Support NeoGAF

[mcrommert]

Yea you mean that *high end* PC that dropped framerate like crazy when they accidentally moved to an empty space but magically regained framerate when things are in view. I'm sure that was a legit *demo.*

Yup its a conspiracy...they tried to pull the wool over your eyes but you figured out their illuminati ways

Or the software isn't production and was only intended for you to face one direction

But mostly conspiracy and lies

 

[REMEMBER CITADEL]

there is overlay on my vita. The game is still running live when I snap back to it and so is my netflix. Its not all on the screen together but its still all running. I need everything on the screen at the sametime to be considered a snapper?

Yes, you do. So you can play a game while waiting for a show on TV to start without having to switch back and forth to check. To watch an achievement guide on YouTube while mirroring it in your own game session at the same time. To play a round of Nutjitsu while waiting for that Titanfall match to start.

Those are just some examples. Snap - the actual Snap - can be really practical.

 

[vcc]

Yup its a conspiracy...they tried to pull the wool over your eyes but you figured out their illuminati ways

Or the software isn't production and was only intended for you to face one direction

But mostly conspiracy and lies

So you mean the BS DX12 with 50% more FPS and 60% less power demo is under realistic usage conditions and wasn't configured to flatter the technology?

You don't need a conspiracy to fluff demo's.

 

[a916]

So it's client-server stuff. I wrote client-server software back in 1996.

Congrats, do you want a medal?

Regardless of how long it's existed, the fact that MS has a good infrastructure already in place and not a pipe-dream that Nintendo/Sony could one day have is somehow lost on you.

Is Sony offering it? No. Is it offering it at a discount to lure in developers like MS? No. Should they tout any advantage over the PS4? Like any smart company yeah.

 

[TrojanBlade]

This is all well and cool on the paper but then in real world we have the bitch called network latency. So my experience of that nice looking flowing grass will change as my network slows down and make it look worse or slow the game or inconsistent experience? Or the game will have offline/online modes, alienating some gamers? Or they will do online only and get hated by a lot of the folks out there? Just doesn't seem like a good idea.

Also this tech is not XB specific, if Sony really wants to do this they can too. Of course MS has the money and Azure which makes it easier for XB devs. Nothing special about it that Nintendo or Sony or any other company can't do it. But not sure if this is worth it at this point of time.

 

[ypo]

Yup its a conspiracy...they tried to pull the wool over your eyes but you figured out their illuminati ways

Or the software isn't production and was only intended for you to face one direction

But mostly conspiracy and lies

Oh really, that sounds like a great demo. Do tell us more.

Maybe you were hiding in a cave or something...so let me tell you something about pulling wool over your eyes and microsoft...

...on a second thought that will take way too much time to write. Here try this instead.

www.google.com

 

[REMEMBER CITADEL]

Also this tech is not XB specific, if Sony really wants to do this they can too. Of course MS has the money and Azure which makes it easier for XB devs. Nothing special about it that Nintendo or Sony or any other company can't do it. But not sure if this is worth it at this point of time.

Sure they can, in theory, just like they could've had total parity with Xbox Live from day one, in theory. They will all be there in time, but when and how remains to be seen.

 

[JaggedSac]

This is all well and cool on the paper but then in real world we have the bitch called network latency. So my experience of that nice looking flowing grass will change as my network slows down and make it look worse or slow the game or inconsistent experience? Or the game will have offline/online modes, alienating some gamers? Or they will do online only and get hated by a lot of the folks out there? Just doesn't seem like a good idea.

Also this tech is not XB specific, if Sony really wants to do this they can too. Of course MS has the money and Azure which makes it easier for XB devs. Nothing special about it that Nintendo or Sony or any other company can't do it. But not sure if this is worth it at this point of time.

Of course anyone can do it. MS is working with it NOW with at least one game we know of, most likely several more. Wouldn't be surprised if Gears and Halo were using it. If it catches on, there will be a window where only MS is doing it. Probably 3 years or so. Same as MS has no PS Now service. If they wanted that, they would need several years to get it going. So Sony has several years of no competition in that specific segment of gaming.

