We do often include affiliate links to earn us some pennies. See more here.

Google gives up on Stadia, will offer refunds on games and hardware

By - | Views: 38,514

As expected for some time now, Google has decided to call it quits on their cloud gaming service Stadia. This was announced in a blog post today.

Written up by Phil Harrison, the Vice President and General Manager at Stadia, the post mentions how "it hasn't gained the traction with users that we expected so we’ve made the difficult decision to begin winding down our Stadia streaming service".

The wildest part about this, is that they're going to be refunding all Stadia hardware purchases made through the main Google Store and they will also be refunding all game and add-on content purchases made through the Stadia store. Harrison said they expect to have finished up the majority of refunds by Mid-January, 2023. They will not be refunding any Stadia Pro subscriptions though, only the full purchases. More info on the process here but it seems like it's not ready yet.

Players will still be able to access and play games on Stadia through until January 18, 2023.

In the post Harrison mention how the "underlying technology platform that powers Stadia has been proven at scale and transcends gaming" and they see "opportunities to apply this technology across other parts of Google like YouTube, Google Play, and our Augmented Reality (AR) efforts — as well as make it available to our industry partners" so it seems they will continue to offer it to others to use.

This is a pretty huge defeat for Google to give up and refund wholly like this. With the likes of GeForce NOW, Xbox Cloud and Amazon Luna — the business model that Google had with you needing to buy full-price games was pretty much doomed.

Article taken from GamingOnLinux.com.
26 Likes
About the author -
author picture
I am the owner of GamingOnLinux. After discovering Linux back in the days of Mandrake in 2003, I constantly came back to check on the progress of Linux until Ubuntu appeared on the scene and it helped me to really love it. You can reach me easily by emailing GamingOnLinux directly.
See more from me
97 comments
Page: «8/10»
  Go to:

Mohandevir 30 Sep
Quoting: Liam Dawe
Quoting: KlaasBut it requires a lot more power everywhere else, so it should be avoided at all costs.
It's a nice way to think, but like people who argue against capitalistic ways all the time, it's just not grounded in the reality of how we all live our lives. Should I care about how much energy servers on everything I use cost the planet? Yes. Do I? Not really, I'm just trying to survive and keep costs low like everyone else.

Everytime I read this kind of argument, I'm wondering if the environmental impact of the over the seas shipments of the new devices is taken into account... I guenuinely don't know, but I'm wondering if a few shipments to the likes of google, for their servers with the streaming impact is much worse than 25+ millions of units of consoles or pc being shipped to 25+ millions of different adresses, on huge ocean liners/trucks/airplanes that burns lots of unecological fuel... I'm guenuinely curious.

Edit: And I didn't even mentionned the impact of these shipments on sea life.


Last edited by Mohandevir on 30 September 2022 at 4:01 pm UTC
Mohandevir 30 Sep
Quoting: STiAT
Quoting: MohandevirIt would be really nice of them to "turn on" the standard bluetooth pairing for the Stadia controller, so we may use it elsewhere, wireless... It could make a fantastic AndroidTV controller for GeForce Now...

I thought that was a hardware limitation not just a limitation by the firmware.

Would be nice, I really like the controller.

Nope. The Stadia controller has a standard 4.2 bluetooth chip... It's only used for initial pairing, though.
Eike 30 Sep
View PC info
  • Supporter Plus
Quoting: Mohandevir
Quoting: Liam Dawe
Quoting: KlaasBut it requires a lot more power everywhere else, so it should be avoided at all costs.
It's a nice way to think, but like people who argue against capitalistic ways all the time, it's just not grounded in the reality of how we all live our lives. Should I care about how much energy servers on everything I use cost the planet? Yes. Do I? Not really, I'm just trying to survive and keep costs low like everyone else.

Everytime I read this kind of argument, I'm wondering if the environmental impact of the over the seas shipments of the new devices is taken into account... I guenuinely don't know, but I'm wondering if a few shipments to the likes of google, for their servers with the streaming impact is much worse than 25+ millions of units of consoles or pc being shipped to 25+ millions of different adresses, on huge ocean liners/trucks/airplanes that burns lots of unecological fuel... I'm guenuinely curious.

I don't know... but the 25+ million people will still need a device to access their games either way. Maybe less often, though.
Mohandevir 30 Sep
Quoting: Eike
Quoting: Mohandevir
Quoting: Liam Dawe
Quoting: KlaasBut it requires a lot more power everywhere else, so it should be avoided at all costs.
It's a nice way to think, but like people who argue against capitalistic ways all the time, it's just not grounded in the reality of how we all live our lives. Should I care about how much energy servers on everything I use cost the planet? Yes. Do I? Not really, I'm just trying to survive and keep costs low like everyone else.

Everytime I read this kind of argument, I'm wondering if the environmental impact of the over the seas shipments of the new devices is taken into account... I guenuinely don't know, but I'm wondering if a few shipments to the likes of google, for their servers with the streaming impact is much worse than 25+ millions of units of consoles or pc being shipped to 25+ millions of different adresses, on huge ocean liners/trucks/airplanes that burns lots of unecological fuel... I'm guenuinely curious.

