What is the Cloud and what does it mean to gaming?

[spaceelf]

Even now if you are a game dev and you want to make a cross platform game (PS4/XB1) you're going to have to set up servers for the PS4 version and if you want to support Mac lets say or even Linux you can't use Xbox Live Compute for that.

I believe MS stated plans to make it open to any platform, but I admit I don't have that info in front of me.  At any rate, time for me to pass out methinks. 

[+LogicalApex MVC]

The fact it's growing big enough to make it afforfable means a big step forward for multiplayer gaming, and gaming in general in the future. (technical stuff aside)

16 ms ping was not possible before without leveraging the cloud for MP; ofcourse they've had used peer-to-peer if Microsoft didn't open up their Azure servers for XBL.

Maybe this is only true for the Xbox? For me on PC, a ping below that is normal for me. I typically ping around 5ms in TF2.

[Jarrichvdv]

Maybe this is only true for the Xbox? For me on PC, a ping below that is normal for me. I typically ping around 5ms in TF2.

I don't have enough knowledge of that, as I don't play online a lot; but when I saw 16ms that seemed very fast to me. I don't know what's the average standard ping with dedicated servers.

[firey]

The fact it's growing big enough to make it afforfable means a big step forward for multiplayer gaming, and gaming in general in the future. (technical stuff aside)

16 ms ping was not possible before without leveraging the cloud for MP; ofcourse they've had used peer-to-peer if Microsoft didn't open up their Azure servers for XBL.

Uhm.. I've gotten low latency in Multi Player games for a long time.  I think in WoW during the busiest times I average 20-30ms tops.  In many other games such as CS:S 19 ms was average.  I don't think that "the cloud" is what made this all possible.

[trooper11]

I totally agree. As I stated in the original post cloud computing absolutely IS the future. It's just not MS specific. Sony, Nintendo, and anyone else can use cloud computing as well. It's not a perk of the Xbox One as some marketing and journalists seems to imply.

Its currently a perk of the X1 because MS is currently the only company of the three console makers that is offering such access at a cheap cost. I don't think Nintendo or Sony have the infrastructure to offer a similar setup.

I think its silly that MS is not allowed to promote the cloud simply because the tech that powers it can be used elsewhere. As long as MS doesn't try to claim that they are the only ones that can do this, whats the problem? Currently, they are the only ones offering the package to developers in this way. That a good thing that should be shared with the public.

[+Asmodai MVC]

I am having troubles believing Sony nor Nintendo have the same resources and amount of datacenters to support a whole generation of MP games coming up for their platforms.

That's the thing, they don't have to. Again I want to add though that I don't know anything about how Nintendo does multiplayer (nor do I have any desire to research it being not interested in the least in Nintendo) so let's set them aside for a second.

Microsoft HAS to provide it's own data centers if they want to allow for cloud computing because they restrict access to game servers outside their Xbox Live network and so developers/publishers are prevented from using their own or anyone elses.

Sony doesn't have such a restriction and so Sony doesn't have to build out the data centers itself. I'm not sure they couldn't if they wanted to considering they must have data centers all over already to support PSN, Movie and Music streaming, and the upcoming Gaikai game streaming but let's say they can't. Since Sony isn't a "walled garden" developers are free to use ANY public cloud compute service for PlayStation games. Cloud computing is a rapidly growing field and there is strong competition so Sony doesn't even need to wade in itself. PlayStation devs can use any existing public cloud service such as those provided by Amazon, Google, and even Microsoft's Corporate Azure cloud. The benefit to devs of using these is that they are not Sony specific. The developer can use the same cloud services for PC, Mac, Linux, PS3, PS4 or pretty much any other client that can connect unrestricted to the public internet. The developers/publishers themselves if they have sufficient funds can set up their own data centers and make their own clouds if they like. This probably isn't going to happen for little developers but big publishers may do so for use by the various developers whom the publish titles for.

