-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
Microsoft investing $700 million in data centre to support cloud service & Xbox Live
- Thread starter zakislam
- Start date
The Xbox gaming business is secondary at Microsoft in general, they're far more interested in operating systems and Office. That's why it's all about TV and sports now with the 180.
SirIgbyCeaser
Banned
The whole cloud idea for the xbox one scares me, it's so inconsiderate of the future of these game titles.
What are you going to do 10 years from now when a game can't reach these servers and who knows what meta strings get calculated in these server farms.
The legacy of those games will be tied to how long MS keeps this going. And all of their first party games will mandatorily use it to sell costumers on those yearly XBL subscriptions.
What are you going to do 10 years from now when a game can't reach these servers and who knows what meta strings get calculated in these server farms.
The legacy of those games will be tied to how long MS keeps this going. And all of their first party games will mandatorily use it to sell costumers on those yearly XBL subscriptions.
entremet
Member
Why do you care? Do you hold shares in the company?
As a gamer, I'm selfish and if this improves online performance, quicker downloads, etc., I'm happy.
I just find it strange that people are questioning MS's use of capital to improve its services. This is what companies do.
davepoobond
you can't put a price on sparks
i would guess Office easily makes more money than xbox
what if i did? what's it to you how i armchair analyze what microsoft is doing? i am a customer and use their products all the time. maybe it interests me.
none of that will happen because of this
"the cloud" is as of yet unproven for anything other than storage.
Alx
Member
Most people just don't intend to play 10 years old games any more... I still have my dreamcast games in a cupboard, but would rather buy their ported versions on the digital market than bother connecting everything again.
I understand that it sucks for game collectors, but they're too negligible a part of the market for companies to bother.
There's nothing negative in this, nothing. Not even a speck. A robust and flexible server structure is...quite a good thing actually.
...Yet the atmosphere and comments in here..something better reserved for a disease outbreak of some sort...It's like straight out of bizarroworld.
...Yet the atmosphere and comments in here..something better reserved for a disease outbreak of some sort...It's like straight out of bizarroworld.
mangochutney
Member
Well, with video streaming the quality can adjust to your connection, so if you've a poor connection it'll still work but be at a poor quality.
With using the cloud to make up for system performance you need lots of data, and you can't miss bits of that data so you need a very fast internet connection.
You can read about those kind of limitations on Eurogamer, http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/digitalfoundry-in-theory-can-xbox-one-cloud-transform-gaming
Delusibeta
Banned
Gaikai cloud has the game run on servers, so calculation time would be the same as local (i.e. nanoseconds). It's essentially the server running the game and sending a video feed of that game to your console and you sending controller inputs back. Basically, the only real problem is controller lag.
Microsoft cloud supposedly has bits of the game run on servers and bits of the game run on servers, and the PR guff suggested that stuff like physics would be improved by being calculated on servers. This is garbage, because by the time the physics calculation on the server has made it to the console, about 0.1 second (being generous here) has passed, which means noticeable errors are inevitable, especially if you're playing something fast paced such as a racing game. There's also the problem of SimCity using the same excuse ("Server side calculations for the simulation") that proved to be absolute horseshit. Right now, all the implementations of the cloud has been stuff that already was possible in the last generation of consoles.
I also stand by people not noticing the difference between last gen's multiplayer structure and this gen's multiplayer structure. Hell, PSN has more games running on dedicated servers than Xbox Live, and people still claim XBL's better.
Xenon
Member
Because one is from Sony and the other is Microsoft. Honest answer. The Gaikai announcement was met with optimism here simply because no one has a vested interest in tearing it down. I don't have much faith in cloud based gaming solutions for things like backward compatibility but don't see the point in creating a thread point this out. But then again I don't need to point out the flaws in another system to validate my choice.
entremet
Member
MMOs?
Netflix/Hulu?
Folding @ home?
That's all ''cloud'' stuff my friend.
Because PSN's feature set was piss poor compared to XBL. Stuff like dedicated servers don't translate to tangible benefits that most Joe COD gamer notices; however, party chat, cross game invites, do.
Uno Venova
Banned
They're spending so much money, how could you not love them.
Krisprolls
Banned
It's because it has become hard to trust anything MS says when they made so many anti consumer moves recently. Although they reverted half of them to avoid getting crushed on release.
There's nothing here saying how much is really going to Xbox Live precisely. It's rather vague.
Why would we think they suddenly decided to give more to the gamers when they all they did recently was going in the other direction, giving less for more money ?
quickwhips
Member
The only BS is smell is everything you posted in the last few days. I may be biased also but I at least try sometimes....
