dslreports logo
site
spacer

spacer
 
   
spc
story category
Is Cloud Gaming the Unavoidable Future?
Caps, Quality, Bandwidth and Latency
by ryan711 07:51AM Friday Aug 24 2012
With services like Onlive, the recent announcement of Sony buying cloud gaming firm GaiKai and Microsoft’s apparent commitment to a could gaming future from an internal leaked slideshow, could we be headed for a cloud gaming future? A better question, however, is will that future satisfy us as gamers. The answer in my opinion would be not yet, but we are close. There are several hurdles that must be overcome before cloud gaming can begin to offer a viable alternative for local gaming, but when we pass those hurdles, cloud gaming offers more good than bad.

Let’s take a look at some of the advantages that cloud gaming could bring.

Advantages to Cloud Gaming

One of the biggest advantages in my eyes is the ability for developers to create a game with cutting edge hardware, and not be constrained by static consoles. As a PC gamer primarily, it has been very frustrating to see games developed for a piece of technology that is almost seven years old. The old saying graphics>gameplay still rings true, but I say good graphics plus good gameplay is greater than mediocre graphics and good gameplay. With cloud gaming, developers are free to create a game based on some of the latest technology because the hardware in the cloud is constantly being upgraded to the latest and greatest.

Click for full size
Another advantage that comes out of necessity due to latency concerns is higher frame rates for games. The vast majority of console games run at 30fps. In order to reduce the perceived latency of the game (basically the time between when you press a button and when that corresponding action happens on screen), games will need to run at higher frame rates, probably 60fps or greater.

In the same realm as frame rates, games will also be able to run at higher resolutions, provided you have a fast enough connection. Most console games run at 720p, but the flexibility of the hardware in the cloud will allow you to run games at 1080p if you so choose. Running at a television’s native resolution will also reduce local latency due to it not having to scale the image, which will also help offset some of the network latency.

Disadvantages and hurdles of cloud gaming

The most glaring issue in the face of cloud gaming is two-fold: bandwidth and latency. The former will improve significantly with time, the latter will improve slightly with time, but tricks to help reduce perceived latency will also have to be employed.

The first thing I want to get out there is the misconception about the speed of light and current network latency. I’ve seen numerous people say something along the lines of "well, cloud gaming will never be viable unless you can increase the speed of light." That makes me want to tear my hair out because we cannot transmit data at anywhere near the speed of light currently.

For instance, if you assume a 3,000 mile coast-to-coast length of the United States and you put a single cloud datacenter in the exact middle, the absolute worst latency at the 1,500 mile mark would be around 8ms with a 16ms round trip, assuming perfect speed of light. Now, it would be stupid to assume that core routers would not be able to switch faster in the future, but I doubt that we will get perfect speed of light transmission anytime soon, if ever. It would also be stupid to assume that there would be only one cloud datacenter every 1,500 miles.

Click for full size
Even though the chart to the right is pretty idealistic, it is pretty close to the current status, and it would be safe to assume that some of those things can be reduced in the future (It's an NVidia slide about GaiKai).

The other half of that equation is bandwidth. The good news is that really shouldn’t be a problem for most of the United States by 2015+ (not applicable to those living in the extreme sticks). Many ISPs are currently offering 50mbps, 100mbps, and ever faster, and it will only continue to climb.

Some may argue that picture quality will be sacrificed when streaming games versus playing locally. I would agree, but with the condition that it will be hardly noticeable. Just like it’s very difficult to tell the different between uncompressed 1080p and Blu-ray material.

If we assume conservatively that a 1080p stream for a game will run 30mbps, even with current codecs, it would be pretty amazing quality wise, but with the current proposed HEVC codec, you can essentially cram double the amount of data in the same space with no noticeable drop in quality, at the expense of processing power of course. This essentially means that our example of 30mbps could be doubled to 60mbps if we’re talking about H.264. In other words, 60mbps of H.264 encoded video equals 30mbps of HEVC encoded video. I think that would satisfy all but the 1%.

