Quantcast
Microsoft: Xbox One's cloud support will "eliminate unfair advantages" in multiplayer

Forums - Microsoft Discussion - Microsoft: Xbox One's cloud support will "eliminate unfair advantages" in multiplayer

I'm sure infinity ward or treyarch will find a way to make Call of Duty annoying and unplayable regardless. They always manage to muck up multiplayer in the end. All other developers seem to have no issue anyways



Xbox One, PS4 and Switch (+ Many Retro Consoles)

'When the people are being beaten with a stick, they are not much happier if it is called the people's stick'- Mikhail Bakunin

Prediction: Switch will sell better than Wii U Lifetime Sales by Jan 1st 2018

Around the Network
darkknightkryta said:
sales2099 said:

Because every PS3 gamer owns a Vita ;)


Except Nsanity wasn't talking about the PS3, he said "Sony".

because every Xbox discussion has Vita labelled as the main rival ;)



___________

Older and wiser. Still bias and proud though ;)

sales2099 said:
darkknightkryta said:
sales2099 said:
 

Because every PS3 gamer owns a Vita ;)


Except Nsanity wasn't talking about the PS3, he said "Sony".

because every Xbox discussion has Vita labelled as the main rival ;)

Again, he said "Sony".



Multimedialover said:
KylieDog said:
Multimedialover said:
I hope Sony have the ability and amount of servers to allow every single game dedicated servers. Otherwise Microsoft have a MASSIVE advantage for those who like to play online.


How?  MS will not provide dedicated servers for every game, same way Sony will not.  Be like this gen, only MS may catch up to Sony, since Sony been doing it this gen already.


Didnt Microsoft state at E3 on stage that every single Xbox One from day 1 will have access to 3 servers each of their own?

Im positive they did.

From day 1 Xbox One launches your individual Xbox One has 3 servers allocated to it. And only your Xbox uses those 3 servers.

I doubt Sony has even 1 per every PS4 sold. 

That's not what they said...

They said you should have access to 3 consoles worth of power, not 3 individual servers. How useful that power will be with latency is already debatable.

3 servers for each console would be absurd; 300000 servers and each console having 3 servers would mean they only expect to sell 100000 consoles?!



I actually came into this thinking Microsoft has done something innovative to stop cheaters. Instead they're just talking about the benefits of dedicated servers to eliminate a few limited methods of cheating using P2P.



Around the Network
endimion said:
I think that will be up to the devs to define the different options or actions of matchmaking.... the servers just do what they are told....

so all of your example are possible if that's how they want it to be...

on your scary quote I think he refers to the rating scheme that has already been talked about I think here on that forum I'm not sure I remember seeing a video.... maybe Nsanity posted it.... it was around E3

I remember some of that post. Something like people with bad rep will be more likely to be grouped with other people with bad rep.
Found it http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/thread.php?id=163313&page=1#

Sounds good, basically matching people based on play style and behaviour online. Though it might not be ideal to get people to behave by putting the bad apples together. Might actually be fun to see what a 'bottom of the barrel' match looks/sounds like hehe.



lol can't wait to see that :D



SandyVGina said:
PeterSilenced said:
SandyVGina said:
Are they refering to dedicated servers? If so then no big deal... Resistance, a PS3 launch title, had dedicated server support which allowed 40 player battles with no host advantage... that was in 2006...

You missed the point ,it's not about one game or a couple games having dedicated servers it is about making sure every game has dedicated servers.

 

I did not miss the point... the point is that Sony spent the $$$ on dedicated servers when online play was free... and now Microsoft is using something Sony had in 2006 to brag about there cloud system.

And its not just 1 game or even a couple games; Resistance, Resistance 2, Warhark, Killzone 2, Killzone 3, MAG plus others all had dedicated servers, no host advantage and more than 18 players!


Sony made third parties pay for the online servers as they rightfully should. Microsoft has always sided with the developers and publishers over the people so they made the people pay.



SandyVGina said:
PeterSilenced said:
SandyVGina said:
Are they refering to dedicated servers? If so then no big deal... Resistance, a PS3 launch title, had dedicated server support which allowed 40 player battles with no host advantage... that was in 2006...

You missed the point ,it's not about one game or a couple games having dedicated servers it is about making sure every game has dedicated servers.

 

I did not miss the point... the point is that Sony spent the $$$ on dedicated servers when online play was free... and now Microsoft is using something Sony had in 2006 to brag about there cloud system.

And its not just 1 game or even a couple games; Resistance, Resistance 2, Warhark, Killzone 2, Killzone 3, MAG plus others all had dedicated servers, no host advantage and more than 18 players!


Sony made third parties pay for the online servers as they rightfully should. Microsoft has always sided with the developers and publishers over the people so they made the people pay. Microsofts cloud gaming wont really change very much. THey are good at selling things to be more than what they are.



I don't see why publishers wouldn't use their own dedicated servers. Who is Microsoft advertising this to? Unless the servers are dirt cheap- if a big company, like activision, wanted dedicated servers- wouldn't they just invest in their own. EA already has their own servers- I don't see why they would pay Microsoft to use theirs. Are they advertising it to the smaller titles on XBLA- because as far as I know those still need a publisher that would have their own servers. And maybe I'm wrong, but wouldn't it be in the company's best interest to get their own?

Who is going to make use of these 300k servers? (I'm legitimately curious- not trying to downplay what could be an impressive feature).