Microsoft says cloud isn't the future

  • 88 results
  • 1
  • 2

This topic is locked from further discussion.

#1 Edited by Shewgenja (7776 posts) -

GamesBy James Plafke Jan. 13, 2014 1:29 pm

Over CES last week, we had the usual announcements of sharper televisions, fitness bands, weird computers, and normal computers (branded as Steam Machines). The most interesting announcement, though, came from Sony’s PlayStation division: PlayStation Now, a complete game streaming platform serving up potentially any game from the PlayStation brand’s history, right up to the PS3. Despite PS Now being demoed by playing The Last of Us on a PS Vita and Bravia televisions (without attached gaming hardware), Microsoft doesn’t think game-streaming is the future just yet.

Whether or not PlayStation Now is able to serve up video games without latency, the idea behind the service — streaming video games through some sort of app, not requiring specialized hardware — is indeed most likely the future. Almost every other form of entertainment has been moving toward a complete streaming platform. Movies and TV shows have moved to services like Netflix and Amazon Instant, and music has moved to services like Spotify and Pandora. A large portion of current-day video games require check-ins to a central server (console, PC, and mobile included), so it’s not like video games don’t require you to have an internet connection. However, Microsoft vice president Phil Spencer stated in a tweet that he doesn’t think streaming is the way video games are going, at least not anytime soon.

It’s not surprising that Sony’s competition would state that Sony’s very-hyped and extremely intriguing PlayStation Now service isn’t the wave of the future. If Microsoft announced Xbox Now, Sony would probably do the same. Spencer stated that he thinks a machine that can handle local computing will “be important for a long time.” If the noble-but-imperfect OnLive game-streaming service was any indication, then Spencer would be right — the service was frequently crippled by latency. However, Sony has considerable more power to throw around than most gaming tech companies in the world. Furthermore, Sony is attempting PlayStation Now four years after OnLive launched — which means it has four years of improved internet to utilize. As I wrote last week, if Sony uses PS Now’s 2014 launch as an effective beta until the PS5 releases, then the company will have almost a decade to perfect the service, which could potentially be the PS5 itself.

Spencer may be right that fully streaming games are a long way off — technically he may consider that length of time one console generation, since a decade is indeed a while — but in the scheme of things, an all-streaming games platform is inevitable, and likely sooner rather than later.

http://www.geek.com/games/microsoft-conveniently-doesnt-think-playstation-now-is-the-future-1582056/

So, let me get this straight. After an entire summer of being bombarded with all this talk of Cloud and the THOUSANDS OF AZURE SERVERS, all MS can come up with as a rebuttal is this? They really have no clear vision of what they are doing with the XBox and gaming. Drivatars and Titanfall hype aside, they have delivered nothing. Meanwhile, Sony puts in place something relevant and gets it out for beta testing in short order.

#2 Posted by -RPGamer- (34283 posts) -

I don't want to stream games, in fact in general I think streaming any content is stupid in comparison to DLing it.

#3 Edited by lundy86_4 (42549 posts) -

He's talking about fully streaming games. MS' X1 cloud was never about that AFAIK. The game would still largely run off the actual X1 hardware.

#5 Edited by millerlight89 (18338 posts) -

I don't want to stream games, in fact in general I think streaming any content is stupid in comparison to DLing it.

So you download YouTube videos? I mean you did say any content. As for streaming games, yes I agree. Maybe in the future ISP will be there, but not now.

#6 Edited by k2theswiss (16585 posts) -

@lundy86_4 said:

He's talking about fully streaming games. MS' X1 cloud was never about that AFAIK. The game would still largely run off the actual X1 hardware.

^ ^ ^

Still waiting for the day till someone cracks the power in chips by making them 100% upgradeable without actually replacing the chip it self

#7 Edited by -RPGamer- (34283 posts) -

@millerlight89: actually if I could DL a copy of youtube videos with ease I would over streaming them. That's the entire reason I pay GiantBomb, so I can DL their videos and pause and play my way through hours of content locally.

