thranx said:
Mmmfishtacos said:
J_Allard said:
MS would be wasting a lot of money if their big cloud infrastructure was even with Gaikai, so much so that users "wouldn't notice a difference".
Of course, Gaikai is for streaming games and they did a decent job. Not the same thing MS's cloud does. |
Servers are servers. Nothing more. With the right code ms could stream games just as well as gaikia and gaikai can run dedicated servers just the same. Nothing more and nothing less. The only "advantage" would be the size of MS cloud. And that only and advantage if there’s enough users to take use of it. But right now both install bases are zero and won’t grow fast enough to warrant the massive amount of money being spent by MS. Sony doesn’t need to dump a billion dollars in it right now. Just invest in it as the service grows and stay a head of the curve and no one would know otherwise.
|
MS doesnt need a big install base to reap the rewards of their cloud. Gaming is only one part of it, business and governments are the rest. That was my point, but having multiple uses it allows MS to invest more than sony could as there is no benifit to sony for the extra servers. I was talking about cloud services, not game cloud services when I was talking about size. When I do research on cloud companies gaikai has never been mentioned in any cpapcity except for here. MS is the second biggest player in the cloud market and already has the need for all of the data centers, using for xbox live is an added bonus.
|
And it's still dosn't mean some how it's going to be better for playing games. I dont care about anything else MS cloud can do and most gamers wont.
