Support NeoGAF

[Garrett 2U]

personally i dont care about stuff like "60fps or GTFO", it was just a few questions...
Im just curious if people really think that this is going to be as powerful as its being hyped... and if tradeoffs are made, would they be okay with it.

Too many people would rather have a game run @60FPS and be 720p than see a game be 30fps @1080p and if this ends up being another 900p game... are people REALLY going to be okay?

You don't seem to understand that this tech has little to do with resolution.
If this level of destruction was programmed to run locally on the console, it wouldn't run at a playable framerate on either next gen console.

It would literally be a slideshow.

 

[BudokaiMR2]

Can we put it in DBZ terms?
Is the PS4 Super Saiyan God Super Saiyan Goku while the Xbox One is now the new Beerus?

Don't worry, I am getting in touch with the JP retailer that put this image together for clarification.

 

[KiraXD]

You don't seem to understand that this tech has little to do with resolution.
If this level of destruction was programmed to run locally on the console, it wouldn't run at a playable framerate on either next gen console.

It would literally be a slideshow.

no i get that...

but im curious if people are okay if res isnt high. like even if this destruction is amazing... if the game itself looks like junk... lets say for sake of argument, when the game releases, it looks like it does now in alpha... would people be okay with that?

 

[Oogedei]

In other words, during the next 16+ months of dev time, the graphics won't get better and the performance will get worse.

Excellent assumption.

I'm rating things on how they look now. Never said that this will be the case for the final version but they have to prove that they're capable of delivering good physics and good visuals combined. In this current state it's just not impressive for me.

You could at least try to discuss normally rather than being salty. Those manners just because someone doesn't like what you like...ridiculous.

 

[badb0y]

The claim was 16x a normal Xbox One right? That puts it at 20.8 Tflops which is about 2 Titan Xs. So this is not the best console but the best personal computer ever! Amazing!

 

[Synth]

no i get that...

but im curious if people are okay if res isnt high. like even if this destruction is amazing... if the game itself looks like junk... lets say for sake of argument, when the game releases, it looks like it does now in alpha... would people be okay with that?

People have been fine with that (resolution) in so many cases, that I don't see how this is a legitimate concern tbh.

 

[Champagne]

The issue isn't whether or not Microsoft would allow Sony to use it (they would), but Sony may view it as a bad movie both financially and in terms of PR. Sony would basically be admitting that Microsoft's use of the cloud for gaming is the better solution, and that Sony has no answer but to use their own competitor's tech for their own games.

Sony would be more likely to come up with their own solution -- and it's not like they still don't have the most powerful console without the cloud. As it stands, all of this is still in testing, and nothing is proven until it is out in the wild. Crackdown 3 could very well be a game change for Microsoft, but even if it was it's not like Sony's back would be against a wall. This is something that Microsoft would usher into the next generation where everyone would look into it, but Microsoft would be at an initial advantage.

It would be pretty difficult for Sony to build an infrastructure similar to what MS has in place currently.

 

[Garrett 2U]

no i get that...

but im curious if people are okay if res isnt high. like even if this destruction is amazing... if the game itself looks like junk... lets say for sake of argument, when the game releases, it looks like it does now in alpha... would people be okay with that?

Sorry, this just seems like concern for concern's sake.

I'm rating things on how they look now. Never said that this will be the case for the final version but they have to prove that they're capable of delivering good physics and good visuals combined. In this current state it's just not impressive for me.

You could at least try to discuss normally rather than being salty. Those manners just because someone doesn't like what you like...ridiculous.

You don't leave much room for interpretation with your phrasing.
You pretty much flat out say the game is going to be disappointing and you 'really really' (BOLDED) don't think it will work that smooth.

I'm sorry if you didn't mean to sound that direct, but you did.
There wasn't a single 'if', metaphorically or literally, in your entire post.

it's going to be disappointing for me and I really really doubt that it will work that smooth when they release it.

 

[presagetogood]

Too many people would rather have a game run @60FPS and be 720p than see a game be 30fps @1080p and if this ends up being another 900p game... are people REALLY going to be okay?

the people who care about 900p v1080p are the people who live on forums, or they are easily swayed by their friends who dwell on forums.....there are literally millions of buyers of blockbuster games on XB1 that have been less than 1080p, who obviously don't care all that much about 1080p, otherwise they wouldn't buy it.

your concern is concern for concern's sake...trying to make an issue out of something that isn't there. so from that angle, it's warrior-esque.

