Support NeoGAF

[Yautja_Warrior]

Checked out the ign gameplay video from Gamescom. The part where they showed the server load was interesting. The guy said they have had up to around 14 servers in use for one game. Now that's one game in a closed environment for demo / development purpose.

If this game is good and sells a few million or more, they will need a hell of a lot of server power. It will be interesting to see how the servers handle all the destruction for real, when it comes out.

Cool concept though, hope it actually works.

 

[Shpeshal Nick]

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.

Seriously? Dave Jones isn't a Microsoft employee. At least not a PR guy at any rate. Microsoft has been spruiking the cloud for a long time. Since long before the Xbox One was a concept. Gaming is but one of many uses for their infrastructure.

If you truly believe this thread has its source with Microsoft trying to change the narrative with the Xbox One's performance levels then I don't know what else to say.

 

[shoreu]

Tell me something FordGT, does Microsoft send you a check for all the work you put in?

Just because someone calls people out for not understanding something and answers questions, and then discusses things with people doesn't mean he gets payed. Some people in this thread REFUSE to accept that a game running on xbox can do this. Others think just won't take the proof right in front of them.

 

[FordGTGuy]

Its server side rendering on PlayStation 3 hardware output to an mp4 stream. So a video in part.

There are also interface inputs sent back and forth.

I mentioned interface inputs originally but it is bottom-line a video stream with as low-latency input as possible.

I'm not hating on PSNow but I'm not going to say it's not plainly video streaming.

Tell me something FordGT, does Microsoft send you a check for all the work you put in?

Man I wish, I could use a few checks in the mail with the Xbox's greatest gaming lineup in history this year coming up and next year is even better!

 

[cakely]

New article on GamesRadar. Probably controversial, but we like that on GAF ... right? They have a full preview up later today.

http://www.gamesradar.com/crackdown-3-effectively-turns-your-xbox-one-most-powerful-console-ever-made/

.



http://metro.co.uk/2015/08/05/crack...he-xbox-one-killer-app-5329378/#ixzz3i31sTbtw

I see what they're getting at but it reads like click bait hyperbole.

 

[Fafalada]

They are????

For most part, Physics (kinda like rendering), is an "embarrassingly" parallel problem. It scales-wide easily, so describing it as simple-problem is reasonably accurate (not much we do in games nowadays is really simple, but whatever). But that's for single-player/local scenarios.
Networked physics has never been simple, and most of the problem with it has never been a question of processing power (for at least the last decade anyway). Moving multiplayer-physics to cloud effectively removes a great deal of complexity. Offering potential processing advantages(assuming product-monetization can support the costs) is just an added bonus.

 

[EGM1966]

Yes they do since they bring in millions of $60 yearly server subscription fees.



In what world?

While I doubt Xbox Live Cloud games will ever impact Azure operation there is no way they have Carte Blanche, you're just being silly with that statement.

Azure is full of external paying customers and no way will MS impact their service for Live: you always prioritize your customers usage before your own and they have their SLAs and others T&Cs that you cannot risk touching.

Azure isn't there for Xbox division, in fact their usage is probably tiny, Azure is primarily there for MS commercial customers such as Pixar, Boeing, etc.

Xbox usage will be another customer and one of the smaller ones too almost certainly for the foreseeable future.

 

[Rocketz]

Also yes, this isn't the same thing. But it's also not just "hardware power times 20". It's a subset of computing (physics). I'm admittedly impressed by the tech. It's also tech I don't really want, though. I'd rather have inferior physics that rely on "tricks" but that can run locally - say, like Red Faction Guerilla, which was also quite impressive back then - than server-reliant ones. It's interesting that they're doing both approaches in the package, and only using server-reliant physics in multiplayer. I think that's the right way to go.

lol

 

[Can Crusher]

Sounds like a PR article meant for the easy to fool crowd.

 

[Trup1aya]

I know people still want to say that it's Microsoft technology that is making this happen (azure and the ability to spin up and down servers) but wouldn't it be more the Cloudgine technology that lets the Azure servers ability to spin up and down to be used for computation offsetting for games? Really then they could use the same Cloudgine tech on any other cloud based servers like AWS that also has the ability to spin up and down servers?