All this talk of high bandwidth has the words "cap" ringing in the background. I agree that with current implementations of caps, cloud gaming will never take off. Using our example of 30mbps for steaming, a single 10-hour game would use 135GB of data. That’s getting pretty close to the caps already, for those that have them. By the time cloud gaming is ready for prime time, the cap situation will either have to have gone away or be regulated and metered like gas or electricity.

While cloud gaming isn’t too viable now, it will be in the future, and it has too many advantages not to pursue.

This article is part of an effort to solicit paid content from the Broadband Reports community. If you'd like to participate, please contact us.

view:
topics flat nest 

cableties
Premium
join:2005-01-27

Another cha-ching...

Xbox Live, PSN are already "cloud" gaming. There is storage on these services, downloadable games and add-on content. Stores to rent or buy digital movies.
The game console is now becoming the PPV/STB/DVR/console.
There is advertising, socializing, ... and you can play games locally without having a connection. (you will be amazed at the number of non-gold gamers that use coupons or stay silver...and who wants to go online and hear smack from tweens or get butt-handed in some FPS?)

IMHO, Onlive was late to the game but on the same path like Netflix: you don't own the content nor the pipes it needs to travel on. Without control of one or both, you can't deliver a product to the market with consistency.

As it stands now, I can speak for others I game with (in our bracket) that with the state of the economy, companies that depend on pushing DLC, zero day downloads, or milking for content on expensive games ($60 for console games yet irony, $10-20 less for PC version), have left a bad taste in our mouths. Bringing an Online Onlive ticket to the game, for cheap, might work but not when you can't deliver. (I've all the consoles and prefer PS3 over Xbox for reliability, but Xbox for my friends).
Gaming online should be universal. Until then, it ain't.

Gaming today is nothing like days of Atari or Nintendo. I will find amusement when in another 20 years, gamers will shake their heads when they regret the game collections they traded in for $5 would have been worth $100's...
--
Splat

88615298
Premium
join:2004-07-28
West Tenness

Re: Another cha-ching...

said by cableties:

Xbox Live, PSN are already "cloud" gaming. There is storage on these services, downloadable games and add-on content

That's not cloud gaming. Any games or add-on you buy have to be stored on the consoles or some storage device attached to the console. The only cloud services they have is for game saves and profile saves. XBOX only gives you 512 MB PSN gives you even less. Which is fne for games/profile saves. Not good for actual cloud gaming.

Cthen

join:2004-08-01
Detroit, MI
Reviews:
·Verizon Wireless..
Cha-ching is so correct here!

The way I'm reading all of that is these services charge a monthly fee to access the service. That is interesting because as it stands now, I don't have to pay a monthly fee to play my games (I gave up subscription mmo's long ago). Even using Steam I can play my single player games if my internet goes out. With no monthly fees!

So basically these "Cloud Gaming" services are telling us is that "We have all your stuff for hostage. Keep paying the fee or you get nothing. Even if your connection goes out or we go out, you get nothing! Suckers!" Do I have that right?
--
"I like to refer to myself as an Adult Film Efficienato." - Stuart Bondek
azzonie

join:2012-08-25
Phoenix, AZ
Do not confuse Cloud Storage with Cloud gaming. With Cloud storage you store a file on a internet accessible server. Here the game is processes on an internet computer and streamed to the end user.

Also Onlive is basically dead. They just restructured. If anyone thinks this is going anywhere .... it is not.
»money.cnn.com/2012/08/18/technol···pt=hp_t3

footballdude
Premium
join:2002-08-13
Imperial, MO

1 recommendation

Latest fad

'Cloud' is the latest fad. It will be replaced by something else in a few months, like 3D TV.
--
Concentrated power has always been the enemy of liberty - Ronald Reagan

MxxCon

join:1999-11-19
Brooklyn, NY

Re: Latest fad

Ok, Nostradamus. See you again "in a few months".

danclan

join:2005-11-01
Midlothian, VA

Did we not learn from OneLive

That this will not pan out....

ArrayList
netbus developer
Premium
join:2005-03-19
Brighton, MA

Re: Did we not learn from OneLive

I don't know what you mean, OnLive is still around.
Rekrul

join:2007-04-21
Milford, CT

I dread the future of gaming...

