Slashdot Mirror
Microsoft's Next-Gen Xbox Will Focus On 'XCloud' Game Streaming (theverge.com)
One big area that Microsoft is focusing on with its next-generation Xbox is game streaming. According to a report from Thurrott.com, Microsoft is working on two new Xbox consoles. The "Xbox Two" will be a console similar to that of the Xbox One and Xbox 360, with updated hardware and specs. The other Xbox console in development will be limited to streaming games. The Verge reports: The streaming-only console will reportedly include a low amount of local compute for handling tasks like controller input, image processing, and collision detection. These tasks are essential to reducing latency in game streaming, and Microsoft is said to be planning to slice up processing between the game running locally and in the cloud in order to reduce input lag and other image processing delays. Microsoft is currently developing its next-generation Xbox console under the Scarlett codename. The software giant recently revealed it's also working on a game streaming service for Xbox that will work across any device. This is a key part of Microsoft's future plans with Xbox, and part of the company's vision for developing its "Netflix for video games" service, Xbox Game Pass.
Sources familiar with Microsoft's plans tell The Verge that Microsoft is currently "all hands" on creating datacenters capable of powering the company's game streaming service. Referred to as codename "XCloud" internally, Microsoft has been experimenting with combining four lots of custom Xbox consoles into a single server blade for its datacenters. These servers will launch initially with developers in mind to build and develop games in the cloud instead of local debug machines, and then to stream games to consumers.
Sources familiar with Microsoft's plans tell The Verge that Microsoft is currently "all hands" on creating datacenters capable of powering the company's game streaming service. Referred to as codename "XCloud" internally, Microsoft has been experimenting with combining four lots of custom Xbox consoles into a single server blade for its datacenters. These servers will launch initially with developers in mind to build and develop games in the cloud instead of local debug machines, and then to stream games to consumers.
"low amount of local compute for handling tasks like controller input, image processing, and collision detection"
I'm honestly more confused than anything
Followed by a $15 / mo subscription.
People are being brought up into this new norm.
This could make senses for multiplayer games that rely heavily on always online anyways, both creating a fair playing field graphics wise and hopefully making them impossible to hack. I would be concerned about ping causing some issues in how the game feels to the player however.
"low amount of local compute for handling tasks like controller input, image processing, and collision detection"
You are probably wondering why they are doing collision detection on the box when they are streaming the game from the server...
The answer of course is that the are doing the *game* collision detection on server and just streaming the video/audio; the local box collision detection is merely to detect when you kick the unit out of frustration and parks the cache hard drive briefly.
"There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
They tried to "stream" a game, not only some sequences but having the game essentially run on their servers with the players' computers handling more or less just input and graphics rendering. What I'm talking about is the original Final Fantasy XIV (not the 2013 re-release but the original one in 2010). To say it was unplayable would be more praise than the result deserved. And we're talking about a fairly simple MMO here where delays are not quite so noticeable as in other games that depend highly on precisely timed input, where a key aspect of the game is that you feel in control.
But it seems some kids have to touch the stove themselves to believe it.
We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
Subscriptions, a steady stream of it.
[($)]
Have these idiots not seen the steaming pile of laggy shit that is PSNow? It will work properly in New York and that's about it
Netflix for video games even with download installed to an local fat client. Download caps with hurt it.
With this caps are worse and people with slow networks are just cut off. Even people with unlimited FAP overnights can work with an download to an local fat client system.
Also with no network neutrality isp can really slow things down and it's not just that your downloads take longer or when you stream that movie you have to wait a bit for the buffer. No it's lower the game down maybe 720p or lower and deal with poor lag / pings.
From my PC.
i bet microsoft kicked market share to the curb soon as someone there had the brain fart that is streaming streaming (for its absolute drm).
i won't touch streaming games. some games that use a server-client model already use up tons of data i dont even want to think about what data usage and bandwidth requirements would be.
UK internet is slow, spotty. We're just not there.
This thing will not work here.
Any time cloud gaming systems are announced they need to come up with a way of hiding network lag, so they choose a driving game and never an FPS.
Driving games have a lot of inertia; they don't have twitch controls, so they're the perfect candidate.
Let's see what XCloud is demonstrated with!
Seems like we've been here before. Possibly more than once. It's never really flown well in the past, but maybe this time will be different?
It does makes a lot of sense, for manufacturers and developers. If you take away all the hardware and turn the 'console' into basically a glorified VNC viewer... what's not to love about this?
Modding your console system becomes moot. Piracy ends instantly. Hell, it's the last console you'll buy, since when the games need more processing power, they just move your game onto a better data center system.
