Amazon Luna, GeForce Now, Shadow, running Parsec in the cloud and paying by the minute, xCloud, and PS Now all better Stadia by offering game subscriptions or more features or are more sustainable by being cheaper in the case of GeForce Now for 4K.
If Amazon Luna/GeForce Now can succeed as upstarts, it says Google should've likely focused on a game subscription service or offering a standalone game streaming platform. They're closer to being the later with this announcement, but not until I can play my Steam/GoG/Itch/Epic libraries on it.
I have a few hours in AC:Odyssey and BL3 on Stadia, it's a good service that has improved a lot too. It's still tough to recommend if you're not the most occasional gamer.
If we're speaking in net good/bad, I'd wager the last two end up being net positives when you consider how many people think their ISP/router isn't up to the job (and therefore don't try Stadia at all) compared to how many actually aren't up to the job.
The minimum speed Stadia requires is 10 Mbps, or 35 Mbps for 4K streaming; I'd personally recommend at least 20 Mbps without 4K though, since it's "playable" below that at the cost of graphics artifacting. To put these numbers into context though, Speedtest/Ookla reported an average USA broadband speed of 135 Mbps and an average worldwide broadband speed of 64 Mbps for 2019 [1], rising every year.
It's a lot harder to measure latency, though, which is the biggest variable IMO for whether Stadia works for you. It doesn't work well on my parents' HughesNet satellite internet, but I regularly got <4ms ping when I lived in Kansas City and rarely go above 10ms round trip here in Oregon (on Comcast, even!). They seem to have done really well with their edge node placements, because even in small cities like Joplin/Bentonville (both around 50k pop.) and in Netarts (800 pop.!) the latency feels on par with native games. Luna latency here in Portland spikes to multiples seconds at a time on occasion, and GeForce Now was pretty much unplayable in many cities/towns outside of Kansas City back in the Midwest (but seems to work fine most of the time here). In my experience, Stadia's been by far the most consistent experience wherever I went.
I'd wager that the the subset of [people Stadia would work well for but they think their connection isn't good enough so they don't try it] is larger than the subset of [people that would try Stadia but don't have a good enough connection for it].
[1] https://www.speedtest.net/insights/blog/global-index-2019-in...
Connection speeds have improved since Stadia launched, but you will almost certainly go through a 1TB cap before the month is over if you have 2 TVs streaming 4K. This is really the main reason people considering Stadia might still say no, and there aren't a lot of ISPs left without caps: https://arstechnica.com/information-technology/2017/08/at-le... People could just pay an extra ~$30/month for unlimited internet, but that will pay for a console in a year or two.
- Spend budget on getting more AAA titles released on Stadia on launch day. (like they did with Cyberpunk)
- Spend budget giving huge discounts on AAA titles to attract more users.
- Spend the money to get integrated into every Smart TV platform (Roku, Google TV, LG Web OS, Tizen, Apple TV, ect.). TV Boxes should include a Stadia controller in their box and a few months free.
- Advertise that you can play AAA console games on the TV / Streaming box you already own.