#8 Posted by navyguy21 (12682 posts) -

He means streaming games, not cloud computing............which he is correct.

Why do you think Onlive failed?

PC gamers know how unreliable internet streaming is, its bad enough for video itself.

To say that there wont be any lag is a lie plain and simple.

Even multiplayer games lag and you actually OWN those discs....

#9 Posted by CrownKingArthur (3513 posts) -

I don't want to stream games, in fact in general I think streaming any content is stupid in comparison to DLing it.

why is streaming stupid?

often i'll stream a couple of minutes of a documentary, discover it's one of those terrible documentaries with a protracted and contrived delivery, then try a different documentary. this process takes a couple of minutes, and only uses a portion of bandwidth.

now i compare this to downloading the whole thing, only to discover the same thing after several minutes of downloading ... and two minutes of viewing.

or perhaps this is compatible with your 'in general'?

#10 Posted by millerlight89 (18338 posts) -

@millerlight89: actually if I could DL a copy of youtube videos with ease I would over streaming them. That's the entire reason I pay GiantBomb, so I can DL their videos and pause and play my way through hours of content locally.

I mean I get that streaming can kill quality, but I really don't get it. I get downloading movies, TVS shows, and games.

#11 Edited by navyguy21 (12682 posts) -

@-RPGamer- said:

I don't want to stream games, in fact in general I think streaming any content is stupid in comparison to DLing it.

why is streaming stupid?

often i'll stream a couple of minutes of a documentary, discover it's one of those terrible documentaries with a protracted and contrived delivery, then try a different documentary. this process takes a couple of minutes, and only uses a portion of bandwidth.

now i compare this to downloading the whole thing, only to discover the same thing after several minutes of downloading ... and two minutes of viewing.

or perhaps this is compatible with your 'in general'?

Pretty sure he meant games. Streaming video is fine because it isnt interactive and doesnt depend on input by the player, nor does anything need to be uploaded. Streaming games are different.

#12 Posted by -RPGamer- (34283 posts) -

@CrownKingArthur: I would say in general fits, if I wanted to preview something, or it is only a minute or so long than streaming is fine.

#13 Posted by -RPGamer- (34283 posts) -

@navyguy21: nope I meant almost everything. I would rather DL videos than stream them. A local copy is far more flexible and convenient for me as a consumer of content. This becomes more important for me as videos start passing the 30min mark.

#14 Posted by CrownKingArthur (3513 posts) -

Pretty sure he meant games. Streaming video is fine because it isnt interactive and doesnt depend on input by the player, nor does anything need to be uploaded. Streaming games are different.

he said "in general I think streaming any content is stupid" and i interpreted that as "any content".

@CrownKingArthur: I would say in general fits, if I wanted to preview something, or it is only a minute or so long than streaming is fine.

cool beans man. but reading your giantbomb thing i understand your reasons. yes, its much easier to 'scrub' through a video and so on if it's local. if you want to download entire youtube videos i recommend JDownloader. one simply copies the URL to the clipboard, and JD will offer you the different video qualities to download, pick one, and it will download it.

be careful when installing, it's one of those programs which will install a toolbar if you do not uncheck a box (like utorrent).

peace.

#15 Posted by Couth_ (9908 posts) -

Your title is misleading and wrong OP

#16 Posted by joel_c17 (2803 posts) -

bu bu bu da cloudzz!

#17 Edited by starwolf474 (379 posts) -

Good.

Downloading > Streaming

I especially hate the idea of streaming video games and I really don't want that to be the future.

#18 Posted by Jak-25 (2490 posts) -


I don't think everyone can stream games right now so I don't expect the cloud to take over just yet.

#19 Posted by Jacobistheman (3975 posts) -

This is a complete misrepresentation of what he said. He didn't say that the "Cloud isn't the future." The cloud is "the future" but it will coexist and not replace local hardware. Capability of the cloud will be outpaced local hardware for a long long time if not forever. The graphical ability/speed of a local machine can beat what the internet/cloud can produce remotely right now (unless you are on a crazy fast/expensive connection and the people running the server are willing to pay a bunch of money for hardware/power/cooling). The internet/cloud will continue to improve, but so will local hardware. This is what he is saying and why will continue to see consoles and PCs.