 

[Kampfheld]

Arg. Actually, it was not the plan that this will become a big deal. What you see there is really just a super small-scaled, super simple, super basic test. In reality, we are far more ahead with the tech than what you see there. However, at least some of the comments here motivate us even more to really show what is possible with server calculation

I hope we will be able to share more with you guys next year.

 

[vcc]

Arg. Actually, it was not the plan that this will become a big deal. What you see there is really just a super small-scaled, super simple, super basic test. In reality, we are far more ahead with the tech than what you see there. However, at least some of the comments here motivate us even more to really show what is possible with server calculation

I hope we will be able to share more with you guys next year.

I'd like to see you succeed in proving my doubts wrong. (not sarcasm)

 

[JaggedSac]

Arg. Actually, it was not the plan that this will become a big deal. What you see there is really just a super small-scaled, super simple, super basic test. In reality, we are far more ahead with the tech than what you see there. However, at least some of the comments here motivate us even more to really show what is possible with server calculation

I hope we will be able to share more with you guys next year.

Looking forward to seeing what you guys are up to. Any plans to do some talks at GDC about this stuff?

 

[Ol No Bones]

This is all well and cool on the paper but then in real world we have the bitch called network latency. So my experience of that nice looking flowing grass will change as my network slows down and make it look worse or slow the game or inconsistent experience? Or the game will have offline/online modes, alienating some gamers? Or they will do online only and get hated by a lot of the folks out there? Just doesn't seem like a good idea.

Also this tech is not XB specific, if Sony really wants to do this they can too. Of course MS has the money and Azure which makes it easier for XB devs. Nothing special about it that Nintendo or Sony or any other company can't do it. But not sure if this is worth it at this point of time.

Sony and Nintendo do not have and are likely never to have an infrastructure like azure offering what it does. They can certainly pay for amazon, google, Microsoft cloud if they wanted I guess but its not this snap of the fingers thing. Microsoft as a whole has embraced this tech like crazy over the years and have built a huge infrastructure and its still growing.

Yes I suppose Sony and Nintendo could at some point do the same thing that MS are working toward but I font think its as easy as you would believe.

When something interesting about MS cloud gaming endeavors cones out there is this odd default comment to downplay it and say "Sony and Nintendo can do it too". That's like me watching a bloodborne gameplay video and downplaying its awesomeness and saying,"MS can do it too!". Yes its possible that MS could make a similar game but it doesn't matter because they aren't.

The whole reaction to cloud talk is so odd in these parts.

I hope it works rather well and enables really good advancements in console physics and gameplay.

 

[shandy706]

yep, apparently some consumers think "snap" is exclusive to the x1 when the only thing exclusive about it is the name.

sure I can open apps, and switch between them on the PS4 PS3 and 360. I am "Snapping" on my Vita right now.

That's not what snap is.

No you aren't. Lol

talking to you guys with uncharted golden abyss open and just snapped to my netflix lol "all in one" instance. I am getting all this entertainment in one device and its the vita!

Again, that's not what snap is.

Can you watch Netflix and play uncharted at the exact same time on the same screen?

Nope, then you aren't snapping.

there is overlay on my vita. The game is still running live when I snap back to it and so is my netflix. Its not all on the screen together but its still all running. I need everything on the screen at the sametime to be considered a snapper?

Oh snap!

 

[Rolf NB]

How many frames late?
How many cores used on the server?

Btw, anyone figured out the available CPU resources per node yet? (hint: lol)

 

[Ol No Bones]

Arg. Actually, it was not the plan that this will become a big deal. What you see there is really just a super small-scaled, super simple, super basic test. In reality, we are far more ahead with the tech than what you see there. However, at least some of the comments here motivate us even more to really show what is possible with server calculation

I hope we will be able to share more with you guys next year.

Well at least you know people are definitely interested. Eventually something has to be shown to prove or disprove the skeptics position. Thanks for the crumb of information though.

 

[gofreak]

Of course anyone can do it. MS is working with it NOW with at least one game we know of, most likely several more. Wouldn't be surprised if Gears and Halo were using it. If it catches on, there will be a window where only MS is doing it. Probably 3 years or so. Same as MS has no PS Now service. If they wanted that, they would need several years to get it going. So Sony has several years of no competition in that specific segment of gaming.

