You're excused.
-
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.
XB1: Microsoft Claims that Cloud Computing Can Provide Power of 3 XB1's, 32 X360's
- Thread starter bombshell
- Start date
You're excused.
justsomeguy
Member
Actually I'm enjoying your posts. They're sensible, factual, well reasoned and most importantly saving me a lot of typing!I don't think this is worth continuing really. There's almost no applicable games that would serve as likely candidates either. If PvZ and BF4 aren't using the servers, then the chances are most devs probably don't want to split the implementation on games that they already have a working solution for. Maybe once we have more multiplats designed exclusively for this gen, we'll have more of an idea (or someone will just outright say what the deal is).
Until then I guess we stay with me not seeing a reason to think they're lying right now, and you not seeing a reason to believe they're telling the truth. Neither of us is going to change the others mind, and I'm pretty sure we both understand the others viewpoint quite thoroughly at this point. If we continue, we're both just going to fall back on all the points we've already covered up until this point, and I'm sure everyone else is tired of skimming past our posts.
Ploid 3.0
Member
I now game mostly on PC, PS4 is for the games that don't come to PC (some multiplatform games still stick to console only too, and sony is known have awesome first/second party games imo). I'm even considering getting Watchdogs on PS4 since the PC version seems crazy with the requirements. Another thing is some pc ports don't run too well, and are bad (GTA4, Saints Row 2, etc.).
I feel this is where we always go wrong in these discussions, but it has to be addressed nonetheless. Just because people may not be rioting in the streets about games not being 1080p native, doesn't mean that we somehow don't care about graphics or visuals also. Fun is a big part of it, sure, but if we just wanted "fun," and that alone, people wouldn't buy next gen consoles. The 360 version of Titanfall may be fine for others, but it damn sure isn't for me. I don't want any part of that. If Titanfall were just a game for the 360, I wouldn't even be interested. I love my campaigns as it is, and practically never touch MP, but I broke that role for this game. A very big motivating factor for me to buy this game is because there's a next gen console version, and I want to hit the ground running with the new system. And not really isolating you, I'm just speaking in general, but I don't have the faintest idea where this mindset emanates from that just because people have chosen to game on Xbox One that it must obviously mean we don't care about graphics or don't like the idea of having prettier looking games to play. When they release multi-platform titles, do people believe PS4 owners are the only ones gaming with next gen graphics, and Xbox One owners are slumming sega cd style or something?
Don't want to get way off topic so I'll obviously make this my final post in the thread, but I don't feel the differences between the Xbox One and PC version are anywhere nearly as big as the ones between the 360 and the Xbox One version, and I've seen and played all 3. The fact that PC is always going to be better goes without saying. That's an age old absolute, and it's always been a common argument for PC over consoles, but if that reason alone wasn't nearly compelling enough for me with the 360 and PS3, I don't see it having much weight with Xbox One and PS4 either. My PC is more than capable of absolutely crushing it in Titanfall, but if I wanted to play it on the PC, I would get it for PC. It would surely be a lot cheaper for me if all I wanted were this game, wouldn't it?
But it's not that simple, and it surely isn't all that I want. I much prefer to have the game on the Xbox One where I can use it in combination with the console's specific featureset, and where I can play on Xbox Live with my friends or family who will also be playing it on their xbox ones. I like being able to jump straight to watching tv or a specific channel with a voice command after playing some titanfall, I like being able to say "xbox record that" "xbox broadcast" "xbox snap game dvr," or start up or join an existing party with some other people that have the new system. If anybody wants to just have some fun, don't even bother getting the next gen console or PC versions of watch dogs, just wait for the ps3 and 360 version... don't get it twisted, man, we bottomfeeders like to look at pretty graphics, too..
Not an XB1 thread without Senjutsu
MS "claim" cloud can provide 3x power boost.
Me: challenge accepted. Now I demand ALL "cloud" implemented games to be 1080p / 60 fps locked games. I think 3.6 TF is plenty enough for otherwise ..... STOP lying, or change your messaging ....we are not idiots.
I know what cloud means and I know its just a fluff PR word for offloading small physics and static lightning + dedicated servers. But it seems like PR deceiving campaing is effective since we have some posters who refused to face reality and see that TF " Cloud based game" is running a pathetic 792p with single digit fps at times....but oh well.
Me: challenge accepted. Now I demand ALL "cloud" implemented games to be 1080p / 60 fps locked games. I think 3.6 TF is plenty enough for otherwise ..... STOP lying, or change your messaging ....we are not idiots.
I know what cloud means and I know its just a fluff PR word for offloading small physics and static lightning + dedicated servers. But it seems like PR deceiving campaing is effective since we have some posters who refused to face reality and see that TF " Cloud based game" is running a pathetic 792p with single digit fps at times....but oh well.
justsomeguy
Member
Go re-read the op and the comment about graphics fidelity instead of throwing up a stupid straw man argument.