#20 Posted by voljin1987 (675 posts) -

microsoft decided to channel all their energies into making 720p games for kinect

#21 Edited by lglz1337 (2826 posts) -

this what you call DC from MS when your own cloud is a mess you downplay the other. funny thing is MS hyping it Sony doing it

#22 Posted by FoxbatAlpha (5854 posts) -

The MS cloud and Sony cloud are completely different things. Sony's was always intended to be a stream service to support backwards compatibility.

MS's cloud was for AI, off loading compute and calculations, to make the console 10x more powerful, storage, servers and to work in conjunction with the Local Cloud.

#23 Edited by voljin1987 (675 posts) -

MS's cloud was for AI, off loading compute and calculations, to make the console 10x more powerful, storage, servers and to work in conjunction with the Local Cloud.

#24 Posted by tormentos (16290 posts) -

He's talking about fully streaming games. MS' X1 cloud was never about that AFAIK. The game would still largely run off the actual X1 hardware.

Yeah at least that has been done with lag over Onlive and Gaika,what MS was saying its cloud would do,was transmit power to the console over streaming which is 100 times worse and a lie to,MS claimed that the xbox one was 10 times more powerful than the 360 without the cloud and 40 times more powerful with the cloud,and several times claimed 3 times the power of the xbox one using the cloud.

That was utter bullsh** and was quickly dismiss by many sites,using cloud t renders games is not even close to be a reality at least not anything that demand hardware,because internet connection are super slow compare to even very old GPU when the topic is bandwidth.

#25 Posted by FoxbatAlpha (5854 posts) -

@FoxbatAlpha said:

MS's cloud was for AI, off loading compute and calculations, to make the console 10x more powerful, storage, servers and to work in conjunction with the Local Cloud.

You are a quick one.

#26 Edited by tormentos (16290 posts) -

He means streaming games, not cloud computing............which he is correct.

Why do you think Onlive failed?

PC gamers know how unreliable internet streaming is, its bad enough for video itself.

To say that there wont be any lag is a lie plain and simple.

Even multiplayer games lag and you actually OWN those discs....

Onlive failing wasn't tied to lag,it was just poorly advertise on a market where players prefer their own hardware.

Cloud computing is even further away to deliver anything significant over internet,the PS2 has way faster bandwidth than the best online connection out there and is 14 years old,intensive graphics require super fast bandwidths even very low end GPU like the 7730 had bandwidth that is incredibly faster than the best online connection out there..

Even a 100MB connection will serve you for nothing,since bandwidth is measure in GB no MB.

By the way that same unreliable internet also affect internet computing,any lag or problem will cause you accepts to stop loading or not load at all.

Cloud computing is years away from the point graphics are today,and MS lied about its cloud.

The MS cloud and Sony cloud are completely different things. Sony's was always intended to be a stream service to support backwards compatibility.

MS's cloud was for AI, off loading compute and calculations, to make the console 10x more powerful, storage, servers and to work in conjunction with the Local Cloud.

And that is where the joke strike the cloud can't make the xbox one be half more powerful than already is 10 times is complete and utter bullSh**,MS lie and most of its cloud is for dedicated servers for games.

Titanfall use it and it look like crap and is struggling to reach 720p,if the xbox one was 10 times more powerful with the cloud it would be what 11 teraflops.? Come on dude stop day dreaming MS lie to you people and the cloud what will be use the most would be for dedicated servers

#27 Posted by silversix_ (13430 posts) -

Now lems are stuck with a cloudless Bone, a forced Kinect and is almost as pathetically underpowered as WiiU for 2012 but HEEEEEEEEY, MS got your money already trolololol how does it feel? 720p is the future-------------------for Microsoft Home Entertainment System, brace the future!