Running at a television’s native resolution will also reduce local latency due to it not having to scale the image, which will also help offset some of the network latency.

Theoretically true, but the service would have to let you enter arbitrary screen sizes, both in the X & Y dimensions for that to work. Every TV and monitor has a different native resolution. If you simply select the width of your monitor and the service automatically selects the height, it's never going to match everyone's screen size. So the image will almost certainly still be scaled. Every time I go into a store and look closely at the TVs, I see scaling artifacts because the video signal NEVER matches the TV's resolution.

The most glaring issue in the face of cloud gaming is two-fold: bandwidth and latency.

To me, the most glaring issue with cloud gaming is its temporary nature. Exactly how long are companies going to keep each game available? Will the games released today still be available to play a decade from now? Or will the company decide that they're not worth keeping on the system when the number of people playing them goes from the millions down to a few thousand?

Want a concrete example? The game Thief: The Dark Project was released 14 years ago in 1998, and while it's not exactly a blockbuster, there are still dedicated fans who replay it, create mods for it, make patches to keep it running on new hardware. Eidos doesn't support the game any more. Sorry, I meant Square Enix. Just try to find a mention of it on their site. If Thief had been a cloud game, do you think it would still be available to play?

Also, what about mods? You can't exactly create new content for a game on a remote system. Look at how many maps have been created for games like Doom and Quake. How many user-created maps are there for Onlive games?

Provided I have the appropriate hardware, I can still run any of the games that I've bought. Through emulation, I can run thousands of games from older systems, both console and computer. I can load and play games from the late 1970s if I want to. By contrast, cloud games will appear, be played for a few years and then disappear. Once gone, they will exist only as screenshots and maybe gameplay videos on YouTube.

They'll be like those old lost TV shows and movies that now only exist as still photos and short clips taken from other sources.

To me, that's sad...

MxxCon

join:1999-11-19
Brooklyn, NY

Re: I dread the future of gaming...

said by Rekrul:

Running at a television’s native resolution will also reduce local latency due to it not having to scale the image, which will also help offset some of the network latency.

Theoretically true, but the service would have to let you enter arbitrary screen sizes, both in the X & Y dimensions for that to work. Every TV and monitor has a different native resolution. If you simply select the width of your monitor and the service automatically selects the height, it's never going to match everyone's screen size. So the image will almost certainly still be scaled. Every time I go into a store and look closely at the TVs, I see scaling artifacts because the video signal NEVER matches the TV's resolution.

You must be talking about either extremely old or extremely cheap TVs.
Every TV worth buying on the market now has 1920x1080 native resolution.
Older "HD" TVs and current super-budget models have some non-standard resolutions like 980 or 830. Everything else is now 1080p.

said by Rekrul:

The most glaring issue in the face of cloud gaming is two-fold: bandwidth and latency.

To me, the most glaring issue with cloud gaming is its temporary nature. Exactly how long are companies going to keep each game available? Will the games released today still be available to play a decade from now? Or will the company decide that they're not worth keeping on the system when the number of people playing them goes from the millions down to a few thousand?

Want a concrete example? The game Thief: The Dark Project was released 14 years ago in 1998, and while it's not exactly a blockbuster, there are still dedicated fans who replay it, create mods for it, make patches to keep it running on new hardware. Eidos doesn't support the game any more. Sorry, I meant Square Enix. Just try to find a mention of it on their site. If Thief had been a cloud game, do you think it would still be available to play?

Also, what about mods? You can't exactly create new content for a game on a remote system. Look at how many maps have been created for games like Doom and Quake. How many user-created maps are there for Onlive games?

Provided I have the appropriate hardware, I can still run any of the games that I've bought. Through emulation, I can run thousands of games from older systems, both console and computer. I can load and play games from the late 1970s if I want to. By contrast, cloud games will appear, be played for a few years and then disappear. Once gone, they will exist only as screenshots and maybe gameplay videos on YouTube.

They'll be like those old lost TV shows and movies that now only exist as still photos and short clips taken from other sources.

To me, that's sad...