 

[Maxwell House]

Sorry, this just seems like concern for concern's sake.




You don't leave much room for interpretation with your phrasing.
You pretty much flat out say the game is going to be disappointing and you 'really really' (BOLDED) don't think it will work that smooth.

I'm sorry if you didn't mean to sound that direct, but you did.
There wasn't a single 'if', metaphorically or literally, in your entire post.

Yeah, sound like tears to me too.

 

[scitek]

The claim was 16x a normal Xbox One right? That puts it at 20.8 Tflops which is about 2 Titan Xs. So this is not the best console but the best personal computer ever! Amazing!

I know you're being facetious, but there are PCs out there with 4 Titan Xs
.

 

[Shrennin]

It would be pretty difficult for Sony to build an infrastructure similar to what MS has in place currently.

Almost impossible, give that Sony is a much smaller company than Microsoft. Still, I think Sony would rather figure out some solution rather than utilize their competitors' own tech.

 

[Liabe Brave]

Read the articles. The bandwidth required for this will be very minimal.

Yeah, bandwidth isn't the issue. It's latency, and then memory--the server has to remember where all those pieces are. To help solve the memory issue, after a few seconds at rest debris below a certain size disappears. (And in the IGN video David Jones says the final version will probably remove pieces more aggressively than that.)

There's several ways they could address latency. A couple folks in this thread have suggested that they're running the physics at a lower framerate than the engine. But I can't tell from looking at the streams. Is there a downloadable version of the footage anywhere?

 

[CarbonFire]

The claim was 16x a normal Xbox One right? That puts it at 20.8 Tflops which is about 2 Titan Xs. So this is not the best console but the best personal computer ever! Amazing!

They said multiples of the XBOne's physics compute power, not the power of the entire box. And it's also not on just one single server, but spread across multiple Azure servers as necessary as the destruction spreads. We don't know specifically how much of the XBOne's power they're using for physics compute on Crackdown 3, so there's no real way of knowing exactly how much they're actually stressing their Cloud Servers.

 

[KiraXD]

Sorry, this just seems like concern for concern's sake.




You don't leave much room for interpretation with your phrasing.
You pretty much flat out say the game is going to be disappointing and you 'really really' (BOLDED) don't think it will work that smooth.

I'm sorry if you didn't mean to sound that direct, but you did.
There wasn't a single 'if', metaphorically or literally, in your entire post.

i guess? im not really concerned... "curious" isnt the same thing....

 

[la flama blanca]

Microsoft's been pretty on point with telling the truth for the past decade, especially when it comes to gaming. I'm sure this works exactly as they say it would.

 

[Oogedei]

Sorry, this just seems like concern for concern's sake.




You don't leave much room for interpretation with your phrasing.
You pretty much flat out say the game is going to be disappointing and you 'really really' (BOLDED) don't think it will work that smooth.

I'm sorry if you didn't mean to sound that direct, but you did.
There wasn't a single 'if', metaphorically or literally, in your entire post.

Looking at recent Fallout threads it doesn't seem to be a "concern for concerns sake" for a lot of people. I don't need that great graphics but if all of this is reduced to this cell shader look than I'm truely disappointed by this. It surely is an interesting possibility for the future though.

Sorry but I find it extremely annoying when people cherry pick certain phrases, extending them with stuff people never wanted to say and trying to make that statement looking dumb.
The comment about the smoothness is related to the question whether the consumer is getting this kind of smooth gameplay presented in the showcase or if the servers won't deliver that way. I doubt that it will work that smooth for the majority of the people. It is ridiculous how online services are still failing so often nowadays (take the DriveClub release as an example). There are plenty of reasons for me to remain critical but I would be happy if MS would prove me wrong. There is a lot of potential in this but I just don't see it yet.

 

[nib95]

Almost impossible, give that Sony is a much smaller company than Microsoft. Still, I think Sony would rather figure out some solution rather than utilize their competitors' own tech.

