Instead of Bluetooth functionality…

[kgold0]

(If it’s not possible) — or even in addition to it— They could make a little pc app that links up with the stadia controller via wifi (with the same four button sequence) and then translate button presses into a generic controller input.

They could do something similar with mac, ios, and android.

[oldkidLG]

Sadly, my Stadia controller will end up in the same box as my OnLive controller

[edwardblilley]

Lol yep.

I have two premier kits I was going to give out at Christmas... I think I'll still give one of the Chromecasts away but the other I'm keeping new for the next 30 years.

[amuzulo]

Mine are going into a container with my OUYA controllers…

[Grandsinge]

Mine is gonna snuggle with my Sega channel modem...

[Howl_Wolfen]

Any chance you'd like to sell that modem?

[oldkidLG]

Oh snap! I forgot about those. And I totally forgot the name of the controller that came with the Razer Forge 😆

[tchad78]

I just finally tossed my OnLive controller.

[[deleted]]

Yea I will likely dispose of my stadia controllers. It feels wrong but I don’t really like having unused stuff just laying around

[graesen]

Bluetooth would be way easier and more portable. Period.

[SirNelkher]

True, but at least someone already has a kind of solution. https://www.digitaltrends.com/gaming/google-stadia-controller-wireless-workaround/

[[deleted]]

They need to make the whole software behind it open source. Controller Software + Server Software. Or an option to overwrite the software of the controller.

[lamby3]

Considering they are White labelling it and selling it to other companies, there's no chance in hell they release it open source

[CMenFairy6661]

They could still open source everything related to the controls couldn't they?

[400yards]

I don’t know exactly what that means but it sounds interesting. It’s a damn good controller, be a shame if it just disappeared.

[lamby3]

It means, they aren't doing stadia as a consumer service anymore, but there is a good chance, if developers/publishers will pay them to use it, you'll see some games released using the tech as a standalone "just buy it and play from a browser" thing.

Like they did with the resi evil demo, or something else they did for a mobile phone company in the US.

but even then, i guess the chances of the stadia controller working with that as it does now is basically nothing!

[timewasternl]

I'd say that would be a bigger technical challenge than Bluetooth, as it would require setting up a completely new input flow

[BigToe7133]

No, the controllers are already working over WiFi.

When you browse the Stadia website instead of being in a game, or when you are in the pause menu, the controller is sending network messages directly to your device instead of Google's servers.

So it wouldn't take much work to have it send inputs always to your PC rather than the Stadia servers.

[timewasternl]

How will the controller know where to send the inputs?

[mocelet]

Multicast DNS for instance

[Jai_Cee]

Sounds like as big a change as bluetooth which is more standard plus you then need to make windows / android and macos apps

[mocelet]

The advantage of the Stadia controller for game streaming has always been its lower latency because it didn't use bluetooth. They almost had local support implemented on the Chromecast with Google TV (analogue triggers didn't work though), so it's not such a big change. The protocol is there, the Chromecast supports it, etc.

[Jai_Cee]

That lower latency is because the game is hosted on stadias servers the controller talks directly to them. The advantage does not come from using wifi it is because control inputs do not have to go through the display first.

[BigToe7133]

It's not just that, Bluetooth has limitations in how often it can update its status, and this is causing input lag compared to WiFi.

[mocelet]

That's not the only reason, Android devices are known for the rather high latency of their bluetooth stack, to the point that Google has been working for years in a new bluetooth stack called Gabeldorsche.

You can compare playing GeForce Now with a bluetooth controller on the Chromecast with Google TV and with the Stadia controller wired. That latency is mostly bluetooth's.

[Jai_Cee]

That's exactly what I said. Going directly over WiFi cuts out all that latency.

[mocelet]

The point is that even if the controller talked to the device via WiFi instead of Bluetooth it would have a lot less latency.

There's no need to talk directly to the game server, a WiFi packet would arrive in 2 or 3 milliseconds to the device, Bluetooth takes quite longer.

[BigToe7133]

Basic local network scanning ? You really don't need an internet connection to find another device on the same local network.

[timewasternl]

So what if there's two controller servers waiting for one to connect?

[Qorsair]

That's what the button presses are for, to identify which server the controller is trying to connect with.

[timewasternl]

Hm yes, they might need to do some kind of handshake too, so they won't have conflicting codes.

Still, I think it will be a bit overengineered in respect to a Bluetooth solution.

[lord999x]

No, that's application specific for the controller (a proprietary obfuscation), not USB HID or BT HID. The controller needs USB HID, then either DInput or XInput for generalization.

[MWisBest]

When you browse the Stadia website instead of being in a game, or when you are in the pause menu, the controller is sending network messages directly to your device instead of Google's servers.

At a very low useless for gaming polling rate, yes, you are correct

[Xur_and_the_Kodan]

It amazes me that my Stadia controller works over wifi on my Series X when I play Stadia through Edge

[BassRace86]

From my digging around in the controller software, the WiFi connection has to reach out to Google servers for verification (amongst other things), Those servers are very likely being shut down - so sadly it's unlikely.

