Contradictory position 2.
I'm a convert to this, no doubt about it. I've often thought; just let people try it for a bit. They'll see how it works, understand it and be won over.
And yet, the way they've chosen to do that will actually drive people away.
It sounds appealing; you can download Stadia for free, and get a free trial for a month, to play on your phone, tablet etc. You can also use a Bluetooth controller, a PS or Xbox one on it. So, it costs you nothing to try it, hardware wise. Jump in.
Plus, it's actually a good subscription, not like Sky. You get a warning before it renews, it's one button press to cancel.
But it's exactly the wrong way to showcase Stadia. People are sus about streaming games because of lag etc, and fair enough if they are.
That's what Google have (mostly) solved by having a controller that connects directly and separately to the servers, it skips several intermediary points where lag gets introduced. You don't get the proper Stadia experience without the controller, imo.
And yet people will get their free demo playing in a sub optimal way, find the glitches, reconfirm what they thought about streaming and give up.
Today, Amicii Invector, a music rhythm game was released 'free' on Pro. I love this kind of game, will play it later again. But it relies on split second reactions.
So, if you took a pro trial today, used your PS4 controller, and hated it because of lag, you'd think streaming could never work.
Again, contradictions. You find a way to showcase this for free, then actively prove your detractors right because you haven't shown them how it does work when done properly.
Oh anyway, I'm going for another poke on Pixeljunk Raiders. Think I've figured out what I was doing wrong
My reign of terror Stadia posts on this forum is done for this evening