I don't think they will bother, at least with the PS4, not for these particular tasks anyway. My guess is Sony has their money on GPU compute for doing advanced physics and things of that nature. One of the biggest customisations of the PS4's GPU is actually the compute specs, perhaps the only part of the console's hardware that is actually pretty advanced, comparable to the R9 280X in that respect. Resogun, an indie launch title by a tiny team, uses GPU accelerated physics to push up to 500,000 voxels in destruction, on screen at any one time, at 60fps no less. This is actually way beyond the number pushed in example voxel destruction demo's using better hardware, at 30fps instead of 60fps. So with the right optimisations, there are alternatives. How it will stack up to cpu side cloud compute I have no idea.

 

[pottuvoi]

They said multiples of the XBOne's physics compute power, not the power of the entire box. And it's also not on just one single server, but spread across multiple Azure servers as necessary as the destruction spreads. We don't know specifically how much of the XBOne's power they're using for physics compute on Crackdown 3, so there's no real way of knowing exactly how much they're actually stressing their Cloud Servers.

Most likely all meaningful destruction physics run on servers and small particle systems on XO.

I do not see how separating physics into different XOs would benefit the system, too much latency and data movement to both directions.
Just handle big stuff in one cluster of computers or GPUs in Azure and send results back to all players. (with proper LoD if needed..)

 

[lifeexpectancy]

I didn't "give up a fight", I repeated my argument, until I was tired by people mistaking a discussion for "a fight", and not investing enough time to actually read what I actually argued.

I can post it again, if somebody want's to try anew.



Which fits nicely with the revelation, that this "offloaded processing" is only there in multiplayer mode. That is the only gameplay that needs an online infrastructure anyway.

I don't think you quite get what's happening here and why it's different than other destructible-physics games. Every piece of rubble from those structures they are destroying in the video is still being physically rendered, still has interactivity, 'weight' if you will, and physics properties.

Typically in a destruction-physics game, once the item that is destructible is fully destroyed, there is nothing left to interact with (or a portion of the original object is 'invulnerable', and is left behind after you break off all the destructible bits). This is not the case here. Also, it doesn't create additional server costs because these aren't dedicated servers, at least not in the strictest sense. Microsoft already has this infrastructure in place and these servers are virtual, are only created on an on-demand basis when players connect to a game world. Once a given match ends, the "servers" they were playing on go on to do other tasks. They aren't just sitting there running crackdown 24/7. Of course they still have to pay for using the servers, but that's no different than any multiplayer game that uses Microsoft's Azure platform. That's not a deterrent to any dev looking to create on online experience, so it isn't a deterrent here either.

Don't get me wrong. I still personally think it's a glorified tech demo. Destructible stuff in online multiplayer isn't interesting to me. When that bridge was shot down in the video, he only shot the right-hand side, yet the whole bridge fell straight down. Maybe that's because he was using a modified dev-mode OP gun, I dunno, but my point is when it comes to Crackdown I'm interested in the traditional, single-player campaign. Jumping around the city with people online and destroying everything in site seems like it would get old really, really fast.

Despite my disinterest in this particular component, I think you are trying very hard to sell it short, when the tech itself is actually quite impressive on its own merits.

Is XB1 the most powerful console ever? No. Is this tech pretty cool? Yes. And I hope something comes of it that I have more interest in in the future.

 

[CarbonFire]

Most likely all meaningful destruction physics run on servers and small particle systems on XO.

I do not see how separating physics into different XOs would benefit the system, too much latency and data movement to both directions.
Just handle big stuff in one cluster of computers or GPUs in Azure and send results back to all players. (with proper LoD if needed..)

Correct, it's doing all that on the Azure servers. They were just using XBOne's physics compute as an ill-defined unit of measure. In their demo, they use "9X" the power of XBOne's physics compute power to handle the city-wide destruction they were showing at the end.

It'd be really interesting to find out what the simulation rate was for these demos.

 

[Shpeshal Nick]

I don't think you quite get what's happening here and why it's different than other destructible-physics games. Every piece of rubble from those structures they are destroying in the video is still being physically rendered, still has interactivity, 'weight' if you will, and physics properties.