#28 Edited by Shewgenja (7776 posts) -

Microsoft just talks about cloud. Sony does it. Lems am cry.

"bu-bu-bu drivatars!"

"Have you seen Titanfall?"

So many infinite,

Such cloud power.

Wow.

#29 Posted by lglz1337 (2826 posts) -
#30 Posted by Shewgenja (7776 posts) -
#31 Edited by StormyJoe (4474 posts) -

@Shewgenja:

The ignorance of Moo-genja... startles me.

#32 Posted by donalbane (16126 posts) -

Because of internet latency, you won't have robust online games on the cloud for some time. 2D simple games, sure, but forget about Call of Duty etc. So I agree... we will have hardware until internet connectivity is far more ubiquitous and free of latency.

#33 Edited by edwardecl (1718 posts) -

So Microsoft vision of the cloud was offloading CPU tasks that can easily be run locally or by having a more powerful GPU with more compute power. I guess that's why MS overclocked the CPU, I guess cloud computing worked out well for them.

It seems to me that MS has a lack of direction throughout the design. They have not focused one one thing they have tried to be everything and failed at everything. Unless they can fix everything broken about the Xbox One in the next 6 months (including their vision of the cloud) they are going to be having problems. If it turns out they have over sold the cloud to their customers they are going to be annoyed.

#34 Posted by kuu2 (6769 posts) -

So my thread about Cerny saying games won't come for 3 years on PauperStation4 is closed because it was "out of context" but this one is not..........

Cowspot confirmed.

MooJenga, bbbbut I am not a cow........lulz.

#35 Edited by Shewgenja (7776 posts) -

@kuu2 said:

So my thread about Cerny saying games won't come for 3 years on PauperStation4 is closed because it was "out of context" but this one is not..........

Cowspot confirmed.

MooJenga, bbbbut I am not a cow........lulz.

#36 Posted by Shewgenja (7776 posts) -

@Shewgenja:

The ignorance of Moo-genja... startles me.

Drivatars in a game that cut so many corners to attain 1080p, the discs the game came on made themselves circular and then there's Titanfall. If it struggled any harder to attain 720p on the XBone, it would need a hernia surgery.

Please, tell me more about your cloud power.

#37 Posted by Tighaman (709 posts) -

he is basically telling you that PS NOW will always have a latency problem because PS4 doesn't have LOCAL CLOUD COMPUTE I said it before the Ethernet port is connected to the SOC for a reason everyone thinking its a joke but its happening rather the fanboys like it or not.

#38 Edited by StormyJoe (4474 posts) -

@StormyJoe said:

@Shewgenja:

The ignorance of Moo-genja... startles me.

Drivatars in a game that cut so many corners to attain 1080p, the discs the game came on made themselves circular and then there's Titanfall. If it struggled any harder to attain 720p on the XBone, it would need a hernia surgery.

Please, tell me more about your cloud power.

You don't know a goddamed thing about MS's cloud. I use it everyday (Azure), and I know for a fact it does a hell of a lot more than "Drivatars". You are so fricken ignorant that it is almost irritating.

Ever hear about Office 365? SQL Server Azure? You are clueless.

#39 Posted by Shewgenja (7776 posts) -

@Shewgenja said:

@StormyJoe said:

@Shewgenja:

The ignorance of Moo-genja... startles me.

Drivatars in a game that cut so many corners to attain 1080p, the discs the game came on made themselves circular and then there's Titanfall. If it struggled any harder to attain 720p on the XBone, it would need a hernia surgery.

Please, tell me more about your cloud power.

You don't know a goddamed thing about MS's cloud. I use it everyday (Azure), and I know for a fact it does a hell of a lot more than "Drivatars". You are so fricken ignorant that it is almost irritating.

Ever hear about Office 365? SQL Server Azure? You are clueless.

You got 'splainin to do. I am not talking about Office apps. I'm talking about gaming. I know that's difficult for XBone supporters to do, but just remember you are on Gamespot forums right now.

