Gaikai Drawing Interest With Low-Key Demo, Believable Claims 121
Earlier this week, we discussed news that games industry veteran Dave Perry had posted a demo of his upcoming cloud gaming service Gaikai. Now that people have had time to speak with Perry and evaluate the demo, reaction has been surprisingly positive. Quoting Eurogamer: "What struck me about the presentation was that there was absolutely nothing unbelievable in it whatsoever. There were no claims of streaming 720p gameplay at 60 frames per second — games were running in differently sized windows according to how difficult they were to compress, and video itself runs at the internet standard 30FPS. There was no talk of world-beating compression systems that annihilate the work of the best minds in video encoding today, the demo was using the exact same h264 codec that we use ... And finally, there was nothing here to suggest that we were looking at a technological breakthrough that would make our PS3s and Xbox 360s obsolete... just that this was a brand new way to play games in an ultra-accessible manner." By contrast, OnLive was received with much more criticism, in part due to their dramatic promises. While playing online games with Gaikai will naturally add some amount of latency, the article points out that single-player games need not lag more than you'd expect from a console controller. Meanwhile, unlike OnLive, Gaikai is not trying to compete directly with the major console manufacturers, instead trying to work with them in order to deliver their first-party games to new audiences.
Next step (Score:5, Interesting)
Sell out?
Who'd buy these guys, a gaming company or a streaming media company?
Re: (Score:2)
Re:Next step (Score:5, Interesting)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:1)
this is DRM (Score:5, Insightful)
Stop giving it press.
Gaming is already ultra-accessible, this is the solution to a problem that, for consumers, doesn't exist. The only people this will benefit is the game companies.
I will not rent my game software.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:this is DRM (Score:4, Interesting)
As long as the service doesn't expand into the realm of hi-def gameplay (which is unlikely considering the horrible state of our Internet bandwidth) you'll minimize the exposure of Nvidia, ATI, and console manufacturers.
This service won't supplant buying high end consoles or PC hardware -- this will still be necessary if you want the best gaming experience. But it will allow those who cannot afford to upgrade their hardware to play the games they currently can't. It's a win-win for everyone.
Re:this is DRM (Score:4, Insightful)
This service will likely cost more for a few months of subscription fees than a midrange video card does, and a netbook to play one of these streamed video games on costs about the same as a budget/midrange gaming PC. PC "gaming hardware" is hardly "insanely" expensive and for PC games this isn't terribly useful unless you have a portable machine and a quick internet connection, things that often don't go together.
Re: (Score:1)
Don't count on it being any cheaper really..
You can't ignore how much rendering a game costs in hardware, it's why some people are willing to dish out 2000 USD for an enjoyable game experience.
What this is doing is shifting the cost to a server and letting people connect to it, so you get even more problems, lag issues, connectivity bottlenecks, fps bottlenecks and so on.
I'm also guessing that it will still cost a bucketload to run and maintain, and the initial cost will be huge, and people will either pay
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2, Funny)
Re:this is DRM (Score:5, Interesting)
However, if I can use a netbook (rather than a $2000 15 pound gaming notebook) paired with in-flight wi-fi and play my 360 games on the airplane, it might be worth it.
For the cost of playing a 360 game streamed over satellite wi-fi, you could buy the best laptop on the planet.
And that's assuming that several people playing games on the same aircraft could even get enough bandwidth in the first place. Isn't the total bandwidth to one aircraft around 512kps?
Re:this is DRM (Score:5, Informative)
And that's assuming that several people playing games on the same aircraft could even get enough bandwidth in the first place. Isn't the total bandwidth to one aircraft around 512kps?
Nevermind that - if you're going to use this on an airplane the lag (aka latency) is absolutely going to KILL you unless you're playing some turn-based game, and even there input lag will probably make you want to stop playing it.
np: Sweet Billy Pilgrim - Joy Maker Machinery (Twice Born Men)
Bandwidth, exgtravagant claims, 20 years ago (Score:2)
About twenty years ago, a friend of mine excitedly told me about a project to send movies over standard phone lines. The "inventor" was looking for investors, since he'd "solved" the problem . . . these were to be full quality movies. Note that 56k modems weren't available yet . . .