Typically in a destruction-physics game, once the item that is destructible is fully destroyed, there is nothing left to interact with. This is not the case here. Also, it doesn't create additional server costs because these aren't dedicated servers, at least not in the strictest sense. Microsoft already has this infrastructure in place and these servers are virtual, are only created on an on-demand basis when players connect to a game world. Once a given match ends, the "servers" they were playing on go on to do other tasks. They aren't just sitting there running crackdown 24/7.

Don't get me wrong. I still personally think it's a glorified tech demo. Destructible stuff in online multiplayer isn't interesting to me. When that bridge was shot down in the video, he only shot the right-hand side, yet the whole bridge fell straight down. Maybe that's because he was using a modified dev-mode OP gun, I dunno, but my point is when it comes to Crackdown I'm interested in the traditional, single-player campaign. Jumping around the city with people online and destroying everything in site seems like it would get old really, really fast.

Despite my disinterest in this particular component, I think you are trying very hard to sell it short, when the tech itself is actually quite impressive on its own merits.

Is XB1 the most powerful console ever? No. Is this tech pretty cool? Yes. And I hope something comes of it that I have more interest in in the future.

They say during the destruction demo that they exaggerated the power on the guns for the sake of the demo.

Which is why he used a pistol for the wall but a rifle fir the building.

 

[lifeexpectancy]

They say during the destruction demo that they exaggerated the power on the guns for the sake of the demo.

Which is why he used a pistol for the wall but a rifle fir the building.

Yeah I know that. I mentioned that in the post you quoted. I'm just hoping that with 'regular' guns, the destruction leads to more realistic outcomes, like destroying the right-side support makes the bridge supports on the left side bend/break and the bridge crashes down at an angle against that building rather than straight down.

I also recognize all of this is pre-alpha footage or something? So some of the oddities may be sorted. Like the structural beams of the building seem to withstand a great deal of abuse after the building itself has been brought down. If they can destroy everything else with such ease, I would think destroying the structural support beams within ought to be just as easy. As someone else said, something about the whole demo just felt a but off, almost like the whole uncanny valley effect when talking about rendering humans realistically.

I'll be curious to see how the destruction feels when the final product ships. If it has a more organic feel to it, I might be more interested than I currently am. And FWIW I do the bulk of my gaming on Xbox One currently, so this isn't fanboyism talking here.

 

[Brad Grenz]

I don't think they will bother, at least with the PS4, not for these particular tasks anyway. My guess is Sony has their money on GPU compute for doing advanced physics and things of that nature. One of the biggest customisations of the PS4's GPU is actually the compute specs, perhaps the only part of the console's hardware that is actually pretty advanced, comparable to the R9 280X in that respect. Resogun, an indie launch title by a tiny team, uses GPU accelerated physics to push up to 500,000 voxels in destruction, on screen at any one time, at 60fps no less. This is actually way beyond the number pushed in example voxel destruction demo's using better hardware, at 30fps instead of 60fps. So with the right optimisations, there are alternatives. How it will stack up to cpu side cloud compute I have no idea.

The reason we aren't seeing other companies pursue this tech is because the economics don't really add up. At this point Crackdown's use of cloud tech is a vanity project for MS, which is why we are only seeing it in one mode of one game that won't actually ship until 4 years after they made all their bombastic "power of the cloud" claims. Everyone else who wants destruction will figure out a way to do it locally because the costs of not only maintaining servers, but engineering a hybrid physics system are not justified by the gains that the cloud offers.

 

[Vinland]

I will be honest, it just sounds like EVE Online's original approach to running local and remote simulations and syncing them up. The big difference here is that the tech runs a a heavier sim on the dedicated server that is running the MP map and the data is just rendered on the other side after some minute error correction.

It is very fascinating stuff but this is not what what I feel most people expected with the promise of the cloud. To me a single player campaign with server turbo chargers is what most people, perhaps to a fault, expected.

What they showed was impressive none the less. It means the tool chains to do servers have finally been taken to the next level. Now let us hope we see more than a few titles succeed in the market place to keep the momentum going.

