PS4 Architect: Cloud Computing Won't Make Graphics Better

[RandV80]

If you require Cloud Computing to get your game to run a certain way. And lets say the internet of a gamer goes down.. doesn't that strips out allot of functionality from the game?

How more you off load how more is broken!

And will there be games that are utterly broken if it can't run the cloud?

In short what I ask is simply yes using the cloud to do things the current next gen hardware can't optimally will extend its life. And make it more powerful. But where is the fall back point?

If a game requires the cloud to run 50% of its functionality isn't it technically broken?

No, the game just runs worse/slower.

Cloud allows you to offload certain processes/tasks, so that your console can focus it's own processors on certain processes/tasks so those processes/tasks can run faster/better.

Because the console processors have limited resources to spend amongst processes/tasks. And if they don't have to deal with certain processes/tasks themselves then they can spend more resources on the remaining ones.

If there is no cloud the console processors do all processes/tasks themselves, which is worse/slower.

Of course if you have no internet connection you do loose any extra cloud based function (like cloud saves). But these are not essential to playing the game.

That is the idea anyway, of course you have to take things like latency into account which theoretically could actually make cloud processing worse/slower.

My concern would be the developers willingness to embrace this technology. We saw how they dragged their feet the last go around with multi-processing, so developing a game with the mindset of 'what can we offload to the cloud and how to handle various-none latency issues' sounds like a whole lot of extra development and design time. The much better solution would be to have your local machine able to handle all the processing and memory requirements for your game, outsourcing to the cloud is something for multiplayer or a work around if the hardware can't handle the software.

 

[Delance]

The dependence on cloud computing means if your connection is down you can?t play and when the provider discontinues or if provider removes the server the providershuts down the server your game will be useless.

 

[Tien Shen]

]I'd love for you to show me where Microsoft proclaimed it as a "mystical cure-all". Microsoft has said all along that it would be useful for latency-insensitive computation only.

http://www.develop-online.net/news/44318/Microsoft-Cloud-makes-Xbox-One-four-times-more-powerful

Four times as powerful. FOUR FUCKING TIMES MORE POWER WHEN IT'S ONLINE. Microsoft has been claiming that for quite a while now, and last time I checked, saying you multiply your console's power with 'da internets' counts as claiming cloud computing is a 'magic bullet' to gaming.

Do you read more than the headline, ever?

The actual MS statement is this:

"We're provisioning for developers for every physical Xbox One we build, we're provisioning the CPU and storage equivalent of three Xbox Ones on the cloud," he said. "We're doing that flat out so that any game developer can assume that there's roughly three times the resources immediately available to their game, so they can build bigger, persistent levels that are more inclusive for players. They can do that out of the gate."

Read it and comprehend it. Then read it again. And one more time for good measure.

Nowhere does it say "the cloud makes Xbox One 'four times more powerful'". They said "here's the amount of CPU power we're allocating for cloud processing." That is all.

Actually reading further down, it says in the article:

A spokesperson for Xbox Australia went on to reiterate the claims to Stevivor, and stated that the Xbox One would effectively be "40 times greater than the Xbox 360 in terms of processing capabilities" using the cloud.

 

[OneCatch]

I've always thought that cloud computing in games would only really be useful in certain processes. I can see an RTS using the cloud for a particularly complicated overall-strategy AI that doesn't need a quick response time, while running the individual unit/local squad AI on the machine itself. As far as I know, graphics need a fairly quick response time, so don't respond well to latency.

Yeah, niche applications like that it could work for (and things like determining random encounters in games, even things like the Director in L4D) but not for real time rendering or whatever.

Though if they were to offload battle RTS AI then we could take down the entire XBL network by playing a single Empire Total War siege battle [http://steamcommunity.com/app/10500/discussions/0/828938532915871228/][footnote]Granted, it might take a while[/footnote].
Gotta love pathfinding bugs that just consume ever more CPU resources until the game crashes!

 

[masticina]

Awesome forum

I think it is nice to see a forum like this where we all think the situations through and well we all seem to agree that it sounds cool but it won't work.

And yes I would love to see ETW in a full size siege battle being ran on said cloud. Hey at least it isn't your own console that is groaning and breaking out in black clouds.

And yes what if in 5-6 years the specific cloud service running your game goes down. Again this would make your single player game less worth. Already single players games are being stuck with online requirements and online activations. Already singleplayer games are turning into MMO's where you are alone.

Cloud services going down would just mean that our single player games, yes even our single player games, would end up worse.