68 posts in this topic

He said High End Machine? What does he mean by that then? What specs he talking. I am really surprised that the high end machine FPS dropped that low when you look at anything like 3D Mark or whatever. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I truly believe the only way any of you skeptics would believe this was not rigged was if Microsoft released the source code and a runable project that anyone could see, and even then, there would be people saying it's bs.

 

Project Milo still has people dubious when MS demo something, rightly or wrongly (that demo was horse**** though, no doubts). Once you see 3rd parties show things or actual finished products from MS you'll see doubts lessen.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Project Milo still has people dubious when MS demo something, rightly or wrongly (that demo was horse**** though, no doubts). Once you see 3rd parties show things or actual finished products from MS you'll see doubts lessen.

 

 

It also is affected by timing.  Sony has done dubious things in the past, but if they made any announcement like this today, it would be taken at face value by most people.  But right now, MS gets no such consideration because the issues people have with them are much more recent. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It also is affected by timing.  Sony has done dubious things in the past, but if they made any announcement like this today, it would be taken at face value by most people.  But right now, MS gets no such consideration because the issues people have with them are much more recent. 

 

Pretty sure if it was a demo of the next Killzone game the 2nd or 3rd post would be asking if it's CG :P Still it doesn't really matter what other companies do, you build your own fanbase trust through what you do. And anyway, demos of things such as this are always looked at sceptically, especially when it's controlled. We live in an industry where what we often get shown early on is a "target render". See Watch Dogs recently...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Pretty sure if it was a demo of the next Killzone game the 2nd or 3rd post would be asking if it's CG :p Still it doesn't really matter what other companies do, you build your own fanbase trust through what you do. And anyway, demos of things such as this are always looked at sceptically, especially when it's controlled. We live in an industry where what we often get shown early on is a "target render". See Watch Dogs recently...

 

 

Your points are true, but they don't invalidate my point.

 

Timing matters.

 

As I said, a company can earn trust by having a certain length of time without dubious issues that builds up trust among end users.  Sony earned more trust recently thanks to the actions they took, meaning that their ideas can be given more 'benefit of the doubt consideration'.  MS, on the other hand, has not built trust recently, which has resulted in much more skepticism.

 

Nothing you said above changes that reality.  Plus, you paint it as being about building trust with fans, when its actually about building trust with all potential customers, not just those that are already a fan of what you do.  Sony and MS don't just go after people that already want to own their products.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As good as the demo looks, I refuse to believe it would be possible on any ordinary internet connection. It says it's tracking over 23,000 individual objects, which will all have their own equations applied and whatnot.

Let's just imagine for a moment trying to send down the gravity equations and other stuff for 10,000 objects... Yeah, looks almost impossible. Now double that and they're saying it's completely achieveable. ######. With a 10Gbps LAN it might well be.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As good as the demo looks, I refuse to believe it would be possible on any ordinary internet connection. It says it's tracking over 23,000 individual objects, which will all have their own equations applied and whatnot.

Let's just imagine for a moment trying to send down the gravity equations and other stuff for 10,000 objects... Yeah, looks almost impossible. Now double that and they're saying it's completely achieveable. ########. With a 10Gbps LAN it might well be.

 

 

I wonder though.  Did they actually claim that the calculations were taking place live and then instantaneously sent over a network to the pc? 

 

My thinking was that they leveraged the servers to do the calculations quickly, so quickly that they had time to do the calculations, cache them into some compressed form, and then send them over a standard connection to the pc where it is decompressed on the fly and used. Or maybe the raw calculations aren't actually that large in size.

 

The guys doing the demo seemed to be focused on the idea that data that is not bound by very low latency rules can be done via the cloud, hence the demo.  They claimed that the data in question was indeed not data that the game required in real time, so latency can be high and still be enough to get the data to the game engine for use in time to matter.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

We're not talking about sending or working with GBs of data, or even MBs I bet.  The actual sizes of data being sent is small, we're talking calculations here, the reason the local system's framerate dropped is that doing all the calculations on the single SoC/PC gets in the way of rendering the scene itself.   With offloading it, the game/app sends out the path and impact info or however you want to think about it and the calculations happen up on the cloud, the final info the GPU needs to render where the pieces are to fall is what's sent back and so on.    I'm betting we're working with KBs of data going back and forth, and when latency isn't an issue then even lower end 2mbps connections are enough.