I'm surprised this hasn't happened much sooner. Let's just pray it sticks to games and console systems, and doesn't migrate into the general computing arena, cuz then they have us, by the balls. Forever. Alas, it already is honestly, one needs only point to Microsoft Office 365.
Sarcasm aside.. this actually does make a hell of a lot of sense, from every angle. It will eventually lead to console systems just going away entirely and you 'subscribe' to your game console delivery service, and you 'play' with whatever device you happen to have.. laptop, desktop PC, smart TV, tablet, phone, endless possibilities for this technology.
Of course, any network outage, burp or bump, and you are going to feel it, every time, every tiny hiccup gunna translate into sluggish response from the game, or complete momentary desync from your inputs to it's outputs. I imagine these are issues that those peddling the Thin Clients of the future will try to keep buried.
Also, as a side note, this will in the long run, not be cheap. Initially, to hook people, they'll practically give these things away. But as the companies realize the maintenance and power costs for running all that back end for millions of people playing games... yeah, they're gunna need to charge a pretty hefty penny to make any kind of profit. Maybe they should abandon Thin Client.. as I said, we've tried it before and ... see any thin clients near you? That's what I thought.
go back to your incel /btard trollden of hatered
but hell no.
Networks available to the consumer aren't quite where they need to be in terms of speed, availability and reliability ( heavy emphasis on the latter )
to think streaming any game beyond a simple mobile style ( read that small size ) app is even an option.
Net neutrality just got torpedoed. Guess who is going to have to pay the big bucks to ensure those game streams don't get put into the low priority que ? :|
Some places have zero broadband options at all. Going to just tell those folks too fucking bad ?
Data caps are going to be an issue for many.
I have a mediocre connection ( 90/6 ) that works most of the time, but not all of the time. Packet loss is a frustrating occurrence when it's upstream somewhere.
Noting the previous, my only other option is Verizon DSL and that is absolutely not happening. ( You think Xfinity is bad . . . hahahaha )
Ever play a game where the next area / stage has to load first ? Imagine waiting for it to come via network download.
I will pass on every aspect of this lol
I prefer a system I can play offline if necessary when Xfinity decides to go all stupid on me.
Microsoft Office 365 has full fat client + web mail. Not the same as gameing.
Sorry, but our internet is REALLY bad here. Will work well in China and any other country that has actual competition and infrastructure. But here we have monopolies and still consider DSL an option.
"Have you ever thought about just turning off the TV, sitting down with your kids, and hitting them?"
Wow. Seriously you need to calm down and ask the doctors in you mental patient wing for an adjustment.. what you are currently taking needs to be carefully adjusted.
your going to need another CAL for that, just don't get audited... RDP sucks so I am sure this will be worse. VMware PCoIP and Blast would work but MS will not license that. HP RGS would work too, but MS will not license that either. The queen says "Let them eat cake" and we accept this as good.
Your Average Joe
If most of the back end of this system is going to be loaded in the cloud... then why the fuck even bother having a console at all??
For the same reason Valve has the Steam Link extender.
Just turn X-box live into a new Steam and be done with it.
I imagine on average (median), the display connected to an Xbox One is much larger in inches or centimeters than the display connected to a PC running Steam. (Unfortunately, Steam Hardware & Software Survey data do not include the physical size of the primary monitor, only its pixel count.) People choose Xbox for the living-room-first experience, or because they don't own and/or don't want the upkeep burden of a gaming PC.
So in other words if you've got a shitty internet connection, you'll have a shitty console experience. Buy the hardware, lease the game, until they decide to stop supporting it AND pay for a net connection to support it all. Sounds like a cash cow for M$, and a cornholing for consumers. YEAH TEAM !!!
errr....umm...*whooosh* *whoosh* Is this thing on ?
I see no possible way this could work to any reasonable degree. Even if it could be made to more or less work, the level of complexity required on the game programming side of things would ensure failure anyway. That console better cost nothing and have a monthly fee of like 10$ with access to the whole library because otherwise nobody is going to put up with the inevitable trash heap it's going to be.
I can play Overwatch at a Platinum level on my Xbox One over streaming. The latency is surprisingly palatable at 9-10ms. And latency is dropping and dropping. Cable used to be around 60ms a couple years ago, now it's 6-10ms.
