Stadia failed due to lack of top-tier games, and Microsoft is partly to blame, Google says

Failure Stage becomes relevant again after statements Dov Zimringformer head of cloud gaming platform Google. In a statement made as part of the legal battle between Microsoft and the FTC over the purchase of Activision Blizzard, the executive assured that the lack of top-tier games was detrimental to the service, and that games from Redmond played a role in preventing it from ever taking off.

Zimring’s comments came to light as part of unredacted confidential documents that were released in an apparent mistake by Microsoft. Interestingly, they mark the first time Google has spoken openly about why it thinks Stadia hasn’t delivered as expected.

The inability to add quality games to its catalog was the platform’s main weakness, the Mountain View manager noted. This created a kind of vicious circle that undermined both the interest of subscribers and video game studios..

“Gamers weren’t signing up for Stadia due to the lack of AAA games, and many AAA game developers weren’t developing games for Stadia because there weren’t enough users,” says Zimring.

However, Stadia’s failure is not based solely on Google’s failure to make its platform more attractive to both parties. publishers as far as the community is concerned. Technologically develop games for this service. suggested more difficulty thanks to the infrastructure chosen by Californians. This is where Microsoft comes into the picture.

Why Stadia failed, according to a Google executive

Stadia servers were based on two key elements. On the one hand, they used open source software based on Linux. On the other hand, they depended on the Vulkan graphics API. According to the head of Google, this negatively affected the development of new games for the platform, as well as the creation ports existing names, because it was too expensive for an external study. No small feat considering Mountain View subsidized most of the costs.

Dov Zimring noted that an alternative to this problem would be to go the way of NVIDIA GeForce Now. That is, using an infrastructure based on Microsoft. But Google felt that this would not provide the level of customization that was intended for Stadia. and that over time this will be an economic loss.

“We ultimately concluded that Windows licensing fees were too high for the long-term viability of the service and that using Windows/DirectX did not allow for the necessary customization. […] For example, with GeForce Now, the cost to developers was close to zero because it runs on a virtual Windows PC running in the cloud.”

Dov Zimring, former head of product at Google Stadia.

More darts against Microsoft

But these weren’t the only attacks against Microsoft from the former Stadia product manager. The head assured that in addition to complaints about the high costs of creating versions of their games for the cloud platform, negotiations are underway with studios now owned by Redmond. they have always been defiant.

“Our experience with ZeniMax, the parent company of Bethesda Softworks, suggests that while owned by Microsoft, Activision will likely be reluctant to port its games to competing gaming services, especially those that compete with its leading cloud gaming platform and Window”.

Dov Zimring, former head of product at Google Stadia.

What’s striking about Zimring’s comments is that Microsoft has agreed to promote Activision Blizzard games, including Call of Dutyto compete with platforms to get regulators to approve your purchase. The most notable case happened with NVIDIA GeForce Now, but the same thing happened with less world-known solutions such as Nware.

The Google executive’s excuses for Stadia’s failure today are anecdotal. Let us remind you that the service announced its closure in September 2022 and completed it in January of this year. Mountain View has come under fire for its approach to maintenance. Especially for the fact that he quickly abandoned developing his own games.

The main negative comments addressed to Stadia management came from Phil Harrison. The executive, a controversial figure in the industry, came to Google to take the reins of the service but ended up leaving through the back door after it shut down.