Anyone - any third party, or Sony for that matter - could start doing this kind of thing in a game in the morning if they wanted to, using an existing platform. With something like spot requests on Amazon it might be economically viable too, perhaps competitive with the discounted service MS offers on Azure.

Offering it with a nice helper SDK would take more time, off their own infrastructure probably more time again, but those aren't necessarily barriers to entry.

There are barriers to entry for offering 360 or PS3 games running off the cloud because of the specialist hardware/infrastructure that implies, but general compute capacity in the cloud is a commodity now, so they're not really comparable scenarios.

How many frames late?

I think in the grass demo posted, they're getting 12 updates from the server a second. Latency might be a few frames depending on the fps I suppose. They can interpolate the motion between updates and move blades, on the local machine each frame, to avoid interpenetration with the ball. Grass presents a very visually noisy system so you probably wouldn't notice this 'fudging' in between.

 

[jimi_dini]

Have you seen this video? I don't know much about this stuff, but it seems legit.

Didn't Red Faction Guerrilla did something like that, but locally without the framerate dropping on last gen consoles?

Anyway - you are actually getting always online DRM with that. Because they are either a) dependant on those servers, which means players will have to be online, which also means that the games will get broken when the servers are turned off or b) change to a much worse version without servers, which is also idiotic, because such games will degrade after some time, because the servers will go offline at some point (and without being online, it will look like shit already).

 

[GuitarAtomik]

Didn't Red Faction Guerrilla did something like that, but locally without the framerate dropping on last gen consoles?

Not nearly to that level no. And I would know because I played the shit out of that game lol.

 

[Caayn]

Yea you mean that *high end* PC that dropped framerate like crazy when they accidentally moved to an empty space but magically regained framerate when things are in view. I'm sure that was a legit *demo.*

Take a look at the chunk count, frames are dropped at the same time as those chunks start to increase in a rapid way. Him looking away has nothing to do with that.

Didn't Red Faction Guerrilla did something like that, but locally without the framerate dropping on last gen consoles?

Red Faction did destruction locally but not on that scale.

 

[soul creator]

Didn't Red Faction Guerrilla did something like that, but locally without the framerate dropping on last gen consoles?

Anyway - you are actually getting always online DRM with that. Because they are either a) dependant on those servers, which means players will have to be online, which also means that the games will get broken when the servers are turned off or b) change to a much worse version without servers, which is also idiotic, because such games will degrade after some time, because the servers will go offline at some point (and without being online, it will look like shit already).

By your logic, World of Warcraft is "always online DRM". A game using/requiring an internet connection to accomplish certain actions in the game doesn't suddenly mean it has "DRM".

Of course, if you don't have an interest in games that use these types of online features, that's fine. But it seems weird to try to always associate it with DRM.

 

[spencman]

Didn't Red Faction Guerrilla did something like that, but locally without the framerate dropping on last gen consoles?

Anyway - you are actually getting always online DRM with that. Because they are either a) dependant on those servers, which means players will have to be online, which also means that the games will get broken when the servers are turned off or b) change to a much worse version without servers, which is also idiotic, because such games will degrade after some time, because the servers will go offline at some point (and without being online, it will look like shit already).

I'm a consumer. After playing a game (1, 2 or 3 times) it will never be touched again. Even more, when there's a new console gen available...with remastered versions.
I'm sorry to disappoint the gaming community in this case...

 

[JaggedSac]

Anyone - any third party, or Sony for that matter - could start doing this kind of thing in a game in the morning if they wanted to, using an existing platform. With something like spot requests on Amazon it might be economically viable too, perhaps competitive with the discounted service MS offers on Azure.

Offering it with a nice helper SDK would take more time, off their own infrastructure probably more time again, but those aren't necessarily barriers to entry.

There are barriers to entry for offering 360 or PS3 games running off the cloud because of the specialist hardware/infrastructure that implies, but general compute capacity in the cloud is a commodity now, so they're not really comparable scenarios.



