Google is known for its constant ventures into new and exciting technologies, many of which are shelved after an exploratory phase and never seen again. In early 2018, we began to see the hints about its first venture into the video game industry with what would be later named the Stadia.

Since those first rumbling across the internet, there was much speculation about what sort of console Google would release. Thoughts of something to rival Sony and Microsoft became the main talking points until we learned that streaming would be the focus of this mystery device.

Via: 9to5google.com

In March of 2019, we were finally given a formal presentation of the Google Stadia. Without a doubt, the concept touted as the future of gaming through streaming sounds fantastic, but there are a number of questions that demanded answers in order to take the project seriously.

What if I have a slow internet connection? What if the project fails, where do my games go? Why are games full price if there is no proper console, or physical copies of the game available?

All of these have been addressed, some more satisfactorily than others, but there are still some points to consider if the Stadia is to succeed.

What The Stadia Needs To Succeed

First and foremost, the Stadia is going to live or die by the promises it has made about its streaming performance, and the perception consumers have of those promises.

This means that while players in the most ideal of circumstances may be able to use the Stadia as advertised, with great looking games all steaming at beautiful resolutions, will that experience translate to everyone who invests in the hardware?

If your ISP cannot provide the necessary bandwidth for the Stadia, or like many people discover when testing their internet speeds, find that they are lower than advertised, the gaming experience will be far from optimal. Or perhaps, one thinks they will have sufficient bandwidth, only to discover that when other family members use the internet, there are issues with streaming on the Stadia.

Neither of these issues are the fault of the Stadia, and yet, they will be blamed on the Stadia. Perception is everything, along with how consumers feel, and if the promised experience fails to reach that same level of hype, it ultimately falls on Google.

Developer Commitment And Games Going Forward

It may seem like an obvious statement, but a gaming platform requires a strong lineup of games at launch and going forward to entice and retain consumers. Despite being something that any console maker should be aware of, we most recently saw the catastrophic outcome of this with the Sony PlayStation Vita.

Of course, the Vita improved later with the introduction of the PlayStation 4 and was outstanding for Indie games, but by that point, production and long-term prospects foretold the death of the console.

So far, we have seen AAA developers show their support for the Stadia, including titles like The Division 2, Destiny 2, Watch Dogs; Legion, and Marvel’s The Avengers game, among others.

Via: pcworld.com

Indie games are another potential strong point for the Stadia, as TheGamer’s Eric Switzer writes, developers can flourish and expand their user base. Given that most Indie games are less demanding of hardware, it would be far easier to play this kind of games in optimal conditions.

However, the Nintendo Switch is already an outstanding place for Indie developers, and one would be hard-pressed to argue for the Stadia over the Switch if Indie games are the primary use of the device given the latter’s portability and ability to dock in the home.

RELATED: Should You Buy A Google Stadia At Launch?

Is The Stadia The Next Ouya?

This has been a question asked since the Stadia slowly began drip-feeding information about its capabilities, though now that we have a clearer picture, the similarities between it and the catastrophe that was the Ouya are few. In summary, here are the main failures of the Ouya, and how the Stadia stacks up so far.

First of all, the Ouya Kickstarter featured both Minecraft and a unique looking UI, but neither of these were ever seen on the system. The Stadia’s initial lineup of games seen at presentations have been AAA titles that are confirmed to be coming, so there should be no problem there.

Secondly, the Ouya as a piece of hardware was a cheaply made, low-quality console, and this extended to the controller. WiFi problems were reported for months on several news sites, and this all but required the purchase of a power-line adapter to work at even a basic level as advertised. The controller too was simply of terrible quality, with pieces breaking after little use and large dead zones that required the entire controller be replaced. The Stadia looks solid from a technological standpoint and in the quality of its controller, at least based on early reviews and developers testing their games.

Third, is the issue of shipping, whereby backers of the Ouya were sometimes waiting over a month to receive their consoles after other backers in the same area had already been sent theirs. From a public relations stance, this was further problematic because the issue was ignored for far too long.

Finally, one of the largest failings, be it on purpose or through incompetence, was the Ouya’s promise of all games being free to try. This was unfeasible and ultimately abandoned in favor of a traditional sales model of games.

So far, the Stadia has done none of what made the Ouya an absurd footnote in gaming history, and given the scale of Google, there is no reason to believe that it will.

Ultimately, the Google Stadia will likely do fine. It is not likely to crash and burn, but it also probably will not become great competition to Sony, Microsoft, or Nintendo. At least, not in our current marketplace.

The idea is lofty, and the future of gaming doubtless lies in streaming, as evidenced by Microsoft’s massive push into its own Project xCloud, but the infrastructure necessary to be an optimal device does not currently exist for all potential users of the Stadia.

Via: cnet.com

This writer lives in Montreal, pays nearly $100 a month for internet access from Bell - one of the three monopolistic entities in Canada’s sad market for telecommunications - and has a staggeringly low 13 Mbps at its peak. Given the Stadia’s recommended minimum of 10 Mbps, the bare minimum may be achievable, while the listed 35 Mbps is out of reach entirely.

In closing, the future of streaming video games is looking bright, but we will need to wait and see if the Stadia can deliver on its promises, or if we will simply need to wait for Microsoft to release its Project xCloud, which would combine its own streaming technology, massive library of games, and existing hardware to give players a true choice about how to access their games.

READ NEXT: Female Character Designs In Fighters Are More Complicated Than Meets The Eye