Adinnieken said:
|
So 200ms (i.e. 0.2 of a second) latency just for doing lighting effects (150ms for lower quality). That's 6 frames at a 30fps frame rate, or 12 frames at 60fps. With that sort of performance the cloud will only be able to be used for the most passive of visual elements, which won't actually do much to significantly improve the graphics.
But yes they show that it can be done, which means performance can be improved (i.e. reduced latency) eventually to the point that it could be used to significantly improve the visuals of games that are primarily rendered on the local box. However don't be expecting that in 2014 or 2015. But the video also shows that for best cloud processing performance you also need well spec'd local hardware. So the ability for the cloud to enchance Xb one games is still limited by the specs in the Xb one. How does the Xb one's graphics specs compare to the GPUs in the laptop and PC of that video?
And let's not forget that there is nothing magical about the Xbox cloud. Every console with the ability to connect to the internet can use cloud technology to improve aspects of a game. It's just that in the case of non-Xbox consoles the developer or publisher needs to hire a 3rd party cloud service. So MS's secret sauce is that they just make it easier for developers/publishers to utilise the cloud. So by the time the Xbox cloud is technically capable of mindblowing graphics enhancement, the cloud will be so ubiquitous and cheaper to access that it will be feasible for developers to utilise cloud processing on all versions of its games.
Indeed because MS has invested in such a massive cloud infrastructure using today's hardware tech it might be that MS lags behind independant cloud services in upgrading hardware.
“The fundamental cause of the trouble is that in the modern world the stupid are cocksure while the intelligent are full of doubt.” - Bertrand Russell
"When the power of love overcomes the love of power, the world will know peace."
Jimi Hendrix







