Streaming WAS the problem. Had they launched an actual piece of dedicated hardware with a solid launch lineup and some compelling online services they may have had a winner.

Arrogance and lack of effort.

Publishers won't let a "netflix of gaming" happen anyway. They want everyone to sign up for several services instead of one. Look at what happened to GeForce Now, who arguably got it right.

Thats ok with me though. Streaming games is not something that should be mainstream anyway.

It’s google. Doing wrong is what they do best.

Phil Harrison. I think they put the wrong guy in charge and it all went to hell from there.

Broken promises, streaming is NOT the future most gamers want, overpriced AND MOST OF ALL THEY HAVENT ACTUALLY INVESTED IN GAMING, NO STUDIOS MAKING NEW IP'S.

Now creating studios after the fact is a really stupid move on their part, they should’ve waited until their studios had something amazing and exclusive.

All the money in the world doesn't make you smart.

Google made two blunders that I'll connect together.

*First, was dumping Daydream. It was a bad idea to drop it. Google already had inexpensive VR and the next step should have been to build on that and move away from the cellphone and use a dedicated phone chip to do VR and AR from Qualcomm. Which would have been a competitor to Facebook with Quest.

And with Dr. Marks leaving Sony and joining Google, he could have helped make that 6dof headset with easy to use controllers as he helped create PSVR and Eyetoy. And with Phil Harrison there, who was the backer of Eyetoy and Dr.Marks, he knew that motion controls would be a hit because the Nintendo Wii showed us it can be a run away hit.

*And secondly, Google would have started a service of VR and AR games you could play wirelessly. And apps like Google Earth VR would have been exclusive to Daydream. And great for navigation on the go in AR.

As they gained a foothold with the platform, they could have used their servers and 5G in the future, to send high quality games and content over the network with low latency. Not try and replace consoles with a controller trying to be Netflix of games. Not yet anyway.

But Google had a clear direction with what they have or had and just bungled it all with one failed venture and the other is currently on life support. Will get worse when Microsoft And Sony release their next systems as they both have streaming abilities. Who will want Stadia then?

It sounded great on paper then when made and put into production thats where it fell flat bet it was developed by the team who made Google Glass.

its simply that the gameplay experience is worse streaming than playing locally.

To counter this, streaming services need to give a massive incentive to choose them i.e cheaper games, exclusives etc. Until they do this, things wont change.

gee I wonder what happened??? maybe the idea of streaming sucks? just maybe? glad it flopped.

😆you had to know it would be?

Most people didn't want anything to do with it, to address the question in the title.

Biggest waste of money I have ever spent!

The ridiculous pricing.

Google what now ?

Stadia works for me. I think it's awesome. Future proof. Now my games are always with me to play, anytime. You guys are haters. Or you have bad internet connections.

Google Stadia is a total bust. What went wrong? Hmm, thats easy. Everything.

First off, there are a myriad of issues.

Primarily, their business model. Making people pay FULL PRICE, for games they can ONLY stream and still make them pay a subscription fee for things they "bought" is ridiculous

Second, they didn't have ANY games outside of Gylt that wasn't already in other places at much cheaper prices for you to TRULY own, without having to buy into a subscription to play said owned products.

Third, they promised 4k 60fps for everything, which people are PAYING for btw. Just to find out that majority of the games aren't running at that rate.

Those are just three that come to mind.

What bothers me if that you have people like Phil Harrison and Jade Raymond there, both of which have industry experience. You'd think they would know better than to try such a pathetic pricing model at least.

When non gamers takes executive decision, you'll have situations like this.
We're far away from these kind of service especially for competitive games, cause network architecture these days can't deliver what Satdia needs to work properly.

The whole marketting plan was self destructive, and it's a real shame because the service itself is brilliant (in my honest opinion). The lied, continuously, about what Stadia could deliver in terms of resolution and now it's been out 3/4 months I don't think a single game runs native 4K.... I will unfortunately be cancelling my sub this month, it's a shame, being able to play my games smoothly all over was a great experience, but I just feel like it's no longer going to gain any momentum and just die off.

The usual. Rushed out of the gate. Should have built up a first party studio first and made those partnerships. Wait for all the promised features to be done before launching and have an actually complete product. You know you're shit is bad when a competitor in Beta is doing 10000x better than you.

But they wanted to beat Xbox to the punch so bad they forgot they don't even have the footing in gaming.

Meanwhile xCloud is just chilling and still kicking their ass.

I think one of the main issues with Stadia, in my opinion, is internet data caps. I know this has been talked about before, but I dont think Google really has addressed how big of an issue that can be some people.

I think Google went the wrong way with this and didn't think things through well enough. They should have entered the market with console hardware. Maybe things would have been better for them

Other than just being sort of lame fundamentally, they did a TERRIBLE job marketing it. The average person has no clue what Stadia even is and the hardcore crowd was never given a reason to care. It's nothing more than an interesting discussion point on the list of biggest flops in gaming history, with 3DO, Philips CD-i, etc.

i think its faster so to say what didnt ha.

What went wrong lol? People were dumb enough to believe in it. That's what went wrong.

The tech isnt there yet and Google was hoping people were dumb enough to think it was.

No compelling software.they really should have invested in some third party deals or something to give the system an identity

It was doa tbh thank god.

Come on, let's be honest, Stadia has its faults but the constant media bashing minute after minute the second it was announced also played a big factor. Media didn't even give stadia a chance

What went wrong is Google tried to give people something they neither wanted nor asked for.

They tried to strongarm their way into the games industry and it's backfired.

Hopefully this will send a message to any other company trying to force gaming streaming as the future that it's not the future we want

what a f**King disaster. You'd think one of the largest, most successful companies in the world could sink a few resources into putting in some effort to actually compete. MS and Sony will do a better job of this (MS already is just in testing) and Sony will probably give their server business to AWS or MS's Azure (yeah thats a real possibility - just like how Apple gets its displays from Samsung) so Google gains 0 here, imo.

Here are the problems that I have seen with the Stadia:

1. It is never smart to believe that streaming will be the only option for gaming.

2. Why didn’t Google have a studio that was going to make games for the Stadia?

3, Does Google not understand that many people around the world still don’t have a solid internet connection?

Everything.

It was made by google
That what went wrong

Gee, who coulda seen this coming....

Tell me again how the multiplatform strategy was supposed to fix everything. Look at your results and compare them to Nintendo, which keeps thriving with exclusives. Your loyal fans are gone. And let’s not forget the pile of IPs you purchased only to let them rot.

The worst thing is this is down from last years numbers/expectations which was down from the previous years numbers/expectations. You think about how long “down” has been a consistent part of the communication and you realize those subscriptions are what’s holding that boat together. The price cut of gamespass is still a price raise in a string of price raises. They are trying to use players to offset the missing revenue. Now call of duty is out of gamespass, which is literally WHY they bought the company. To draw people to the subscription. They realized they missed a boatload of money and that wasn’t sustainable. Now you pay for it like you would have if they never bought the company… so why buy the company? Mind you those billions still need to be paid back. Yeah it gives you a chance to say we make the biggest FPS… but the internal conversations must be brutal at high level on topics that really matter. Like revenue. Profitability. And ROI for the shopping spree.

Is this like the 10th quarter in a row they're down 33% on hardware how is that even mathematically possible. You would think their mediocrity would Plateau