[Jarrichvdv]

Uhm.. I've gotten low latency in Multi Player games for a long time. I think in WoW during the busiest times I average 20-30ms tops. In many other games such as CS:S 19 ms was average. I don't think that "the cloud" is what made this all possible.

Pretty sure WoW runs on dedicated servers instead of peer-to-peer right, so that'd qualify as cloud.

[+Asmodai MVC]

Its currently a perk of the X1 because MS is currently the only company of the three console makers that is offering such access at a cheap cost. I don't think Nintendo or Sony have the infrastructure to offer a similar setup.

I don't know about Nintendo but Sony doesn't have to offer it because unlike MS they don't block access to servers outside their network. As such a game developer is free to use ANY public cloud compute service to host their servers.

I think its silly that MS is not allowed to promote the cloud simply because the tech that powers it can be used elsewhere. As long as MS doesn't try to claim that they are the only ones that can do this, whats the problem? Currently, they are the only ones offering the package to developers in this way. That a good thing that should be shared with the public.

Who is saying they can't promote the cloud? Microsoft's public Azure cloud (which also forms the basis of their Xbox Live Compute cloud) is actually one of the best cloud offerings currently available. The cloud is totally the future and it's worth promoting but doing so in such a way as to make it appear an Xbox One specific capability is highly misleading.

Currently there are many cloud service providers offering packages to developers, MS is NOT the only one (though they are VERY competitive.) MS is the only one that targets specifically to gamers but Amazon, Google, and even the public Azure cloud from MS doesn't say the servers they host on their service can't be game servers (plus there are many other smaller options in the competitive cloud compute market.) Nothing is stopping game developers from developing game servers on ANY public cloud service available today and it's MUCH more cost effective then that developer trying to host their own dedicated server hardware. In theory a developer for example could make a game where the server runs on say Amazon's EC2 cloud service. That server would be reachable by PS3, PS4, PC, Mac, Linux, etc. or any other platform they choose to make a client for that has access to the public internet. It would not be reachable by the Xbox One or Xbox 360 though because MS prevents game hosting on servers outside the Xbox Live network (i.e. their "Walled Garden"). A developer HAS to use the Xbox Live Compute cloud if they want to do cloud computing for the Xbox 360 or Xbox One. (Windows PC's can access BOTH Xbox Live and public clouds, though there may be licensing restrictions keeping a game from doing both at the same time)

[trooper11]

I don't know about Nintendo but Sony doesn't have to offer it because unlike MS they don't block access to servers outside their network. As such a game developer is free to use ANY public cloud compute service to host their servers.

But aren't MS offering access to all of their server tools and the hardware itself at a very cheap price (or is it free for developers?)

That's the part that I thought made its a nice bonus for anyone developing on the X1 versus say the ps4 when they want or need to use servers. Those people would have to pay for whatever cloud service they were going to use.

[McKay]

Maybe this is only true for the Xbox? For me on PC, a ping below that is normal for me. I typically ping around 5ms in TF2.

 

Jealous lol, even on UK servers I get 10-20ms. 30-40ms on mainland Europe servers. 160-200ms on east coast US servers. 

[+Asmodai MVC]

But aren't MS offering access to all of their server tools and the hardware itself at a very cheap price (or is it free for developers?)

That's the part that I thought made its a nice bonus for anyone developing on the X1 versus say the ps4 when they want or need to use servers. Those people would have to pay for whatever cloud service they were going to use.