I see a very easy solution to your 1st problem.
There will be services that cycle current ~3- year old games, and there will be services or service levels that offer huge back catalog of games. Games are not stored on each server/computer, they use a centralized SAN/NAS/Whatever, so disk space usage is not a problem. It will take them no effort to provide an infinitely large catalog of games.

To install mods you don't need a direct game access. Games could/will be coded with such services in mind and will provide facility to install and access mods directly from within the game. Same with creating mods. Who says you can't run Unreal or Cry Editor from those cloud services?
--
[Sig removed by Administrator: signature can not exceed 20GB]
Rekrul

join:2007-04-21
Milford, CT

Re: I dread the future of gaming...

said by MxxCon:

You must be talking about either extremely old or extremely cheap TVs.
Every TV worth buying on the market now has 1920x1080 native resolution.

Even the ones marked as 720p, or are those the ones you don't consider worth buying? Not to mention that some people will be playing them on a computer monitor and those also have a range of sizes. A quick look at Amazon shows sizes of 1600x900, 1360x768, 1280x1024, 1440x900 and others.

Just because you consider them outdated or worthless doesn't mean that everyone is going to go out and dump them for something new.

said by MxxCon:

I see a very easy solution to your 1st problem.
There will be services that cycle current ~3- year old games, and there will be services or service levels that offer huge back catalog of games. Games are not stored on each server/computer, they use a centralized SAN/NAS/Whatever, so disk space usage is not a problem. It will take them no effort to provide an infinitely large catalog of games.

You're trying to apply logic to the business world and that rarely works out.

Once a game reaches a certain age, the company declares it obsolete and washes their hands of it.

Plus, the games have to run on some kind of a computer. What happens when the hardware and OS is upgraded and the old games no longer work? Is the company going to hire someone to patch their entire back catalog to make sure it works on the new system? Or are they just going to dump everything that doesn't work?

Because they sure don't do that now. Even when the company knows about a bug and what causes it, if the game is more than a couple years old and not a huge seller, they're not going to bother fixing it.

said by MxxCon:

To install mods you don't need a direct game access. Games could/will be coded with such services in mind and will provide facility to install and access mods directly from within the game. Same with creating mods. Who says you can't run Unreal or Cry Editor from those cloud services?

So the mods can disappear along with the game when the company takes it offline...

Not to mention since everything is in the cloud, on the company's servers, they will have the final say about what mods get released and which ones don't.

What about 'total conversions' which require patching the original game files to work? How are you going to patch game files on a remote server? Will you be able to tell the system to create a 100% working duplicate of the game installation for you to tinker with?

Cloud gaming is going to be a closed, locked-down system.

MxxCon

join:1999-11-19
Brooklyn, NY

Re: I dread the future of gaming...

said by Rekrul:

said by MxxCon:

You must be talking about either extremely old or extremely cheap TVs.
Every TV worth buying on the market now has 1920x1080 native resolution.

Even the ones marked as 720p, or are those the ones you don't consider worth buying? Not to mention that some people will be playing them on a computer monitor and those also have a range of sizes. A quick look at Amazon shows sizes of 1600x900, 1360x768, 1280x1024, 1440x900 and others.

Just because you consider them outdated or worthless doesn't mean that everyone is going to go out and dump them for something new.

Budget monitors use TN panels, their refresh rate is pretty low, 2-10ms. Proper monitor use IPS panels, their refresh rate is 5-16ms. In both cases local latency produces by monitors resizing image is not a problem. If you are playing it on a computer, then your video card scale images with much better quality and much faster where this is not a concern at all.

said by Rekrul:

said by MxxCon:

I see a very easy solution to your 1st problem.
There will be services that cycle current ~3- year old games, and there will be services or service levels that offer huge back catalog of games. Games are not stored on each server/computer, they use a centralized SAN/NAS/Whatever, so disk space usage is not a problem. It will take them no effort to provide an infinitely large catalog of games.

You're trying to apply logic to the business world and that rarely works out.

I'm implying logic based on personal experience working with this technology in this field.
said by Rekrul:

Once a game reaches a certain age, the company declares it obsolete and washes their hands of it.

read what I said in the previous reply.
said by Rekrul:

Plus, the games have to run on some kind of a computer. What happens when the hardware and OS is upgraded and the old games no longer work? Is the company going to hire someone to patch their entire back catalog to make sure it works on the new system? Or are they just going to dump everything that doesn't work?

