Listen to it carefully. The IGN's own interviewer says that he's heard from industry people himself that cloud is whole bag of bull and Cerny never dismisses it outright but rather outlines what it's not good for. Turns out that graphics stuff everyone can see and some are pretending to be more knowledgeable about the lead system architect and game designer happens to be latency sensitive.
-
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.
PS4 Architect Mark Cerny: 'Cloud won't work well to boost graphics'
- Thread starter Audioboxer
- Start date
DagnastyEp
Member
I find it interesting that MS has made certain claims about cloud computing, and Sony, who seems to be eager to stick it to MS whenever they can, have done nothing to refute the claims that MS has made.
MS has claimed that the developers will have access to three times the compute in the cloud to be used in games, and that it will help with A.I., physics, and lighting. As well as do all the stuff that dedicated servers are known to do. Never once (that I have seen) has MS claimed that the cloud will help to boost graphics (lighting =/ graphics)
In the first instance where Sony was questioned about cloud computing they tried to dismiss MS's claim, saying they could do that too; claiming linking, matching, etc - basically using dedicated servers. No mention of the other claims about the cloud.
Then in this interview Cerny uses a common marketing technique; making a factual statement that is related, but not relevent to the claims of their competitor in order to transfer doubt onto the competitors claims. MS never claimed graphics would be boosted, Cerny is saying graphics can't be boosted, and hoping people equate that to mean that MS's other claims about the cloud are also invalid.
I'm not trying to say that the cloud is a magical wonder; I just find it interesting how Sony dances around the claims that MS is making. I'd love someone from Sony actually address MS's claim, rather then answer in roundabout maketing terms. Real or not, I think it's still to early to unequivocally make judgement on the cloud before the systems or games that (might) use it are out. It will likely be 1 or 2 years before we can really assess what kind of benifit, if any, it provides.
MS has claimed that the developers will have access to three times the compute in the cloud to be used in games, and that it will help with A.I., physics, and lighting. As well as do all the stuff that dedicated servers are known to do. Never once (that I have seen) has MS claimed that the cloud will help to boost graphics (lighting =/ graphics)
In the first instance where Sony was questioned about cloud computing they tried to dismiss MS's claim, saying they could do that too; claiming linking, matching, etc - basically using dedicated servers. No mention of the other claims about the cloud.
Then in this interview Cerny uses a common marketing technique; making a factual statement that is related, but not relevent to the claims of their competitor in order to transfer doubt onto the competitors claims. MS never claimed graphics would be boosted, Cerny is saying graphics can't be boosted, and hoping people equate that to mean that MS's other claims about the cloud are also invalid.
I'm not trying to say that the cloud is a magical wonder; I just find it interesting how Sony dances around the claims that MS is making. I'd love someone from Sony actually address MS's claim, rather then answer in roundabout maketing terms. Real or not, I think it's still to early to unequivocally make judgement on the cloud before the systems or games that (might) use it are out. It will likely be 1 or 2 years before we can really assess what kind of benifit, if any, it provides.
I guess the Xbox One with the cloud being three times as powerful as the Xbox One without the cloud also has nothing do with graphics, just like lighting has nothing to do with graphics.
Yes yes.
He's not dancing around it, he's just not being disingenuous like Microsoft are. He acknowledges there are some advantages to cloud computing, that games very likely will or already do use (MMOs, dedicated servers etc), but that it will not be useful or viable for some of the graphics tasks Microsoft has suggested. It's a fair and reasonable response, and the correct one.
mangochutney
Member
The common man/woman will see 'more power = better graphics'. So MS going oh the cloud makes our console 30x more powerful will make the misinformed believe the console will be pumping out better graphics.
Mark is just dispelling that for those that think it, he isn't saying 'Joe Bloggs said "xyz" but that is bulllllllllllllllsheeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeet'.
Azure is a world-class cloud platform. I doubt MS need to customise it that much for Xbox one.
Nothing stopping Sony renting capacity from third party cloud services and offering the same to their developers. Heck they could even rent Azure, although they may choose not to
dragonelite
Member
Im not talking about shadow being done on the cloud.
Because deferred rendering makes using point lights pretty cheap. What the cloud does is calculate and update a data structure containing locations of those said point lights and what color they need to be.
