Consoles Are Going Extinct, Says David Jaffe

[TRB]

No thanks, Australias internet is too **** for this kinda of thing, and i doubt they would put servers in australia to reduce lag.

If 'the other party' allows the NBN to be finished our internet will be quite good [better then the USA by far], but this idea that games could be streamed is still idiotic.

It wouldn't even work in the USA or Europe just due to latency and the sheer size of new games.

good luck streaming a 20gb game to 100,000 people at the same time 24hrs a day.

[Bronze_D]

I dont think latency will be a huge issue, NVidia's GRID network already has latency lower then a console to tv.. and i think that was on a tv

The problem will be more of what was raised above; with it all being integrated does this mean it will need to be a monopoly on distribution? Or completely freeware design...

To give a better angle at that

this is what they actually said

Cloud gaming today is typically done on a 5 Mbps connection at 720p30Hz, and the latency can be as good as 150 milliseconds on a GeForce GRID server. This is a very similar experience to what you get with today’s game consoles over HDMI on a TV.

i'd like to stress the 'CAN BE' part

and you are mistaking something... they are not even reducing latency from the server to us (which is the biggest problem for australian given our connection)... that one is IMPOSSIBLE, as in physically impossible without some new method of coding the information or new transmission method that are somehow more efficient than existing one.

what they are doing is reducing the latency that derives from the time it takes for the server to actually process the information and send it back ASAP to the consumer.

Combined, these technologies allow for the efficient, low-latency rendering of games in a remote data center to be streamed in standard H.264 format to any display device with a decoder

so either way, you still need:
A. a local server equipped with this GRID nearby your location (as close as possible naturally).
B. a network infrastructure capable of handling the stream.

and whatever latency comes from the distance between you and the data center (which is really the real problem for us) we'll still have to absorb face first.

[tacitus42]

It's ok. we'll have flying cars at about the same time too.
and personal jetpacks.
the future will be rad.

[InAUGral]

so either way, you still need:
B. a network infrastructure capable of handling the stream.

This will be the biggest barrier for aussies.

[tacitus42]

Well hey when TV was invented, not every place in Australia had TV antennas.

[Bugalugs McScruffin]

It wouldn't even work in the USA or Europe just due to latency and the sheer size of new games.

good luck streaming a 20gb game to 100,000 people at the same time 24hrs a day.

It already works in the US and Europe. The size of the game doesn't matter. Player input is sent to a server running the game, the image is sent back to the user's device, in this case a TV.

Distance between the device and the server is the issue. The further away the server the longer it takes for the information to get there.

[Bronze_D]

the other part that matter of course is the resolution and quality of the video streamed to the consumer that represents the game itself.

and in this part the bandwith requirements naturally explode the higher it goes (hence why they are using 720p resolution for now since that's still manageable).

so essentially imagine an extreme interactive youtube, and you can't really buffer the video naturally.

[TRB]

It wouldn't even work in the USA or Europe just due to latency and the sheer size of new games.

good luck streaming a 20gb game to 100,000 people at the same time 24hrs a day.

It already works in the US and Europe. The size of the game doesn't matter. Player input is sent to a server running the game, the image is sent back to the user's device, in this case a TV.

Distance between the device and the server is the issue. The further away the server the longer it takes for the information to get there.

No it doesn't work.

Just because they ran some demo with a server practically next door with a dedicated connection doesn't mean it somehow 'works'.

The latency is already over 100ms before the data even leaves the building.

and this article isn't talking about having all the game assets stored client side with just a cloud CPU/GPU.
this is talking about having all the assets stored server side and having the images transmitted which means it very much depends on the resolution being transmitted [aka no point having a high fidelity game if you're getting **** looking picture on the other end].

To even come close to the fidelity I get in my games right now you'd be streaming over a gig per hour.

let not forget this is supposed to be after the next gen of consoles so I'd expect it to require upwards of 5gb per hour to get that kind of image quality.

thats about equal to running a 15mb/s connection flat out all the time for the hundreds of thousands or millions of users that are playing at any given point in time.
tell me which network either here or in the US can handle that on top of current usage.

So no, it doesn't 'work' despite some smoke and mirrors tech demo.