 

When a developer is smart about how it's used it's easy to see them sending out what they need calculated, getting the final data back and holding that in cache till the scene has to render.   So if you're going to enter a new area of the game in 2-3seconds that, IMO, is enough time for them to offload quite a bit, get the needed data back and let the local hardware just show the scene without having to do any heavy calculations.    A number of things you can't directly control or change in a game world could be offloaded, like the wind blowing at any given time and how it will effect things around you, it's something the game would do on it's own and not something you'd effect, you can offload that, get the data back and then show it.   You could do this with lighting when a scene changes from daytime to night and so on.  There's probably a number of things to offload and I really question just how much data is being sent back and forth, we're not talking about streaming the game from the server to your screen here.  We're talking, more or less, part of, if not all of, a scenes render pipeline or path or w/e the correct naming is.  But instead of the local CPU giving instructions for the GPU to process you'd get the final 0s and 1s from the server and so on.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I wonder though.  Did they actually claim that the calculations were taking place live and then instantaneously sent over a network to the pc? 

 

My thinking was that they leveraged the servers to do the calculations quickly, so quickly that they had time to do the calculations, cache them into some compressed form, and then send them over a standard connection to the pc where it is decompressed on the fly and used. Or maybe the raw calculations aren't actually that large in size.

 

The guys doing the demo seemed to be focused on the idea that data that is not bound by very low latency rules can be done via the cloud, hence the demo.  They claimed that the data in question was indeed not data that the game required in real time, so latency can be high and still be enough to get the data to the game engine for use in time to matter.

You wouldn't be able to do that though, because things change in real-time, if someone does something else like another explosion, it'd interact with all the other objects and the data received on them would be useless

 

Doing calculations on 23,000 individual objects, you've got to send that data over and it's going to be a path or whatnot and so the amount of data builds up very fast.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You wouldn't be able to do that though, because things change in real-time, if someone does something else like another explosion, it'd interact with all the other objects and the data received on them would be useless

 

Doing calculations on 23,000 individual objects, you've got to send that data over and it's going to be a path or whatnot and so the amount of data builds up very fast.

 

Maybe you can pre-calculate the data based on what is possible in the scene and then that data is taken by the game engine for use based on how the user interacts with it?

 

I mean is the only possibility here that it is bs? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

All they've done is shown one thing slowed down and one thing running at normal speed.

 

There was nothing in that demo that couldn't run even on a last gen 360?  Graphics were awful and physics average.

 

They just slapped a low number on the slowmo one and all of a sudden people are lapping it up

Sure. You need crysis level graphics or a high end computer will never slow down. /s

Shows the level of your understanding about computers, graphics/physics/ai processing. Please, educate yourself first and then talk.

 

 

He said High End Machine? What does he mean by that then? What specs he talking. I am really surprised that the high end machine FPS dropped that low when you look at anything like 3D Mark or whatever. 

See above.

 

 

As good as the demo looks, I refuse to believe it would be possible on any ordinary internet connection. It says it's tracking over 23,000 individual objects, which will all have their own equations applied and whatnot.

Let's just imagine for a moment trying to send down the gravity equations and other stuff for 10,000 objects... Yeah, looks almost impossible. Now double that and they're saying it's completely achieveable. ########. With a 10Gbps LAN it might well be.

Another "this is not possible because I said so" post. Do you have ANY idea how much information you can put in an 1MB package?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Pretty sure if it was a demo of the next Killzone game the 2nd or 3rd post would be asking if it's CG :p Still it doesn't really matter what other companies do, you build your own fanbase trust through what you do. And anyway, demos of things such as this are always looked at sceptically, especially when it's controlled. We live in an industry where what we often get shown early on is a "target render". See Watch Dogs recently...

 

If it was a Killzone demo or screens I'd be dubious of it too, after they were caught photoshopping in-game screenshots to make them look better, adding lighting effects and changing the colouration. 

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Collision detection is usually done server side today. they even store snapshot and full history of where you travel for a period of time. So that when you fire a gun at someone, the server actually turns back time to properly calculate hit or miss. I'm doing a terrible job at explaining it though.  But it's all to prevent people abusing lag to dodge shots or hid behind buildings. 

 

Best example of this might be Diablo 3, were there was a lot of rubber-banding at the beginning when the servers weren't much optimised.

 

EDIT: That is, if I understood what you wrote.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As good as the demo looks, I refuse to believe it would be possible on any ordinary internet connection. It says it's tracking over 23,000 individual objects, which will all have their own equations applied and whatnot.

Let's just imagine for a moment trying to send down the gravity equations and other stuff for 10,000 objects... Yeah, looks almost impossible. Now double that and they're saying it's completely achieveable. ########. With a 10Gbps LAN it might well be.