I explained to him that that person couldn't possibly be doing what he was doing, given the theoretical limits based upon the way the US phone system worked, but he insisted.
Several months later, I saw the news article on the a
Re: (Score:2)
paired with in-flight wi-fi and play my 360 games on the airplane, it might be worth it.
I wouldn't hold my breath on this, in-plane internet services measure latency in moons.
Re: (Score:1)
Will the text be still readable on lower resolution? Perhaps, not so essential for a FPS, but would kill an RPG.
Re: (Score:2)
Not bloody likely. Unless you're playing Bejeweled or something. Current in-flight WiFi has horrendous latency, because of the uplink (satellite or via ground station, the latter can easily be 100+ms). And it's not likely to change soon since 100+ms latency doesn't impact much on browsing or IM, but kills things like VoIP. And forget about it
Re: (Score:1)
This technology will not work with inflight wi-fi. The latency on over the air (non-hardwire) internet is far too great, and the bandwidth is too low. Given the speed of light issues related to sat links, airplanes will probably never have low enough latency (50ms) to make gaming feasible in this manner.
Re: (Score:1, Insightful)
It doesn't even benefit game companies because it basically hands all the control over to the console manufacturer that can pull your game at any moment forbidding your consumers from being able to play it.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
The millions playing World of Warcrack beg to differ. The software is useless without the monthly access fee.
Re: (Score:2)
I will not rent my game software.
Why not? There are a few games which I have bought that I wish I didn't pay full price for.
There are some classics which I have made several backups of for "just in case", but seriously... Do you play games these day? 90% of them are shovel ware and stastically were allays going to get duped by a developer or shiny graphics (I'm LOOKING at you European Total War!) and we wish we didn't pay full price for because in a month we throw the box in a bin and forget about that game
Having read TFA... (Score:2, Interesting)
Um... yes? "How many Nintendo games are going to appear on OnLive? The answer is none," Perry adds. "And some of the best games in the world are from Sony, Nintendo, Microsoft... I'm already talking to Nintendo. I'm talking to all the major publishers.
So in the end this service is going to end up as nothing more than PC games? Its not a good sign when a company who makes most of the classic games that people remember rejects your ideas, and I'm not sure Sony or MS wants to jump on the bandwagon (though it wouldn't surprise me if MS bought the company
Re:Having read TFA... (Score:4, Informative)
Re:Having read TFA... (Score:4, Insightful)
Its not a good sign when a company who makes most of the classic games that people remember rejects your ideas, and I'm not sure Sony or MS wants to jump on the bandwagon (though it wouldn't surprise me if MS bought the company if they managed to turn out a decent product).
The console manufacturers have everything to lose and nothing to gain by helping out. If this service succedes no one will be buying specalized gaming systems anymore and this company will be buying comodity hardware to run these games. At best they could each have their own roku type box that connects to the service. Even with the pc games eventually this company will end up wanting volume licensing and start taking a cut of the sale.
This is like going to EMI and asking to license their entire catalog for a new mp3 downloading website. Eventually Apple and Amazon got them to do it, but this is like asking them in 2001.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Why would game developers develop games for Nintendo if there was no Nintendo hardware? No-one is going to develop a 'Nintendo game' if it's running on an x86 server and displayed over the Internet.
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
"...losing money on specialized hardware "
Consoles startup costs are offset by the fact that most of them end up being profitable later in its lifecycle as parts get cheaper to make through sheer volume and die shrinks. The original Xbox is a notable exception, but that is excused by its 'enter the market at all costs' mantra. It seems to have paid off in the long run.
Re: (Score:2)
There is something else to add, Nintendo got away with a cheaper to make console because all they did was basically beef up the Gamecube design. Im not saying its a bad thing, in fact Im 90% positive PS4/XBOX 720 will be the same architectures but with MOREâ.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
And EMI's stupidity in not embracing 21st century technology shouldn't be held up as a banner example. I'd like to
Re:Having read TFA... (Score:4, Interesting)
Console manufacturers don't make money on the hardware, they make money on the software.
Except of course Nintendo, who is a significant contender. Also, if previous console generations are of any indicator, the current-gen consoles for Microsoft and Sony will eventually turn a profit near the end of their life cycle.
But they still need to buy the games. Cha-ching! You've now sold a game to someone who didn't have a console. How exactly is this going to hurt them?
