The future may well prove that OnLive was ahead of its time. Like Timothy Dalton’s serious Bond take before Daniel Craig, or Boss before House of Cards, OnLive may have been that necessary sacrificial trailblazer whose death leads to the next down-the-track leap.
For those unaware, OnLive was the first game-streaming service of note. It’s now gone the way of the dodo, but the idea was as straightforward then as it is today for surviving services: instant on. No need to physically own a game. No need for a high-end PC or the latest console. Just a compatible device and a high-speed internet connection.
The catch is that game-streaming services require adequate, stable bandwidth to be playable.
When OnLive fired all its employees in 2012, Australia’s average internet speed was an abysmal 4.2Mbps. It’s likely why OnLive and other still-alive services like Sony’s PlayStation Now or the online component of Nvidia’s GeForce Now never made it to Australian shores.
OnLive’s DNA may still live on, though, given that Sony bought the service before shuttering it. Sony will no doubt launch some kind of streaming service for PlayStation 5 – PlayStation Now branded or otherwise – and it certainly won’t be alone. EA also has an unnamed game-streaming service in the works. Microsoft has xCloud. But the current big name in what might become gaming’s next big thing is Google Stadia, which is due to launch in select countries this November.
The nitty-gritty of game streaming
The Stadia pitch is that you can open a Chrome tab or smartphone app to stream a game “instantly”. This means no download, no patching, just immediate access. This pitch, however, doesn’t extend to accessing a catalogue of games through a Netflix-style subscription – players must still purchase the vast majority of games on the service for full-price, to then be able to stream them.
Even so, the prospect of streaming high spec games to almost any screen (at some point in the future – the launch is more limited) is a major reason why companies are falling over themselves to be involved. Instead of there being millions of compatible gaming devices, the number stretches to potentially billions. Google, for instance, has showcased Stadia’s potential on older PC and Mac hardware, streaming Assassin’s Creed Odyssey to them from a specced-out gaming PC.
The point of this demonstration is simple: these older machines wouldn’t be able to install and run the game, let alone play it at max settings. This lack of the need for a dedicated gaming platform lowers the barrier of entry. Chuck in the possibility of streaming directly to compatible TVs, smartphones or tablets, and it’s easy to understand why game streaming is a big deal for those companies with budgets big enough to back the R&D.
In terms of the actual process of game streaming, the upload bandwidth requirements are less important than download because the main thing being transmitted from the player’s end is control inputs. The download bandwidth requirements, though, include all of the game video and audio, which scale upwards based on each incrementally increasing fidelity metric.
“
For Stadia, Google recommends a minimum download speed of 10Mbps for 720p gaming at 60 frames per second (fps) with stereo sound. Bump that up to 1080p/60fps with 5.1 surround sound (the max resolution for free Stadia users) and you need 20Mbps minimum. Jump up again to Stadia’s current maximum of 4K/60fps with 5.1 surround sound and you need at least 35Mbps of dedicated download bandwidth.
Google has also been talking up future leaps to 8K resolution and up to 120fps, which would likely translate to at least double the download bandwidth, unless bandwidth improvements can be made within the technology. Still, the prospect of a minimum of 70Mbps for fidelity lovers streaming in 8K is a giant bandwidth pill to swallow.
Consistency is important, too, as the real-time nature of gaming means that, unlike video, it can’t have breathing space in a buffer. The other challenge is data usage. Extrapolating Google’s minimum bandwidth estimates, 720p gaming uses approximately 4.5GB per hour of gaming, with Stadia’s 4K/60fps option stretching to a cap-destroying 15.75GB for every hour you play.
The need for speed
Australia isn’t on the initial launch roadmap for Google Stadia, though it may be one of the countries that Google targets from 2020 onwards. This is likely an infrastructure consideration, given we don’t have Google data centres (yet?), even if we do have a Google Cloud Platform.
Regardless of where you’re located, there are three key player-side considerations when it comes to any game-streaming service: download speed, latency and minimal (ideally zero) data loss. Conceptually, even these are problematic in Australia, especially when you account for the reality that no matter how fast the back-end architecture of a game-streaming service is, it’s at the mercy of a player’s internet connection.