So just an assumption, then?
Depends on what you want to do and why.
A game running in Gaikai is pretty much still the same game that ran on your local console. Its FPS may be bumped to account for network latency, but that's pretty much it. The input/output now work over network and not over HDMI/Bluetooth to your TV/Controller.
A game that runs locally but offloads parts into a cloud is a completely different beast entirely. Such a game is a time-critical distributed software system and, thus, much more complicated. In fact, most of its subsystems cannot be "offloaded" by any practical means. Latency and bandwidth are natural barriers, and the inherent unreliability and asynchronicity of distributed software parts make the developer’s life a pain in the ass.
And the parts that can be "offloaded" are most likely those parts that are already done on the server-side in multiplayer games and MMOs, that is, game world synchronization and shared gameplay elements like bullet impact calculation.
In addition, it doesn’t make much sense economically to (a) build expensive dedicated local hardware like the Xbox 180 APU and, in addition, run an expensive cloud infrastructure to run non-essential functions like visuals. No developer would do that. They would just scale the game such that it runs entirely in the local hardware. Less effort and fewer costs. Cloud infrastructures make only sense for functions that are inherently in need of servers (multiplayer, MMOs, sharing, social) and define the product.
Alx
Member
That would depend on what kind of remote processing you want to do, but you wouldn't always need to exchange lots of data. The important part of the internet connection would be latency (low ping), not bandwidth.
Many people suggest AI applications for cloud processing because it does fit the limitation of that technology : you only send simple info (character positions, health level etc), and retrieve simple commands ("do that", "move there" etc), while all the big data never leaves the server (and the expected result is decorrelated from frame rendering).
I think that compared to cloud gaming (like Gaikai), the requirements would be less important on your internet connection, but much more on the software architecture. Any game could be played on Gaikai, but there will always be some lag and loss on image quality. Only games specifically designed for cloud processing could benefit from it, it could be completely invisible to the player in good conditions, and the quality in degraded conditions will depend on the talent of developers to hide it.
davepoobond
you can't put a price on sparks
folding @ home is distributed computing, not "the cloud."
Netflix/Hulu is about as "cloud" as Youtube is. just because something has a server doesn't automagically make it a cloud-based service.
MMOs intentionally tie you to a server so that you are forced to pay money. it's about as beneficial for games as it was for SimCity.
might as well call the whole Internet a cloud. there's a difference.
A better assumption than that idiotic GI.biz assumption that it's mainly for Xbox Live.
entremet
Member
What do you think the Cloud is then?
For example, I use a product called Salesforce.com. Of course they have servers, but they're considered a cloud service, because unlike client software, I can access my data from any supported device.
Would make sense to make the Xbox 180 itself more "powerful" than invest in cloud processing, since it would be more difficult or not reliable to implement it.
Krisprolls
Banned
Cloud computing and full game streaming are two completely different things.
Streaming full games where full frames are remotely calculated DOES work. We saw it with onlive, we saw it with gaikai, it works. The only problem is the latency, but it works.
Cloud computing would mean you mix things you calculate locally to things that are remotely calculated.
It's pretty hard to find a situation where it would be useful in a game AND where it wouldn't be easier and more efficient to make those calculations locally on the console since remote calculations add latency.
Our modern CPUs are extremely powerful, there aren't many things it can't calculate efficiently. The only real time consuming tasks in games are linked to graphics, so you either calculate frames remotely, or you do everything locally...
Remotely calculating something else than graphics hardly makes sense in games, you've got enough power for that in the console.
Unless you talk about global parameters in multiplayer games...
Streaming full games where full frames are remotely calculated DOES work. We saw it with onlive, we saw it with gaikai, it works. The only problem is the latency, but it works.
Cloud computing would mean you mix things you calculate locally to things that are remotely calculated.
It's pretty hard to find a situation where it would be useful in a game AND where it wouldn't be easier and more efficient to make those calculations locally on the console since remote calculations add latency.
Our modern CPUs are extremely powerful, there aren't many things it can't calculate efficiently. The only real time consuming tasks in games are linked to graphics, so you either calculate frames remotely, or you do everything locally...
Remotely calculating something else than graphics hardly makes sense in games, you've got enough power for that in the console.
Unless you talk about global parameters in multiplayer games...
newshinycd
Member
That's Microsoft for you. Throw as much money at the wall hoping some of it sticks.
I may be looking at this totally wrong or just misunderstanding but this really doesn't sound like a lot of money for a 300,000 -server cloud.
