http://www.engadget.com/2013/07/03/the-playroom-playstation-4/
It also recognises individual fingers and such. Also, another source, see Just Dance 2014. It works entirely without a controller or additional accessories and it's actually 'living proof' that it recognises a person's arms, legs, fingers, hands, head movements, etc.
ThatsMeRight said:Sony confirmed it in an interview that games can use the cloud to off-load certain aspects of the game, such as the AI.
ThatsMeRight said:Oh, and I am sorry, but Respawn didn't ask Sony for cloud solutions (do you have a source for this?). Microsoft offered Electronic Arts a lot of money for exclusivity. In fact, as it appears right now, Titanfall will be released on PS4 a year after the Xbox one.
I personally talked to both Microsoft and Sony and explained that we need to find a way to have potentially hundreds-of-thousands of dedicated servers at a price point that you cant get right now. Microsoft realized that player-hosted servers are actually holding back online gaming and that this is something that they could help solve, and ran full-speed with this idea......
Amazon has a cloud that powers websites. Sony has a cloud that streams game video so you can play a game that you dont have on your machine. Now Xbox Live has a cloud that somehow powers games.
ThatsMeRight said:I'm glad we can agree on something, haha.![]()
I know they said it, but they have no computational cloud assets that I'm aware of that can actually do it. With MS we all know it's using Azure.
Nonsense. Computational assets = servers. Where do you think PSN is run from? What do you think Sony's multiplayer servers are exactly? What exactly is Galkai going to run from?
Sony don't have a fancy name like Azure assigned to their servers, nor have they put a number on them, but cloud computing is simply a bunch of servers on the end of an internet connection. Rest assured, Sony have a whole bunch of them too, and are probably expanding them for the PS4 launch. It's simply about what tasks get assigned to the CPUs.
You're oversimplifying and treating the cloud like it's a singular piece of tech enabled by owning a server farm. You're ignoring the millions of cloud applications used to make these servers useful.
Look at SIRI, which is a good example of cloud compute. That's $200 million worth of adaptive learning and language modeling algorithms that get run off servers. You think just because MS or Sony owns a server farm, they can duplicate SIRI?
I can tell you right now unless Sony plans on paying some other company to use an Azure competitor or they have some secret R&D project nobody knows about, they're not gonna be able to duplicate Azure's cloud compute abilities at this point in time. If they did, Titanfall, Sunset Overdrive, etc would not be MS exclusives. Likewise, the XB1 is not gonna have the same streaming capabilities as the PS4 simply because MS owns a bunch of server farms. That's why Gaikai is worth over $300 million - it's streaming tech other companies can't copy.
Don't underestimate the value of cloud apps, which is what these companies are using for product differentiation. Both A and B might run off a server, but just because you can do A doesn't mean you can do B.
You really do buy in to marketing don't you?
Azure is the name for a collection of servers, nothing more. There's going to be some fancy software doing load balancing and so forth, but that's all there is to it. Amazon have exactly the same thing, but bigger, in their EC2 servers. Ultimately all these cloud servers run off exactly the same thing - CPUs, RAM and hard drives - the only difference being the software plonked on top.
You are correct that the software can be patented, such as Galkai, which prevents other people using it, but there's multiple ways in doing the same things to avoid patents (Azure vs Amazon EC2 for example, or Siri vs Samsung's S Voice). Cloud computing for games isn't going to be a massively complicated piece of technology - after all, it's just running code from a game remotely - it's simply the infrastructure that needs to be present.
MS stole a march on Sony with the announcement of this technology, but have no doubt that if it proves useful Sony can achieve the same thing.
