Microsoft demonstrates Halo 4 streaming from the cloud

[kaotic]

 

 

Microsoft is building its own cloud gaming service. Company officials demonstrated a prototype of the service during an internal company meeting today. Sources familiar with the meeting revealed to The Verge that Microsoft demonstrated Halo 4 running on a Windows Phone and PC, both streaming the game from the cloud. We're told that the concept service runs smoothly on both devices, and that Microsoft has managed to reduce the latency on a Lumia 520 to just 45ms.

source

 

This is quite impressive; especially the 45ms latency.  I would REALLY love to play Halo 4 on my PC. 

[McKay]

The final nail in the coffin for Microsoft Games on PC. No more PC Games from their studios, the answer will just be "Why? You can just stream Xbox Games to your PC"

[kaotic]

The final nail in the coffin for Microsoft Games on PC. No more PC Games from their studios, the answer will just be "Why? You can just stream Xbox Games to your PC"

 

Yeah, I think there might be some truth to that.

[George P Global Moderator]

The final nail in the coffin for Microsoft Games on PC. No more PC Games from their studios, the answer will just be "Why? You can just stream Xbox Games to your PC"

 

Just because they're showing it can be done doesn't mean they're going to shift everything to that.  In the end though, but we're talking way down the line, lots of things will just be streamed to your client which will be nothing but a dumb terminal.   Once every last place gets super fast internet that is.   Till then this will be a bonus and shows that MS can do backwards compatibility this way going forward.

[vcfan]

they are obviously bringing some type of streaming service to windows devices. they recently started hiring some guys like a guy who made steam what it is to work on the windows pc gaming team.

 

AAA titles on a surface RT ? YUP :laugh:

[Crisp]

Xbox Infinity?

[trooper11]

This is very interesting considering that there was an interview with the Xbox head guy a while back where he said that they were considering a streaming service, something they wanted to offer.

 

It seems like they are farther along than I thought.  It would seem that MS I much closer to a Gaikai-like servce.  This could certainly be an issue for Sony, which is still trying to get its service going early next year for the US.

 

The bigger picture here is that MS seems to be very interested in created a game service, something that does not require certain hardware, something that can be accessed on a range of devices not possible before.  Look at MS' other work and you will see the pattern of migrating all of their software to the cloud and selling it as a service instead of individual copies.

[Blackhearted]

So the latency to what is likely their own servers in the same location as the test is 45ms... meanwhile, in the realworld where servers aren't right nearby, latency on input will be like dialup and unbearable.

[HawkMan]

So the latency to what is likely their own servers in the same location as the test is 45ms... meanwhile, in the realworld where servers aren't right nearby, latency on input will be like dialup and unbearable.

About the same or better than gaikai and onlive

Though when I tried onlive it was pretty unplayable.

[George P Global Moderator]

So the latency to what is likely their own servers in the same location as the test is 45ms... meanwhile, in the realworld where servers aren't right nearby, latency on input will be like dialup and unbearable.

 

Why do you assume that their servers are in the same location?   We don't know where the game was streaming from, it could be right from a beta service running on some Azure datacenter and not in the same building.   

[trooper11]

Why do you assume that their servers are in the same location?   We don't know where the game was streaming from, it could be right from a beta service running on some Azure datacenter and not in the same building.   

 

 

Yeah that's what I was wondering as well.  I mean, no one has said the servers were at the same location.

[Blackhearted]

Why do you assume that their servers are in the same location?   We don't know where the game was streaming from, it could be right from a beta service running on some Azure datacenter and not in the same building.   

 

Because of the unrealistically low latency. Look up test on things like gaikai/onlive and you'll see why i say that.

[JonnyLH]

Because of the unrealistically low latency. Look up test on things like gaikai/onlive and you'll see why i say that.

Common sense should tell you that most of the latency comes from server processing and not the round trip. Even if its locally routed your probably still looking at a latency of 20ms~ due to latency mostly being throughput determined. Azure is the most competent server farming platform in the world.

[trooper11]

Because of the unrealistically low latency. Look up test on things like gaikai/onlive and you'll see why i say that.

 

 

So what's the usual latency from something like Gaikai?

[HawkMan]

Because of the unrealistically low latency. Look up test on things like gaikai/onlive and you'll see why i say that.

How is it unrealistically low. I live put in nowhere using adsl, that is transmitted wirelessly from a mountain top nearby to the ISP server and from there to the world. And if I don't saturate my outgoing line I can easily get 16 to 20 pings within the country at least.

[vcfan]

Because of the unrealistically low latency. Look up test on things like gaikai/onlive and you'll see why i say that.

 

just because gaikai/onlive are incompetent doesnt mean it cant be done. they dont have nearly close the resources and infrastructure microsoft has.

[madd-hatter]

I'm going to take this like I take 80% of my gaming news these days:

Vid or didn't happen.

[theyarecomingforyou]

just because gaikai/onlive are incompetent doesnt mean it cant be done. they dont have nearly close the resources and infrastructure microsoft has.