According to the Speedtest global index, Australia’s fixed broadband average at the time of writing is 38.54Mbps (57th in the world), compared to 119.09Mbps in the USA (7th) and 61.02Mbps for the UK (41st). (The USA and the UK are two of 14 launch countries for Stadia.) While comfortably above the minimum (10Mbps) and 1080p (20Mbps) Stadia download requirements, Australia’s average fixed broadband speed is not comfortably above the 35Mbps needed for 4K game-streaming. It’s also worth considering that the internet’s busy period is 7pm to 11pm every night, where user demand slows things further. This means it’s possible that average would drop below the 35Mbps required to stream 4K Stadia games.
For comparison, Italy has the slowest average fixed broadband speed of the 14 Stadia launch countries, but that’s still 53.89Mbps: comfortably above the 35Mbps requirement.
Australia’s average fixed broadband speed should improve once the NBN rollout is completed and as more Australians connect to the new access network. Additionally, if NBN follows particular upgrade paths in the future, it should bring copper/fibre hybrid technologies closer to the current max consumer fibre speeds.
Australia’s mobile internet fares much better: we’re ranked fourth on the Speedtest global index with an average download speed of 63.2Mbps. That’s faster than the UK average for fixed broadband, but there’s a big catch. Australia doesn’t really have mobile plans with unlimited data at these speeds. We do have unlimited-data mobile plans, but they’re either fully or fine-print capped (once you reach your data cap) at a paltry 1.5Mbps.
With 5G on the way and as consumer data demands grow, that may change. But given that 5G depends on device compatibility and telcos treat data as though it’s as scarce as helium, this network upgrade isn’t likely to change much, at least not in the short-term.
Beyond the need for speed
The bigger catch of game streaming is latency, particularly for those living in regional locations in Australia. In these locations, the only internet options are satellite or fixed wireless, where the pings can be high (particularly for satellite) and reliability is impacted by total users and adverse weather.
Even fixed broadband internet users are at the mercy of server locations for a hypothetical Stadia rollout in Australia. If, like Microsoft’s Azure data centres, servers are only positioned on the east coast of Australia, those in the far west and north of our expansive country will have higher latency. To put that in context, there’s lower latency between the east coast of Australia and New Zealand than there is with Perth in Western Australia.
Put simply, the farther the distance, the higher the latency. The higher the latency, the more the real-time illusion of game-streaming is broken and input delays are more noticeable, among other detractors.
Data loss is the final concern, and while there are controllable factors within the home, loss can come down to external networks outside of the player’s control. By way of example, my Telstra cable connection was incredibly reliable for the first year (outside of the odd day-long outage). It’s now basically unusable for any live-streaming service because of data loss care of sporadic 10-second dropouts.
“
With the NBN arriving in my area next year and after a year of fighting, Telstra tossed my case in the ‘too hard’ basket and stopped trying to fix it. I was given bill credit for the lack of reliability but, honestly, I’d rather be paying full price for a consistent connection, especially because that all-important r-word is the first adjective in Telstra’s internet sales pitch.
Outside of these dropouts, my latency is an impressive 7ms with an above-spec 112Mbps download bandwidth. Incidentally, this bandwidth is fast enough to pass the Google Stadia bandwidth test with a big green tick.
What’s less viable for Stadia or a similar game-streaming service is my Optus phone internet. I get two bars of 4G reception in my area (10km from the Sydney CBD), and while that equates to a respectable 14ms latency, the download speed is around 35.5Mbps. It doesn’t help that it’s not the most reliable of connections. Additionally, while 60GB of data is adequate for my monthly needs, it would only allow for around 6.5 hours of 1080p streaming on Stadia’s 20Mbps recommendation.
Granted, my phone plan is more than a year old. With a top-tier plan today, I could score 200GB of data from Optus, which would allow for 22 hours of monthly game streaming (and nothing else) at the same resolution on Stadia. That’d cost $105 per month (excluding any handset repayments) on top of my home internet.
Cracking the latency code
The challenge of any form of wireless technology – Wi-Fi, mobile or otherwise – is that it includes inherent latency. It’s likely why the Google Stadia founder’s edition includes a Chromecast Ultra, the top-end gizmo that’s also best used with its included ethernet capability. The Stadia requirements list this particular Chromecast model as the minimum for using Stadia on a TV.