 

All have their own equations applied? No... it's the same physics, the same equations, applied to every object...

 

Sending down gravity equations? The equations don't take up any space at all. It's the time to apply those calculations 20,000 times.

 

Math for 10,000 objects, assuming no compression:

Transmitting the positions of all the objects to the server? 117 kb of information (10000 * 3 floats * 4 bytes/float).

Transmitting the orientations of all the objects? 156 kb of information (quaternion... 10000 * 4 floats * 4 bytes/float).

Transmitting the velocity of all the objects? 117 kb of information.

... several more fields ...

Your estimated bandwidth? 10 Gbps? 1.25 GB/s? It would take 1/3 of a millisecond to transmit the data (excluding latency) at that speed.

 

At 60 fps, that's 16.6 ms per frame. You could transmit the data back and forth 50 times each frame (ignoring latency). At the 30 fps demoed, you could transmit the data back and forth 100 times in the time between frames.

 

You don't actually have to pre-calculate everything for the path. All you have to do is offload crude bounding box calculations... determine which objects will be colliding in the cloud. That leaves your gaming console to calculate the actual collisions, without having to go through the huge problem of computing which of 30,000 objects are interacting. Most of them aren't.

9 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

All have their own equations applied? No... it's the same physics, the same equations, applied to every object...

 

Sending down gravity equations? The equations don't take up any space at all. It's the time to apply those calculations 20,000 times.

 

Math for 10,000 objects, assuming no compression:

Transmitting the positions of all the objects to the server? 117 kb of information (10000 * 3 floats * 4 bytes/float).

Transmitting the orientations of all the objects? 156 kb of information (quaternion... 10000 * 4 floats * 4 bytes/float).

Transmitting the velocity of all the objects? 117 kb of information.

... several more fields ...

Your estimated bandwidth? 10 Gbps? 1.25 GB/s? It would take 1/3 of a millisecond to transmit the data (excluding latency) at that speed.

 

At 60 fps, that's 16.6 ms per frame. You could transmit the data back and forth 50 times each frame (ignoring latency). At the 30 fps demoed, you could transmit the data back and forth 100 times in the time between frames.

 

You don't actually have to pre-calculate everything for the path. All you have to do is offload crude bounding box calculations... determine which objects will be colliding in the cloud. That leaves your gaming console to calculate the actual collisions, without having to go through the huge problem of computing which of 30,000 objects are interacting. Most of them aren't.

Seeing some replies, was going to do the math myself and saw this. Couldn't of done it better myself.

 

People really don't understand that raw object data in-games take fraction of the bandwidth compared to say, video and music. It's definitely feasible through normal connections.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

All have their own equations applied? No... it's the same physics, the same equations, applied to every object...

 

Sending down gravity equations? The equations don't take up any space at all. It's the time to apply those calculations 20,000 times.

 

Math for 10,000 objects, assuming no compression:

Transmitting the positions of all the objects to the server? 117 kb of information (10000 * 3 floats * 4 bytes/float).

Transmitting the orientations of all the objects? 156 kb of information (quaternion... 10000 * 4 floats * 4 bytes/float).

Transmitting the velocity of all the objects? 117 kb of information.

... several more fields ...

Your estimated bandwidth? 10 Gbps? 1.25 GB/s? It would take 1/3 of a millisecond to transmit the data (excluding latency) at that speed.

 

At 60 fps, that's 16.6 ms per frame. You could transmit the data back and forth 50 times each frame (ignoring latency). At the 30 fps demoed, you could transmit the data back and forth 100 times in the time between frames.

 

You don't actually have to pre-calculate everything for the path. All you have to do is offload crude bounding box calculations... determine which objects will be colliding in the cloud. That leaves your gaming console to calculate the actual collisions, without having to go through the huge problem of computing which of 30,000 objects are interacting. Most of them aren't.

Thank you for post this. I wanted to do this myself but the amount of idiotic posts in thread made me feel it'd be a waste of time from my part. They'd probably still keep singing their same old tune.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Check out a high resolution side-by-side of the Cloud Assist demo we showed off at Build 2014 during Steve Guggenheimer's keynote. One side is a single computer doing all of the physics calculations real time by itself, the other is a computer taking advantage of remote destruction servers doing those calculations.

This is real time physics and lighting calculations and not scripted, and ends up being tens of thousands of individual chunks being thrown through the air and interacting with each other.

http://channel9.msdn.com/Blogs/AndrewParsons/Cloud-Assist-Demo-from-Build-2014

2 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.