I don't understand shit but I'm gonna come forward and claim that games with graphics partially made in-box and partially in-cloud are impossible on this day.

Either the game is running entirely on your machine - with the usual suspects like leaderboards, ghost times and replays being offloaded to servers - or the game is running entirely on servers and is being streamead to your device ala Onlive and Gaikai.

pic from gaf. Don't hate, it is actually funny.

They wouldn't probally do this. It seems they just turn off the servers not caring wheather or not there is customers still willing to play them. (They want you to "upgrade" to the newest games so they can make money.)

I'm still wondering why you're talking about Watson, since it has nothing to do with cloud computing. But I agree: Many cloud computing systems could theoretically win at jeopardy as well.

He's not really forgetting about compression. He simply used the bandwidth numbers for streaming compressed video provided by Netflix. His only mistake was that that bandwidth is actually higher: For compressed 1080p video, Netflix actually mentions a bandwidth of 7 Mb/s; The 5 Mb/s they mention is for 720p.

If you just want to point out that it's not necessary to stream video for cloud gaming, well, that's correct. The above bandwidth numbers would be about right for a cloud gaming service like Gaikai. But if the cloud gaming service is not actually streaming image data, the required bandwidth can be much smaller.

But of course, that still doesn't change the fact that Xbone's "cloud" is mainly just a propaganda term. If Xbone owners weren't constantly being told about "the power of the cloud", they wouldn't even realize that something has changed since last generation. Because  from the end user/gamer perspectice, the cloud is pretty much just a bunch of virtual servers. Whatever the cloud can do, it could have been done with last generation's regular servers as well. If there was a good reason why something wasn't done with last generation's regular servers, chances are it won't be done with the cloud as well.

Cloud technology is NOT in any way new technology at all, just FYI. Also, it is good to see a thread where someone isn't talking about it as if it were MS technology or MS specific in any way! As for how it will work for them I have no idea. One thing I think is a safe bet. Once everything is live and they have sold a lot of systems, I bet it will need to be grown hugely. Many smaller companies who use Cloud for less intensive purposes have had scalability problems in the past.

I don't know.

BUT what I can say is that I'm intrigued by the concept of offloading gaming aspects to a environment that can be scaled and will continue to improve. It takes the limits of the box and leaves room for console performance improvement without having addons. The only major holdup will be availability of higher speed internet for consumers.

That's a high number if it's in my basement and I'm the only one using it, but doesn't mean jack shit when millions upon millions of users are connected to it with different bandwidth and latency. You can offset some problems with software on the server side, but you can't fix all problems with software along.

I wouldn't know for sure, but my research leads me to believe the term cloud 9 has nothing to do with clouds...

This this video may blow your mind.  There really is no reason to do either/or espcially when both the host computer and your local one can work together.  Sort of like how .h265 is going to improve the look, quality, and size of video streaming.