I don't know... but the 25+ million people will still need a device to access their games either way. Maybe less often, though.

Not if you already have the device, because it runs on a potato. Yes there will be new devices to be bought, but streaming will lengthen your device's lifespan, thus less shipments required.

And think about electronics... Even more obvious with DIY PCs... Parts rarely comes from one place... I don't know. I'm wondering.

Edit1: Seriously, let's pretend we are in a 100% streaming world (absolutely not a wish; I like local gaming too much)... I'm probably still running my old i7-3770 from 2012. No Graphics card, one less shipment.

Edit2: And now, I'm thinking about all the upgrades I wouldn't have bought afterward... That much less shipments... Yikes!

Edit3: x25 million users? And one device for all services? No need for a Playstation and/or Xbox and/or Steam Deck and/or PC and/or Nvidia Shield, etc... One device that does it all in the form factor that you prefer? Think about all the shipments that gets avoided... Ok. It's highly theoric, but see where it could lead us?


Last edited by Mohandevir on 30 September 2022 at 5:35 pm UTC
Quoting: KuJo
Quoting: BlackBloodRumI wonder if they'll do real refunds to your bank account, or just give you credit to your google account so that you have to still use their services to use your refunds?
That would be okay for me. I get back about 280€. Could invest that in a Google Pixel 7, which I want to buy. :)
I guess there's that

Pixel phones are probably the only google things I do buy. Gotta love the ability to flash GrapheneOS the same day it arrives at your doorstep
STiAT 30 Sep
Quoting: Mohandevir
Quoting: STiAT
Quoting: MohandevirIt would be really nice of them to "turn on" the standard bluetooth pairing for the Stadia controller, so we may use it elsewhere, wireless... It could make a fantastic AndroidTV controller for GeForce Now...

I thought that was a hardware limitation not just a limitation by the firmware.

Would be nice, I really like the controller.

Nope. The Stadia controller has a standard 4.2 bluetooth chip... It's only used for initial pairing, though.

Then I hope they change that, otherwhise the controller is just waste while it could still be perfectly used.

I doubt it though that there will be a single dollar more invested.

Hope is the last thing to die though. I even like the Stadia controller better than the Steam one (my wife prefers the steam one though, so it would be nice if I could use the Stadia one).
slaapliedje 30 Sep
View PC info
  • Supporter Plus
Quoting: BielFPs
Quoting: slaapliedjeAnyone who knows anything about Google pretty much knew it. They try to diversify their businesses, but they almost always end up giving up on them and going back to 'give us data to sell ads to'
Maybe nowadays yes, but back then Stadia was still in beta and most of user were excited about the brand new Read Dead Redemption 2 support

Also kudos for @YoRHa-2B who apparently also saw that coming
Ha, yeah I mean I never signed up for it as I knew it was going to happen when Stadia was first announced. I'd have never signed up for it regardless, as it always seemed a way to take money from people without letting them ever actually own anything.
Quoting: Mohandevir
Quoting: Eike
Quoting: Mohandevir
Quoting: Liam Dawe
Quoting: KlaasBut it requires a lot more power everywhere else, so it should be avoided at all costs.
It's a nice way to think, but like people who argue against capitalistic ways all the time, it's just not grounded in the reality of how we all live our lives. Should I care about how much energy servers on everything I use cost the planet? Yes. Do I? Not really, I'm just trying to survive and keep costs low like everyone else.

Everytime I read this kind of argument, I'm wondering if the environmental impact of the over the seas shipments of the new devices is taken into account... I guenuinely don't know, but I'm wondering if a few shipments to the likes of google, for their servers with the streaming impact is much worse than 25+ millions of units of consoles or pc being shipped to 25+ millions of different adresses, on huge ocean liners/trucks/airplanes that burns lots of unecological fuel... I'm guenuinely curious.

I don't know... but the 25+ million people will still need a device to access their games either way. Maybe less often, though.

Not if you already have the device, because it runs on a potato. Yes there will be new devices to be bought, but streaming will lengthen your device's lifespan, thus less shipments required.

And think about electronics... Even more obvious with DIY PCs... Parts rarely comes from one place... I don't know. I'm wondering.

Edit1: Seriously, let's pretend we are in a 100% streaming world (absolutely not a wish; I like local gaming too much)... I'm probably still running my old i7-3770 from 2012. No Graphics card, one less shipment.

Edit2: And now, I'm thinking about all the upgrades I wouldn't have bought afterward... That much less shipments... Yikes!