Both Microsoft and Sony have a problem with it, because it means that some consumers may not buy/rent/whatever the software from them (so they can get their cut in the game sales) and may instead by from the other current-gen offering.
And that's why, in a nut shell, why all three major console players wouldn't see much to gain with more to lose by going along with Gaikai.
Re: (Score:1)
Even if you consider end-of-life profits on the consoles they make many magnitudes more money on the games.
I wouldn't be surprised if the consoles balk at the idea at first, simply because it's completely new territo
Re: (Score:2)
Well, I guess your argument is pretty solid. It can be hard to argue how you would do nothing gain when you're getting a larger audience...
But the we have to remember that some people really like control, and don't like relinquishing it. A point I didn't make in my previous post that I should have is that each of the big three console guys have some sort of service that is part of their system. Even in the case of Nintendo, where... well, they don't have much that many people would care about, but Nintendo
Re: (Score:1)
I actually think this is a good thing for Gaikai, and probably is what's going to work in its favor. It's not something that will appeal to hardcore gamers (perhaps only as a remote solution). But it can open up a completely viable re
Chicken and Egg (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
I disagree. It doesn't make much sense for MS to release Halo 4 or Sony to release Little Big Planet 2 right away, but what about their backed catalog? It wouldn't hurt Nintendo (or anyone else) to release older games (everything from old arcacde through the last generation) on this kind of a service. It's just one more way to take people's money.
Heck. Maybe after playing Zelda or Halo 1 or something, I'd go out and buy the new version of the console, thus increasing revnue.
Makes sense to me, as long as you
Re: (Score:2)
Likewise.. 1 meg DSL is all we have here. The other negative, from a gamer perspective, is that this does away with resale of old software.. The used game market. I also took away from this, is that it is scaled down and in a window based on your bandwidth. Something like my connection would get 640x480 or something like that.
Re: (Score:1)
Worst case, it would have no more impact on used games than Steam does.
And the bandwidth and resolution issue further underscore how this service won't be a replacement for traditional gaming.
Re: (Score:2)
Having read the first 2 pages of TFA, I still don't see how fast of a connection you need for these to become playable. I mean, where I live, the best connection you can get is a ~1 Megabit DSL connection.
Really? Here in Portugal the *minimum* you can get is 3Mbps at about 20, and we have expensive ISPs compared to most other countries in Europe. And a new ISP is saying they'll offer symmetrical 50Mbps for 15 without any subscription to keep you locked.
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:1)
Having read the first 2 pages of TFA, I still don't see how fast of a connection you need for these to become playable. I mean, where I live, the best connection you can get is a ~1 Megabit DSL connection.
Not everybody lives where you live. Here in Japan the standard is now fiber optics at 100Mbps. I could see it working.
Re: (Score:2)
Having read the first 2 pages of TFA, I still don't see how fast of a connection you need for these to become playable. I mean, where I live, the best connection you can get is a ~1 Megabit DSL connection
The company's site states that it will work with a 512kbit connection, but that for best quality you should have 2Mbit.
Did I miss the ping time revolution? (Score:3, Insightful)
How exactly are they reducing the latency from the controller to the cloud? Let alone the roundtrip latency of the video/sound.
Anything more than 100ms ping time is gunna kill this thing.
Re: (Score:2)
How exactly are they reducing the latency from the controller to the cloud? Let alone the roundtrip latency of the video/sound.
The thing that people are missing is that the application is actually now much closer to the Internet with a service like this. Take World of Warcraft for example, if you party with someone and you're both using this service, there is basically no lag between you and him. No more players jumping around on screen showing or actions executed out of order. And which message do you think has more overhead, "move player1 to position 35272,123, cast heal on player2", or "move mouse to position 1323,42, click".
Re:Did I miss the ping time revolution? (Score:5, Informative)
Re:Did I miss the ping time revolution? (Score:4, Insightful)
Moderately interesting article, though it would be more interesting IMHO to see something similar done for PC games and user interface more generically.
What I don't understand about your post though...
On my cable modem connection right now, my ping to a dns server generally are between 20-30ms. Let's say pressing a key and transmitting it to "the cloud" takes 25ms on average. Now it's input to the game, the game's 66ms processing time takes place, and the result is streamed back to me...30ms+
We're now at a minimum of over 110ms latency assuming everything runs full speed and we don't get any "buffering" etc...