So we're supposed to take at face value that Microsoft has managed to eliminate latency in streaming games? Other services made the same claims and every time they have failed to live up to expectations. Don't forget that any latency claims will be in addition to the latency from the controller. And it's worth pointing out that Gaikai is owned by Sony, a company with resources to match Microsoft's.

 

If Microsoft could stream games with minimal latency and with high graphical fidelity then there wouldn't be any need for the Xbox One. What you'll find is that it's like OnLive, which is to say that it will be playable for some genres of game but with heavily compressed visuals and noticeable latency. That's fine for mobiles and tablets where it will be able to surpass the quality achievable locally but it won't be even close to a replacement for consoles themselves.

[kaotic]

And it's worth pointing out that Gaikai is owned by Sony, a company with resources to match Microsoft's.

 

 

Not even close.

 

And I doubt MS is looking at it as a replacement for consoles. They're probably looking at it as a way to play OG xbox, and xbox360 games on all platforms. There's been a lot of people who've wanted to play games like Halo 3 on PC and this is one way they could.

[theyarecomingforyou]

Not even close.

Please, do explain your reasoning.

[vcfan]

So we're supposed to take at face value that Microsoft has managed to eliminate latency in streaming games? Other services made the same claims and every time they have failed to live up to expectations. Don't forget that any latency claims will be in addition to the latency from the controller. And it's worth pointing out that Gaikai is owned by Sony, a company with resources to match Microsoft's.

 

If Microsoft could stream games with minimal latency and with high graphical fidelity then there wouldn't be any need for the Xbox One. What you'll find is that it's like OnLive, which is to say that it will be playable for some genres of game but with heavily compressed visuals and noticeable latency. That's fine for mobiles and tablets where it will be able to surpass the quality achievable locally but it won't be even close to a replacement for consoles themselves.

 

let me know when they match the 300,000 xbox live servers. they couldnt even match the 15,000 used by the 360.

[siah1214]

Microsoft's datacenters have over a million physical servers in Azure.   300,000 (I'm guessing virtual) servers for xbox live.  The idea that sony can match that is downright laughable and can only be attributed to fanboy bias. 

[Showan]

Please, do explain your reasoning.

OnLive & Gakai was decent for the time period they existed in. Sony has since purchased Gaikai and as it stood then vs now, I'm sure is night and day (and I mean this in a good way for Sony). But even with all that flushing out, OnLive and Gaikai (even if combined) doesnt have the infrastructure back end like Microsoft does.

With Azure server farms all over the Globe and growing, pings with be much better. And Microsoft has BILLIONS & BILLIONS of $$$ to throw at this... The only thing that would hold things are ISP's whose networks aren't up to par to handle...

[theyarecomingforyou]

OnLive & Gakai was decent for the time period they existed in. Sony has since purchased Gaikai and as it stood then vs now, I'm sure is night and day (and I mean this in a good way for Sony). But even with all that flushing out, OnLive and Gaikai (even if combined) doesnt have the infrastructure back end like Microsoft does.

With Azure server farms all over the Globe and growing, pings with be much better. And Microsoft has BILLIONS & BILLIONS of $$$ to throw at this... The only thing that would hold things are ISP's whose networks aren't up to par to handle...

But as you point out, a lot of the difference relates to networks which are beyond Microsoft's control. Microsoft hasn't suddenly eliminated that. Further, while Microsoft does have an advantage when it comes to cloud computing it can't simply dedicate all of that to its Xbox division?afterall, it's trying to leverage that to make money?and Sony can simply outsource its cloud computing to third parties with more experience.

 

I just don't find it plausible that Microsoft has suddenly perfected streaming technology, not at a time when people still have trouble streaming 1080p YouTube videos on connections that are theoretically more than adequate. I simply doubt that Microsoft can get real-world latency anywhere near as low as it is claiming and that it is profitable to provide such a service to gamers without additional cost.

[JonnyLH]

But as you point out, a lot of the difference relates to networks which are beyond Microsoft's control. Microsoft hasn't suddenly eliminated that. Further, while Microsoft does have an advantage when it comes to cloud computing it can't simply dedicate all of that to its Xbox division?afterall, it's trying to leverage that to make money?and Sony can simply outsource its cloud computing to third parties with more experience.

I just don't find it plausible that Microsoft has suddenly perfected streaming technology, not at a time when people still have trouble streaming 1080p YouTube videos on connections that are theoretically more than adequate. I simply doubt that Microsoft can get real-world latency anywhere near as low as it is claiming and that it is profitable to provide such a service to gamers without additional cost.

Tell that to the financial 50.

People dismissing articles like this purely based on their personal opinion of a company is ridiculous. You've got the most competent server farming platform in the world which can effeciently deploy any application and scale based on usage resources using a lot of the HyperVM technology. Its very very good stuff.

Also people need to understand latency doesn't equal distance away, latency is based on throughput and hops.