|
This is terrible. The only way I can see this working is if this was a "free" service with Google Fiber.
|
#
¿
Mar 19, 2019 18:44
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ Apr 29, 2024 04:33 |
|
|
Google hasn't made a successful product since Android. And that only succeeded due to Microsoft, Nokia, and RIM making the dumbest decisions possible, to the point that all Google had to do was make a semi-competent operating system that third parties could use.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 19, 2019 19:28
|
|
|
Popete posted:The idea of not owning the software you pay for I strongly dislike. Steam alone bothers me. Hence why I use GOG when I can. This is at a whole different level.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 19, 2019 19:39
|
|
|
A factor is that technology is near to the point of taking advantage of anything developers want to throw at it. Besides increasing resolution and marginally increased texture quality, more powerful hardware won't benefit the vast majority of games released today. There is a reason why developers have little problem porting titles to the Switch. Compare that to last generation when titles like Dead Rising were cut down to the point of not even being the same game on Nintendo's hardware.
punk rebel ecks fucked around with this message at 20:07 on Mar 19, 2019 |
|
#
¿
Mar 19, 2019 20:04
|
|
|
Blotto_Otter posted:This framing is far, far too generous to Google. In my neck of the woods, Google Fiber fizzled out primarily because they found out that significant municipal infrastructure projects require negotiating with a wide variety of public and private parties, which happens on a timescale measured in years rather than months... and then they just gave up. It's sad because Google has some GREAT ideas. Ultra cheap laptops just for streaming, lite gaming, and basic office work? Sci-fi type glasses where the argumented world and real world become one? Fiber internet finally coming Stateside? All of these seem like incredible concepts that were unfortunately either abandoned due to fear of significant commitment or were too ahead of their time. What companies like Apple and to a lesser extent Nintendo show is that if you really have to fully commit to your product and know exactly what to sacrifice and what to not. The iPhone and Switch were/are so successful because their respected companies knew what vision they wanted for those products and did what needed to be done to execute said vision. In contrast, Google just doesn't do the same with their projects. And I call them projects because that's what they feel like, more like alpha (or beta at best) releases going public. pixaal posted:Everyone saying they don't like not owning a game fine, but think about how much you'd save if you didn't need a gaming computer? A $500 computer will work just as well as a $2,500 gaming computer. As I've said before, new hardware is needed less and less. I just ran Devil May Cry 5, a "graphics king" contender, maxed out at 60fps with an almost 5 year old GPU and an 10 year old CPU. Neither of which were at the absolute top of the line when purchased. Things will only stay viable longer from here on out.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 19, 2019 20:46
|
|
|
pixaal posted:Chromebooks still exist, and are actively used in classrooms, it's what poor districts use while more wealthy ones use iPads. I think the poor districts are getting a better experience. Oh Chromebooks are still used, but I feel that they aren't the breakaway success that Google wanted them to be. pixaal posted:These were abandonded for a good reason. It caused people to glance where the screen is even when not wearing them. It gave people lazy eye and other rare eye conditions. Microsoft also had a glasses project that they quietly abandoned. Yeah, the tech wasn't there for the vision. The Wii U of Google products.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 19, 2019 21:16
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ Apr 29, 2024 04:33 |
|
|
LMFAO! Playing on PC alone makes FGC tournaments go on fire. This poo poo will be a nuclear explosion.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 20, 2019 05:20
|
|