Now if ping times are closer to 40-50ms ... I would expect that would be fairly unplayable...
Am I wrong?
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:1)
So if you provide frames instantaneously and have a fantastic network connection, the lag is only going to be 3 or 4 times what it is running at 60 fps locally?
It will work well for lots of styles of games, but anything fast paced is going to take a hurting.
Re: (Score:2)
On my cable modem connection right now, my ping to a dns server generally are between 20-30ms. Let's say pressing a key and transmitting it to "the cloud" takes 25ms on average. Now it's input to the game, the game's 66ms processing time takes place, and the result is streamed back to me...30ms+
Ping is roundtrip time. So it only takes 10-15ms to reach server, and only 10-15ms to return. For a total of approximately 1 frame delay. The real issues isn't latency, it's packet loss and bandwidth.
Depends on the game (Score:2)
While that would rule out FPS, fighting, platformers and so on, strategy, puzzle and the like should work fine. This certianly doesn't look to be a be-all, end-all solution, but it could have applications. You'd get a slightly laggy feel from the UI but that isn't a show stopper.
Re:Did I miss the ping time revolution? (Score:4, Insightful)
I don't disagree that games CAN be made playable...but afaik, with the games you list--unreal, quake, etc--they have at various times implemented client side prediction and other methods to minimize the effect of lag. I remember in the days of quake1 when anyone with a sub-100 ping was a lpb :p I don't know how many games will ever be designed to work specifically with this kind of 3rd-party hosting.
Long story short, I don't ever see this technology in the near future working for that huge group of games that falls into the genre of "twitch" gaming.
Re: (Score:2)
The twitch gamers are likely to be in the "hardcore" gaming market which this service wouldn't try to touch. They won't be interested in a service like this anyway, and the games that appeal to them won't appear on it.
It probably ties in nicely with the ever-expanding "casual" games market. One problem casual games face is that they need to support lowest-common-denominator hardware (and software). Many are written in Flash, and virtually none require a half-decent 3D accelerator. This limits what can be do
Re: (Score:2)
For one thing, even though popular games already have lag of 66-100ms, that lag is consistent - it takes pretty much the same number of frames to see the results of your click. So you adjust to this. But if we are adding network lag of a supposedly smaller amount - say 50ms (I don't see how it will be 20ms like he says) - we also need to take into account lag variability (this is like the joke with the statistician drowning in a pool with an average depth of 1 inc
Re: (Score:1)
What you say is nonsense because you still have to network between players. What do you think this is, one humongous server where 1000s of players connect to and all the games are run off it? No. It will be servers located all over the US which have to network between each other. Also you're forgetting the fact that something like a WoW game would be running separate from the rendering servers.
The input would also cause more latency then updating player positions because a player position update happens onc
Re: (Score:2)
Exactly. And there is video compression and decompression delay. And, on top of that, current low-latency applications don't send much data. Do you still get low latency if you're receiving at 1MBit/s or higher? In both directions? Reliably? There can be no client-side prediction to smooth out lag: your connection must be perfect all of the time.
I don't believe in this idea at all. I don't think they've done the math correctly. I'm sure it works wonderfully on their LAN, but over the Internet..?
Re: (Score:2, Interesting)
Latency only really becomes an issue with FPS games. Even if FPSs don't turn out to work very well this still leaves a massive amount of content that isn't so latency-dependent.
There are quite a few free-to-play MMOs that currently work like this, e.g. FusionFall. They play just fine.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Most gamers don't play 'FPS' games.
No hacking (Score:5, Interesting)
I'd see the biggest benefit of something like this is NO CHEATING, which is the bane of most PC games, FPS types especially. It's pretty hard to be running a wall hack on your client if you only get sent an already rendered image from a central server!
Re: (Score:2)
Alternatively, now there's only one server (farm) you need to own.
Re: (Score:2)
Well it certainly would be more difficult, but you could maintain a collection of the maps in different games then construct overlays based on inputs.
Re:No hacking (Score:5, Informative)
There have been framebuffer capture based aim bots in the past already.