EDIT: Also, those games are not dependent upon the cloud - they're not on the XBone because the cloud computing made the decision for them, they're on XBone because MS paid them a house full of money to do so. Titanfall, for example, is also getting a PC release...that doesn't use the cloud at all. Ergo, the cloud computing cannot be something that makes or breaks the game.
well you obviously _are_ buying into MS marketing regarding the "power of the cloud"
i recommend reading into the actual developer comments about it ... the really big advantage of Azure is the easy dynamic,scaling of providing dedicated servers for the players
it's a huge advantage for the developers that they don't have to care about setting up infrastructre (very likely though they'll have to pay for it)
You look at a single-player GTA type open world game. Obviously everything that requires a <100 ms response time has to be locally processed - Your character moving, collision detection, twitch based action, etc. What about the NPC AI? Right now the NPC's just walk down the street in straight lines and run away when something happens. This is all processed locally - which is why the same no-name NPC's disappear when you're not looking, your console needs to clear memory. By offloading AI, you could individualize them - give them unique routes and personalities stored in the cloud, make them a permanent part of the world, time sync their daily actions to real-time, etc. What about non-realtime environmental computations - vehicle AI on the street, the sun and planets tracking through the sky, non collision based physics. It's all simple right now because the bottleneck is your console's resources. Offload it to a cloud supercomputer, and you can get more detail, a wider variety of simulation/detail in your game.
Maybe I am getting old and grumpy.
The last thing I want is for my game's performance to be dependent on the quality of my internet connection and the availability of servers. That goes against everything console gaming stands for in my opinion.
I always disliked PC gaming, cause it gave me the responsibility of tailoring my system to the requirements of the latest games. "Will it run on my machine? What components do I need to upgrade to have the game run smoothly?"
I like console gaming cause it shifts that responsibility to the game developer. My system specs are fixed and solidly defined. It's the developer's job to tailor their game for optimal performance on my system.
Now this whole offloading-processing-jobs-to-the-cloud thing adds another variable, one that is hard to predict and rely on. Will we notice the game get slower and choppy when the servers are down? Will I try to avoid peak times to enjoy the best performance? What will happen a few years down the road, when the game's popularity is fading, and the servers are needed to support the latest and newest games?
All that can only be speculated right now. All I can say is that I really do not like the idea of adding this variable to the mix. I want solid reliable performance, I want the game to be optimized to my system's specs - not "my system and an army of cloud servers"! Yes, this also means only getting a bump in specs every ~7 years when the next generation of consoles comes around, I am totally fine with that.
And now get off my lawn, you dang kids with your fancy cloud servers!![]()
An excellent example of it, but one that would benefit this generation of consoles and not the next-gen. A GTA world wouldn't need a whole city to be kept alive (for all the millions of people who play it, when do the servers stop calculating say, if you stop playing for a while). It just needs new behaviours to download and a persistent-world update which can all be handled on boot - the Animal Crossing "preparing town" screen.
I'd still like to know who would pay for servers once the game is a few years old or if the studio or publisher goes bankrupt/closes down. I wonder if MS has made allowances for that, if Azure is a one-off payment or annual.
Maybe I am getting old and grumpy.
The last thing I want is for my game's performance to be dependent on the quality of my internet connection and the availability of servers. That goes against everything console gaming stands for in my opinion.
If you do any kind of online multiplayer, you're already dependent on those.
In the end, whoever doesn't like the cloud and wants 100% local computing should just pick up a PS4 because that's what they'll get. Only new PS4 games I've heard using cloud compute are the Division, because Ubisoft paid Cloudscaling millions to build them a server farm for persistent world elements, and Destiny, because Activision is using a server farm enhance the gameworld. Considering Sony doesn't have infrastructure or capabilitiy to subsidize something like Azure, PS4 games should end up following the same architecture as PS3 games.
Hey guys, did you hear the rumor that EA wants to start charging $80 for PS4/Xbone games...
That's pretty crazy
Only a problem if you insist on buying on/around launch day.
I usually wait about half a year after release, and then buy games for around 20 bucks from amazon UK. The next gen will probably be the same.
And also, to answer the original question: No, I have not heard that rumor.
Any chance you are actually starting this rumor here, so you can brag about it later in the "confess your sins" thread?![]()
Hey guys, did you hear the rumor that EA wants to start charging $80 for PS4/Xbone games...
That's pretty crazy
That's only a problem if you buy EA games on launch day!
I can't find any EA game in my library that wasn't bought in a Steam sale for a few ££ or second hand for console, for a few ££.
This increase in price might be just another way that publishers such as EA are trying to rescue the AAA market. Perhaps the extra profit created by the increase in price will offset enough of the losses produced by used game sales and piracy. With the new generation of consoles incoming, now would be the opportune time to try something different before gamers come to expect the same prices as the current generation.