Windows compatibility is going to last for a very very long time. Every single game released for XP can run on Win7. Only some Win95/98 have problems. Once we reach the point where games will be no longer compatible with then-current OS, computers will be fast enough to be able to run emulation of Win7 w/o any problems.
said by Rekrul:

Because they sure don't do that now. Even when the company knows about a bug and what causes it, if the game is more than a couple years old and not a huge seller, they're not going to bother fixing it.

They will fix problems if service provider will tell game mft about those problems.
Situation will be much different where instead of a single user worth $5-60 complains vs a service provider that serves 100s if not 1000s copies of their games.

said by Rekrul:

said by MxxCon:

To install mods you don't need a direct game access. Games could/will be coded with such services in mind and will provide facility to install and access mods directly from within the game. Same with creating mods. Who says you can't run Unreal or Cry Editor from those cloud services?

So the mods can disappear along with the game when the company takes it offline...

Well mod is useless w/o the game its written for anyway, so I don't see that being a problem.
said by Rekrul:

Not to mention since everything is in the cloud, on the company's servers, they will have the final say about what mods get released and which ones don't.

It won't be any different when what we currently have with Steam or nexusmods.
said by Rekrul:

What about 'total conversions' which require patching the original game files to work? How are you going to patch game files on a remote server? Will you be able to tell the system to create a 100% working duplicate of the game installation for you to tinker with?

if there will be enough demand, there will be services that offer that.
said by Rekrul:

Cloud gaming is going to be a closed, locked-down system.

Market forces will decide if that's going to happen or not.
--
[Sig removed by Administrator: signature can not exceed 20GB]
dra6o0n

join:2011-08-15
Mississauga, ON
Reviews:
·ITalkBB

1 edit
Only Onlive has crappy resolutions like they are rendering it on a 480p...
Their budget and their data center hosting is nothing compared to the bigger companies.

Cloud based clients are one thing, but what about tools that can create content and be uploaded to the cloud?
You are already doing that with Steam Workshop btw.

The problem here is that everyone think of 'cloud gaming' like Onlive and GaiKai, where you get a video stream back and sending a controller function over...

Nay, that's not completely true, for there exists other forms of cloud gaming that you can innovate, but they would rather work on something that's already there, plus video streaming means you literally 'don't own' anything and that's what they are going for.

At the very least with steam, the data is downloaded and although internet connection is needed to maintain login, you'd need internet to download games in the first place.

The most simple form of image of cloud gaming is as so:
Division between client and server in %
Type | Client | Server
OnLive | 1% | 99%

But what if there is a universal game client that can play multiple games on it, but uses cloud to stream 'data' onto it while you play, instead of a flimsy video stream?
Type | Client | Server
Universal | 10% | 90%

That 10% means the game will render stuff but it will only render stuff that the server sends, and it's specific and also encrypted so people cannot read it and understand and modify the packets sent to it.

World of Tanks and World of Warplanes utilize server sided gaming over client sided, but the client still contains the general data, still, hacking is very hard to do and controls is limited to your latency (delayed response).

But then I get to FPS games where client sided controls is freely given away and hackers or laggers can move and shoot freely while lagging and not being responsive properly to the server, resulting in impossible things happening as it's p2p, like being killed when the person is still behind a wall, since you are experiencing 'ghosting' where a laggy player pops out and kills you, but you only see him pop up 2 seconds later and died before that.

MxxCon

join:1999-11-19
Brooklyn, NY

Re: I dread the future of gaming...

said by dra6o0n:

But what if there is a universal game client that can play multiple games on it, but uses cloud to stream 'data' onto it while you play, instead of a flimsy video stream?
Type | Client | Server
Universal | 10% | 90%

That 10% means the game will render stuff but it will only render stuff that the server sends, and it's specific and also encrypted so people cannot read it and understand and modify the packets sent to it.