No, azure has always had the ability to spin up on demand... That's its claim to fame...

Cloudgine portion is its work on engines that are designed to use local and cloud processing together deliver a game...

 

[Game4life]

Seeing the IGN video the graphics do look incredibly simple. I guess it is a tradeoff with with all the destructibility. Also there is no reason why other manufacturers cant do this. Sony could use Rackspace or Amazon servers for a similar thing most likely. It is not unlikely for Sony to get into a long term contract with either of these companies if this is indeed a so called gamechanger.

It is most likely not cost effective or worth the effort for the time being which is why this is not being used on a large scale even by Microsoft. I wish people stop turning every new feature as only possible by X or Y and romanticize the company's capabilities.

 

[FordGTGuy]

While I doubt Xbox Live Cloud games will ever impact Azure operation there is no way they have Carte Blanche, you're just being silly with that statement.

Azure is full of external paying customers and no way will MS impact their service for Live: you always prioritize your customers usage before your own and they have their SLAs and others T&Cs that you cannot risk touching.

Azure isn't there for Xbox division, in fact their usage is probably tiny, Azure is primarily there for MS commercial customers such as Pixar, Boeing, etc.

Xbox usage will be another customer and one of the smaller ones too almost certainly for the foreseeable future.

carte blanche

[ ˈkärt ˈbläNSH, ˈblänCH ]

NOUN

complete freedom to act as one wishes or thinks best:

"we were given carte blanche"

I think Microsoft knows what is best for their Xbox Live use of Azure.

Seeing the IGN video the graphics do look incredibly simple. I guess it is a tradeoff with with all the destructibility.

It's a tech demo for a game not releasing for 16 months bro.

 

[Version 3.0]

Is this a joke?

Of course you can stream a game to a piece of hardware that wouldn't be capable of playing that game.

Crackdown 3 isn't streaming though, it's a full on your console experience. You just have to jump in a mode to experience something that the local hardware or even a enthusiast PC isn't capable of.

It isn't video streaming, but it's still streaming. But yes, it's impressive tech. I'm very surprised that they can crunch physics and send that data out in a way that local boxes can use in real time. It's quite an accomplishment.

I'm not very impressed visually, though. We've had destructible environments for years. A falling building looks like a falling building. Chalk it up to diminishing returns, I suppose.

 

[RoboPlato]

While I am still skeptical about the stability of using the cloud in this manner for huge numbers of players over a global network, I am really impressed by the tech involved in the demo. There are few things I love more than destruction/physics touches in games.

 

[Bloodrage]

So what happens if your internet provider or your router/modem are having problems? How is it not streaming when you need Internet to make it work?

It isn't video streaming, but it's still streaming. But yes, it's impressive tech. I'm very surprised that they can crunch physics and send that data out in a way that local boxes can use in real time. It's quite an accomplishment.

I'm not very impressed visually, though. We've had destructible environments for years. A falling building looks like a falling building. Chalk it up to diminishing returns, I suppose.

Graphically, it does looks really bad. The art style really hasn't aged well.

 

[FordGTGuy]

It isn't video streaming, but it's still streaming. But yes, it's impressive tech. I'm very surprised that they can crunch physics and send that data out in a way that local boxes can use in real time. It's quite an accomplishment.

I'm not very impressed visually, though. We've had destructible environments for years. A falling building looks like a falling building. Chalk it up to diminishing returns, I suppose.

Please show me a game that matches this.

So what happens if your internet provider or your router/modem are having problems?

Usually you would stop playing because it would be a bad experience, restart your modem/router and continue playing.

Man that was hard.

 

[Rocketz]

Lets see, so we won't have sub-1080p games on X1!

Challenge accepted.

It's been stated many times over for a long time that's not what this tech does.

 

[EGM1966]

carte blanche



I think Microsoft knows what is best for their Xbox Live use of Azure.



It's a tech demo for a game not releasing for 16 months bro.