LordOfChaos
Member
Actually the HD Graphics 4000 is higher performing than the 360 GPU, and the CPU certainly is. Granted this isn't factoring in console specific programming, which does alter the game a lot.
http://forum.beyond3d.com/showthread.php?t=61950
I don't have to re-read anything, what does x3 the POWER of a gaming system mean? 3x the power at cooking pasta?! No...Power of a gaming console means "computational power of the CPU/GPU" thankfully thats measured in flops.
I need to see tangible results before buying anything ... I saw nothing.
Not really a strawman considering its what MS used when they initially tried to put the cloud over.
Ploid 3.0
Member
The thing is when they show "Xbox One + Cloud = army of Xbox One's" graphic it is leading people to believe the console becomes a gen above the current gen in a way. Like when they say Xbox One is x amount of Xbox 360s in power. They know what they are doing with stuff like this. People are going to expect 1080p 120fps!! Not multiplayer servers, cloud building destruction physics, and suh. They want to make the Xbox One look like a mega powerful console, or as capable as the competition since word is going around that it's weaker and will get worse versions of multiplatform games in my opinion.
That one physics demo they presented some time ago was pretty neat, but it's time to show it being used in an actual game.
NTIETS13A_Superiority
Banned
MS you lying SOBs. Cloud can make XBO 100s of times more powerfull. It is just that those fuckers limit it to roughly 3x. MS is really underselling the Power of Cloud.
1. It is nice that MS offers this computational power. I do not know all the details so can not say much more about it
2.You will lose some amount of control if you go with any other than your own servers.
3. This marketing is funny. (Edit: becouse of past jokes and stuff)
Edit: GAF step-up your game. I posted to Power of the Cloud thread for poops sake. be interesting. I bought motorcycle 08.04.2014. Half liter machine full of love.
1. It is nice that MS offers this computational power. I do not know all the details so can not say much more about it
2.You will lose some amount of control if you go with any other than your own servers.
3. This marketing is funny. (Edit: becouse of past jokes and stuff)
Edit: GAF step-up your game. I posted to Power of the Cloud thread for poops sake. be interesting. I bought motorcycle 08.04.2014. Half liter machine full of love.
BurnOutBrighter
Banned
Alas, if only we could download computing power as fast as it could compute.
Head.spawn
Junior Member
I'm a bit perplexed seeing this pretty much negating physics performance penalties and the date on the video, then reading this thread with so many people saying it's a joke. I do think it's a bit wishy-washy to go around throwin, marketing it out there as a benefit without any games to fully demonstrate it in the wild.
On the otherhand, Titanfall may use it, but I don't think it is easy enough for people to understand how it benefits the game considering it is also on PC/360 and isn't necessarily a performance showpiece on the Xbox One. I think if they're going to market it as a feature, they need to give us a game that makes it evidently clear that "the cloud" is necessary to make the game happen. People are expecting to see a "wow"-element when you make such a big deal out of things.
/2cents.
Heh, thanks. I think I'm done for now though unless something break the "they have no incentive" "yes they do" stalemate that we have going on. We're at the point of trying to read the minds of people we've never met to decide why they would or wouldn't take a certain course of action. At that point it's best to take a few steps back.
The messaging is crap, but it's also not as simple as you're claiming either. If they had three actual Xbox One boxes used purely for the purpose of calculating stuff on the server end, then 3x the power of an Xbox One would be exactly correct. It still wouldn't get you 1080p and 60fps on Titanfall though.
I agree they need to alter how they present this (or maybe stop mentioning it at all and just implement it somewhere useful), but that doesn't really mean that you can choose the criteria for what 3x power means. Considering the OP of this thread explicitly states that graphics aren't what they're talking about, I think it's becoming a little ridiculous to have one in every 3 posters shouting "then show me the graphics!".
There's a problem with this though. Regardless of what implementation they achieve, it would always platform agnostic. That building demo? That would benefit an Xbox 360 as well, only to a lesser extent (because it would struggle to draw as much). There would never be anything you can do with the cloud that wouldn't also be valid for a PC version, or a cross gen version if it exists. So then we're just talking about them making a game fully exclusive to the Xbox One just to prove a point.
I, um, what.
Is it sad that I immediately checked his post history purely to see what other insane things he may have said?
LordOfChaos
Member
I did the same
Oh, no worries, I'm plenty aware. It's sad, but mildly entertaining enough to skim through his posts. It's like a milder version of Misterxmedia.
Nice strawmanning.
OK, why wouldn't a theoretical power of 3.6 TF run TF in 1080p/60fps while we have it pretty much run on those resolutions on a much weaker GPU's on the PC?
Microsoft's cloud isn't graphical power, it's computational power. You are multiplying the gpu's power by 3 when it should be 3 times the cpu's power.
Is that correct tech savvy people?
NullPointer
Member
"Computational" is a rather vague term that doesn't necessarily exclude GPUs.