[Bronze_D]

To be fair though, their statement already mentioned that: (and obviously filled with their promotional statements and what not that sums up as 'BUY OUR GRAPHICS CARD')

Hardcore gamers will still want to use local GeForce boards, such at the GTX 680 or GTX 690, because they can play at resolutions of 1080p-plus, and the latency of a local PC and monitor is only about 75 milliseconds. GeForce GRID cloud gaming is a good option for more casual gamers or for mainstream gamers who want to play PC games on a other devices, such as TVs and tablets.

and the drastic increase in bandwith relative to the video resolution is pretty much why they are sticking with the 720p target for now.

in a way, i can see the idea... i mean assuming the game is latency resistant, you can effectively play the game with the additional latency on platforms that have a fraction of the processing power of a PC (which otherwise would be impossible to use to play the game baring drastic redesign or reduction in visual fidelity).

[TRB]

To be fair though, their statement already mentioned that: (and obviously filled with their promotional statements and what not that sums up as 'BUY OUR GRAPHICS CARD')

Hardcore gamers will still want to use local GeForce boards, such at the GTX 680 or GTX 690, because they can play at resolutions of 1080p-plus, and the latency of a local PC and monitor is only about 75 milliseconds. GeForce GRID cloud gaming is a good option for more casual gamers or for mainstream gamers who want to play PC games on a other devices, such as TVs and tablets.

Exactly, which is why I'm saying it doesn't work in the context the person quoted in the news story was talking about.

also pc/monitor lag is typically much less then 75 MS, often closed to 15ms.
it could be as high as 70ms on a console/LCD/plasma tv setup though.

PC monitors often don't have the same level of onboard frame buffering and post processing as HDTVs.

I believe a way of testing is to see [for example] how many mouse pointers you can get to show at the same time by quickly moving your pointing device back and forth at a set rate.
beyond a certain speed they wont increase in number, they'll just spread out more.
using a high speed camera and some math you can calculate the difference between mouse input and screen output and how the buffering is working .etc

[Bugalugs McScruffin]

A streaming system currently works. http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/digit ... ve-article

Whether it is up to your standards or not is another question. The other point to note is that the article is talking about consoles, not PCs, so the resolutions are lower in general.

Finally, TVs will get better resolutions and the bandwidth required will increase, but so too will the infrastructure. Your argument rests on the idea that all other technology will improve but infrastructure will be the same.

[Bronze_D]

It's still a valid concern though because infrastructure upgrade goes at an EXCRUCIATINGLY slow pace compared to the lightning speed progress made in the hardware and software.

fortunately we have other ways to improve the bandwith without needing a major upgrade of infrastructure, but that has it's limit and it's one of the reason why NBN is needed since we're already squeezing the old copper network we have to it's bone.

and well... take a look at how fast NBN is coming in...

and ironically that article you point out, gives a rather clear picture of why it's not really working though, even just as a console replacement... (never mind PC, yeah i don't think anyone enjoy 150ms latency on MOUSE pointer thanks... unless if they have no choice).

[sh0v0r]

The market gets what the market demands, while people still demand low latency, high end performance, someone in the market will be catering.

[Bluefire]

You have to remember current gen consoles "last" for somewhere between 8-10 years... given when the next gen will be released. (hopefully before 2015 so they can finnaly stop **** pc gaming over for a few years)
So that gives them until 2025 at the earliest to get a network in place to handle cloud services for tv's with the hardware to replace consoles build into them.
Most likely the "next gen" consoles (aka: last years hardware) will be expected to last 15+ years instead of the 8-10 we can expect "current" consoles to "last"
So I wouldnt even consider expecting this tech till 2030.
Really dont see why so many people are upset with the article..

[Bronze_D]

probably because it's not really feasible in general...

regardless of what infrastructure we will get (which at best will likely be the NBN) the network latency is effectively impossible to remove, and it's not likely that it can be reduced to the point where actual gaming of the level that can replace local console/PC becomes viable short of some breakthrough in R&D.

what we are improving thus far is mostly our bandwidth, but the latency improvement is marginal comparatively and not likely to progress much from there short of laying a direct optic fiber STRAIGHT from your residence to the data center with no relay/switch in between.