companies via PS1. Yes the tech was there beforehand.

Are you not aware that the Google machine is based around PC architecture, it about as straightforward to develop for as it can be in comparison to consoles.

You can't even get a single comparison right

The architecture difference between PS4 -> PC is nowhere close to the architecture gap between PS1 vs Saturn.

Seems it already is, but then you never have let reality get in the way of a good bit of bias.

In summary

Google has a new format that third parties are all going to accept.... NO
Google has the biggest third party games exclusive....NO
Google has a 1st party that can churn exclusives out near launch....NO

Its like your ego gets in the way of admitting how hilariously wrong this comparison and you keep digging yourself deeper.

 

[Novalee]

It doesnt have to be any of that though. All it needs is to solve latency and it will sell its self. Sony and microst would be foolish to not want their products exposed to the most amount of people.


If playing a game is as easy as watching a video of a game then hitting play im not sure how a console would compete .

Plus the streaming esports aspect cannot be ignored .

 

[SlipZtrEm]

So do Sony, so your point is?

As if to prove the point, look at how this wasn't responded to.

Its like your ego gets in the way of admitting how hilariously wrong this comparison and you keep digging yourself deeper.

I know it's only early April, but surely this stands a solid chance of being the most ironic GTPlanet post of 2019.

 

[PzR Slim]

I know it's only early April, but surely this stands a solid chance of being the most ironic GTPlanet post of 2019.

Forget April, I know it's only 2019 but that could end up being the most ironic post of the century!

Imagine being so in love with a little box underneath your TV that you behave in this way. I can't imagine having so little respect for myself that I would time and time again show myself up in such a way that it meant I had zero credibility in a community I had chosen to be a member of.

I'm so glad I support all console and game manufacturers so I don't feel the need to take sides in such a pathetic way. I hope Stadia is hugely successful, not only because it will be better for us all as gamer's but because it will also stick in the craw of such odious people.

 

[Scaff]

Unlike Sony, Google have had 0 presence at any console based gaming venture or manufacturer.

You seem to have missed the point that they are not releasing a console in the traditional manner, as such that presence isn't needed. What they are releasing is a streaming service based around global software access in a remote manner, something they have a huge amount of experience and presence with (given that they operate data centres with over 2.5 million servers on a global basis).

This is the company that released a web browser that now has a near 70% market share and an mobile phone OS that now has 75% market share, in both cases they entered a market place and gained dominance in three year periods. They have the knowledge, infrastructure and experience to make this work.

If they were releasing a traditional console you would have a point, but there not.

You just can't understand a simple point:

SCE had a first party 1 year prior which was fine at the time as they were able to churn out exclusive games in 1-2 years.

Google showed 0 1st party titles in a time where big games take 3-6 years to make, and is launching this year.

Anyone can see the difference but of course you won't admit it

Odd that I've already addressed this point and you've either missed it or ignored it (given your track record I'm going for the latter).

Google has the biggest third party games exclusive to their platform? Thats what the PS1 had.

They can't even get a fraction of the support PS4 has atm let alone have them exclusive lmao

Have you seen the final list of partners and third parties?

Also expecting a new platform to have the same range of titles that one approaching the end of its life is utterly asinine. Lets compare its lance title to the PS4's launch titles when it arrives.

What I meant was the CD was widely accepted by majority of companies via PS1. Yes the tech was there beforehand.

So the CD, which was released in 1982 and the CD-ROM which was released in 1988 had to both wait until the PS1 came along in 1994 to be "widely accepted by the majority of companies"?

The tech was both there beforehand and widely accepted.

You can't even get a single comparison right

The architecture difference between PS4 -> PC is nowhere close to the architecture gap between PS1 vs Saturn.

Which was not the point you made at all, but keep moving those goalposts.

In summary

Google has a new format that third parties are all going to accept.... NO
Google has the biggest third party games exclusive....NO
Google has a 1st party that can churn exclusives out near launch....NO

Its like your ego gets in the way of admitting how hilariously wrong this comparison and you keep digging yourself deeper.

Seriously I am so glad to not be you.

Do you honestly not think that the likes of Sony, MS and Nintendo are not looking at this as assessing exactly what impact it will have on the market? I can 100% assure you that all three will be taking it seriously (and knowing exactly what they have done when they have entered other sectors), and having you white-knighting for them I'm sure must fill Sony with renewed confidence. Oh sorry, my bad, they neither know you, nor give a ****.

You also owe me an answer on Sony's list of failed products.

 

[GT6mebe]

You seem to have missed the point that they are not releasing a console in the traditional manner, as such that presence isn't needed.

What a joke of a reply. The industry isn't just exclusively about hardware....videogames are software

This is the company that released a web browser that now has a near 70% market share and an mobile phone OS that now has 75% market share, in both cases they entered a market place and gained dominance in three year periods. They have the knowledge, infrastructure and experience to make this work.