I think in the grass demo posted, they're getting 12 updates from the server a second. Latency might be a few frames depending on the fps I suppose. They can interpolate the motion between updates and move blades, on the local machine each frame, to avoid interpenetration with the ball. Grass presents a very visually noisy system so you probably wouldn't notice this 'fudging' in between.

Of course, I am saying game development takes time. No one but MS has active game development in process at this point in time. With actual development and testing having taken place for a while now. Probably several years. Meaning, if some other group wanted to start today, they could, but it will be years before their efforts are seen. MS's efforts will be seen in action at next E3. No one else will be there with hybrid cloud computed games. That was my entire point. Perhaps I wasn't clear.

 

[REMEMBER CITADEL]

Anyway - you are actually getting always online DRM with that. Because they are either a) dependant on those servers, which means players will have to be online, which also means that the games will get broken when the servers are turned off or b) change to a much worse version without servers, which is also idiotic, because such games will degrade after some time, because the servers will go offline at some point (and without being online, it will look like shit already).

It's not always online, it's online only as long as you play the game (or as long as you want to play it with remotely computed enhancements). So just like every online game out there. Last I checked, online multiplayer was pretty popular.

 

[JaggedSac]

It's not always online, it's online only as long as you play the game (or as long as you want to play it with remotely computed enhancements). So just like every online game out there. Last I checked, online multiplayer was pretty popular.

I heard people didn't like Destiny because they had to be online the whole time or it wouldn't work.

 

[gamechanger87]

Arg. Actually, it was not the plan that this will become a big deal. What you see there is really just a super small-scaled, super simple, super basic test. In reality, we are far more ahead with the tech than what you see there. However, at least some of the comments here motivate us even more to really show what is possible with server calculation

I hope we will be able to share more with you guys next year.

My hope with the thread was to motivate you guys. A lot of us believe that this could be something huge, thus getting some tangible examples out lends more credence to it.

The lack of CLOUDZ drivebys should point that out.

 

[jimi_dini]

By your logic, World of Warcraft is "always online DRM". A game using/requiring an internet connection to accomplish certain actions in the game doesn't suddenly mean it has "DRM".

World of Warcraft is always online. It won't work without online connection. BUT the game is a MMORPG. An online multiplayer game requiring an online connection makes sense. A single player game requiring an online connection just so that it can do some calculations on servers is not the same.

Of course, if you don't have an interest in games that use these types of online features, that's fine.

Using servers for calculations can be done to any game in theory. Which means that sentence of yours makes no sense. It's not a specific type of game. It's about games, that are doing some calculations on non-player-owned servers, which can be shut down at any time (see that always-online Sim City). I'm saying that the implementation has extremely negative consequences for the games themselves and for consumers.

But it seems weird to try to always associate it with DRM.

It has all sorts of issues just like Microsoft's original always online DRM had. Well, it's actually worse than for example calling home every 24 hours. These games would simply require a constant and perfect internet connection all the time or at least would look way worse without it. And there is simply no way around that. That's my problem with this technology.

I mean if you are okay with that, why not simply get all your games via streaming and doing everything on Microsoft/Sony servers. There isn't a big difference between those. Well in one case you don't own anything and in the other case you own a coaster in case they shut the servers down. You turn every game into SOCOM: Confrontation or MAG.

We already know that those servers cost devs/publishers quite a bunch of money per month. What will happen when the publisher goes broke? Who will pay for the servers?

 

[gofreak]

Of course, I am saying game development takes time. No one but MS has active game development in process at this point in time. With actual development and testing having taken place for a while now. Probably several years. Meaning, if some other group wanted to start today, they could, but it will be years before their efforts are seen. MS's efforts will be seen in action at next E3. No one else will be there with hybrid cloud computed games. That was my entire point. Perhaps I wasn't clear.

Oh for sure, I thought we were talking about tech or infrastructure readiness. On a game dev cycle point of view this does take time indeed.

Not nearly to that level no. And I would know because I played the shit out of that game lol.

As far as demos go, though, the scale isn't really unprecedented. There have already been locally processed physics demos throwing tens of thousands of objects around in destruction scenarios, others with a lot more. And not on super high end hardware either. So I think the 'legitness' of some of the claims there is very dubious indeed (i.e. that this wouldn't be possible even with multiple high end machines! If that were the case it would be completely impractical for cloud processing anyway due to cost per user...).