What Google has cleverly done is push Stadia wannabes towards its proprietary controller. At first glance, it looks like just another average controller. The cleverness comes from the inclusion of a link between controller and Stadia gaming server (via Wi-Fi), as opposed to being paired to the device displaying the screen. This has the potential for lower noticeable input delays.
Clever controller tech.
Users can opt for their own controller or keyboard/mouse combo, but this will introduce additional latency. Even though this ultimately amounts to milliseconds of latency, it can start to add up to noticeable delays between control input and onscreen responsiveness.
This was the case with my xCloud experience at E3, with an Xbox One controller connected via Bluetooth to a mobile phone that was streaming Resident Evil 7. While the major detractor was the screen darkness of this particular demo, the adequately lit areas showcased a noticeable delay between joystick camera movement and onscreen actuation.
Game-specific impressiveness
There is a chance these kinds of game-streaming input delays may be less noticeable to more casual players, for whom these types of technology may be more relevant than the dedicated gamer crowd who likely own their platform/s of choice. Mobile games are often designed with control limitations in mind, and the same logic may well prove true in terms of the type of game that’s best played via game streaming.
Competitive multiplayer shooters are out for now and, unsurprisingly, almost entirely absent from the list of Stadia launch titles (though Google notes there will be multiplayer games at launch). Doom and Doom Eternal are potential exceptions to this, but there’s more on them below. It’s not a stretch to imagine that other games like Cuphead and Dark Souls, which rely on immediately responsive control feedback, are going to be a challenge for game-streaming services because of the inherent latency.
“
It’s interesting that the rise of controllers like the Xbox Elite and Scuf, which champion the competitive advantages of lower latency, are on the rise alongside the birth of a gaming service that includes inherent latency. On top of this, Sony and Microsoft have talked about the high frame rate potential of the next-gen consoles, which is another step closer to lower latency (albeit perceived, in this instance).
Even TV manufacturers have included higher-refresh-rate ‘game modes’ for years, and newer-model teles offer 120Hz refresh rates and FreeSync support. In this respect, a new technology that inherently includes latency seems like a step in the wrong direction.
Devilish delights
While the bigger focus is on core game-streaming technologies like Stadia, Bethesda swooped into the race with a surprise announcement at E3 2019: Orion. Initially, it sounded as though Orion was another competing service. Instead, the pitch for the patented tech is as a Pied Piper-like middleware software solution to improve the hardware-focus of game-streaming services.
Orion is implemented at a game-engine level and is built to reduce two all-important factors: latency and bandwidth. These improvements are potentially significant, too, with the claim of latency reductions of up to 20 percent per frame and a 40 percent reduction in the required bandwidth.
“
According to the spiel, technically, Orion can be used on any game-streaming service, which means it’s there to complement the Stadias and xClouds of the gaming world, albeit with one big caveat: developers, publishers and streaming providers have to choose to use it.
If the theory is true in application, Orion has the potential to lower bandwidth requirements and data usage. The Orion official page even claims “imperceptible latency” in reference to “twitchy shooters”, on top of this huge-if-true statement: “a wider availability, making quality play available to players living far from data centers.”
Orion is likely why both Doom and Doom Eternal are the only fast-paced shooters among the launch titles; it’s a chance for Bethesda to showcase its tech. Both shooters have multiplayer but the higher PvP time-to-kill (TTK) makes them less in the vein of Counter-Strike and Rainbow Six Siege, and closer to the likes of Destiny 2. The extra survivability of a higher TTK shooter is better suited to the inherent latency of game-streaming services.
Game-streaming downsides
There are more game-streaming detractors outside of those previously mentioned. Interruptions in the connection, be it player or server side, result in choppier frame rates, graphical artefacting and input delays. Even a dip in connection speed can reduce resolution, introduce latency and equate to more noticeable on-screen compression.
At best, these are immersion tarnishes; at worst, tech destroyers. Google does note that Stadia will automatically adjust “to deliver the best possible visual quality at all times” during bandwidth fluctuations, but if that’s a fidelity-at-all-costs mentality, something has to give, and that may be responsiveness.