So its like a voxel representation of how secondary sun light bounces propagates through a level. And tell the engine to place light at those location to simulate secondary light bounces. Those light sources don't have to cast shadows. It may not be a perfect solution or precise one but i could save some computation and give a maybe better lighted scene. And sunlight direction changing isn't a fast dynamic effect so you can engineer/design around it.
D
Deleted member 1235
Unconfirmed Member
Azure is a world-class cloud platform. I doubt MS need to customise it that much for Xbox one.
Nothing stopping Sony renting capacity from third party cloud services and offering the same to their developers. Heck they could even rent Azure, although they may choose not to
well price would assumedly be an obstacle that MS would have less of a problem with since they own the infrastructure.
LOL.
basically, it's disingenuous when it's someone you don't like saying it and being at all vague.
So wait, exec from company A is pooh poohing technology from company B?
It's so good to have news from an unbiased source such as this.
FranXico
Member
It was not disingenuous nor vague in the slightest. He clearly said that it can't be effectively used to improved graphics, period. And gave as a counter-example, one thing that Sony does use cloud computing for: online match making.
Were you hoping that he said the cloud has "infinite power" or something like that? Because *that* is disingenuous, if not outright insulting the intelligence of whoever reads/hears such claims.
perineumlick
Member
If you have a rudimentary knowledge of how graphics in games work, you can easily see through the PR that MS is dishing. Most of us didn't need Cerny to come to a conclusion.
Deadly Cyclone
Pride of Iowa State
I think we need a Cerny OT.
Cerny OT: Tubs be overflowing
FonkyByNature
Member
I think Microsoft are way too forward thinking with the cloud. I definitly see it as something that will change the way devices work but it's not gonna happen this gen and not the one after. For the cloud to work properly, it needs a solid internet connection which many people don't have. It'll be used for very light things but i doubt it'll change graphics or anything.
Sony have Gaikai but it's not ready the same way Azure is. Microsoft have a way bigger mass to satisfy with cloud computing since they want all their products like Office 365, Servers and future computing to work with the cloud and those require a solid cloud infrastructure which pretty much only Microsoft has the money for. But i see Sony putting a lot of money into their cloud tech. They're definitly not late and the tech has time to mature.
Anyway, Microsoft wanted to make people believe Xbox One is more powerful than PS4 which is obviously not the case at all. Then came the power of the cloud 40 times more powerful bla bla bla...
That's like the Microsoft version of crazy ken's 4d and shit.
Sony have Gaikai but it's not ready the same way Azure is. Microsoft have a way bigger mass to satisfy with cloud computing since they want all their products like Office 365, Servers and future computing to work with the cloud and those require a solid cloud infrastructure which pretty much only Microsoft has the money for. But i see Sony putting a lot of money into their cloud tech. They're definitly not late and the tech has time to mature.
Anyway, Microsoft wanted to make people believe Xbox One is more powerful than PS4 which is obviously not the case at all. Then came the power of the cloud 40 times more powerful bla bla bla...
That's like the Microsoft version of crazy ken's 4d and shit.
CadetMahoney
Member
Aren't there ppl in this thread adamant MS said it will boost graphics.
RedNumberFive
Banned
"The cloud" is quickly becoming the "blast processing" of this generation.
FranXico
Member
This is exactly what the "infinite powa of da cloud" is.
backbreaker65
Banned
POST #18
http://arstechnica.com/gaming/2013/...s-more-processing-power-from-cloud-computing/
While cloud computation data doesn't have to be updated and synced with every frame of game data, developers are still going to have to manage the timing and flow of this cloud computing to avoid noticeable changes in graphic quality, Booty said. “Without getting too into the weeds, think about a lighting technique like ambient occlusion that gives you all the cracks and crevices and shadows that happen not just from direct light. There are a number of calculations that have to be done up front, and as the camera moves the effect will change. So when you walk into a room, it might be that for the first second or two the fidelity of the lighting is done by the console, but then, as the cloud catches up with that, the data comes back down to the console and you have incredibly realistic lighting."
blitzcloud
Banned
That is so fun, every time I heard that I thought that when not connected, the AI would run on a straight line or stand still. Please use the power of the cloud.
k
Avalanche said:
.Digital Foundry said:
so basically, prometheus engineer-like internet connection required to do anything other than trivial/pre-baked/non-dynamic crap.