Maybe they were comparing CPU sims only here, but it seems a little narrow sighted to completely ignore the work on GPU rigid body and debris simulation just to promote a use case.

The benefit here is that this stuff can be done somewhere else, to spare the local machine for other work. I think it's overselling it on their part, for the moment, to make it about 'unprecedented scale'. Maybe in the future that'll be the case.

 

[spencman]

Let's call those Games OSPGs (online single player games)

Done.

 

[DeSolos]

Bandwidth and latency are obvious issues, and many people will still play games offline. If games need to be offline compliant, the cloud features can only be gimmicks a'la PhysX or TressFX.

 

[TrojanBlade]

Sony and Nintendo do not have and are likely never to have an infrastructure like azure offering what it does. They can certainly pay for amazon, google, Microsoft cloud if they wanted I guess but its not this snap of the fingers thing. Microsoft as a whole has embraced this tech like crazy over the years and have built a huge infrastructure and its still growing.

Yes I suppose Sony and Nintendo could at some point do the same thing that MS are working toward but I font think its as easy as you would believe.

When something interesting about MS cloud gaming endeavors cones out there is this odd default comment to downplay it and say "Sony and Nintendo can do it too". That's like me watching a bloodborne gameplay video and downplaying its awesomeness and saying,"MS can do it too!". Yes its possible that MS could make a similar game but it doesn't matter because they aren't.

The whole reaction to cloud talk is so odd in these parts.

I hope it works rather well and enables really good advancements in console physics and gameplay.

Yes I know about Azure as I have used it in our development at my company and acknowledge that MS certainly has a leg up. But again my point was if this is really worth it because of latency issues on the gamers network link? The latency issue is a big deal and can create inconsistent results. I guess we have to wait and see the results of this cloud side computing in real time scenario.

 

[REMEMBER CITADEL]

I heard people didn't like Destiny because they had to be online the whole time or it wouldn't work.

Sure, some people won't like that. It'still the most preordered new IP in history, and Call of Duty, Battlefield, World of Warcraft, Team Fortress 2, League of Legends and countless others are pretty popular, too.

 

[GeneralArrow]

Forza 5 is actually using Azure tech for its Drivatars and is part of the reason why it's 1080p 60fps on the console.

 

[elohel]

the assumptions about cloud services and online services in general inherently hold this back

most people don't assume their console will go down or will require maintenance whereas with anything online or server related it's assumed it'll have some downtime

That's my only issue is that cloud is so new and people are actively trying to solve problems that real solutions haven't emerged yet

 

[Gestault]

Forza 5 is actually using Azure tech for its Drivatars and is part of the reason why it's 1080p 60fps on the console.

Well, not quite for the sake of performance. It makes the AI system more robust, but it's not really helping with local-side processing. Once your local data has been updated with drivatar data from server-side, your game runs the same, online or off. You have the behaviors on your side, with the "rules" for each drivatar running on your own system. You just *want* to be online, because having those profiles updated constantly is awesome, and you want to be really mad at how Jeff Gerstmann drives his cars.

 

[JaggedSac]

Sure, some people won't like that. It'still the most preordered new IP in history, and Call of Duty, Battlefield, World of Warcraft, Team Fortress 2, League of Legends and countless others are pretty popular, too.

Sorry, I was being sarcastic.

 

[soul creator]

World of Warcraft is always online. It won't work without online connection. BUT the game is a MMORPG. An online multiplayer game requiring an online connection makes sense. A single player game requiring an online connection just so that it can do some calculations on servers is not the same.

This assumes that the only reason the internet/cloud/servers/etc. should ever be used is for multiplayer games. I guess I don't agree with the arbitrary need to limit developers like that.

Using servers for calculations can be done to any game in theory. Which means that sentence of yours makes no sense. It's not a specific type of game. It's about games, that are doing some calculations on non-player-owned servers, which can be shut down at any time (see that always-online Sim City).

