qa_engineer
Member
Sure it is. But their inital messaging was not sincere, actually most of the cloud benefits they touted were complete and utter bullshot. Infinite power of the cloud, the power of x amount of xboxes etc.
-
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.
Eurogamer: Microsoft's confusing Xbox One cloud message shifts to dedicated servers
- Thread starter ElTorro
- Start date
Sure it is. But their inital messaging was not sincere, actually most of the cloud benefits they touted were complete and utter bullshot. Infinite power of the cloud, the power of x amount of xboxes etc.
1.21Gigawatts
Banned
Maybe Microsoft realised that talking doesn't do anything. They need to show stuff.
So when they're going to talk about the power of the cloud again, they need to show something that cleary uses the "power of the cloud".
CGI Crackdown trailer wouldn't be that.
So when they're going to talk about the power of the cloud again, they need to show something that cleary uses the "power of the cloud".
CGI Crackdown trailer wouldn't be that.
Didn't pick up on it immediately, but got a few alarm bells after a while.
I guess a focus group told them that gamers are suspicious of 'the cloud' but like 'dedicated servers'.
I wish what they were selling was true, cuz that would've really made this gen feel modern. Back when gen to gen was only a double in bits (8-16 & 16-32) game development seemed to make greater strides. Diminishing returns is bs to me; I think the cloud could have brought about that leap in game development that we deserve.
DarkoMaledictus
Tier Whore
What? The power of the almighty all knowing cloud was not true... shocked 
.
.I think everyone is expecting the game to be online-only, even in single player. They'll cite "seamless co-op options" or something as the front-facing reason why it needs to be online if they have to.
I understood what they were saying from the get go.
I guess they have to shift the terminology for those that are confused by it.
Edit** You know what...."Dedicated Servers" is IN FACT the wrong terminology. I hate that the ignorance of people forces a company to dumb down their talk.
The system they are using, and the system they want to push and implement in their games is in fact CLOUD based.
I guess they have to shift the terminology for those that are confused by it.
Edit** You know what...."Dedicated Servers" is IN FACT the wrong terminology. I hate that the ignorance of people forces a company to dumb down their talk.
The system they are using, and the system they want to push and implement in their games is in fact CLOUD based.
Yes but I think the article specifically highlights their E3 press conference. They talked about the Crackdown cloud stuff outside of that presentation.
sixpackrules
Member
I think is a good move on their part to have changed the wording of the message, overpromising is never a good idea, i know is essential to PR stuns and publicity to try to make your product shinier and brightier but in this case the limitations of the tech and of the infraestructure are well known. And i understand their desire to tie everyone not to the product but to the service, but it´s a future that i really don´t like.
I like the diversity of gaming right now, but an all time connected one for the big releases , not so sure
I like the diversity of gaming right now, but an all time connected one for the big releases , not so sure
Microsoft has Azure, which is basically dedicated servers with fancier technology that provide additional benefits.
They're using it for Xbox Live.
That's basically it. There's nothing different now than before.
It's just that the chuckleheads originally in charge of Xbox One marketing and messaging seem to have come from a background of selling tech to clueless CEOs and glommed onto pushing the buzzword phrase "DA POWER OF DA CLOUD" to describe the service under the apparent impression that it would impress hardcore early adopter gamers. So dumb.
They're using it for Xbox Live.
That's basically it. There's nothing different now than before.
It's just that the chuckleheads originally in charge of Xbox One marketing and messaging seem to have come from a background of selling tech to clueless CEOs and glommed onto pushing the buzzword phrase "DA POWER OF DA CLOUD" to describe the service under the apparent impression that it would impress hardcore early adopter gamers. So dumb.
What they were saying "from the get go" was that each XBO would enjoy 3x more power when cloud connected and that games would end up with infinite power due to the cloud.
Their pie-in-the-sky hyperbole of the actual tangible benefits of using the cloud for gaming in order to create a facade of technical superiority over their competitor did so much damage to the cloud talk that a complete rebranding of the idea was necessary.
It just strangely feels like a wasteful idea to provide cloud calculations to every person thats playing the game to be able to shoot a building and watch parts fall off until it completely crumbles. The mass market probably wouldn't be impressed by this unless told that its special.
BumblebeeCody
Member
Microsoft will let you download more CPU!?
It really shouldn't be though. It should just require that they stop using the term for things that it's not suitable for. Everyone here likes to claim that they're so well informed, and could see through everything MS was saying in the first place.. yet they for some reason require that the term 'Cloud' be swapped out with a different, less accurate term, because somehow that's the only way they can relate it to what they're already familiar with. If everyone was so annoyed at the term being misused in the first place, they shouldn't be happy with a new term being misused either.
Not the point of my post. See Synth's post too. The stupid early comments still shouldn't have to be replaced with an inaccurate term for the ignorant.
The fact that people hold onto Cloud as a BS term vs their claims being stupid up front is the problem here. The Cloud is real, the cloud may enhance games over time, and that's a fact. How much and whether they deliver is yet to be seen.
Impeccable
Member
I thought Sunset Overdrive was only possible because of the cloud, seriously. E3 came and went without them explaining that.
FranXico
Member
Not the exact same thing. Cloud computing is more akin to what we used to call distributed computing.
Both require client-server data negotiation though.
In essence, marketing has abused the "cloud" term.
aries_71
Junior Member
This cloud affair is really tiresome, no matter what angle you take at it. On one hand, you got those that grasp at any opportunity to bash the XBO and Microsoft, repeating the same overused jokes about cloud power. On the other, you got Microsoft, that really cornered itself with their failed strategic bet (kinect, less powerful hardware), that keep hinting at server side computing. The way I see it, the only thing that Microsoft can do is stop talking, and start walking. Put in the market a game that uses the cloud power, or stop selling dreams.
gamechanger87
Member
I believe SO is supposed to have an open world where Insomniac can continually update things on the dedicated servers it is running on or something like that.