Many TVs have 10+ms of latency just in the video processor but that's getting better every year too. There's also Warp rendering where the GPU synthesizes a frame from a previous frame. It's being used for lowering latency of VR but it's something that could easily be baked into a low cost DSP chip on a thin Xbox Cloud device. The cloud renders a frame. If everything continues as expected and the latency is unnoticeable then it'll just wait. If the input changes or game state changes the local machine can synthesize a new frame from the last frame. \
XCloud won't be out for at least 2 years. We'll be living in a whole new world by then.
Fuck streaming games ...Oh yeah, remember that?
Fuck games as a service
Fuck the xbox poo
Fuck slashdot beta
When we moved over here from the US I was a little shocked at the state of the ISPs. We're stuck with au but have friends with similar problems through other providers:
- Connections just randomly drop
- Oversold back-hauls
- 10 year DSL router with no firmware updates and no option to use a third-party modem/router
- Using WiFi on the router is an up-charge (and it's only 802.11g)
- DNS server will frequently return SERVFAIL (thankfully they don't block third-party servers)
* Some major ISPs use enterprise NAT by default (they cast it as a security feature) so you end up getting double-natted unless you call them and tell them to turn it off for you.
Yes, you can get FTTH in major metro regions but only in newer buildings and apparently getting your rated bandwidth is exceedingly rare (see oversold back-hauls). I miss my Verizon FiOS.
I have a tough enough time deciding on what games to buy today given the ambiguity over how good the offline play is.
I have little motivation to pay $50+ for a game which is online only and will only have a large enough user base for under 2 years.
Local play has to be on par or better than online play.
How many GameStop used games become doorstops because online play is non-existant?
For $2 to $5 a game the online only model may work if there is no monthly subscription cost.
$15 a month subscription or forced paid upgrades is not a business model I would buy into.
I've tried game streaming from my Xbox downstairs to my PC and even that doesn't work well. If they can't get game streaming working well over a 10gbps LAN I've no fucking idea how they think they can make it work well over the internet and half way across the world.
I mean, they keep trying to make it sound like they're doing you a favor.
They have had their eye on streaming games for the last 20 years. A way to hold complete control, to decide when you stop playing it, and how you play it. It made them sick to their wallets that you could still play the first version of the game that you loved and still play video games, saying to hell with the new Game release 3 or Game release 4. You weren't buying it because the original was better, and you still play it.
Well enough of that. We'll "depreciate" the copy you paid for, and say we longer offer it, so you can no longer play it. Now if you want to play anything close to it, you're forced to buy our newest title. We can also turn that previous title to shit with an update patch to make it like our newer product, saying it's a free content update etc, but it will not only wreck what you loved about the original, it won't be as good as our next release, so you'll be encouraged to buy it, for more 'features'
Oh yeah, remember how pissed everyone was when they wouldn't let you share games with a friend? Pass him your disk? They were super mad to that they didn't get to do it.
Now they're going to 'stream it' so there is no disk to share, it's all account based. Oh no they didn't say they're getting rid of sharing, noooo, just UNFORTUNATELY...the technology we're using doesn't support it, you know, for your benefit.
All these corporate companies have constantly, non stop looked for a way to be profitable but remove all control of products from your hands. They just want the money but it still all be theirs..
That's why hardware gets locked down, they make it difficult to repair except by giving them more money and they use firmware to make sure you only run what they want you to run, even completely legal software.
This is just the next step, continuation on this path. I've gamed a lot of my life, but many companies, game developers, and console makers have been pushed out of my wallet due to their bullshit, it's not worth it. Don't worry, I'll speak with my money too, hopefully everyone else will.
Triggered
*yawn* And you just one more autistic retard with a raging case of Trump derangement syndrome. You just cant accept that President Trump was able to pull of an upset victory against one of the worst candidates the DNC has pushed in recent history. So you run around screeching about your desire to lynch people in the comments section of /.
I'll think you'll find it was the pro-trump persone screeching like a moron. As they tend to do.
Wanna buy a shirt?
https://www.redbubble.com/people/stealthfinger/shop?asc=u
It's not too bad, unless someone else tries to use the network for any purpose at all.
Wanna buy a shirt?
https://www.redbubble.com/people/stealthfinger/shop?asc=u
Ditto for Australia.
and even a clinton presidency where she forces all white males to service her crab infested pussy would be better than a streaming games console.
Much of the rest if not all of the rest of the first world don't have data caps. I've not been with an ISP which hasn't been unlimited data for almost two decades here in the UK.
I only please one person per day. Today is not your day. Tomorrow isn't looking good either. - Scott Adams
"If the future pans out the way Spencer sees it. In this scenario, there’s never really an Xbox Two. There’s just an Xbox One being upgraded over time like a PC, but with games developed on the Universal Windows Platform system, they would stay backward compatible despite new hardware. The software platform is separated from the hardware, allowing consoles to be upgraded without needing to move to an entire “next” generation of hardware."
https://www.forbes.com/sites/i...