Well, yes. Developers are trying to accomplish other types of game design features with calculations on servers beyond just multiplayer. Whether it works or not is up in the air, and I'm not saying that it's always 100% awesome (as you mentioned, it seemed to fail for Sim City), but that doesn't make it DRM. It makes it an internet-required game, like multiplayer-only games.

And yes, anything that's on a server can be shut down, which is a risk to literally every online service, message board, multiplayer game, etc. But I don't think that should mean "developers, don't make games with internet features", because that seems arbitrarily restrictive to me.

I guess I'd much prefer to let whatever game come out, and succeed or fail on its own merits. I don't think the gaming industry as a whole will be "hurt" by that.

I'm saying that the implementation has extremely negative consequences for the games themselves and for consumers.

What other consequences are there beyond "the game might be great, or it might be terrible"?

It has all sorts of issues just like Microsoft's original always online DRM had. Well, it's actually worse than for example calling home every 24 hours. These games would simply require a constant and perfect internet connection all the time or at least would look way worse without it. And there is simply no way around that. That's my problem with this technology.

Ok, so if you're someone with spotty internet, then games that use this functionality shouldn't be purchased. Just like if you're someone with spotty internet, you shouldn't buy multiplayer games either.

If the game sucks, because it can't handle the random fluctuations of internet connections...then the game sucks. But I'm not seeing why that has some dire consequences for the industry as a whole.

I mean if you are okay with that, why not simply get all your games via streaming and doing everything on Microsoft/Sony servers. There isn't a big difference between those.

Because assuming things are smartly designed, there's a difference between features that don't depend on rapid response being used on cloud servers, and everything being streamed from cloud servers.

So I may not want my player controls to depend on servers, but world destruction or AI or whatever else may work fine with it. I'm willing to let developers experiment, and then we can see what comes out of it.

(That still doesn't make this DRM.)

Well in one case you don't own anything and in the other case you own a coaster in case they shut the servers down. You turn every game into SOCOM: Confrontation or MAG.

We already know that those servers cost devs/publishers quite a bunch of money per month. What will happen when the publisher goes broke? Who will pay for the servers?

As you said, this can apply to multiplayer games too. All I'm saying (and all my response was attempting to communicate) is that the existence of internet-required features doesn't therefore make internet-required features the same thing as "DRM".

DRM actually has a real meaning on its own, we don't have to use it as a word to scare people away from trying anything that requires an internet connection.

 

[theWB27]

We should be cheerleading this kind of stuff....even if there are doubts. We, as gamers, should be excited as hell that a company is out there spending money to TRY and advance the way games are made.

Glad that Micro has devs out there developing games with this so that it has nothing but room to grow and get better. I'm pretty sure there is some tech in consoles/PC's that's used all the time that was doubted at one point.

It's not harming anything...Micro has the money to foster this growth. Cheer this shit on instead of "I don't see the need for it." You'll never know the need for something until you've had the chance to need it.

I applaud Micro for doing this...even if this gen is the seed and we don't see the tree till next gen, this is nothing but good stuff. There is a strange group of gamers who hate to see progress that isn't along the lines of the usual. Be it VR/controls/ or cloud.....

 

[gamechanger87]

We should be cheerleading this kind of stuff....even if there are doubts. We, as gamers, should be excited as hell that a company is out there spending money to TRY and advance the way games are made.

Glad that Micro has devs out there developing games with this so that it has nothing but room to grow and get better. I'm pretty sure there is some tech in consoles/PC's that's used all the time that was doubted at one point.

It's not harming anything...Micro has the money to foster this growth. Cheer this shit on instead of "I don't see the need for it." You'll never know the need for something until you've had the chance to need it.

I applaud Micro for doing this...even if this gen is the seed and we don't see the tree till next gen, this is nothing but good stuff. There is a strange group of gamers who hate to see progress that isn't along the lines of the usual. Be it VR/controls/ or cloud.....

One of the better posts I've seen on the subject. I don't know why so many people push back on someone trying to improve our gaming experience.

 

[Raist]

Take a look at the chunk count, frames are dropped at the same time as those chunks start to increase in a rapid way. Him looking away has nothing to do with that.