$700,000,000/300,000 servers = $2,333 per server. As an Enterprise Architect who deals cloud servers for probably one of the largest vendors for such hardware and services, that cost per box is very low even for virtualized platforms. Given all the stuff they say is going to be done in the cloud and the dynamic nature of what these servers are doing, they really will be getting a ton of mileage out of these servers for the money.
$700,000,000/300,000 servers = $2,333 per server. As an Enterprise Architect who deals cloud servers for probably one of the largest vendors for such hardware and services, that cost per box is very low even for virtualized platforms. Given all the stuff they say is going to be done in the cloud and the dynamic nature of what these servers are doing, they really will be getting a ton of mileage out of these servers for the money.
Delusibeta
Banned
I think you're misunderstanding, the $700 million figure is for a new data centre, not an entire new cloud infrastructure.
davepoobond
you can't put a price on sparks
simply put, it is something you would normally do on your computer but instead, it is on a remote server.
not something you would rely on "the internet" for traditionally. Streaming video, e-mail, going to a web site... these things are not "cloud" services. They may say they are but they are using "the cloud" as a buzz word. you are still using your hardware to play the video, the video isn't playing somewhere else. the web site is still being displayed in your browser, e-mail is just e-mail -- its always been on a server.
Google Docs is cloud based, because the spreadsheet calculations etc are done by the server, not your computer.
high capacity storage is a cloud-based service because traditionally we have not been able to store large amounts of data online on a large/open scale. they are basically hard drives to us, which has only ever been available on an actual computer.
Well, Its their mantra.. and boy they have those mohney, just hope its actually benefit us not just in concept.
Because Xbox and Xbox Live wasn't created last month..? The brand was introduced 12 years ago with the launch of the original Xbox console. Xbox Live itself have been regarded as fairly reliable and effective. And that's what the news is partly about.
There's some truth behind common sense skepticism, I can support that. But lunatic conspiracy theories (not aimed at you) mixed in with FUD and juvenile system wars mentality brings nothing good to the table.
EdibleExplosives
Member
Nope.
We asked them for months to stop, but day after day they kept ignoring us and warming up their salivary glands. It wasn't until they realised that spitting on us might actually hurt them in the long run, that they eventually said 'oh lol sorry, we were totally listening to you!'
Stop pretending that MS got rid of DRM out of the goodness of their hearts, or because they listened to the fans.
Who cares why they got rid of it? All that matters is that they did.
These are products, not people. No reason to hold grudges.
PanicFreak
Member
Ever heard of Salesforce.com?
davepoobond
you can't put a price on sparks
until entrement mentioned the word, no.
EdibleExplosives
Member
That's a whole nother argument, I was pointing out why your analogy was completely wrong. And people care because it leaves a bad taste in their mouth, whilst also fearing MS might do something similar later down the line. You can't treat your consumers like shit, then expect no one to care after it.
It personally doesn't bother me since I won't be buying an XO as long as mandatory Kinect stands, but I understand why people are pissed.
blurredvision
Member
How did they "spit in your face" when the console is still 5 months out? Those sneaky bastards, did they sneak into your house again and take $500 out of your wallet?
But they aren't.
They were going to, but they didn't.
If the 180 happened after launch, I could see the point. But all the DRM went away before a single console was sold.
EdibleExplosives
Member
The fact is, they would've if they could have gotten away with it. They heard the fans' pleas for months, said they were listening, and continued to go ahead with the original plan anyway. That, for many people, is treating them like shit.
Goodacre0081
Member
PanicFreak
Member
Customer relationship software that is completely run in the cloud. In my career, I've worked as a consultant for two companies that have incredible cloud software.
Those two had expense management software and data mining software in the cloud. Adobe and Microsoft have their Creative suite and Office running in the cloud, respectively. I also know of companies that have HR software that runs in the cloud.
The point is, the video game industry uses low hanging fruit to deliver games to you. Cloud computing is one of those things. To say that cloud hasn't proven anything outside of data storage is simply wrong.
Rising_Hei
Member
700 more billions invested in bullshit, oh god... this generation will be a pain
If they're wiping the spit away then they spit somewhere right? Your face is the only place you mention so I can only assume.
As far as I'm concerned, they spit in our faces, then when we didn't just sit there and take it, they wiped it away and tried to play goody-goody with us.
Yeah because of the backlash, not because they tried to be nice.
Garrett 2U
Member
Jeeze the online services of XboxOne are going to be incredible 
Jake Tower
Banned
fuck you eduardo
So?
In your fierce crusade to defend Microsoft, that sort of behaviour might not register with you. However in a normal consumer, that kind of behaviour is despicable that you have to kick and scream just be treated with some respect by a company.
Similar threads
- Poll