“
In terms of mobile devices, Stadia is curiously only limited to Google Pixel phones and Chrome OS tablets for the time being. Google has confirmed this will change, but it’s odd that other modern Android devices can’t also run the tech. Given that Stadia will be accessed via app, conceptually, it seems straightforward to lock out incompatible phones and tablets via Android OS version.
If a player’s connection drops out, the server will stay live for a few minutes. This means that even Google Pixel owners are at the mercy of internet coverage to ensure they can reconnect in time to resume or save their game. Australia, for instance, has great mobile coverage in cities, but in smaller city centres and in rural areas, the coverage starts to shrink and speeds slow.
Game access in general is also a big issue. The US$9.99 monthly fee for Stadia Pro grants access to a limited library of free games, discounts and 4K streaming, but you’re utterly dependent on an online connection to use Stadia, which means no form of offline gaming. The same is true of the free version of Stadia, and in both cases most of the games on the service cost full price to purchase. Google does note, though, that purchased games will be playable on Stadia even if they’re removed from the library.
It’s also worth flagging that older compatible devices will be at the mercy of their screen technology in terms of resolution (unless Stadia supports Xbox One X-like supersampling) and refresh rate, which may not be capable of frame rates beyond 60fps. Finally, unlike a service like Netflix, Stadia only allows for a single stream, albeit a single user can use this single session across unlimited compatible devices.
Perks of game streaming
It’s not all bad news, though. Stadia and other game-streaming services effectively eliminate piracy, which is great news for developers and publishers. Lower device requirements mean a lower initial barrier of entry to play games. Playing Stadia with a stable online connection is reportedly comparable to local game-streaming services, like Steam Link and GeForce Now.
On top of this, because the games are streamed and not installed, there’s no need to make space for increasingly growing game installs. Additionally, games are patched on the server side (at Google speeds for Stadia), meaning you don’t have to wait for patches to download before you’re ready to play. This, in particular, is a gaming-godsend for players who have limited gaming time that may be chewed up by waiting for patches.
There’s also the early pledge from Google that Stadia will support cross-platform multiplayer. This is, of course, reliant on other platforms coming to the party. Still, it’s a strong pro-player stance that sets an example for other parties to follow suit. Mind you, for that to work, latency really will have to be in line with other platforms.
Future potential
Stadia’s Director of Product Andrey Doronichev had this to say recently in a Reddit AMA: “To be clear, Stadia Pro is not ‘Netflix for Games’ like some people have mentioned, a closer comparison would be like Xbox Live Gold or Playstation Plus. The Pro subscribers get 4K/HDR streaming, 5.1 sound, exclusive discounts and access to some free games. Roughly one free game per month give or take. Starting with Destiny 2 (yay!).”
So… no broad catalogue, just a drip feed of free titles, with all others to be purchased at full price. That being the case, what is the use case for streaming that makes this worthwhile? If you don’t have a high-end gaming PC, a PS4 Pro or an Xbox One X maybe it makes sense. But if you don’t have that entry-level investment in gaming are you really interested enough to pay a monthly fee? If you do buy in, will you hog the bandwidth in your house to the point that a flatmate or partner may not be able to do what they want to do online?
Ultimately, services like Stadia need to prove that the many potential headaches associated with them – at least early on – are actually outweighed by the advantages. Would you, for instance, take instant-access gaming that’s potentially lower fidelity and higher latency every single time you want to use it over simply waiting for an install at the beginning and then having consistent, excellent performance from that point on? I think that trade-off would be much easier to sell if Stadia was indeed offering up a Netflix-style service, rich with content. The ability to browse through a large catalogue and try anything you like instantly would be pretty compelling. But that’s not what Stadia is going to be at launch.
Stadia and other streaming services really do feel like they raise more questions than they answer, so for now, perhaps it’s not such a bad thing that Australia isn’t part of the initial rollout. This vision of the future of gaming seems like it’s going to feel pretty inessential for some time to come. Mind you, it’d still be nice to have the internet to support it.
Nathan Lawrence is a freelance writer based in Sydney who writes about games and film, and is a shooter specialist. Say hey on Twitter.