If they were releasing a traditional console you would have a point, but there not.

Nothing here inspires confidence in making videogames. No one here is disputing Googles tech in the server space.

Odd that I've already addressed this point and you've either missed it or ignored it (given your track record I'm going for the latter).

You've addressed Google's lack of exclusive titles from first party? Where?

Have you seen the final list of partners and third parties?

Thats Google's fault. The fact it's launching this year and has no such list is telling.

Also expecting a new platform to have the same range of titles that one approaching the end of its life is utterly asinine. Lets compare its lance title to the PS4's launch titles when it arrives.

Thats just false. The point in question is a list of third parties that are on board developing or placing software on the platform. Its not exclusively about launch games. Here's the PS4 one we had prior launch for comparison

The tech was both there beforehand and widely accepted.

Not by all the big third parties in the videogame industry.

Which was not the point you made at all, but keep moving those goalposts.

Yes it was. I clearly stated PS1 had architecture advantages over the Saturn. You tried to falsely equate that to PS4 and PC to which you were called out and now have no answer. Predictable.

Seriously I am so glad to not be you.

Do you honestly not think that the likes of Sony, MS and Nintendo are not looking at this as assessing exactly what impact it will have on the market? I can 100% assure you that all three will be taking it seriously (and knowing exactly what they have done when they have entered other sectors), and having you white-knighting for them I'm sure must fill Sony with renewed confidence. Oh sorry, my bad, they neither know you, nor give a ****.

None of this is even relevant to the conversation. The dispute was never if companies are not observing what their competitors do, rather Google's product has massive holes and is such hardly a threat to Playstation.

 

[Novalee]

I think the problem for consoles is the world will leave them behind.

Right now i have 5 devices i could use to play games on googles gameflix approach if the latency can be solved.

Raymond said that Google’s first party will “reimagine the new generation of games” and “will also be working with external developers to make all of the bleeding-edge Google technology you’ve seen today available to partner studios big and small.”

https://www.polygon.com/2019/3/19/1...dio-games-entertainment-jade-raymond-gdc-2019


That there tells me they want to make their platform available to existing game devs plus im sure she has contacts with ea and ubisoft right off the top.

Raymond is part of a growing gaming team at Google, which includes Phil Harrison, formerly of PlayStation and Xbox, and Jack Buser, previously the director of PlayStation Now and PlayStation Home.

With those guys. They have contacts with sony and microsoft.


I dont see google as competators i see them simply as what gaming is going to become .

Why lug a,console around when my chromecast will work as good.

Then at gift time what is more cost effective ? Few hundred for big box thst can be defective or 30 dollars fora chromecast. Or the phone your going to buy anyways. And oh yea play triple a games on
Or the tablet you get for son or daughter and oh yea can play the next big game and if your device can use a mouse and keyboard be competitive with pc players something the consoles cannot .

But it all depends on latency

 

[Tornado]

Not by all the big third parties in the videogame industry.

Yes it was. By 1994 the only company in the entire industry that didn't already know CDs were the future and didn't want to publish games on them was Nintendo. It was known long before even the original Playstation was cancelled. Publishers by the beginning of that decade already hated floppy disks and cartridges.


Sony didn't do anything with the PSX in making CDs an accepted format that wouldn't have been done with the Saturn if the PSX hadn't existed, because third parties still wouldn't have supported the N64.

 

[Scaff]

What a joke of a reply. The industry isn't just exclusively about hardware....videogames are software

Oh dear.

Actually the industry is about three things currently. Hardware, software and infrastructure. With the first of these becoming a reduced factor, and the last of these (the part that Google are market leaders in) is where the money is right now and in the future. After all what part of the Playstation portfolio is it that brings in the most money for Sony?

Nothing here inspires confidence in making videogames. No one here is disputing Googles tech in the server space.

They don't actually need to make games, why is that so damn hard to grasp?

You've addressed Google's lack of exclusive titles from first party? Where?

Read, its really not hard. I have to read your asinine noise, so you can go back and read my posts (however its increasingly clear from your posts across they site that you either don't read or don't comprehend anyone's posts).

Thats Google's fault. The fact it's launching this year and has no such list is telling.

Really, has the marketing campaign for it finished? You know this how exactly?

Thats just false. The point in question is a list of third parties that are on board developing or placing software on the platform. Its not exclusively about launch games. Here's the PS4 one we had prior launch for comparison

How on earth can you say its false when one of them hasn't even launched yet. Unless you work for Google that's simply impossible to say.

Not by all the big third parties in the videogame industry.

Treed' by Tornado, you are still quite, quite wrong about this.

Yes it was. I clearly stated PS1 had architecture advantages over the Saturn. You tried to falsely equate that to PS4 and PC to which you were called out and now have no answer. Predictable.