 

[Aroll]

I don't think they will bother, at least with the PS4, not for these particular tasks anyway. My guess is Sony has their money on GPU compute for doing advanced physics and things of that nature. One of the biggest customisations of the PS4's GPU is actually the compute specs, perhaps the only part of the console's hardware that is actually pretty advanced, comparable to the R9 280X in that respect. Resogun, an indie launch title by a tiny team, uses GPU accelerated physics to push up to 500,000 voxels in destruction, on screen at any one time, at 60fps no less. This is actually way beyond the number pushed in example voxel destruction demo's using better hardware, at 30fps instead of 60fps. So with the right optimisations, there are alternatives. How it will stack up to cpu side cloud compute I have no idea.

There are definitely alternatives, but it won't reach the level of what Crackdown 3 does in multiplayer. It's just not feasible, and really, isn't feasible on either console no matter the optomization. It is possible on Xbox One due to the cloud, but without that, it's nothing. PS4 can use that same cloud if they so choose, but given how they are handeling PSNow, I would say they are going to avoid that route entirely.

The interesting part to me is that everyone I have heard of that saw or played this game... there isn't a single one that wasn't blown away. Let's think about that for awhile. Some complain the resolution isn't that high or maybe there is some AA issues or this and that - reality is, everyone who is touching this is like... this is something they haven't seen before. Going beyond what we've seen even on PC games. Virtually going "next level".

That's pretty neat. To think a game can get universal praise like this because it's doing things that no one has seen before the way it is actually being done. Just a crazy thought that we've finally got a game that is proving itself right in front of people's eyes to be something truly next level. Truly never done before.

Will it get overhyped because of this? Sure. Will it live up to most people's expectations? Probably not. Will it still be impressive and beyond anything we have seen on a game console? Probably.

Does this mean Xbone > PS4? No. Does it mean the Xbone has an exclusive doing something the PS4 isn't? Sure, and unless Sony sucks it up and decides to hop on Microsoft's cloud structure, it may always remain that way.

More importantly, if this ends up working live as well as it is working at gamescom (and that's a big IF. PSNow worked great in small things like this too, but publicly it hasn't been as smooth in full testing), it's literally proving that microsoft wasn't full of it when they boasted about this possibility years ago. They just needed a studio to actually decide to use it.

Of course, there are limitations with cloud stuff. There probably always will be. But it's recognizing those limitations and just using what the cloud is most capable for over what your local box can do, or in conjunction with, that is going to feel great.

However, the real question is if this ever becomes a norm, or just something a handful of titles plays around with. Time will tell, but it's nice known that in a controlled environment at least with 11 servers, what is happening looks and feels special. No matter if you're a sony, microsoft, nintendo, or PC gamer (or heck, mobile device gamer), you have to just appreciate the effort of doing something no one has done before and getting a result that is that good so far.

 

[Lys Skygge]

There are definitely alternatives, but it won't reach the level of what Crackdown 3 does in multiplayer. It's just not feasible, and really, isn't feasible on either console no matter the optomization. It is possible on Xbox One due to the cloud, but without that, it's nothing. PS4 can use that same cloud if they so choose, but given how they are handeling PSNow, I would say they are going to avoid that route entirely.

The interesting part to me is that everyone I have heard of that saw or played this game... there isn't a single one that wasn't blown away. Let's think about that for awhile. Some complain the resolution isn't that high or maybe there is some AA issues or this and that - reality is, everyone who is touching this is like... this is something they haven't seen before. Going beyond what we've seen even on PC games. Virtually going "next level".

That's pretty neat. To think a game can get universal praise like this because it's doing things that no one has seen before the way it is actually being done. Just a crazy thought that we've finally got a game that is proving itself right in front of people's eyes to be something truly next level. Truly never done before.

Will it get overhyped because of this? Sure. Will it live up to most people's expectations? Probably not. Will it still be impressive and beyond anything we have seen on a game console? Probably.

Does this mean Xbone > PS4? No. Does it mean the Xbone has an exclusive doing something the PS4 isn't? Sure, and unless Sony sucks it up and decides to hop on Microsoft's cloud structure, it may always remain that way.

More importantly, if this ends up working live as well as it is working at gamescom (and that's a big IF. PSNow worked great in small things like this too, but publicly it hasn't been as smooth in full testing), it's literally proving that microsoft wasn't full of it when they boasted about this possibility years ago. They just needed a studio to actually decide to use it.