Typo notwithstanding you're still plain wrong my friend and clearly have now idea how SaaS and Cloud based contracts work (and before you ask yes I do professionally).

I do agree MS knows what's best for Azure and that isn't allowing Live unlimited access to servers no matter what.

 

[FordGTGuy]

Typo notwithstanding you're still plain wrong my friend and clearly have now idea how SaaS and Cloud based contracts work (and before you ask yes I do professionally).

I do agree MS knows what's best for Azure and that isn't allowing Live unlimited access to servers no matter what.

You're the one making a claim, please go ahead and enlighten us with evidence on the limitations of use on Microsoft 1st party titles of Azure.

I can't believe you guys are trying to downplay this by claiming Microsoft would limit their own games use of their own servers, fucking hell.

 

[RiccochetJ]

While I doubt Xbox Live Cloud games will ever impact Azure operation there is no way they have Carte Blanche, you're just being silly with that statement.

Azure is full of external paying customers and no way will MS impact their service for Live: you always prioritize your customers usage before your own and they have their SLAs and others T&Cs that you cannot risk touching.

Azure isn't there for Xbox division, in fact their usage is probably tiny, Azure is primarily there for MS commercial customers such as Pixar, Boeing, etc.

Xbox usage will be another customer and one of the smaller ones too almost certainly for the foreseeable future.

Makes sense. I think even MS themselves said that there was a percentage allocated for the XBox division. There's no way they would allow it to run rampant at the expense of their other customers. To be fair though, they keep on growing their cloud infrastructure to the point where I wonder if that would ever become an issue.

 

[Trup1aya]

Seeing the IGN video the graphics do look incredibly simple. I guess it is a tradeoff with with all the destructibility. Also there is no reason why other manufacturers cant do this. Sony could use Rackspace or Amazon servers for a similar thing most likely. It is not unlikely for Sony to have a long term contract with either of these companies. It is most likely not cost effective or worth the effort for the time being which is why this is not being used on a large scale even by Microsoft themselves. I wish people stop turning every new feature as only possible by X or Y and romanticize the company's capabilities.

This was a physics demonstration not a graphics one. Considering the game is over a year away, and it's in pre-alpha, it's safe to assume the graphics are nowhere near complete...

As far as Sony renting servers to do something similar... That's entirely impractical... The key draw of azure is that you only use as many servers as are neccisary at a particular point in time... In the course of a game, you might go from using 1 sever to using 8 servers during a more intense scene, then back down to 1.

If your renting servers through rackspace, you don't have that flexibility... You have to rent as many servers as you think you need ever... If you low-ball you will have service interruption. If you over-estimate, your wasting a bunch of money... You don't have flexibility to adjust to changing demand... That's what makes the notion of MS' competitors doing anything similar unlikely... They don't have the infrastructure to do it in a cost sensitive manner...

 

[Shrennin]

Typo notwithstanding you're still plain wrong my friend and clearly have now idea how SaaS and Cloud based contracts work (and before you ask yes I do professionally).

I do agree MS knows what's best for Azure and that isn't allowing Live unlimited access to servers no matter what.

I'm fairly certain that the use of Crackdown for Azure is EXTREMELY minimal. It's barely a dent as far as Azure is concerned. This will likely be used across all first party titles if Crackdown proves successful. There may be a limit to what Live can use, but I doubt using Azure for this purpose will ever reach that limit.

 

[sam777]

So what happens if your internet provider or your router/modem are having problems? How is it not streaming when you need Internet to make it work?

This level of destruction only happens in multiplayer. If you got a internet problem then you can't play online, simple.

 

[Outtrigger888]

Impressive tech going on there, I thought all you guys said that Microsoft was bullshitting and that it wasn't possible. Ha

 

[shandy706]

you're talking about full games, this is a feature, 2 completely different things

A multiplayer feature...soooo...same thing.

You kind of have to be online to play co-OP and multiplayer in Crackdown.

Those are the only modes confirmed using cloud compute.

 

[Pathfinder]

Sounds like a PR article meant for the easy to fool crowd.

And what about the videos that demonstrate it?