It really doesn't help when they make statements about how it could improve graphics, or explaning it in terms of "x consoles equivalent". Not that it's not intentional, mind.
So the new messaging is "Microsoft didn't really say this"?
Who from Microsoft decided that The Cloud is no longer for graphics?
"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" - Matt Booty, General Manager of Redmond Game Studios and Platforms.
Yes; with a whole whack of qualifiers which neuter it to a very narrow range of uses which aren't sexy or salable.
How was that a strawman?
This is the point we have been stuck at not for a long time. We've argued about some of the micro details that would affect the overall outcome, and found that we disagree on those too.
If the developers would choose a single online implementation across both platforms (the course of action I would expect them to take), then I believe that as a result MS would see incentive in offering the servers.
If the developers would choose a split implementation across the two platforms (the course of action you would expect them to take), then you believe as a result MS would not see any incentive in offering the servers.
This is us arguing what we think two sets of people that we've not interacted with, would choose to do. What in my previous post is a strawman?
We have made zero progress on this topic for over 24hrs... I mean, let's just stop and consider that for moment. We've been arguing on and off about something neither of us can prove for over 24hrs, and have gotten nowhere. Where would you like us to go from here? Should we continue to make the same points for the next week, or month maybe? If you have something new to move the discussion in a different direction, then I'm plenty interested. Otherwise, we've run out of talking points.
Because it is distributed, and as a result can't work the same as a unified pool. If I add three additional 2TB HDDs to my PC (previous had a single 2TB drive) individually partitioned, I won't be able to store a 5TB file on them (I don't know what the hell this file is...). That doesn't change the fact that I do have access to 4x the HDD space that I had before. Unfortunately in order for one to work with information on the other it becomes subject to the transfer rate between them. In the cloud's case, this is your internet connection to the servers.
foamdino
Member
Just found this via a mailing list.
Cloud gaming is being actively researched - it may be a real thing in the future when more bandwidth is available and technology has improved in other areas.
Right now though cloud gaming means streaming video of a game running remotely (OnLive/PSNow style) or virtual servers (AWS, Azure style).
Cloud gaming is being actively researched - it may be a real thing in the future when more bandwidth is available and technology has improved in other areas.
Right now though cloud gaming means streaming video of a game running remotely (OnLive/PSNow style) or virtual servers (AWS, Azure style).
Your strawmanning was mischaracterising our discussion as a mindreading exercise, obviously with a condescending intent.
It is not mindreading to be able to appreciate the observable circumstances that influence one's actions and statements. If you don't appreciate that, then I have a Nigerian multibillionaire who needs someone to look after his money, and you have been chosen.
Yes, we've looked at the circumstances. But they still leave us with a choice to be made, and we disagree on that choice. We can't progress without determining a course of action for our fictional developer, and we don't agree on one, even after going into more detail than I think virtually anyone on this forum ever does over something so minor... so we're stuck.
I did not intend the comment to be condescending in any way. Anything I claimed in that comment, I applied to both of us, and I don't spend my time insulting myself.
Then i apologise for misinterpreting your comment. As you suggested, we'll agree to disagree.
hoyalawya
Member
The game developer would not have to pay for Azure for XB1 games and have to pay for all other platforms. Microsoft would be, IMO, more than willing to provide the service to the developers. The difference could be how much stuffs developers are willing to put on the cloud for each platform. Dev can put all the fancy cloud stuffs for XB1 games in Azure without having to worry about the cost. However, they might be more wary in doing the same for all other platforms. This is just my speculation.
ChiliManiac
Banned
Anyone else besides me thinks that they might be speaking the truth? They've never given us hard numbers up until now for one and two they've given the parameters in which it is doable which is computation. I think were all going to be surprised.
Insane Metal
Member
lol, get a room you guys
Suikoguy
I whinny my fervor lowly, for his length is not as great as those of the Hylian war stallions
Where have you been? They have given a multitude of various numbers, values, and comparisons. They have even called it Infinite.
As I've stated in previous threads, there will be no noticeable advantage to any platform this gen because of "cloud power" bullshit. The one exception being the advantages dedicated servers have brought for decades.
The advantages are simply too small, compared to the increased cost of programming, network coding, and server costs. With the Xbone falling behind, the chances of any 3rd party using it becomes almost nill.
Edit: Good, I might have killed the thread!
ChiliManiac
Banned
Your claim states absolutely nothing and using words like bullshit indicates to me your just grandstanding your knowledge of this position because you in fact have no idea what's going on, Microsoft has given us some hard facts this time other than infinite. 3 Xbox's seems a lot more reasonable than that don't you agree? First of all, these are computational algorithms were talking about. See, you aren't giving me anything to go on here. Just your stance that this won't work. Which is called an opinion I believe.
Bam Bam Baklava
Member
All we've seen is talk. How about some solid proof? Where's the game that has 3 xboxs worth of power being computed by the cloud?
ChiliManiac
Banned
That's begging the question sir, you already know the answer to that...