Maximilian Kolbe
Member
You wish.
I wish.
I'm saying that the fully featured unplugged/offline single player experience that isn't in some shape augmented by online resources is going away. Not saying that it'll be soon or that it's going to be a clear cut point but it'll happen.
If Crackdown uses dedicated server resources to compute physics then it's probably going to be one of those "connected" titles like any other multiplayer only title in the past.
methane47
Member
Functionality wise the service probably operates closer to a dedicated server than anything else.
Basically All the benefits of the Cloud are Business Oriented and Has no impact whatsoever on what the player perceives.
Saying "Powered by the Cloud" is basically the same as saying "We updated Our HR System!!!"
This is exactly why the new term isn't helping, lol.
That's not to say that The Cloud is at all unique to any console though. Battlefield 4 on Xbox One doesn't use the Cloud. Titanfall on Xbox 360 does. Sony would have multiple choices of providers if they wanted to go a similar route. The only difference is that they don't already have an implementation of their own already laying about not being fully used.
Dictator93
Member
Spinning up shards on the fly. Dynamially managing servers and server load.
That is cloud computing, it is simple and stupidly simple. Dedicated Servers 2.0
LiquidNarwhal
Banned
It seems like there are an awful lot of people talking down to others in this thread even though they themselves are probably the clueless one's.
Dr. Kitty Muffins
Member
In my opinion, they shouldn't talk about the cloud unless they are willing to showcase what it can do in a way that is jaw dropping. Stick that footage out in front of everyones eyes.
The Crackdown tech demo was nice but why keep it off to the side unless there is some motive for doing so? That just suggests that it isn't ready for prime time and wont neccessarily be implemented.
The Crackdown tech demo was nice but why keep it off to the side unless there is some motive for doing so? That just suggests that it isn't ready for prime time and wont neccessarily be implemented.
InfiniteUnrest
Member
It was apparently very sunny at E3 that day.
It makes sense that Crackdown itself isn't ready to be shown, much in the way that the new Gears isn't. That doesn't really say anything about the state of the Cloud implementation it uses though. I don't think it's strange for them to not want to show the tech in more depth if they can't show it in the context of the game itself. They've already shown an early prototype, and expecting anything more at the moment would be similar to expecting Forza Horizon 2 or Driveclub to have extensively demoed their weather systems before they were at a point where it could be shown in game. It doesn't make much sense, and would only lessen the effect once the game is ready to be shown off properly.
I agree that they should definitely not continue to harp on about it before then (which actually seems to be the case right now)... but I don't think it's very likely that the implementation is going to be cut out, seeing as they've made a deal with a company for who cloud implementation for games is their sole focus.
Nailed it.
Then you have the always online argument all over again. If you are using a thin client model, if your network connection goes down, you can't do anything with the system.
dazzlerazzle
Banned
Plus the quality and speed of internet in US markets compared to other countries looks like middle-earth
The main issue I see with running the entire game in the cloud, is that you place the lag onto the entire game, rather than being able to select only lag-tolerant aspects to be processed that way. Having a 150ms delay on a building crumbling down would probably go unnoticed by most gamers. Having that same 150ms lag on your character's parry is a whole different matter. Whilst their are plenty of game aspects that are unsuitable for cloud enhancements, there are entire genres that are poorly suited to streamed gaming. You're not going to catch me playing a streamed version of Daytona USA or Ikaruga, I'll tell you that.
Muppet of a Man
Member
And what about the quality of the connection? Does that impact the performance of the offloaded calculations being interpreted by the local machine? How do they mitigate this risk? I'm sure only a small portion of the gamers who will have these games have connections that are fast enough to deal with this. It would be nice if that weren't the case, but 'Murica and its (lacking) broadband infrastructure after all.
On top of that, the network lag is such that this will never be able to be physics-based effects that have an immediate interactive impact on gameplay; it will likely be able to handle pretty effects with a lead time (like that building falling apart slowly in the demo video). This is nice but akin to what Nvidia's PhysX currently does: physics-based visual effects that are not really interactive for the most part.
Pretty effects that don't really affect gameplay accounts for a surprising amount of advancements we see in games these days though. Its just a slightly different type of pretty effect.
I don't think the connection on the player's side is likely to be too much of a problem. If you're able to play online (or even patch your friggin games this gen... jesus...), then you'll probably be able to handle what needs to be transferred to you. Unless you're dealing with highly interactive elements, you'd mostly just be receiving some trajectories which will leave you good to go for the next few seconds or so.
If diminishing returns is BS, and if the cloud would help refute that but isn't present...
Then isn't diminishing returns true?
methane47
Member
Maybe you should explain how the Cloud Differs from Physical Dedicated servers then?
Explain away, doc.
soul creator
Member
Yet "Retina" has been accepted and continues to live on.
Apple wins again! Take that "it's just a high resolution screen, gosh!" tech nerds!
Apple wins again! Take that "it's just a high resolution screen, gosh!" tech nerds!
lol
justsomeguy
Member
Mentioned in conference threads at the time.
Gaf > Internet > Gaf
Gaf > Internet > Gaf
justsomeguy
Member
It's already been explained (by me and others) in other cloud threads.
So in your opinion, how do they answer these type of questions? Microsoft isn't really going out of there way to talk about this, they are simply answering questions. I can only imagine the outrage here if their answer was, "No comment."