 

[FordGTGuy]

I'm fairly certain that the use of Crackdown for Azure is EXTREMELY minimal. It's barely a dent as far as Azure is concerned. This will likely be used across all first party titles if Crackdown proves successful. There may be a limit to what Live can use, but I doubt using Azure for this purpose will ever reach that limit.

What?!

Crackdown 3 is a rampantly inefficient use of Azure servers that costs them $100 per console to run and that Microsoft doesn't even know what is best for their own servers!(using carte blanche when you don't even know the terms full meaning is pretty damn hilarious too btw.)

So far these are things I've learned in this thread.

 

[Bloodrage]

This level of destruction only happens in multiplayer. If you got a internet problem then you can't play online, simple.

But you do need to play online to see this destruction..

 

[Trup1aya]

So what happens if your internet provider or your router/modem are having problems? How is it not streaming when you need Internet to make it work?

Do you think everything on the Internet is streamed?

Streaming refers to playing audio and/video content over a network... In the case of crackdown no video data is being sent... Just the resulting positional and orientational data from physics computations...

 

[FordGTGuy]

But you do need to play online to see this destruction..

You are thirsty for water.

But what if your thirsty and there is no water?

These are the ultimate questions of life.

 

[Synth]

That doesn't make your streaming device any stronger.
Im not argueing it's not awesome, I just think the statement is wrong

The statement is indeed wrong... but since everyone laughed when it was actually being correctly credited as "power of the cloud", I guess this is the bed we've made.

Lets see, so we won't have sub-1080p games on X1!

Challenge accepted.

Now this... is just stupid. Why bother to post, if you're just going to come across as both completely uniformed, and salty as fuck, lol.

The only reasonable design for a cloud-based gaming infrastructure that scales its performance over time is to run games entirely in the cloud and stream their input/output to a generic thin client. This way, the game itself is not architecturally distributed and, hence, much easier to develop. Nevertheless, you would still benefit from the cloud's benefits like resource-efficiency and the outsourcing of upgrades and maintenance from customers to service providers.

Really quite late to this, but I actually would like to contest this point here. It's not only reasonable to implement tech like this for use on a thin client. You would be incurring significantly more running costs in that case, because the server would then also be performing the tasks otherwise being handled by each individual Xbox One (much like how PSNow essentially uses a whole PS3 per user). In a 40 player online game, a solution like Crackdown's only needs to perform the calculations for a building being destroyed once. In your suggestion, the game would need an additional virtual Xbox Ones then serving the images to each console (there would be some overlap I guess so not entirely 1:1.. but still far more than this current solution). So if Crackdown uses 20x the X1's processing, that would simply be added on top of whatever is required to run the rest of the game remotely for each user.

The thing is, The Xbox One isn't a dumb terminal. Microsoft are selling a console with plenty of local processing ability of its own, so it would make no sense to not make use of it, if it would alleviate much of the remote running costs. Considering operational costs have been pretty much the entire basis of your arguments, I don't understand why you would then suggest simply offloading exponentially more work to the server to produce functionality that the client you'll be sending it to could have handled itself... and would have given the user a superior experience (such as player responsiveness).

 

[Shia_Labeouf]

Man. Crackdown 3 is really bringing out the people that have a fundamental misunderstanding of how cloud computing works. These threads are fucking gold.

 

[Chris1]

What?!

Crackdown 3 is a rampantly inefficient use of Azure servers that costs them $100 per console to run!

So far these are things I've learned in this thread.

Even if it cost $1million per second to run the cloud for crackdown, why should any of us care how much it's costing them? If Microsoft thinks that's a good investment, which if they're creating a whole game around it they must, then that's their problem not mine. It's not my money they're wasting.

If they want to waste billions or however much it costs just to give us destruction like demoed in games, then bring it on. It's better for me as a gamer, if that's how MS wants to spend there money then I'm not going to complain or worry and I don't see why anyone else should either.

 

[EGM1966]

You're the one making a claim, please go ahead and enlighten us with evidence on the limitations of use on Microsoft 1st party titles of Azure.