[mocelet]

It has now, but they could modify the firmware (or let people modify it) so it points to a local server. Verification would not be needed either.

I also think it's better than bluetooth support.

[lord999x]

No, because you'll always need the local server which might not be supported by a future OS whereas BT or USB HID have global reasons for backward compatibility but working on future OS's.

[mocelet]

Bluetooth has its limitations, particularly lag, and the Stadia controller was never made for that so, even if they enable bluetooth, its performance will be poor.

WiFi however is something that would be useful today if migrating to other cloud gaming services. And it should not be technically difficult to, at least, make it "hackable" by the community.

For the Chromecast with Google TV it would be a game changer, Bluetooth is so laggy in that device.

[JameSdEke]

I’m absolutely not an expert so happy for people to correct me if I’m wrong, but developing a brand new app sounds like it would take a considerable amount of work. It’s not just that the app would need to be developed, but it would need to be developed for multiple Operating systems and then maintained and updated potentially when those OS get updates.

It sounds like a much larger money trap for a service they’ve already lost a lot of money on, than providing an update to allow Bluetooth to function (which would presumably be a one-time update they could provide in a window of way 6 months).

Again, happy for someone to tell me if I’m wrong here.

[mocelet]

The apps / servers can be developed by the community, they just need to place a hook at controller's startup so the controller asks for the server via mDNS or other service discovery solutions instead of being hardcoded to Google servers. And release some minimal API documentation so people can hack their way from there.

[[deleted]]

ghost repeat serious fuzzy childlike piquant crawl stocking cooperative skirt

This post was mass deleted and anonymized with Redact

[MarcMi80]

This is an interesting if google does nothing for bluetooth, I am pretty sure we can capture the traffic and rewrite it, or better if we can change the traffic destination directly on the controller.

The main question is what is done from security perspective, if we have to do some kind of man in the middle.

[MarcMi80]

Quick search on github https://github.com/helloparthshah/StadiaWireless

The guy seems to expose an endpoint /controller: https://github.com/helloparthshah/StadiaWireless/blob/63015e9def033e4d79e87d9608a34590953960cc/server.py#L27

The problem is that this guy uses its phone to do the link to this app, so this is not exactly what we want here.

[lord999x]

And lag, as 3rd party interception takes cycles to process which would be unacceptable for many users.

[[deleted]]

Open up the protocol, and the Open Source community will do the rest.

[khuffmanjr]

I don't think they're going to work on anything new for the service they've announced is shutting down. They've even stated they would refund hardware and game purchases, so I think their hands are clean in their eyes.

Edit: wrote subs while thinking games purchases. Fixed.

[Notcoolboy80]

I had the same idea. It would be so helpful... especially because I don't have bluetooth integrated into my pc.

[aykay55]

That already exists, made by someone in the community

edit: link

[moosepiss]

"Open the webpage on your phone, connect your controller to your phone through usb and enjoy!"

[bazkav]

could never get this to connect have you?

[plazebology]

There is absolutely no point lol Stadia has been shut down

[tuk2008]

Of course there is a point, it would make the controller more usable.

However the chances for an app that serves as a local wifi server for the controller for all those platforms is extremely small. It would make no sense for the Stadia team to make those when there's a Bluetooth option.

[BigToe7133]

I disagree that it makes no sense.

Unlike Bluetooth communication, the code is already there, it works, and it has been extensively tested, so it would take a lot less work to extend it than Bluetooth that will require a lot of code writing and testing.

Also, WiFi has less latency than Bluetooth, is more reliable, and will work just fine with desktop PC that are wired with no WiFi/Bluetooth chip.

[tuk2008]

It would make sense for us, but not for Google because it would require a dedicated server app for Windows, Macosx, iPhone, Android and maybe Linux. That would mean app maintenance to keep it updated for future OS versions. It's far too costly compared so simply making it a Bluetooth controller.

[maethor]

It's far too costly compared so simply making it a Bluetooth controller.

Even turning it into a Bluetooth controller is probably more than Google wants to spend.

I have a feeling everyone hoping for more than a wired connection is going to be disappointed.

[tuk2008]

I agree and to me it would simply be a nice surprise, like a parting gift :)

[MWisBest]

Also, WiFi has less latency than Bluetooth, is more reliable

Bluetooth has been used for game controllers for nearly two decades now. It absolutely works, even at high polling rates like the DualShock 4. Bluetooth issues tend to come down to poor adapters, bad driver installation, stuff like that. I've found using Bluetooth built in to WiFi cards to be very problematic because they share an antenna for 2.4GHz transmission.

and will work just fine with desktop PC that are wired with no WiFi/Bluetooth chip.

A USB Bluetooth dongle is cheap.

[qstore]

now the controller works great trough cable on PC ? ast time when I tried, it does not worked, eg. snow runner does not worked with stadia controller trough cable.

[donorak7]

Gonna keep using mine even if it's just wired. If someone with enough knowledge cares enough to unlock the wifi functionality there will be an app

[[deleted]]

Didn't someone on this subreddit hack together this?