This is exact opposite of cloud gaming.
The whole point of cloud gaming services that all the rendering and processing is happening at the datacenter. You can run client on any dumb client with absolutely no processing power. You can run GaiKai and OnLive on a TV that has CPU weaker than your iPhone.
If you are doing local 3d rendering you are defeating the whole purpose of such a service.

said by dra6o0n:

World of Tanks and World of Warplanes utilize server sided gaming over client sided, but the client still contains the general data, still, hacking is very hard to do and controls is limited to your latency (delayed response).

But then I get to FPS games where client sided controls is freely given away and hackers or laggers can move and shoot freely while lagging and not being responsive properly to the server, resulting in impossible things happening as it's p2p, like being killed when the person is still behind a wall, since you are experiencing 'ghosting' where a laggy player pops out and kills you, but you only see him pop up 2 seconds later and died before that.

You are confusing anti-cheat methods with lag compensation.
--
[Sig removed by Administrator: signature can not exceed 20GB]
danjohn12

join:2012-05-29
20145

want more space

i want more cloud space on my xbox 360

88615298
Premium
join:2004-07-28
West Tenness

Re: want more space

You need more than 512 MB for game saves?
kevinds
Premium
join:2003-05-01
Calgary, AB
kudos:3

Re: want more space

Yes I do, much more... My Skyrim alone is 2-3GB
Expand your moderator at work

88615298
Premium
join:2004-07-28
West Tenness

Caps will make cloud gaming fail.

My son did a trial for Onlive. Thing used 3 GB an hour. 50% more than HD Netflix uses at it's highest setting.

MxxCon

join:1999-11-19
Brooklyn, NY

Re: Caps will make cloud gaming fail.

Yes. Or better yet, cloud gaming will make caps fail.

During beta test of OnLine it was using a steady flat 7mbit/sec of bandwidth. 720p videos on YouTube are about at 3.5mbit/sec. Netflix is probably about the same.
I can see it being less bandwidth efficient because with regular videos you can spend as much time as you need to compress videos to the smallest possible size. Where as with realtime games you "should" at most spend only 1 frame compressing. At 60hz/fps that's 16ms time spent compressing an image. Obviously that's not enough time to try many different combinations to get the smallest possible size.
--
[Sig removed by Administrator: signature can not exceed 20GB]

jmn1207
Premium
join:2000-07-19
Ashburn, VA
kudos:1

Diablo 3

Diablo 3 will be the last game that I ever purchase that forces you to be online to play it, even if you have absolutely no intentions to play multiplayer.

The latency always hovered around 150-300ms with both FiOS and then Comcast at 2 different locations where all of my other network activity seemed nearly flawless. Combined with server congestion, updates that took the servers down, and general security concerns with having to keep my profile online, it will certainly be the last Activision/Blizzard game I will play due to such a negative experience.

C0RR0SIVE88

@direcway.com

Re: Diablo 3

I stopped buying Blizzard products after I saw what WoW would be like, was only 14 and said in the old long removed Battle.net forum that WoW would make Blizzard greedy, and all games from them would be online only from that point on. This is back when Dialup was still the most common connection type. I was rather correct in that thought with all the WoW expansions, SC2 and D3. All to "reduce" piracy, but that is a lie, as all those games have had emulated servers released, plus cracked. It was nothing more but to get the RMAH on D3 to be the new cash cow with WoW dieing.

MxxCon

join:1999-11-19
Brooklyn, NY
yes, it's ridiculous that diablo3 single player is affected by internet/server lag. It's seems like they just made it multiplaying-alone.
--
[Sig removed by Administrator: signature can not exceed 20GB]
silbaco
Premium
join:2009-08-03
USA

The cloud....

The cloud is without a doubt the future. Simply because companies are pushing for it and consumers have to go along for the ride, like it or not.

Personally, I have not bought a console since the Dreamcast. I don't plan to ever buy anything newer. If I can't buy a physical game, resell it or buy used games with no restrictions, I don't want it. And pay $60 for a new game? Not going to happen.

tim_k
Buttons, Bows, Beamer, Shadow, Kasey
Premium,VIP
join:2002-02-02
Stewartstown, PA
kudos:40

Re: The cloud....

said by silbaco:

If I can't buy a physical game, resell it or buy used games with no restrictions, I don't want it. And pay $60 for a new game? Not going to happen.