Re: (Score:2)
The point of proper cheat codes is, to make it fun again! This means that if you are stuck, and the game stops being fun, you can shortly use a cheat code and be done with it.
Cheating in multiplayer games is just a result of bad balancing. You actually have more fun when you lose half the time, than when you win all the time. If you you lose more than halt the time, something with the balancing (which includes the [automated] right choice of other players!!!) is wrong.
As a game designer, there is just no ex
Pickup, Play, and Resume on Multiple Devices (Score:2, Interesting)
You're at home, you log onto Gaikai, and see a PS2 RPG you always wanted to play. Awesome! So you start playing it on the PC. The next day, you have to fly out somewhere (business trip, home for the holidays), and while you're at the airport, you use your iPhone and continue playing your game. No need to copy your emulator files over, deal with incompatibilities, buggy software (there isn't even a ps2 emu for iPhone and I doubt its powerful enough). While on your trip, you decide to retire
Re: (Score:2)
I think this will open a whole new market for gaming to people who either never own consoles or people that do own consoles, and want to play last generation titles that they missed out on and no longer own the older system or don't; have it hooked up anymore (especially now that Sony took out PS2 backwards compatibility)
You really think so? Beyond really hardcore gamers, I don't think many people go back to play old games beyond certain classics... Most games just REALLY don't pass the test of time that well.
I mean as an example, I have a hard time going back to play Morrowind after Oblivion...and Morrowind is a game that STILL has a very active community. Likewise, Baldur's gate 1 after playing Baldur's gate 2 (or BG2 now at all), etc--they just don't satisfy the same way they used to. Graphics, interface, the whole packa
Re: (Score:2)
there isn't even a ps2 emu for iPhone and I doubt its powerful enough
I think we can assume you're correct. The fastest iPhone has a 600 MHz ARM Cortex processor with 2 execution units, whose base instruction set is 32-bit, but which supports 128-bit SIMD. The PS2 has a ~400MHz 64-bit MIPS-compatible processor with 2 execution units, also implementing 128-bit SIMD. Therefore, while the iPhone with a best-theoretically-possible emulator might manage to match or even beat the SIMD performace of the PS2, ord
One place it could be useful (Score:1, Insightful)
I've gone back to student life, and have a Core2Duo laptop with Integrated Intel graphics, and an internet connection that speed tests to 86,468kbps @ 0ms ping. I'd be happy to pay a small sum for this.
Personal Implementation (Score:4, Interesting)
I'd love to have this available for personal implementation. Granted - I'm thinking of very niche use. But I've attempted similar things with VNC and WoW in the past - with painful results. I'm not expecting to take my remote display in to a raid or battleground. But it'd be nice to be able to do auction house tasks, crafting, mailbox, banks, etc. wherever I happen to be at the time; reasonably quick tasks where a little latency isn't an issue.
Of course - it looks like their intent goes well beyond this.
Re: (Score:2)
I'd love to have this available for personal implementation.
I think you'd be surprised by how much an implementation of this would cost to set up. The only way, AFAICS, that they can be encoding the video output of the games to h.264 fast enough is a dedicated hardware encoder, which is probably about $2-300 worth of kit. Sure, you can do live h.264 encoding with a PC, but the latency is typically in the order of 10-15 frames or so, which would be unacceptable for this application.
Re: (Score:2)
It doesn't mean what you think it means. Reading comprehension obviously isn't your strong suit, but please do try to pay attention to the conversation here (psst - your troll is showing).
Re: (Score:2)
Awesome. Everyone should follow that above link to see how the apk troll (see below) operates. Pay close attention to what he links and what he THINKS they are saying. It's worth a chuckle if you enjoy watching a Microsoft fanboy kook in his natural habitat.