Of course, there are limitations with cloud stuff. There probably always will be. But it's recognizing those limitations and just using what the cloud is most capable for over what your local box can do, or in conjunction with, that is going to feel great.

However, the real question is if this ever becomes a norm, or just something a handful of titles plays around with. Time will tell, but it's nice known that in a controlled environment at least with 11 servers, what is happening looks and feels special. No matter if you're a sony, microsoft, nintendo, or PC gamer (or heck, mobile device gamer), you have to just appreciate the effort of doing something no one has done before and getting a result that is that good so far.

Well said!

 

[Garrett 2U]

The reason we aren't seeing other companies pursue this tech is because the economics don't really add up. At this point Crackdown's use of cloud tech is a vanity project for MS, which is why we are only seeing it in one mode of one game that won't actually ship until 4 years after they made all their bombastic "power of the cloud" claims. Everyone else who wants destruction will figure out a way to do it locally because the costs of not only maintaining servers, but engineering a hybrid physics system are not justified by the gains that the cloud offers.

The economics make more sense when you own the second largest cloud platform, like
Microsoft does.
Plus every gamer who taps into it is a Gold member paying a yearly subscription for online gameplay.

For the record, it's going to be 3 years since the console launched.
Just because Crackdown is the first to take full advantage of 'cloud computing' doesn't mean other games haven't taken advantage of the Xbox cloud platform.

Pretty much every multiplayer game runs on dedicated servers on Xbone, that is completely different from last gen.

Halo 5 is even going to have dedicated servers running coop campaign and custom games.
That's possible because the Xbox cloud platform can spin up virtual servers on demand.

My point being, there are other benefits to the "bombastic" power of the cloud than just cloud computing on the scale of Crackdown 3.

 

[Maximilian E.]

I don't know because I didn't implement this. Honestly though, I want this to crash and burn with fire. It's a cool concept but the last thing I want is for devs to use this as a trojan horse to make all games always online. We are headed to that point and I'll find a new hobby when we get there but I'd like to enjoy this hobby for a little bit longer. The only reason they had to do this and not do the computation locally is because they sacrificed hardware for useless shit. We already seen companies using shitty excuses to push forced online like the new nfs. I don't need them to have anymore tools in their toolbox of shitty practises.

Ok, here goes...

So you are here at neogaf, still a junior, so you have not posted so much but i´ll bet that you have been lurking for a while and ever so often you go in and check neogaf. So in one way or another, you have internet access. Whether it is from home or by phone, you have internet access (obviously).

And if I can assume even more (based on how people are today), then I would guess that you prefer to be in places where there is some form of internet connection (IC from now on). Either through wireless or mobile network coverage (because hey, we have to be able to access neogaf 24/7 right?). So, even if you would have a cottage in the woods, you most likely want to have internet access there (because nowadays, we can barely do without it, right?). And if you for whatever reason would find yourself in a place without IC, then perhaps console gaming is not your top priority in that situation.

Correct me if Im wrong so far?

And if we look at the state of technology today, more and more things are getting connected and/or require IC to even work, and I would guess that this includes stuff that you already own (like a mobile phone, for full funtcionality, you need IC)

And yet, you are bickering about IC on a console when nowaydays, in one way or another, you have it at home (because as stated above, people nowadays need internet connection wherever they are)

Your argument is stupid as hell, I mean.. I could say stuff like: "Buhu, I want VR to crash and burn because this is Illuminatis trojan horse to make people stay at home and live in a virtual world instead of going out in the real world.. bu hu bu hu".

Oh yeah, and even if XboxOne was more powerful, you can still add Cloud Power for even more impressive stuff.

So my point is, you did not think over your arguments so much..

 

[Garrett 2U]

There are definitely alternatives, but it won't reach the level of what Crackdown 3 does in multiplayer. It's just not feasible, and really, isn't feasible on either console no matter the optomization. It is possible on Xbox One due to the cloud, but without that, it's nothing. PS4 can use that same cloud if they so choose, but given how they are handeling PSNow, I would say they are going to avoid that route entirely.

