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.
| 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.
SandyVGina said:
I did not miss the point... the point is that Sony spent the $$$ on dedicated servers when online play was free... and now Microsoft is using something Sony had in 2006 to brag about there cloud system. And its not just 1 game or even a couple games; Resistance, Resistance 2, Warhark, Killzone 2, Killzone 3, MAG plus others all had dedicated servers, no host advantage and more than 18 players! |
Sony made third parties pay for the online servers as they rightfully should. Microsoft has always sided with the developers and publishers over the people so they made the people pay.
SandyVGina said:
I did not miss the point... the point is that Sony spent the $$$ 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).
darkknightkryta said:
Again, he said "Sony". |
You knew what he meant. Ils called "implied".
Xbox: Best hardware, Game Pass best value, best BC, more 1st party genres and multiplayer titles.
I think people are missing the point of the quote. Where has it been comfirmed that every game will have dedicated servers on xbox one?
S.T.A.G.E. said:
|
much misinformation.
unfair advantages?
Clearly the guy has never played a game like UT on dialup when everyone in other countries had faster internet.
If you hardcore enough you can adapt. I use to play with 200ms-400ms ping and still won a few rounds.
About Us |
Terms of Use |
Privacy Policy |
Advertise |
Staff |
Contact
Display As Desktop
Display As Mobile
© 2006-2024 VGChartz Ltd. All rights reserved.