Re: (Score:2)
P.S.=> One day, instead of just being a network tech (which is ALL you are, & all guys like that do, face it, is read manuals of the tools guys like myself as a coder, create for YOU, to use, USER (network admin & network tech? USERS WITH A BETTER PASSWORD THAN NORMAL USERS, but that is about it - yes, I can say that, as I function as both in this science & I KNOW which is the more difficult of the two, & which takes more know-how)... & personally? I could care less if a flock of *NIX "network admins" (lol, users with a better password & that is ABOUT IT, compared to coders, who create the tools you manual/man page reading DRONES, merely use)... apk
Wow. An attitude like that really shows why you don't know what you're talking about. But I went ahead and responded to you since I seemed to bother you so badly that you're compelled to spend so much time on me:
http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=1290967&cid=28604931 [slashdot.org]
Re: (Score:2)
http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=1290967&cid=28610457 [slashdot.org]
I want to run my own server (Score:2)
Imagine being at a friend's and being able to stream your own games in this method. That would be the best of both worlds, you have the killer rig at home for the latest and greatest, and you can stream your games while on the go.
This may be the future (Score:3, Insightful)
This may be the future of gaming, eventually supplanting console and PC gaming.
Reasons :
1. This is a DRM system that would be nearly impossible to beat. As long as the game code is only given to these hosts, it would be vastly more difficult to pirate games. Not impossible - workers at the hosting company could leak the game to the internet, but it would be much more difficult.
Strong DRM means the publishers would get paid for every game they sell, yet they could easily offer fully functional 'demos' of the game, or sell time for a game. It might be easier for a lesser known publisher to sell 10 hours of a game for $10 than the entire game for $50.
2. It removes the need for the users to buy expensive hardware, whether that be a console or a high end gaming PC. You instead just lease time on the big iron. More advanced games with more advanced graphics would become available much sooner, since publishers wouldn't have to wait for the next generation of console to become common with consumers, or for PC owners to finally get upgrade their graphics cards. A publisher could offer games with state of the art, photo realistic graphics much sooner : it would just cost more per hour to play a game like that.
3. It solves the nightmare of hardware incompatibility and hardware failures. Since your netbook/living room console/old PC would merely be decoding video, there would be far fewer ways things could go wrong.
Problems : using flash is not a long term solution, flash has many problems : later generations of this service will need their own, optimized decoder code. ISPs will have to work with the companies offering hosted games, and configure their networks to deliver the ultra low latency, guaranteed bandwidth needed for a gaming session to actually work.
I think this idea is going to take off. It'll be a few years before ISPs really get their act together to support this kind of service, but it will gradually happen, and I think it will completely supplant the game console.
Re: (Score:2, Interesting)
Yes, but the publishers would be made extinct, replaced by these types of services.
Why deal with a company specializing in putting boxes on store shelves when this is your new business model?
Re: (Score:2)
Am not going to start the familiar rant that DRM is evil.
The fact is that a stronger DRM will enable stronger restrictions on usage while freeing PC's from the debilitating effects of DRM and Virus [theregister.co.uk]
This does not necessarily translate to better games or even more demos.
On the contrary, it will lead to more profit taking and more of the same crap games.
For instance, Company of Heroes was ground-breaking when it came out. I upgraded my PC to play it. The subsequent Opposing Fronts was even more ground breaking.
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
Am a realist.
Tell me what i have told are not facts.
Am not an optimist, otherwise i would be driving an atomic car and flying to work a.k.a Jetsons.
Re: (Score:1)
I don't believe the point of this service is DRM, but agree it's a strong side effect *only* if you don't already have a copy of the game locally. As each publisher is free to decide how one gains access to their Gaikai games who's to say they won't require you to buy the game from a local retailer first? While some might opt for a Gaikai-only option I don't think this will be the norm for current games, only older titles. H
Re: (Score:2)
Again i repeat, its not paranoia.
What you are saying is ideal in an ideal world: Gaikai's product will be seen as long-term benefits for nVidia and ATI.
But the corporates that make graphics cards and CPUs are... well corporates. Their overwhelming desire is to fulfil next quarter expectations.
Long term plan is great: But it was NOT Moore's law which forced Intel to make faster chips. It was AMD. Without a competitor, we would still be using Intel Pentium chips running at 800Mhz and playing Doom on 640x480 V
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
Next year, let's see where nVidia is and where this fancy company of yours is.
My bet would be on nVidia and Intel and AMD.
Re: (Score:2)
The provider of the service (Gaiku) and the people making the games aren't necessarily the same people. There's also no reason why Gaiku would be the only provider of a service like this.