The interesting part to me is that everyone I have heard of that saw or played this game... there isn't a single one that wasn't blown away. Let's think about that for awhile. Some complain the resolution isn't that high or maybe there is some AA issues or this and that - reality is, everyone who is touching this is like... this is something they haven't seen before. Going beyond what we've seen even on PC games. Virtually going "next level".

That's pretty neat. To think a game can get universal praise like this because it's doing things that no one has seen before the way it is actually being done. Just a crazy thought that we've finally got a game that is proving itself right in front of people's eyes to be something truly next level. Truly never done before.

Will it get overhyped because of this? Sure. Will it live up to most people's expectations? Probably not. Will it still be impressive and beyond anything we have seen on a game console? Probably.

Does this mean Xbone > PS4? No. Does it mean the Xbone has an exclusive doing something the PS4 isn't? Sure, and unless Sony sucks it up and decides to hop on Microsoft's cloud structure, it may always remain that way.

More importantly, if this ends up working live as well as it is working at gamescom (and that's a big IF. PSNow worked great in small things like this too, but publicly it hasn't been as smooth in full testing), it's literally proving that microsoft wasn't full of it when they boasted about this possibility years ago. They just needed a studio to actually decide to use it.

Of course, there are limitations with cloud stuff. There probably always will be. But it's recognizing those limitations and just using what the cloud is most capable for over what your local box can do, or in conjunction with, that is going to feel great.

However, the real question is if this ever becomes a norm, or just something a handful of titles plays around with. Time will tell, but it's nice known that in a controlled environment at least with 11 servers, what is happening looks and feels special. No matter if you're a sony, microsoft, nintendo, or PC gamer (or heck, mobile device gamer), you have to just appreciate the effort of doing something no one has done before and getting a result that is that good so far.

I like it

 

[Synth]

The reason we aren't seeing other companies pursue this tech is because the economics don't really add up. At this point Crackdown's use of cloud tech is a vanity project for MS, which is why we are only seeing it in one mode of one game that won't actually ship until 4 years after they made all their bombastic "power of the cloud" claims. Everyone else who wants destruction will figure out a way to do it locally because the costs of not only maintaining servers, but engineering a hybrid physics system are not justified by the gains that the cloud offers.

There is another reason I can think of. The other candidates either don't have the infrastructure that's enabling this (Nintendo, Sony), or don't currently have a console (Google, Amazon).

 

[PeregrinSe7en]

Sony has nothing to gain for putting on a tech demo for PR, they are not the ones with the weaker console. MS is just leveraging what they can to change the 'underpowered' message. It's not like MS is going to have dozens of different titles wasting Azure time, they just need one example to wave around, red meat for the fans.

true words.

this guy gets it

 

[pixelation]

Man... and then you guys start complaining when members start "shitting up" XB threads (thread title).

 

[AgentP]

There is another reason I can think of. The other candidates either don't have the infrastructure that's enabling this (Nintendo, Sony), or don't currently have a console (Google, Amazon).

Sony can use Amazon servers, but they have nothing to prove. This is a tech demo.

 

[Garrett 2U]

Sony can use Amazon servers, but they have nothing to prove. This is a tech demo.

And next year it'll be a game you could go buy an Xbone and play.

I love how simple you think it is for Sony to just go rent servers from Amazon to do this lol.
Access and usage of a cloud platform isn't just free. Amazon needs to profit off of it.
The huge benefit Microsoft has that they can offer cloud usage dirt cheap is they own the second largest cloud platform.

 

[NoMoChokeSJ]

Man... and then you guys start complaining when members start "shitting up" XB threads (thread title).

People can have discussions without having to drive by troll or "shit up" a thread regardless of the title. I thought this was a main point of pride for GAF.

 

[clem84]

I'm still puzzled at how MS can make this thing profitable. Purchasing and maintaining an army of servers for cloud computing probably doesn't come cheap. Every XBO game sold that uses the could will require servers on standby. Of course each server can probably handle a few copies of the game at the same time. It's just that, it's that much more money that goes into supporting a game. I'm still skeptical about the long term financial viability of such games.

 

[Rafterman]

And next year it'll be a game you could go buy an Xbone and play.

And if it runs as advertised I'll congratulate them, but with Microsoft's shitty claims and output when it comes to "the power of the cloud" up to this point, you'd have to be pretty fucking dumb to jump into this with both feet and expect this to turn out like they claim just because you read about a tech demo.