Lest we forget, unlike local hardware that near zero variation when it comes to response time, the latency on broadband can vary on a different magnitude altogether (variations in milliseconds as opposed nearly no variations in nanoseconds for local hardware).
jim-jam bongs
Member
In this thread I've learned that lighting is apparently not a graphical technique.
DagnastyEp
Member
MS never stated it would be used to boost graphics. They've claimed A.I, physics, and lighting. I'm not saying that Cerny is disingenuous, though perhaps being a bit clever. In the interview he never addressed or mentioned the three talking points that MS has been touting regarding their cloud technolody, nor has anyone at Sony. He's claiming that the cloud wouldn't be good for boosting graphics, and I don't think anyone is doubting that claim. What's left unanswered is will it work to boost physics, A.I. or lighting.
Personnally, I'm not sure about physics or lighting, but I think boosting A.I. might be possible. If online mulitplayer works, then I would think cloud based A.I. would work. Instead of a human controlled teammate/enemy who's located some distance away connected via the internet, it would be a cloud server controlling the enemy/teammate connected via the interent.
it's more of an inside joke
of course everything in modern society somehow gets labeled as either a meme or trolling. Welcome to the future.
Lighting is part of graphics. Physics are as well more loosely, depending on what physics we're talking about (destructible objects, waves, clouds, weather etc). People need to stop pardoning Microsoft on PR fluff by means of confuscating or simply redefining the meanings of things long understood or acknowledged.
I prefer not to get into the spotlight for multiple reasons, but I've produced, designed and operated F2P games..
When I become a full member I intend to start a thread explaining F2P to the larger Neogaf community.
Lighting happens to be part of graphical output and:
"10x the power of xbox 360 without cloud while 40x with it."
"Or 3 times resources of one local made available to developers."
They have never ever clarified their statement and the onus is on them. They also didn't state whether this cloud stuff will be for offline or online games. These reaches for the sake of defending MS's honour is pitiable.
hokagespit
Member
Always-honest
Banned
That was him putting it mildly.
NemesisPrime
Banned
Mr Cerny is wrong...
His definition of graphics is just limited to PR speak. Broad statements FTW. Plugging Cloud processing in a traditional local graphics pipeline will indeed not work.
There are plenty of graphics related things that can be boosted by extra async processing power.
The big question is: Is it dead or not?
His definition of graphics is just limited to PR speak. Broad statements FTW. Plugging Cloud processing in a traditional local graphics pipeline will indeed not work.
There are plenty of graphics related things that can be boosted by extra async processing power.
The big question is: Is it dead or not?
FranXico
Member
Here is another one!
Didn't like the water in the tub. It drowned after post #97.
Kazuma Kiryu
Member
His clearance wasn't good enough. He was getting pretty agressive with other people, not really a surprise.
Name three!
NemesisPrime
Banned
Yeah just a dev speaking. Get the pitchforks! Carry on...
Oh fun.
* Procedural textures
* Model deformations
* Environmental effects (ex weather)
* Tesselations
* Calculating transformations
And let's not even talk about any procedural content generation or pregenerating levels that will be visited by the player "soonish".
You guys have no clue...
iamshadowlark
Banned
There's absolutly nothing you can do in anywhere near realtime with cloud processing and thats all that matters. He means graphics in the broadest sense and he's absolutely right.
FranXico
Member
How do you solve the problem of the latency imposed by the network connection then?
shadowsdarknes
Member
Couldn't dynamic weather and day and night cycles be calculated by the cloud? The latency involved with a few raindrops or by the angle of the sun being off by a degree or two with the lighting seems insignificant.
The cloud could process those calculations.
Or perhaps rendering large objects far off in the distance. Since it is so far away, the object isn't going to need any interaction, it's going to be relatively static.
iamshadowlark
Banned
Squeeze as much data into one pass as you can. Oh wait, you mean the average connection speed is below 10 MB/s? Well...compression?
NemesisPrime
Banned
You obviously mean in the narrowest sense.
Red Liquorice
Member
He's so calming to listen to.
No he means in any meaningful way, cloud processing won't be very useful for graphical purposes.