So, from how many different locations did they test it? Let me guess real quick; one?
If you demand respect or gratitude for your volunteer work, you're doing volunteering wrong.
No wonder Sony partnered with MS over Amazon or Google... That's quite the advantage.
Not going to put too much stock in this. Will be better to compare once both are released and tested at homes rather than at e3.
Having the power to run the games at high fps will certainly help with the feeling of latency.
MS are kings at spinning numbers, wouldn't even waste my time with these claims.
At the end of the day I think this fighting to get the ms down by 1-2 isn't going to be what makes this service a must have. There needs to be something else to make up for the lack of actual ownership of the games and I think that has to be in the form of a massive subsidizing of the price of software on the platform.
In the same way coming out on stage talking about the memory bandwidth of the x1x didn't get the average gamer buying the system I don't feel that talking about ms and data center talk is going to make this seem like a viable platform in contrast to talking about what matters to gamers and that is price, games and accessibility. That is to say, stop this talk about limiting the streaming to certain controllers or having to buy certain google brand phones, if they want it to be popular it will need to be accessible to as many people as might be interested in it.
Why not check me out on youtube and help me on the way to 2k subs over at www.youtube.com/stormcloudlive
CuCabeludo said:
The connections in such big events are the best one can pay. But for latency internet speed doesn't matter, but the distance between you and the datacenter + the route the data takes on its trajectory. And they are claiming the closest data center which was serving the stream at E3 was 400 miles away. If true, then game streaming tech has gotten a huge leap. |
Not sure what to believe. Afaik it was supposed to run on actual xbox one hardware at the data center, 4 XBox One S consoles per server blade.
That 400 mile distance in a straight line through fibre cable in a single hop would take light 6.2 ms round trip. Add video encoding at the server side, video decoding at the other side. Only 4ms slower than running on a local XBox One S is simply not possible.
And indeed, real world will be different with data throttling, jitter, many hops to get to the server, home connection likely shared with other people streaming stuff. Remote play in home adds 60ms on top of the game...
SvennoJ said:
Not sure what to believe. Afaik it was supposed to run on actual xbox one hardware at the data center, 4 XBox One S consoles per server blade. |
Unless they allocate more resources at the datacentre vs a single xb1
"I think people should define the word crap" - Kirby007
Join the Prediction League http://www.vgchartz.com/predictions
Instead of seeking to convince others, we can be open to changing our own minds, and seek out information that contradicts our own steadfast point of view. Maybe it’ll turn out that those who disagree with you actually have a solid grasp of the facts. There’s a slight possibility that, after all, you’re the one who’s wrong.
October will be the launch. If they get good latency results for the open public today, imagine in 10 years.
| CuCabeludo said: October will be the launch. If they get good latency results for the open public today, imagine in 10 years. |
At the speed the internet is improving, if game streaming catches on, in 10 years the internet will look like this :)
My internet is faster today than 10 years ago, most of the time. It was a lot more reliable and consistent 10 years ago.
No worries, you can pay extra to get priority when net neutrality is gone :)
About Us |
Terms of Use |
Privacy Policy |
Advertise |
Staff |
Contact
Display As Desktop
Display As Mobile
© 2006-2024 VGChartz Ltd. All rights reserved.