That's what burns me with Steam games.
--
RIP my babies Buttons 1/15/94-2/9/07, Beamer 7/24/08, & Bows 12/17/94-10/11/09
dra6o0n

join:2011-08-15
Mississauga, ON
Reviews:
·ITalkBB
I don't mind cloud based gaming, but only if:
1) Done right, not buggy, not full of holes or flaws.
2) Consists of multiplayer games only, because it makes no sense to make a single player game cloud only.

MMO and competitive multiplayer games would benefit from server-sided cloud based interfaces for games, as it would disallow players to cheat and maybe depending on the latency offer a decent resolution to gaming...

The issue though would be for High Definition level games, since Onlive's games can be very blurry and annoying to play with, and the delays in controls gets bad...

Cloud shouldn't be like onlive and be only 'video', but special interfaces that's more than videos...

For instance a game client can exist, maybe a universal one that uses a little bit of the client's computing power for trivial calculation that hackers or cheaters don't care about, but the server manages the rest. The server can stream in 'contents' not in form of video but data, for the clients to read and use, but once the client is closed, the 'data' in raw form will vanish.

Essentially a 'temporary' file format in a sense, that's tiny enough to be used?
b10010011
Whats a Posting tag?

join:2004-09-07
Bellingham, WA
Reviews:
·Comcast Formerl..

Avoid the cloud

With more and more ISP's implementing lower caps and bandwidth overage charges.

Cloud gaming is the exact opposite of what is needed.

Contrary to popular belief gaming is not a bandwidth hog, but cloud gaming will be.
--
Bellingham Scanner Kicks Ass! »bhamscanner.kicks-ass.org/

MxxCon

join:1999-11-19
Brooklyn, NY

Re: Avoid the cloud

You are approaching this wrong. Mindset like this kills innovation!
If you are worried about traffic caps, you should not ignore bandwidth intensive apps, but you should petition your ISP and anybody else who will listen to get rid of the caps.
--
[Sig removed by Administrator: signature can not exceed 20GB]
LucasLee

join:2010-11-26
kudos:1

very weak article

The vast majority of console games run at 30fps. In order to reduce the perceived latency of the game (basically the time between when you press a button and when that corresponding action happens on screen), games will need to run at higher frame rates, probably 60fps or greater.


this is so ridiculously false. the framerate isn't locked at 30fps for latency reasons.

i swear this article is written by a high school student in their spare time. so much misinformation, assumptions, and outright falsehoods.

MxxCon

join:1999-11-19
Brooklyn, NY

Re: very weak article

Framerate isn't locked for latency reasons, however faster frame rate(along with all the underlying components) produce faster response time. A game doesn't have to wait as long to display the result of your input.
--
[Sig removed by Administrator: signature can not exceed 20GB]

Morac
Cat god

join:2001-08-30
Riverside, NJ
kudos:1
Reviews:
·Comcast

Cloudy with a chance of failure

Trusting everything to "the cloud" is not a good idea. Ignoring the obvious things, like how gaming won't work if your Internet connection goes does, you run into the possibility of all your games simply disappearing if the cloud company goes under (or simply shuts it's service off).

That's one of the reasons I don't like buying games off of PSN/XBox Live. Sure it's nice to be able to play without inserting a disk, but what happens when if Sony/Microsoft gets out of the gaming market and shuts down the service or if they simply decide to wipe out your games?

It's hard to make a local backup of "the cloud".
--
The Comcast Disney Avatar has been retired.