So Xbox One X is a $500 flop after less than two years, and can't play the new games too?
Twinstiq, game news
You assume your ISP won't charge you a $15.00 month "fast lane" fee for the connection. ISPs are just slavering to see how many fees they can start assessing, and you better expect to start paying twice as you are now, both in new game costs, and per month for the same shitty, buggy code as you do now.
This is message I'm getting: "Hey, we know we screwed with the Xbox One in trying to destroy the used game market. Here's this new idea that doesn't have the exact same result. It will be rad, we swear!"
Well, there's spam egg sausage and spam, that's not got much spam in it.
There's data caps and then there's "network traffic optimization" or whatever the ISPS want to call it. Basically you're using some bandwidth or a certain type of bandwidth. The ISPs totally won't throttle that and offer you a package to make things more "smooth".
Well, there's spam egg sausage and spam, that's not got much spam in it.
I think in the US game streaming used to be an interesting and viable option. However, the current regimed policies of dismantling net neutrality and the push by the big telecoms to pwn the Internet have rendered that option obsolete.
The moderators get it. Too bad you don't. :-)
P.S. if it helps to give you a clue, I would have posted the same response to Sony or Nintendo building the same box. I have nothing against any of them, gaming-wise.
"There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
Streaming here refers to the revenue that streams from people's wallets, straight to MSFTs accounts.
1. Lock the console
2. Lock the console to an account
3. Lock games to a console, locked to an account
4. Lock the account to a geography
5. Lock the purchases to a time limit
For example, games "purchased" are already locked to the console, but if the subscription lapses, the data on the games dies as well, and it must be repurchased.
Or, if you have "unsupported" games, they get support as long as you pay the subscription. Of course, if your subscription lapses, you lose the games, but can "purchase" years of back support for a "small fee".
Consumers have too much choice. They hop from service to service, because there is no penalty for cancellation. This introduces just that. Cancel, and lose everything.
Just keep paying that "small monthly fee".
It works great for cellphones, it will work just as well here.
It also addresses the issue of sharing. Lock the game to an account , locked to a locked console. Console dies, repurchase everything.
Im still fighting the good fight on wireless controllers - lag, cost, plug in to charge (so still cords!), dropped packets. How is this better than the instant response of a wired controller? Because the wire tickles your knee once a night? Streaming is terrible right now - at least with sony and steam - and I dont think the latency issues can be resolved since well, look at the performance of our controllers. Not to mention, taking my hardware takes control away from the end user.
Sorry, I take every chance I get to remind people how shitty we let BT controllers become.
Yes. There is nothing about that design (streaming games) that makes any sense as far as making gaming better for the user in any way. It's less efficient overall too (more hardware globally), and it will be an ongoing cost for them to maintain their servers, which really shouldn't be needed at all (you could run your own server of FPS games decades ago; no reason they couldn't do that today).
I'm kinda curious, with all the money that top gamers put into things, if this will open a market for something like HFT (high frequency trading), where people will buy real estate that is physically close to the servers along with direct connections to their network to significantly reduce their latency. I mean, why wouldn't someone do that?
You'll get a week's worth of gaming before you hit your data cap.... if you don't have another family member watching netflix that is.
I prefer offline consoles and disks/carts. Because I can still pull out my PS2 and play those games all I want. In 7 years, the streaming service will be shut off for this version of XBOX and everyone will need the next gen console in order to keep playing. Rendering the old console a useless piece of junk.
and it will be an ongoing cost for them to maintain their servers,
Exactly. which is why you will see that the game you think you bought gets cancelled because they wants to use the servers for something more profitable. (While on my PC, I can play games that no supplier cared about for a long time.) And instead of getting angry about the cancellation, you're expected to take it and buy the next title - that will get cancelled too . . .
But if you have a datacenter that can start up any game you want on demand then there is no exclusive per-title maintenance. Unlike the way Blockbuster had to maintain copies of older titles and when they eventually wore out they were no longer available Netflix can maintain them forever because whether it's new titles or old ones they all use the same infrastructure rather than dedicated systems.
If gaming were a subscription service like Netflix or Spotify where you pay a monthly fee and play whatever you want whenever you want on a thin-client then heaps of people would go for it. Sure there would be plenty of Blockbuster types still about but this would make highend gaming much cheaper and accessible for the average consumer.