As someone who’s followed the space for more than 5 years, finished over a dozen AAA games via the cloud and is currently playing through Wukong via GFN, I’d say yes. The tech has come a very long way. GFN in particular is really polished and imo offers the best performance/image quality. Granted I live very close to an Nvidia data centre and have solid internet so my set up is optimal. Nevertheless, being able to play Wukong with a 4080 at ultra settings with full ray-tracing and very little latency (especially with a wired controller) at a moment’s notice on any device is pretty amazing.

I'll admit I use my steam deck to stream games from my ps5 to my deck while my wife watches TV.
It works surprisingly good but id never want streaming to be the only way of playing games. Imo local hardware will always be king and streaming can be a secondary method.
I'm running 200mbps up n down fiber optic with a great wireless router 15ft from my deck and ps5 hardwired.
Lag is there and always will be its inherent to streaming.
Macro blocking is there.
Lower resolution is there.
Overall "muddy" visuals.
Frame stutter is there.
The only reason its enjoyable is because of the ability to continue playing my games when I dont have access to the tv.

No. And mostly it’s not possible because of the greed in the West by those selling broadband/fiber, which is made far too expensive for most households, so they won’t pay for the high speeds.

In Hong Kong we paid 300 bucks TOTAL for a year of 1000gb/s, which was around 650gb/s over wifi, so that’s a good fair price for a great speedy connection. No complaints. Got free Disney+ as well.

In Holland, you’d pay AT LEAST double that money and you wouldn’t even get half that speed.

I have a fiber connection and it still sucks. So no.

I still have a data cap so hell no.

Still a decade away from being possible for a majority.

lol, nope, nothing has changed, for example, the NBN in Australia is still gimped and Labor can't be bothered to fix it since they got voted out before anything could be built. It's definitely not feasible in Australia.

Data caps, not owning your games, they can be delisted (and relisted) at any time, internet going down, inherent lag (there will always be some), and not being able to use your internet for anything while streaming is a poor combination.

Would I play streaming games for free? Yes, I played games on PS Now, Stadia, and XCloud for free during their beta periods. Sometimes they worked, sometimes they didn't.

Would I pay to stream games? Absolutely not! If I want to play games at home, I can obviously use real hardware, if I want to play games on the go, I can use 3DS, Switch, PSP, PS Vita, my phone with a controller, or a cheap Android mini gaming device.

Streaming is a solution looking for a problem.

Cloud gaming will never be feasible. You cannot reliably round trip the pad inputs and the frames at 60fps over the internet. It cannot be done, there will always be noticeable lag.

I love the idea of more people having access to games they otherwise wouldn't.

I'm all for options. But that's kind of the problem with cloud gaming: if it ever approaches local hardware levels of latency—to the point that Evo contestants can perform equally well under either conditions from anywhere in the world, that would definitely become the only means of playing. If the corpos could get away with that being the only means of playing their games, they would absolutely do that: no mods, reverse engineering, or piracy to deal with and the companies can monetize single player games in perpetuity.

Just no. This travesty should never have launched in the first place. Streaming is not the future despite some people claiming to be. The Stadia is yet another example of this but the same people will rush to its defence again and again.

Yes. Stadia worked (not flawlessly, because some dark games were umplayable), but it worked in the "lag free" side thanks to the "exclusive" controllers.

Who? My condolences to her family if true...

I'm not sure it was even a thing for most people.

"IS STADIA DEAD"
it was DOA
Ouya welcome you to graveyard

It’s dead to me has been since day 1

lol the end

It should be, and Google wasted their time with this useless shit.

It’s honestly like the wnba. I go so long not hearing about it that I forget it exist until someone brings it up.

If you have to ask then you already have your answer

Some time ago. Google just didn't admit it.

How can you die if you never were alive?

Yes, and hopefully it will stay that way.

The more we can delay cloud-gaming from becoming the ''main thing'' the better.

It wasn't alive to become dead.

Was never alive lol

It was never alive.

The idea of Stadia is cool.

I dipped my toe in with Football Manager (before it came back to consoles).

But the horrible pricing for games which I already have, or can get on my console, meant it isn't going to gain much traction.

I see nobody read the article.

Stadia may be niche but isn't dead and it isn't going away any time soon. Especially as a service through Chromebook.

Is this even a question?

Gee. I wonder what the site StadiaDosage is going to say about Stadia...

Dead? Was it ever alive?

Biggest hunk of junk I ever bought!

Well if you have to ask…then…yea

Yeahh, DOA!

stadia was dead on release

The fact that so many are asking this question kinda tells you it is.

Probably on life support

As of now it is unofficially dead.

How is this still a question? Common knowledge, its been dead for a while now. Move on.

Was never alive. Their studios are dead though.

Was it ever alive?

This living-in-denile write-up had more time and $ invested into it than Stadia has over the last year. Um, yeah, unsurprisingly/predictably Stadia is like Ouya kind of done.

What's Stadia? :P

Its google graveyard material always was but it's also more complicated andonked to another failure of Google's it stank of retrofitting their failing and overpriced and unpopular cloud computing infrastructure. This article really stinks.of a fan trying to convince others not to give up on the ecosystem because they drank the cool aid and if stadia shuts down they will render their investments moot its unlike retro, pc or console gaming once a cloud only game company pulls the plug they take the ball and go home.

It was never a great idea rushed put 1 year prior to real next gen hardware with specs that were underwhelming. Unable to deliver on any promises and having zero exclusive games or reasons to buy in to the ecosystem the primary selling point was basically we can stream rdr2 which at the time 32 million players already played it on ps4/x1.

Google was saying we have the most powerful console on the market but we can't prove it so please just take our word for it. Oh and we will charge you way more than the competition like ge force now, psnow or xcloud.

It wrecked of retrofitting Google's failing cloud computer systems. And for me it read like we spent the last few years building cloud data centres globally however microsoft and Amazon have that market on lock and we are stuck with all this investment no one is buying into so let's just throw some gpus in and retrofit it for playing games build a cheap gaming overlay and buy some tech from Bethesda to slot in.

While I do think Stadia is dead, this idea and concept was the just the beginning. Just like other streaming services, I think it can become a legit way to play games, but we're not there yet.

Despite the perpetual declarations that Stadia is alive and well, as far as I'm concerned it's dead.

Until they change the business model copying GamePass, it still be. When they do, it's gonna be Microsoft vs Google in gaming, and Nintendo doing their own magic.