 

[pixelation]

People can have discussions without having to drive by troll or "shit up" a thread regardless of the title. I thought this was a main point of pride for GAF.

I just think that the thread title could've been better, and not incite possible conflict. And i only say this because i've seen how other threads have turned out (not well).

 

[Bsigg12]

I'm still puzzled at how MS can make this thing profitable. Purchasing and maintaining an army of servers for cloud computing probably doesn't come cheap. Every XBO game sold that uses the could will require servers on standby. Of course each server can probably handle a few copies of the game at the same time. It's just that, it's that much more money that goes into supporting a game. I'm still skeptical about the long term financial viability of such games.

The server infrastructure is in place from Microsoft as a whole, not Xbox. It's virtualized as well.

 

[Synth]

Sony can use Amazon servers, but they have nothing to prove. This is a tech demo.

And Google could build a console... not exactly the point. MS doesn't have to go out of there way to assemble either part of the equation, because they're in business for both already. If there weren't I'd imagine they wouldn't be making the push right now either... but they have the setup regardless.

Not everything is about having something to prove...

 

[Brad Grenz]

And next year it'll be a game you could go buy an Xbone and play.

I love how simple you think it is for Sony to just go rent servers from Amazon to do this lol.
Access and usage of a cloud platform isn't just free. Amazon needs to profit off of it.
The huge benefit Microsoft has that they can offer cloud usage dirt cheap is they own the second largest cloud platform.

Next year it will be a multiplayer beta. It won't be a product you can buy until 2017. Unless the Xbox Wire article is lying.

But, yeah, you're right. MS has a bunch of idles severs lying around. That's one of the reasons we can tell this is a vanity project and not a serious solution for games in general. Anyone who isn't in desperate need of PR wins will look at the cost/benefit analysis and see how foolhardy the approach is.

 

[PeregrinSe7en]

GAF pre gamescom- hahaha, power of the cloud!!! Lolz!!

GAF post gamescom- oh but Sony can do this too if they feel like it!!!

I need the cloud to help me process all the back flipping

GAF pre gamescom - "who cares about teh graphix and specs if teh gamez r funz"

GAF post gamescom - "OMG cloud powa iz gun change da game!"

I dont need the cloud to help me process all this flip flopping

 

[Champagne]

GAF pre gamescom - "who cares about teh graphix and specs if teh gamez r funz"

GAF post gamescom - "OMG cloud powa iz gun change da game!"

I dont need the cloud to help me process all this flip flopping

i question how much of this forum you have actually read

 

[RespectThySole]

GAF pre gamescom - "who cares about teh graphix and specs if teh gamez r funz"

GAF post gamescom - "OMG cloud powa iz gun change da game!"

I dont need the cloud to help me process all this flip flopping

Eh I don't find this to be accurate at all.

 

[Synth]

GAF pre gamescom - "who cares about teh graphix and specs if teh gamez r funz"

GAF post gamescom - "OMG cloud powa iz gun change da game!"

I dont need the cloud to help me process all this flip flopping

Funnily enough... you accidentally highlighted that this has gameplay (aka funz) benefits, which means it actually is changing da game.

Well done.

 

[norm9]

The character model looked like shit in the trailer but I like the minecraft looking destruction. I'd but crackdown 3 but I'm a sucker for playing games in chronological order.

 

[Pathfinder]

Except, you know, common sense. I am sure Microsoft will happily allow Sony to use the technology and centers they've spent billions building up to help make the games on their biggest gaming competitor better! Why not!?!

Actually, common sense would dictate that companies would act like companies and not play console war games like children.

Same reason Apple is okay with buying iPhone components from Samsung, and Samsung is okay with selling iPhone components to them. Money is money.

 

[Head.spawn]

The character model looked like shit in the trailer but I like the minecraft looking destruction. I'd but crackdown 3 but I'm a sucker for playing games in chronological order.

huh?

 

[Bsigg12]

The character model looked like shit in the trailer but I like the minecraft looking destruction. I'd but crackdown 3 but I'm a sucker for playing games in chronological order.

Minecraft looking destruction? What?

And just play the first game if you care at all what happens.