 

It is my understanding that MS is offering their cloud services for free.  I haven't done a ton of research on it but I imagine that there are some strings attached to that (maximum resources used) but even if there isn't there is still a trade off.  If you use the Xbox Live Compute cloud then you're locked in to MS only platforms. (Xbox One, Xbox 360, and PC likely with some sort of Xbox Live licensing agreement.)  So if that's all you want to release your game on you're golden.  If you want to release your game on Mac, Linux, PlayStation, Nintendo, or anything else you're going to have to set up servers somewhere else though (or have two sets of network code so it's peer-to-peer on other platforms and cloud on MS).  Cloud computing is cheap compared to dedicated servers though since the idea is you pay for only the resources you actually use and you don't have to buy or host any hardware yourself.  Microsoft obviously has the lowest cost option at free.  By going non Xbox Live Compute you pay more but you get more flexibility.  I'm not trying to say the MS cloud is bad, it's not my intention to bash MS here and if it's coming off that way I'm sorry.  My point is just that cloud computing is the next big thing across the board so to speak.  It's not a MS specific thing and it's certainly not an Xbox One specific thing.  Microsoft does compete rather well in that market but they aren't the only game in town.

[trooper11]

It is my understanding that MS is offering their cloud services for free.  I haven't done a ton of research on it but I imagine that there are some strings attached to that (maximum resources used) but even if there isn't there is still a trade off.  If you use the Xbox Live Compute cloud then you're locked in to MS only platforms. (Xbox One, Xbox 360, and PC likely with some sort of Xbox Live licensing agreement.)  So if that's all you want to release your game on you're golden.  If you want to release your game on Mac, Linux, PlayStation, Nintendo, or anything else you're going to have to set up servers somewhere else though (or have two sets of network code so it's peer-to-peer on other platforms and cloud on MS).  Cloud computing is cheap compared to dedicated servers though since the idea is you pay for only the resources you actually use and you don't have to buy or host any hardware yourself.  Microsoft obviously has the lowest cost option at free.  By going non Xbox Live Compute you pay more but you get more flexibility.  I'm not trying to say the MS cloud is bad, it's not my intention to bash MS here and if it's coming off that way I'm sorry.  My point is just that cloud computing is the next big thing across the board so to speak.  It's not a MS specific thing and it's certainly not an Xbox One specific thing.  Microsoft does compete rather well in that market but they aren't the only game in town.

If someone takes advantage of this free offer from MS, can they not still use the same Azure server for running their game on other platforms? Yes they can't use Xbox Live features, but the base Azure server infrastructure should be openly available. I would assume the only difference is that it wont be free, but then that is the same for any other option.

I guess the point I'm trying to make is that for some reason other people are trying to ignore the fact that MS is offering developers a good deal if they want to develop a game on the Xbox. In all this back and forth about trying to define the cloud, it just seems like MS simply can't get any positive pr off the fact that developers get a cheaper option.

The only reason people get the impression that 'the cloud' is unique to the X1 is because MS is the only one trying to promote its usage in a public way. I guess that was MS' mistake. This stuff only leads to blow back.

[+Asmodai MVC]

If someone takes advantage of this free offer from MS, can they not still use the same Azure server for running their game on other platforms? Yes they can't use Xbox Live features, but the base Azure server infrastructure should be openly available. I would assume the only difference is that it wont be free, but then that is the same for any other option.

I don't believe the Xbox Live Compute Azure cloud is the same as the publicly available corporate Azure cloud. I believe they are based on the same core APIs but I don't think they run on the same hardware in the same data centers and I'm fairly certain there are further game oriented mods to the Xbox Live cloud. If a developer builds their servers using Xbox Live Compute for the Xbox 360 and Xbox One yes they could then build separate cloud servers on the public azure cloud (or Amazon's cloud or Google's cloud, etc) that would be accessible by other platforms. Since both MS offerings are based on Azure technology there would be less (but I doubt ZERO) changes they'd have to make between the two versions but they ARE two different versions and the public one doesn't HAVE to be Azure. A Windows PC could access either (though I suspect when you make the game you have jump through certain hoops to access the Xbox Live cloud and that likely prevents you from using other cloud services at that point... it's probably an either or choice not an all of the above thing... on a per game basis.)

I guess the point I'm trying to make is that for some reason other people are trying to ignore the fact that MS is offering developers a good deal if they want to develop a game on the Xbox. In all this back and forth about trying to define the cloud, it just seems like MS simply can't get any positive pr off the fact that developers get a cheaper option.