I can't believe you guys are trying to downplay this by claiming Microsoft would limit their own games use of their own servers, fucking hell.

All Azure usage is based on legal contracts. They have thousands of commercial paying customers who contractually have to be given the server access they're paying for. MS own usage is no different. They allocate it and they will make sure their usage never steps on their customers.

You understand if MS did this they'd instantly be open to legal action from their customers for breaking SLAs and contracts?

It's irrelevant because Live usage will be low for sure but my point stands that you are simply being foolish to think MS can simply decide to give Live services for games whatever they want.

No one is dampening anything but you are being way too hyperbole and over the top with your claims (which you haven't s shred of backup for nor will you/).

The tech is cool and is a nice showcase for Azure but it will have to fall within their commercial contacts framework and usage.

I doubt Crackdown/Live usage of Azure is even in top 100 utilization customers which is all the more reason they'll protect their largest customers needs first (if if became a conflict).

In summary of course MS will limit their own usage, to what they need and without harming paying customers usage. That's how you run a Cloud sever farm and Cloud based services.

Stick to game enthusiasm and don't make unwarranted claims on how business's you don't understand work.

 

[kamineko]

I've been wondering what thread would be a good fit for my plane vs. sportscar shootout GIF

 

[Etnos]

I'm biased as I work doing web applications, I think web-cloud technology is rad, we've barely uncapped the potential.

As many people have mention this is not a MS-exclusive technology, sure they have probably one of the best server network out there alongside google or amazon. So I'm not sure why people would fanboy out about it, as I said even Sony studios could take advantage of this in the future.

Does make me sad panda to see all the negativity, for a tech-based hobby a lot of gamers struck me as reactionary-short sighted... but hey, what you gonna do about it ?

 

[Mael]

While impressive on a basic level it has no bearing on what experience most of the xbox will provide as I doubt it's going to be cost effective for 3er parties if it's xbox only and if it isn't it's really more of that cloud company's victory than a MSFT one.
I guess console warriors are happy to have something worthwhile to fight about once in a while.

Do makes sad panda to see all the negativity, for a tech-based hobby a lot of gamers struck me as reactionary-short sighted... but hey, what you gonna do about it ?

You're new here? Gamers are some of the most reactionary short sighted people you could find in some cases.

 

[statham]

Sounds like a PR article meant for the easy to fool crowd.

you should watch IGN's 17 minute video of it. Its Quite amazing.

 

[shoreu]

Does or can this have Graphics applications?

 

[RyanPierre]

Developer Reagent Games haven’t spent years inventing ways to make slightly more realistic looking moustaches (yes, that was a dig at The Order: 1886), they’ve used it to create something that would’ve been completely impossible in the previous generation.

So why couldn't (can't) Microsoft do this on the 360 if it's all based on cloud calculations? Haven't they already done cloud stuff on the 360 with Titanfall? I think the tech sounds awesome, but the previous generation is actually still going, and "completely impossible" seems like overselling it to me, as this doesn't sound like tech that couldn't also be used with 360 games.

 

[Shia_Labeouf]

While impressive on a basic level it has no bearing on what experience most of the xbox will provide as I doubt it's going to be cost effective for 3er parties if it's xbox only and if it isn't it's really more of that cloud company's victory than a MSFT one.
I guess console warriors are happy to have something worthwhile to fight about once in a while.

"According to this pie chart I just made up."

 

[FordGTGuy]

All Azure usage is based on legal contracts. They have thousands of commercial paying customers who contractually have to be given the server access they're paying for. MS own usage is no different. They allocate it and they will make sure their usage never steps on their customers.

You understand if MS did this they'd instantly be open to legal action from their customers for breaking SLAs and contracts?

It's irrelevant because Live usage will be low for sure but my point stands that you are simply being foolish to think MS can simply decide to give Live services for games whatever they want.

No one is dampening anything but you are being way too hyperbole and over the top with your claims (which you haven't s shred of backup for nor will you/).

The tech is cool and is a nice showcase for Azure but it will have to fall within their commercial contacts framework and usage.

