Google Stadia’s latest free game only has a few thousand total players

arstechnica.com

4 points·elsewhen··4 comments

The author used one game as the indicator of the success of the whole platform. Doesn't seem to me as a good reasoning.

However the Stadia platform doesn't seem to be gaining a lot of traction, mostly because of -- I guess -- the network bandwidth requirement, and the limited library?

I hope this leads to a fiery death. Thin client architecture leads to even more loss of control for the individual user.

Thin client architecture allows people to use into products they otherwise wouldn't have been able to. Loss of control is only bad for an individual if they used to have more control. As someone who doesn't have a high-end rig, I never had control in the first place. With Stadia, I might now have an option to try the latest games. I can't help but feel that "Stadia bad because centralized" is a poorly thought-out argument.

There's room in the world for both centralized and decentralized services. Which one you use depends on your situation.

The mass production of high end gaming rigs is only going to continue if the market continues to buys them. If thin-clients become the new standard, they will cease to become an option. If you have a hard time ponying up for the funds for a high end gaming rig today, think of what it would take to buy a million dollar super computer because all the high end PC manufacturers have all gone out of business.

Calling my argument "poorly thought-out" is rather rich when you haven't thought about the ramifications of a the success of a thin-client model, and the bust of the PC market.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com