Well that's a straight up lie. What you said was "and its comparably easy architecture.", you made no mention of a system until that point was disproved and only then did you mention the Saturn, a single platform. You moved the goalposts and then lied about it.

None of this is even relevant to the conversation. The dispute was never if companies are not observing what their competitors do, rather Google's product has massive holes and is such hardly a threat to Playstation.

Yes it is relevant, you don;t get to dismiss it just because it exposes flaws in your (poor) logic, and you just contradicted yourself. If (as you claim) its not a treat to Sony, they would have needed to assess that to find it out.

However your lack of any form of business knowledge is telling, any competitor entering into your market is a potential thread, that's about as basic as it gets.


Oh and why are you still avoiding talking about Sony's failed products? They exist, so pretending they don't while trying to use such a fact as an argument against Google is really rather sad.

 

[Novalee]

Really, has the marketing campaign for it finished? You know this how exactly?

If this article is true then who knows what silly things could happen .

https://www.dailystar.co.uk/tech/ga...me-is-coming-to-Microsoft-s-Xbox-One-consoles


Halo on ps4 anyone or stadia ?

I have only ever owned a sony console but if google can pull this off, ps4 will be the last console i buy .

 

[ImaRobot]

I would take you more seriously if your posts had an ounce of substance

Well that's good, because I wasn't debating anything. I was just pointing out how embarrassingly ironic you always seem to be, but of course you wouldn't take someone serious when they're pointing out something factual - You always dismiss things like that

 

[Tired Tyres]

> ignores every single major difference in the markets
> goes with attitude

But thats also wrong

Nintendo at the time were incredibly harsh to third parties meanwhile Sony have incredibly close relations to both Japanese and Western third parties.

This comparison gets more laughable by the post.

Remember the dominant position Sony were in after the PS2? Notice how they messed up so badly they allowed an upstart to take first place and virtually annihilated the Japanese game developer base in the process with the PS3? They then spent the entire generation playing catch-up?

 

[Scaff]

Remember the dominant position Sony were in after the PS2? Notice how they messed up so badly they allowed an upstart to take first place and virtually annihilated the Japanese game developer base in the process with the PS3? They then spent the entire generation playing catch-up?

Sssshhhhh, that can't possibly have happened


Not to mention it was then MS dropping the ball to an even larger degree that allowed Sony to switch those positions back around again.

 

[Silver Arrows]

And don't get started on Nintendo consistently giving Western third party, and even first party developers, the finger.

 

[GT6mebe]

Actually the industry is about three things currently. Hardware, software and infrastructure. With the first of these becoming a reduced factor, and the last of these (the part that Google are market leaders in) is where the money is right now and in the future. After all what part of the Playstation portfolio is it that brings in the most money for Sony?

Hardware is not a reduced factor

It's the very reason why PSN is dominating the gaming space: PS4 has a purchased base nearing 100 million.


PSN makes so money because it's selling so much software.

They don't actually need to make games, why is that so damn hard to grasp?

Thats a lie
Google themselves know they need 1st party exclusives.

Read, its really not hard. I have to read your asinine noise, so you can go back and read my posts (however its increasingly clear from your posts across they site that you either don't read or don't comprehend anyone's posts).

What a non answer

Really, has the marketing campaign for it finished? You know this how exactly?

It doesn't matter if its finished. These things should be known well before launch, usually revealed at the initial reveal to show confidence. Google's lack of a proper list shows just that: not much confidence.

How on earth can you say its false when one of them hasn't even launched yet.

What? Reread the post. I'm saying the statement of it being only launch games is false. A publisher list shows all pubs that support the platform. Simple.

Again here's the PS4 one, shown at a reveal:

Treed' by Tornado, you are still quite, quite wrong about this.

Hardly. The notion that third parties would choose SEGA over Nintendo is hilarious. The biggest pubs at the time, Square, Enix, Capcom, Bandai, Konami were all supporting Nintendo far more, and SNES dominated hardware sales.

you made no mention of a system until that point was disproved and only then did you mention the Saturn, a single platform.

Wouldn't be hard to deduce I was referring to the Saturn, its a well known statement.

You moved the goalposts and then lied about it.

Says the guy who tried to say that the PS1 Saturn difference is similar to PS4 PC

However your lack of any form of business knowledge is telling,

I'm the only one in this thread that is even posting actual business data disproving a lot of the incorrect perceptions you guys have.

Remember the dominant position Sony were in after the PS2? Notice how they messed up so badly they allowed an upstart to take first place and virtually annihilated the Japanese game developer base in the process with the PS3? They then spent the entire generation playing catch-up?

Sure, though even having botched the product, PS3 still went on to sell 90 million or so and near 1 billion pieces of software.

 

[Silver Arrows]

I'm the only one in this thread that is even posting actual business data disproving a lot of the incorrect perceptions you guys have.

...only to prove your own incorrect perceptions that Sony is somehow this all world juggernaut that doesn't give a **** about market trends.