Well I can't speak for other people but I do think MS offering free cloud services to Xbox developers is a good deal. It's not without trade offs but I don't know how an option for free servers could not be considered a good deal. The point of this thread was not to bad mouth MS but to explain what the cloud is and isn't (at least enough to get the idea, it would have to be WAY too long to go into all the ins and outs.) I DO think MS PR is selling it (or at least allowing others to sell it without making any great attempt to clarify) as more than it is (Xbox/WinPC Exclusive, a revolution in AI/Physics computing, etc.) I've said from the beginning that it's a huge new thing in cost savings, I hope I've been consistently clear on that. It will usher in a new era of dedicated server type capabilities in console gaming which has traditionally been dominated by peer-to-peer gaming (though not exclusively). It should do that across all consoles though not just Xbox.

The only reason people get the impression that 'the cloud' is unique to the X1 is because MS is the only one trying to promote its usage in a public way. I guess that was MS' mistake. This stuff only leads to blow back.

I think the average console gamer has no idea what 'the cloud' is and so is confused my MS's marketing push. They could have just marketed it to developers and let the results speak for themselves. Right now people are throwing around the buzzword in all sorts of places it doesn't belong as a result which is what this thread was intended to address (hopefully I've done an ok job here, I'm not a professional journalist nor do I develop console games but I am a developer and do work with cloud computing in general) At the end of the day what the cloud does is make dedicated server capabilities affordable and end users don't really care how affordable dedicated servers are. I tiny fraction of Xbox 360 games were already running them, a larger fraction of PS3 games were running them (though peer-to-peer was still the majority there as well), and a yet larger portion of PC games use them so their capabilities are nothing new... just their affordability and with that affordability will come more widespread usage... again not Xbox specific.

[Showan]

Its currently a perk of the X1 because MS is currently the only company of the three console makers that is offering such access at a cheap cost. I don't think Nintendo or Sony have the infrastructure to offer a similar setup.I think its silly that MS is not allowed to promote the cloud simply because the tech that powers it can be used elsewhere. As long as MS doesn't try to claim that they are the only ones that can do this, whats the problem? Currently, they are the only ones offering the package to developers in this way. That a good thing that should be shared with the public.

THIS ^^^^^^^

Thank you Trooper for this post...

Though I get tired of hearing it.... It is more than a positive feature to have...

[trooper11]

I just wish more people that participated in conversations about this online took the time to really figure out what this stuff means before they come out and make a bold statement about something.

Coming and condemning something or praising it without really knowing what it is all about just gets tiring.

[spaceelf]

I just wish more people that participated in conversations about this online took the time to really figure out what this stuff means before they come out and make a bold statement about something.

Coming and condemning something or praising it without really knowing what it is all about just gets tiring.

So do the constant rehashes of what the tech is and isn't.

 

Nothing's changed since http://www.respawn.com/news/lets-talk-about-the-xbox-live-cloud/

[Showan]

So do the constant rehashes of what the tech is and isn't.

 

Nothing's changed since http://www.respawn.com/news/lets-talk-about-the-xbox-live-cloud/

You mean like the never ending talk about 16 to 32 to 64 bits of the Cartridge days....

Or the never ending talk about games being bigger and better because the are not on cartridge any longer, and disc will give them bigger and better worlds.

Or the never ending talk that with with a HIGH SPEED internet connection, it will be just like sitting next to people from all over the world, and gaming with them.

Or you mean with the never ending talk about "insert something here".... Gaming industry is about catch phrases and buzzwords... But they aren't targeted towards you. This is for the Non Tech Savvy, Causal gamer & "lil Timmy's Parents" who really make up the majority in gaming sales (as far as hardware goes at least). And are trying as hard as possible to grab those customers

This is their job to do this... It just so happens that you are tech savvy and thus get tired of hearing it...

I know a few people who aren't and are a bit intrigued by this...