I totally agree.  Some people post things(from all 3 sides) that are just totally off base and don't contribute much to the conversation.  Those people just need to be ignored.  They just want attention and the more people give it to them the more they will post the same shit over and over.  And yes the feature is promising and could be a whole new way of creating games in the mainstream.  The only problem that I and many others can foresee is what happens when someone doesn't have a stable/fast enough internet to enjoy the game how it was built within the cloud.  Will the game become practically unplayable?  We'll just have to wait as you said. :-p

People have been paying for XBox Live since the original Xbox...MS can afford 300k servers

What a bunch of pr bull

...and the less consoles we sell the stronger it will be for everyone...

There are only 2 reasons MS is pushing the Cloud so much.

1. It's something for them to fall back on when the PS4 proves to be able to pull off superior graphics. Then they and One owners can spout how the graphics will improve greatly on the One because of the Cloud, while the PS4 is stuck with its internal HW.

2. And this is the most devious reason. It's pretty obvious that the One was originally designed as an always online console. However, because of all the backlash, MS dropped it to once every 24 hrs. This is still horrible, but doesn't seem so bad. But, we will start to see games that "Requires The Cloud" (apparently, Forza 5 and DR3 are two titles already) so they can justify an always online connection.

Of course, in the end, this is just PR nonsense. Cloud processing is not going to improve your power very much. Not when you have to deal with internet connection speeds and HW latency. I believe several sites have pointed this out as BS, as well.

It also makes me wonder, since some people were saying the One demos at E3 were run on laptops, and not Dev Kits, what kind of HW was in those laptops? Was it designed to simulate the theoretical power that MS says can be obtained from the cloud? And will the final products look as good?

2. The pretty obvious reason for "the cloud" is drm

Also people should notice what they say: "...Because of its ability to draw on“virtualized cloud computing resources”. They are talking about 300'000 virtual servers. It remains to be seen how many of those 300k servers are actual physical servers. Either way, once a few million XBox Ones are online, 300k servers will in no way be enough whenever more than a few thousand games are running (each game having its own servers as per MS pr). So I would not bid my luck on the cloud as the saviour...

Having cloud is not useful for Offline console experience which most of us want to enjoy with Campaign and story telling without interruption. They are trying to go with Online which is good for them but very bad for Gamers.

lol yeah cause sony is famous for their servers.... anybody thinking sony has anything remotly close to MS when it comes to networks and servers and cloud computing is an idiot

Moderated - Kresnik.

open world crammed with Zombies with apparently no load times as data is pulled in from the cloud.

I'm interested to see how this turns out. The no load times is bullshit ofcourse, especially loading next-gen environmental data through the recommended 192 Kb per second connection. Second life and PS home certainly didn't lose their load times pulling data from the cloud.
Compared to streaming level data from blu-ray at 27 Megabyte per second, or at 100 Megabyte per second from HDD, no way loading times are eliminated pulling data from the cloud.

I'll be watching for a new section in reviews, recommended connection speed, and how it differs when your bandwidth gets starved.

if this sought of stuff is true and capable then bring on the clouds,should be good for all sorts off online stuff and hopefully RPG worlds