I'll assume games with cloud computing integrated into them are going to need a online connection, since most of them are pseudo mmo's.
Again, it's just something I want to know more about, especially since it's one of the few things that is dissimilar to Sony. Sony only seems to be using the cloud for streaming other Playstation games, rather than add power to new titles.
Yeah, streaming from gaikai. Both are doing cloud storage, and microsoft hasnt really come clear on how much an improvement cloud processing can make. These are probably things that will be clarified as we approach their release.
I didn't think about that. As much of a pain the 24-hour sign in policy is, it meant that all gamers would be using cloud computing. I reckon that it just won't be used in the way it would have been with 100% connected gamers. I'm pissed that Microsoft just gave that all up.
People complaining that you cannot do something that you cannot with the current gen? Wow. Some people. And yeah, I hate that.
I find it funniest how now a ton of people are complaining that there isn't an always-online anti-used-game brick policy. Testament to the internet xD
Well, that's a huge relief.. Now I'm actually thinking about buying it (after a year or so, of course).. Pretty exciting!
Not really. Integral cloud computing would require a genuinely always online system, so the 24 hour thing wouldn't have achieved that. It could definitely have been an option, but games couldn't actually rely on it to provide the fundamental experience without requiring a permanent internet connection. I don't see why any cloud computing system that sat well with the 24 hour online check wouldn't work just as well without any online requirement. If a connection is present, offload processing where possible, if not then make do with local hardware. It was just that: a connection check, not a permanent connection requirement which would enable genuinely integrated cloud computing for games.
I'm fine with that. Like I said, I don't think the extra 100 is necessary but I'll pay it. @stick I don't think Microsoft reversing bad policies is showing "weakness". If anything it shows real balls to admit they had created a bad policy that would lead to alienating their potential consumer base for no very little justification. From what I'm hearing now, the Xbox One will no longer automatically install a disc which is what allows them to not force the connection or the used game policy. That also means disc based games would be required to be in the tray for the game to play like it is now on the 360. But, since games will still be sold digitally at the same time, all the positives that come with having the game installed would still be there for anyone who buys the game digitally. As far as Microsoft's cloud computing goes, nothing has changed with that. If a game utilizes cloud processing to render its levels or help with computations then that game will require an online connection (the 24 hour check in was not related to cloud powered games). If developers are smart they would make their games capable of playing without that extra support but this isn't Microsoft's concern, it's the developers who want to utilize the platform. All this reversal in policy does is allow more people to play an xbox one while allowing the ones who had the stable internet connection to better leverage the new features.
The only cloud computing they could utilize would be keeping persistent worlds or calculating things that don't directly affect the player. Offloading important calculations to the cloud would be game breaking to most players. Calculating the data locally would take less than a millisecond, while offloading it to the cloud would take twice your ping plus the less than a millisecond for the cloud server to calculate it. So instead of looking at less than a millisecond, you're probably looking at upwards of twenty milliseconds for each calculation. If all games on the Xbox One were running at 30FPS, everyone would be required to have a ping of less than 16.7ms to the XBL Cloud Computing Servers at all times for the game to be able to successfully offload it's calculations to the cloud. This is virtually impossible unless you have fiber optic cable going to every single household with an XBO and that's not going to happen for a long time. When Microsoft claimed they could double, triple, or even quadruple the power of the XBO with cloud computations, it wasn't a lie. However offloading important computations to the cloud simply will not happen any time soon. It's just not feasible. The only kind of cloud computing that players can actually benefit from right now is persistent worlds in MMOs and such, and that wouldn't be affected by any of the policy changes that Microsoft has made. It's also entirely different from what Microsoft has been passing cloud computing off as while telling you about it. That's just simple dedicated servers.
It wouldn't be twice your ping. Ping is a round-trip measurement, so it accounts for outward and returning journeys.
There's more to games than just keeping a persistent world. Things like real time shadows, reflections, weather calculations, physics simulations of the world around you like water and wind are processor intensive acts, and many games don't do them or half ass those calculations to fit in more content. If those calculations could be offloaded to a server farm so that your processor only had to handle the barebones data of your character and its interactions with the world games could be sooo much more immersive. Mind you all of this is the developer's decision has little to do with Microsoft. Microsoft is just providing the option for developers to take it (they're pushing it in PR right now because it sounds impressive to say and is more of a hypothetical positive at the moment). My hope is that developers make their game with the capability to do both things. If it can leverage the cloud that it would but if it can't all the same calculations are made locally at the cost of more loading screens. @sky I know that dorkly thing is meant to be a joke but man were there just some wrong things in that
I am sad that there isn't game sharing anymore, and my older posts are proof of that. I am genuinely disappointed... Everybody is saying the xbox would be bricked after ten years but that's not the case since it would be as simple as downloading an OS update from a site onto a USB stick that disables all of the DRM. It's really not that hard to do, and that's essentially what happens with the PS3 now whenever it is "bricked." There's nothing exactly new in the next-generation of consoles now, aside from cloud computing which will be constantly expanded upon, and thus, nearly identical across systems. If anything, I'm just going to play on PC for the first three to four years now instead of waiting one year to make up my mind. I hope Microsoft releases online-only games that relies quite heavily on cloud processing though, just so we can have some kind of idea of what the technology could have been like.
I feel like everybody who wanted science felt, just when religion started waving their cocks around. Real nice innovation you have there, guys.
They listen to the wrong people, apparently. The people bitching most about the DRM were the circle jerking Sony fanboys, and they were bragging. I've said it at least 20 times today, but I'd rather have the DRM with the digital sharing, and my internet is worse than 97% of Canada.
And PS4 choosers are still like : "Uh yeah... But let's not forget how more powerful the PS4 is" or "PS4 is better" on every Xbox One video. It's a bit annoying, but most of damage has been done already anyways.