Ruh-roh

#40 Edited by StormyJoe (4474 posts) -

@StormyJoe said:

@Shewgenja said:

@StormyJoe said:

@Shewgenja:

The ignorance of Moo-genja... startles me.

Drivatars in a game that cut so many corners to attain 1080p, the discs the game came on made themselves circular and then there's Titanfall. If it struggled any harder to attain 720p on the XBone, it would need a hernia surgery.

Please, tell me more about your cloud power.

You don't know a goddamed thing about MS's cloud. I use it everyday (Azure), and I know for a fact it does a hell of a lot more than "Drivatars". You are so fricken ignorant that it is almost irritating.

Ever hear about Office 365? SQL Server Azure? You are clueless.

You got 'splainin to do. I am not talking about Office apps. I'm talking about gaming. I know that's difficult for XBone supporters to do, but just remember you are on Gamespot forums right now.

Ruh-roh

I am talking about MS's Cloud, which you just dismissed as fantasy. It's a hugely powerful tool that has uses well beyond gaming.

As for the cloud improving graphics, I have never swallowed that talking point. I have always stated that the cloud will improve multiplayer gaming, not single player gaming.

#41 Posted by Shewgenja (7776 posts) -

Cool. I'll lay off you, then. That's legit.

#42 Posted by Nengo_Flow (9198 posts) -

M$ before Playstation Now: "The Cloudz be teh future, yo!"

M$ after Playstation Now: "The Cloudz dont even much be the future..."

#43 Posted by Heil68 (42461 posts) -

I could of told you that last June.

#44 Posted by edidili (3446 posts) -

Well he's talking about streaming, nice bait title. No idea how companies will solve input lag for stream gaming, looks impossible to me. You push the button, it has to travel somewhere on some server far away from you, the machine will compute it and send frames back at you. There will be latency there no matter what you do. That's not important at all for videos or music but for gaming is a big deal. Unless you play some turn based strategy/rpg where immediate input is not as important.

MS has still yet to prove their own version of cloud gaming btw.

#45 Posted by bbkkristian (14662 posts) -

Good, I'm glad streaming isn't the future.

Downloading >>>>>>>> Streaming

#46 Posted by HalcyonScarlet (3684 posts) -

"Spencer may be right that fully streaming games are a long way off — technically he may consider that length of time one console generation, since a decade is indeed a while — but in the scheme of things, an all-streaming games platform is inevitable, and likely sooner rather than later."

Yeah, I think that is probably the most important part of this article. Thanks Sony and the cows to contributing to a fucking 'stream gaming' future, thanks.

Pedal to the metal.

Sony domination continuation.

lol and you guys were bitching about MSs DRM.

#47 Edited by dbtbandit67 (353 posts) -

Yeah, this is hysterical. So much for their promises of improving graphics through the power of the cloud when they can't even stream games. So they can't do either. I knew all their cloud promises were BS.

#48 Posted by bezza2011 (2165 posts) -

so wait for the last few years every major developer or anyone within gaming when asked what they were excited for in the future, they didn't say cloud gaming, because i'm pretty sure, for the last few years cloud gaming has been a big topic on most gaming sites and hype for developers.

seems like it depends on the season on what people want.

"Spencer may be right that fully streaming games are a long way off — technically he may consider that length of time one console generation, since a decade is indeed a while — but in the scheme of things, an all-streaming games platform is inevitable, and likely sooner rather than later."

Yeah, I think that is probably the most important part of this article. Thanks Sony and the cows to contributing to a fucking 'stream gaming' future, thanks.

Pedal to the metal.

Sony domination continuation.

lol and you guys were bitching about MSs DRM.

a streaming service so people can play older games is nothing like DRM,

#49 Posted by SUD123456 (4326 posts) -

TC continues to solidify his reputation as chief of the door knobs.

#50 Posted by urbansys (231 posts) -

@Shewgenja: Dont expect anything less from you . Misleading topic and thread....

It is threads like these that i spend less time here now.