I doubt Crackdown/Live usage of Azure is even in top 100 utilization customers which is all the more reason they'll protect their largest customers needs first (if if became a conflict).

In summary of course MS will limit their own usage, to what they need and without harming paying customers usage. That's how you run a Cloud sever farm and Cloud based services.

Stick to game enthusiasm and don't make unwarranted claims on how business's you don't understand work.

I think you seem to be confusing complete freedom and what is best, they are similar but completely different at the same time.

You don't buy a Azure server, you buy server time that can be service by any server available. Xbox Live will never reach the point of having any kind of real impact on Azures capacity in any way shape or form so they essentially do have freedom to use them how the see best.

Even if it cost $1million per second to run the cloud for crackdown, why should any of us care how much it's costing them? If Microsoft thinks that's a good investment, which if they're creating a whole game around it they must, then that's their problem not mine. It's not my money they're wasting.

If they want to waste billions or however much it costs just to give us destruction like demoed in games, then bring it on. It's better for me as a gamer, if that's how MS wants to spend there money then I'm not going to complain or worry and I don't see why anyone else should either.

That comment was reiterating comments from this thread and not my own personal beliefs on the topic.

 

[shoreu]

For most part, Physics (kinda like rendering), is an "embarrassingly" parallel problem. It scales-wide easily, so describing it as simple-problem is reasonably accurate (not much we do in games nowadays is really simple, but whatever). But that's for single-player/local scenarios.
Networked physics has never been simple, and most of the problem with it has never been a question of processing power (for at least the last decade anyway). Moving multiplayer-physics to cloud effectively removes a great deal of complexity. Offering potential processing advantages(assuming product-monetization can support the costs) is just an added bonus.

I typed that wrong lol. It was more of a wtf are you talking about guy. I know that physics are extremely difficult task to handle and at this scale it has to be some serious work.

 

[Raide]

IGN video is really nice.

It made me think. Imagine using this for something like Forza where the track is dealt with by a server and then they unload compute power for things like car damage, physics, weather etc? You could get some amazingly detailed care tweaking and damage if they physically built cars.

 

[Lemondish]

Seriously? Dave Jones isn't a Microsoft employee. At least not a PR guy at any rate. Microsoft has been spruiking the cloud for a long time. Since long before the Xbox One was a concept. Gaming is but one of many uses for their infrastructure.

If you truly believe this thread has its source with Microsoft trying to change the narrative with the Xbox One's performance levels then I don't know what else to say.

Microsoft has always tried to change the narrative about relative power with the cloud talk. Where the hell have you been?

 

[oldergamer]

It isn't video streaming, but it's still streaming. But yes, it's impressive tech. I'm very surprised that they can crunch physics and send that data out in a way that local boxes can use in real time. It's quite an accomplishment.

I'm not very impressed visually, though. We've had destructible environments for years. A falling building looks like a falling building. Chalk it up to diminishing returns, I suppose.

I've noticed responses like this in every Xbox thread lately. Downplaying, spinning, u name it. Again for the 100000th time, no we have not had dedtructable environments like this. Not once, nor ever.

 

[Chris1]

That comment was reiterating comments from this thread and not my own personal beliefs on the topic.

Yeah I know I'm just continuing on from your post. I agree with most of what you're saying, I don't think it will cost them much either nor make a huge dent in azure.

 

[Lemondish]

lol

What is so funny about that? Have we learned nothing about always online games? If high load with those games can have such a negative impact on us (which are seriously only there for authentication purposes) isn't it logical to be suspicious of this?

 

[oldergamer]

IGN video is really nice.

It made me think. Imagine using this for something like Forza where the track is dealt with by a server and then they unload compute power for things like car damage, physics, weather etc? You could get some amazingly detailed care tweaking and damage if they physically built cars.

Oh wow that would be possible and impressive!

 

[Trup1aya]

Microsoft has always tried to change the narrative about relative power with the cloud talk. Where the hell have you been?

How were they trying to change the narrative? They've been working with cloudgine since before the either console was announced... This was always in their plans...

Let's not pretend they came up with this entire concept because Sony launched a more powerful system...