Edit3: x25 million users? And one device for all services? No need for a Playstation and/or Xbox and/or Steam Deck and/or PC and/or Nvidia Shield, etc... One device that does it all in the form factor that you prefer? Think about all the shipments that gets avoided... Ok. It's highly theoric, but see where it could lead us?
Yeah, except in a real streaming-only world, since there would be no alternative to the streaming services, and there would be only a few of them, they would cut anti-competitive deals with each other and all start mandating the hardware you use, so you'd have various incompatible-with-each-other consoles all over again that you'd have to spend money on . . . not because there was any valid technical reason for it, but because they could.
Mohandevir 30 Sep
Quoting: Purple Library Guy
Quoting: Mohandevir
Quoting: Eike
Quoting: Mohandevir
Quoting: Liam Dawe
Quoting: KlaasBut it requires a lot more power everywhere else, so it should be avoided at all costs.
It's a nice way to think, but like people who argue against capitalistic ways all the time, it's just not grounded in the reality of how we all live our lives. Should I care about how much energy servers on everything I use cost the planet? Yes. Do I? Not really, I'm just trying to survive and keep costs low like everyone else.

Everytime I read this kind of argument, I'm wondering if the environmental impact of the over the seas shipments of the new devices is taken into account... I guenuinely don't know, but I'm wondering if a few shipments to the likes of google, for their servers with the streaming impact is much worse than 25+ millions of units of consoles or pc being shipped to 25+ millions of different adresses, on huge ocean liners/trucks/airplanes that burns lots of unecological fuel... I'm guenuinely curious.

I don't know... but the 25+ million people will still need a device to access their games either way. Maybe less often, though.

Not if you already have the device, because it runs on a potato. Yes there will be new devices to be bought, but streaming will lengthen your device's lifespan, thus less shipments required.

And think about electronics... Even more obvious with DIY PCs... Parts rarely comes from one place... I don't know. I'm wondering.

Edit1: Seriously, let's pretend we are in a 100% streaming world (absolutely not a wish; I like local gaming too much)... I'm probably still running my old i7-3770 from 2012. No Graphics card, one less shipment.

Edit2: And now, I'm thinking about all the upgrades I wouldn't have bought afterward... That much less shipments... Yikes!

Edit3: x25 million users? And one device for all services? No need for a Playstation and/or Xbox and/or Steam Deck and/or PC and/or Nvidia Shield, etc... One device that does it all in the form factor that you prefer? Think about all the shipments that gets avoided... Ok. It's highly theoric, but see where it could lead us?
Yeah, except in a real streaming-only world, since there would be no alternative to the streaming services, and there would be only a few of them, they would cut anti-competitive deals with each other and all start mandating the hardware you use, so you'd have various incompatible-with-each-other consoles all over again that you'd have to spend money on . . . not because there was any valid technical reason for it, but because they could.


Not sure about that. Your reasoning revolves around an hardware centric business... Cloud gaming is a SaaS. What hardware you use, they don't really care. What they care about is the subscriptions and the services you pay for. In many cases, those that supply cloud services don't even supply the hardware. Why would they bother? If what you say is true, I wouldn't be able to use GeForce Now on the same device as Stadia. Sony wouldn't have put their games on PC. There is a paradigm shift caused by SaaS.

Edit: What you will definetly see, though, are exclusive games from service to service.


Last edited by Mohandevir on 30 September 2022 at 6:52 pm UTC
elmapul 30 Sep
Quoting: Purple Library Guy
Quoting: elmapul
Quoting: Purple Library GuyPeople didn't actually have to pay a monthly fee for Stadia; it's just Google's terrible marketing made it look like they did.

google or a bunch of influencers who lied?
All I know is what I read here, and back when it was significant news Liam regularly noted both (a) that the actual deal did not require subscription, and (b) that figuring this out from anything Google were saying was nigh impossible. He opined repeatedly both that the service itself worked pretty well and was, all concerns about the fundamental nature of streaming game services aside, a decent offer, and that in his opinion Google were doing a perfectly pathetic job of selling it. Not just the bad messaging on subscription, but terrible ads and all kinds of stuff. I'm prepared to take his word.
really? i dont think it was that confusing.
instead of paying 400 dollars upfront for an ps4, and 400 dollars again for an ps4 pro, you pay just for the game, and a montly subscription if you want to play in 4k.
with 10 dollars per month, it would take 40 months to reach the price of an ps4, 3 years and 4 mounths is almost the entire generation.
and while you do that you get exclusive discounts and some games as part of the deal.
dont seems like a bad deal for me, unless they rise the price or shutdown the service and you lose your games without a refund, that is the part that google should make more clear.

google didnt fail to comunicate that as fair as i remember, but a lot of youtubers miss interpret and repeated what they understood.


Last edited by elmapul on 30 September 2022 at 6:50 pm UTC
While you're here, please consider supporting GamingOnLinux on:

Reward Tiers: Patreon. Plain Donations: PayPal.

This ensures all of our main content remains totally free for everyone with no article paywalls. We also don't have tons of adverts, there's also no tracking and we respect your privacy. Just good, fresh content. Without your continued support, we simply could not continue!

You can find even more ways to support us on this dedicated page any time. If you already are, thank you!
Login / Register

Or login with...
Sign in with Steam Sign in with Twitter Sign in with Google
Social logins require cookies to stay logged in.