MxxCon

join:1999-11-19
Brooklyn, NY

Re: Cloudy with a chance of failure

Then should encourage lawmakers to mandate that digital purchases are OWNED, not leased, and service providers must have a facility to transfer your OWN property to another service or your own computer.
--
[Sig removed by Administrator: signature can not exceed 20GB]

Eddy120876

join:2009-02-16
Bronx, NY

Cloud gaming at its finest in the USA.not until T1 gets here

This is the reason why I kept saying over and over. Onlive,Oya or any other cloud gaming system will surely suffer not until the entire continental USA finally gets some decent speeds. I said until T1 is the standard or something pretty close to it. Right now we are so far back that Japanese,Korean and French gamers run circles around your character in any MMORPG.
silbaco
Premium
join:2009-08-03
USA

Re: Cloud gaming at its finest in the USA.not until T1 gets here

said by Eddy120876:

This is the reason why I kept saying over and over. Onlive,Oya or any other cloud gaming system will surely suffer not until the entire continental USA finally gets some decent speeds. I said until T1 is the standard or something pretty close to it. Right now we are so far back that Japanese,Korean and French gamers run circles around your character in any MMORPG.

A 1.544mbps T1? T1s are too slow to support cloud gaming. Latency is okay and the upload is acceptable, but the download isn't there.

Eddy120876

join:2009-02-16
Bronx, NY

Re: Cloud gaming at its finest in the USA.not until T1 gets here

Well with a T1 you can at lest manage to play a quick game nothing a la final fantasy but pretty close. Hence why I said when we finally get everybody(the entire continental US) on T1 then cloud gaming will become the norm

pnjunction
Teksavvy Extreme
Premium
join:2008-01-24
Toronto, ON
kudos:1

Not sure about the hardware assumption

the hardware in the cloud is constantly being upgraded to the latest and greatest

How is this paid for? I'm not seeing how it's a given that the cloud service will be able to afford this when presumably the budget of consumers is too limited to pay for it. If the cost to keep the latest hardware in the home is prohibitive, I don't see how it gets so much cheaper that having it in the cloud is a given.

Sure they will be some reduction in the hardware required with sharing, but (especially with data centers scattered around to reduce latency) I think most gamers are going to be hitting the service at the same peak hours. There could be cost break buying bulk, but I imagine it would be similar to the break the console makers get when sourcing components.

cpsycho

join:2008-06-03
HarperLand
Reviews:
·Start Communicat..

What?

The old saying graphics>gameplay still rings true, but I say good graphics plus good gameplay is greater than mediocre graphics and good gameplay.

What? graphics are not better then gameplay. Gameplay always comes first. Graphics is an added bonus. If graphics were so important then minecraft would never have gotten very far as a game.

Cloud gaming sucks period.
BiggA

join:2005-11-23
EARTH

So much wrong with this article

The latency numbers just aren't right. OnLive gets under 150ms with existing technology.

Also, the assumption of 30mbps is ridiculous. Currently, OnLive uses around 8mbps for 720p, so 12-15mbps for 1080p isn't unreasonable. For casual gaming, or as a supplement for traditional locally rendered games for a single user, it wouldn't blow a 250GB cap, but if you have multiple heavy users, you'd sail through the cap in a matter of a week or two.

Also, most TVs scale at some level as well, so rendering at 1080p isn't going to help you in this regard, it just gives you more resolution, as long as your hardware can handle it.

88615298
Premium
join:2004-07-28
West Tenness

Re: So much wrong with this article

said by BiggA:

Also, the assumption of 30mbps is ridiculous. Currently, OnLive uses around 8mbps for 720p, so 12-15mbps for 1080p isn't unreasonable.

If 720p uses 8 Mbps then 1080p would need 18 Mbps. And of course you need overhead. If you need 18 and you only have 18 guess what you're not going to get 18. You should count on needing a connection at least 25% faster than whatever speed is needed. So for 18 that would be at least 22.5 Mbps.

For casual gaming, or as a supplement for traditional locally rendered games for a single user, it wouldn't blow a 250GB cap, but if you have multiple heavy users, you'd sail through the cap in a matter of a week or two.

At 8 Mbps 1 hour a day is 105 GB a month.
BiggA

join:2005-11-23
EARTH

Re: So much wrong with this article

No, it's about 2:1 for the same compression level. 1080i and 720 are nearly exactly the same. However, when you go to 1080p, you can compress more and do some other tricks in areas of the video that don't have a lot of detail, so in reality it's not double. More like 1.5:1 or 1.75:1.

That's right. Hence why it's not going to work for multiple users or heavy gamers. Multiple heavy gamers using OnLive on FIOS could easily hit the 500+GB range.