This provides two levels of competition: game developers and streaming game service providers. At some point, these services would reach saturation, i.e. everyone who would want to play games on the service will be playing games on it. If you, as a game developer, want to profit from it, you'll have to provide a better game
Re: (Score:1)
2. So, instead of needing high-end console or computer you'll need the fastest, expensive internet connection. You may have a lot of bandwidth now, but that would require a lot of bandwidth coupled with low-latency. If you don't notice if youtube playback or start of download is delayed by a second, you will with a game.
3. True for PC, but consoles do not suffer from hardware compatibility already.
Scalability? (Score:2)
A big part of my job for the last ten years has been running game servers for PC-based video games (Counter-Strike, Battlefield, etc - your standard dedicated-server based games, mostly FPS).
Over the years as games have become more complicated, the trend has been for these games to consume more and more CPU. They support more players, they're doing complicated collision detection and physics and tracking stats and doing all sorts of other things. CPU usage and memory usage just goes up and up and up.
Say we
Re: (Score:2)
I imagine they'll be using a 1-server-per-client model, at least with most games. Subscriptions will be expensive, at a guess, with the price worked out on the assumption that you'll be tying up a high-end gaming machine about 10-15% of the time. $120 or $180 per year sounds like a likely base price for the subscription, plus a small additional fee for game rental which will depend on what you're playing.
No Thanks. I'll play my own games on my hardware (Score:2)
I hate these silly game streaming ideas. Its too limiting. I would rather own my games and play them on my own hardware.
Its just a form of DRM. I would rather own POWERFUL computer hardware and the software I run on it.
Perfect for demoing (Score:1)
Next: timesharing! (Score:4, Informative)
When are people going to start realizing that the "cloud" is an old idea with new hardware, and that reinventing a concept by putting it on the 'new' cloud platform isn't a business model that stands on its own?
Re: (Score:1)
The mainframe/terminal relationship served us well for almost 40 years. I mean really, isn't the entire web nothing more than a fancy mainframe/terminal operation?
When I was a kid I used to play tic tac toe on a Hazeltine mainframe from the terminal in our house with an acoustic coupler. The mainframe did all the thinking and the dumb terminal recorded my input and spit
Re: (Score:2)
When are people going to start realizing that the "cloud" is an old idea with new hardware, and that reinventing a concept by putting it on the 'new' cloud platform isn't a business model that stands on its own?
You're probably right, but still miss the point. I have never had access to a mainframe, but on the "cloud" I am able - as a private person or company! - to use something similar for very little costs. This is the major difference and changes everything about it. It's like saying the internet was no new thing because there were global networks (e.g. of companies like IBM) before. That would be correct in one aspect (global network), but so wrong on so many other levels.
Waste of Bandwidth and Ressources (Score:1)
Nothing unbelievable? (Score:2)
They claim: We are not using any out-of-the-box virtualization, it's all custom built by our team for this purpose., or and similarly that its their own custom operating system (specifically so that the photoshop demo is a single window)
The company was formed in November 2008.
So, seriously: nothing unbelievable about that? I'd be wondering whose software they are really using there, because the development timescale doesn't add up. If they'd said nothing or said it was off-the-shelf tech that would be a bit
Re:Cloud Gaming?! (Score:5, Funny)
Cloud huffing. Although you'll want to be sure of what's in the cloud before you huff it. A tubgirl when you expect it the less can knock you out.
Re:wow (Score:5, Funny)
Indeed. Actually I would have loved if Slashdot had been there since prehistory.
The hot air balloon is invented : "Oh noes now the evil government will use that to spy on its citizens from above!"
The telephone is invented : "Oh great, one more way for the government to effortlessly eavesdrop on our conversations!"
The television is invented : "Pfft, as if newspapers and the radio weren't enough means of government propaganda!"
Internet multiplayer games are invented : "Waaah waaah 500 ms latencies over my 33.6 modem"
Mankind is invented : "Oh great, so now I can meet people who'll try to rob me, kill me, defraud me or have offsprings with me!"
Romantic and sexual relationships with members of the opposite sex are invented : "If I wanted to coexist with living creatures who'd suck me and give me orgasms I'd get some leeches and stick porn on their backs"
Basements are invented : "HOLY FUCK SHIT YEAH!!"
Re: (Score:2, Informative)
The iPod is invented: "No wireless. Less space than a nomad. Lame."
Re: (Score:2)