IF Stadia, or another streaming service,  allowed me to have 2030/2035 graphics, eg, a game like rdr2, that would run on a 32 core-cpu server, with 15 or 20  rtx2080ti cards, on a pcie-4 M.2 raid, at 20'000Mb read speed, with a 1.2 terabyte texture pack, with full scene raytracing, multi million polygon models for horses, characters, landscapes, etc, all that with a total of 250-400 Tflops, rendered at perfect, pixar/hollywood-ready 8k, then, sent to me at 4k or 1080p/1440p,
Even if that would cost me 2 or 3 bucks AN HOUR, then,
I would say YES to a streaming service.

Being able to play in 2019, with the visuals that will only be possible to get by 2030-35, THAT would be great.

But playing streamed games, in 2019, at low resolutions, badly upscalled to 4k, with a quality from 2005-2010,
sorry, but NO

I'd be happy if they expanded the countries it worked in to include Colombia/more of Latin America

It needs to seize to be. Stadia is a con. Just vaporware that Rob's the consumer the joy and pride of ownership for the sake of convenience.

@Dan6
Well said, I have a similar opinion. Playing games on a platform that has inherent flaws which cannot be overcome (lag) is a dealbreaker fir me. Besides there are areas where internet connectivity is worse thsn ideal.

It needs to become the only way to play games. Actually no, in this case I'll probably stop playing games at all.