That demo is a very embelished "conceptual idea" at best, complete and utter bullshit at worst. I'm leaning towards number 2 considering a few suspicious things, and context with dozens of other such demos on PC hardware etc not breaking a sweat.

 

[tuna_love]

Man that EASTC0AST_GH05T was fun to watch.

 

[Metfanant]

I'm skeptical...but THIS is the type of stuff MS needs to show...running on a Xbone in the real world...

But at least we have a legit source giving us much more realistic expectations...

 

[kitch9]

My hope with the thread was to motivate you guys. A lot of us believe that this could be something huge, thus getting some tangible examples out lends more credence to it.

The lack of CLOUDZ drivebys should point that out.

Can you explain what you are doing in this demo that 50 Gigaflops of local compute and a couple of mb of local ram can't?

 

[JoJo UK]

One of the better posts I've seen on the subject. I don't know why so many people push back on someone trying to improve our gaming experience.

I think people are (understandably) weary of buzzwords, new tech and stage demos, many want to have a hands on experience.

Also console warz.

Spoiler

The missing 'teh cloud' posts is pretty refreshing though.

This technology really interests me and I hope we get to see more of it soon, hopefully it will lead to other things *cough* remote play on mobile phones *cough* .

 

[overdrivex]

I'm skeptical...but THIS is the type of stuff MS needs to show...running on a Xbone in the real world...

But at least we have a legit source giving us much more realistic expectations...

they are not going to show anything like this to the mass public till they are closer to release ( ie. crackdown), else they will suffer the "downgrade" syndrome from the eyes of people

 

[Jimmy Rustle]

My hope with the thread was to motivate you guys. A lot of us believe that this could be something huge, thus getting some tangible examples out lends more credence to it.

The lack of CLOUDZ drivebys should point that out.

Lol, true.

They finally made it past the first step of..Lol, clouds.

Now its progressed to "rabble rabble, latency, bandwith, lag, internet speed, rabble rabble.

Some are actually at the third phase..."Sony can do it too if they wanted you know!"

I have my own bit of skepticism as well, but if they actually get it done, then that's good for gaming right?......right?

 

[Coral Griffon]

Is Fable Legends doing anything with Azure?

Yeah.

 

[AmFreak]

I have my own bit of skepticism as well, but if they actually get it done, then that's good for gaming right?......right?

No it's not, at least not in my opinion.
The end game will be that all you have at home is a dumb box and all it does is getting a video stream like onLive and gaikai tried.
The box will do nothing without an internet connection.
I know people have the impression that the hardware in the cloud grows on tress, but the truth is someone has to pay for the hardware, the data centers, the bandwidth, etc. and that will be you.
In the end you will pay for hardware you do not own.
And on top of it you will get a system with perfect DRM, a much higher chance of failure, image quality depending on your bandwidth and higher latency in games.

 

[justsomeguy]

In the end you will pay for hardware you do not own.
And on top of it you will get a system with perfect DRM, a much higher chance of failure, image quality depending on your bandwidth and higher latency in games.

- The reaction to the Xbox One reveal shows that people simply won't buy it if it's perceived as DRM-laden
- The positive reaction to PSNow shows the other factors are probably okay

 

[AmFreak]

- The reaction to the Xbox One reveal shows that people simply won't buy it if it's perceived as DRM-laden
- The positive reaction to PSNow shows the other factors are probably okay

Eh, there won't be anything "DRM-laden". Gaming in the cloud is DRM by definition, it's like saying water is wet. You can only do what the one with the cloud wants you to be able to do, there is no way around this.
PSNow is DRM-laden like any other cloud gaming, cause as i said there is no way around it.

 

[Alx]

The end game will be that all you have at home is a dumb box and all it does is getting a video stream like onLive and gaikai tried.

The main difference is the developers can (must) choose what is running on the servers, and what is running locally, so that you can have low latency tasks done on your hardware, and everything else done on servers. Theorically it's the best case scenario, even if it is also harder to do right (I suppose).

In the end you will pay for hardware you do not own.

More exactly, you will pay to use hardware you do not own. Which is what you commonly do with all service providers. And yes it means it gets closer to "games as a service" than "games you own".