What exactly is cloud technology?

#31DesperateMonkeyPosted 12/1/2013 1:51:27 AM
I am not sure where you've experienced more powerful AI than in MMOs. I would be interested in knowing this. AI in MMOs runs a far more complex routines, even if they are simple "if this, then that" except with a lot more strands of possibilities. A comparable game would be like Dragon Age. But even in Dragon Age, AI is sluggish and constantly reacts poorly compared to even WoW enemies who have to take into account a far larger number of possible skills, items, mixes, classes, gear and so on and large bosses may have to deal with dozens of players at a time.
---
GT: ZiiX360 PSN: BoxFighter85
PC: i7 930@4Ghz | EX58 UD5 | GTX 460 SLI | 8GB DDR3 | 500GB Spinpoint | Vertex 2 180 SSD | Cooler Master HAF X | VG236H
#32MCC1701Posted 12/1/2013 1:51:51 AM
@warlord3: Stop reading fanboy propaganda.

Now back to monkey: Sony had relatively few servers as all they had to run was PSN, but as you yourself mentioned they are expanding. Honestly unless they are being shut out by MS or they are getting a better deal somewhere else, I wouldn't be surprised if PSN will be run fully or partially using Azure servers.

And I will mention this one more time. MS has azure, and some of those servers are probably being used for Xbox, but Azure was NOT made for Xbox and that is not the focus. MS invested a lot of money with the plan on recouping that money by offering cheap cloud server services and gaining a quick lead in the market. Each server they use for Xbox is one less they can make money off of. MS using just 1% of the Azure servers purely for live is quite a bit, thinking they will use Azure primarily for live is ridiculous.

Could you link that article that says they will be free? Last I heard they said they will be cheap, which is still good. This is the first I've heard of them being free.

Sony invested in Gaikai not for Backwards compatibility but because it promises single player games that play like single player games but are run like an MMO. To be fair I kinda doubt it will be quite the same as playing it locally, but if it does work that will be a MASSIVE step forward for gaming.
---
36: Ancient
Awarded to users with at least 2000 Karma.
#33MCC1701Posted 12/1/2013 2:02:47 AM(edited)
DesperateMonkey posted...
I am not sure where you've experienced more powerful AI than in MMOs. I would be interested in knowing this. AI in MMOs runs a far more complex routines, even if they are simple "if this, then that" except with a lot more strands of possibilities. A comparable game would be like Dragon Age. But even in Dragon Age, AI is sluggish and constantly reacts poorly compared to even WoW enemies who have to take into account a far larger number of possible skills, items, mixes, classes, gear and so on and large bosses may have to deal with dozens of players at a time.


I think you may be overestimating how MMO AIs work, and this is from a WoW player for several years. Most attacks and actions generate threat. This is collected by the AI and a threat table is established. The AI does not factor in level or class or gear or anything unless specifically programmed to(which is little to never). It chooses people to attack primarily with the threat table, sometimes based on placement, and sometimes randomly.

As for a more advanced AI, I'm going to pick a random one and point to the AI in brawl. Not the best AI but it interacts far more to your actions and state than what I have seen in MMOs.

However on the topic of advanced AI I doubt this will convince you, and unless one of us pulls out an article or two to back us up(and I am WAY too tired to find one) this probably won't go anywhere. If you like we can agree to disagree and get back on topic.

edit: Sorry for the HUGE amounts of text, feel free to condense where you see fit in response to what I say, and feel free to ignore responding to parts of it if you agree or feel like it is a trivial detail. I'm going to sleep now, though expect response(s) tomorrow.
---
36: Ancient
Awarded to users with at least 2000 Karma.
#34DesperateMonkeyPosted 12/1/2013 2:11:32 AM(edited)
http://www.vg247.com/2013/10/15/xbox-live-compute-gives-free-cloud-tech-to-all-devs-including-dedicated-servers/

I'd like to see your link about Gaikai too since I've heard absolutely NOTHING about Gaikai being used for PS4 games. Its been advertised as Backwards compatibility from day one. They are looking into a contract with Rackspace for their PS4 gaming needs as far as I know and thats still a pending agreement.


As for the Azure thing, I don't know why you are hung up on it. No one said Azure is for XBL only. People are saying that Azure is what is powering XBL. Nothing about server power matters except capacity. Azure offers XBL practically unlimited capacity as Azure now has a huge overhead in server power. XBL usage of Azure is not considered a loss to Microsoft. They want as many people to use Xbox One online as possible. They want people online and to buy online and to use MS online in their living room. It is also fallacious to say that there is no direct revenue for those servers. Xbox Live is now $60 a year. I assure you that if more people used it and more people bought subscriptions, they would make MORE money, not less. Remember, server capacity is dynamic and scaled. If there aren't a lot of players, there isn't a lot of server traffic. If there is a lot of players, it will encourage XBL Gold sales. The price of XBL is surely far more than whatever it is costing them to maintain servers.

Hence Azure can never really lose money on XBL. More people playing = more subscribers. Less people playing = less active servers. This is the advantage of a scaled server distribution.

As for the AI argument, I will just leave it to developers to prove themselves on this front. I simply disagree with the idea that AI needs a level of reaction that you are requesting. Network speeds are more than adequate at the moment and AI even in single player shooters aren't focused on ridiculous reaction times. In fact, AI is usually built in with mediocre reaction times because, well the player should feel powerful and at an advantage since they have to kill like hundreds of them in the course of a campaign. They aren't going to make AIs as powerful as people.

Titanfall is adding AI into the mix to really make it even more casual friendly. While AIs can be quite useful in terms of putting pressure on the enemy, helping you slow down assaults or make assaults, mask your location and so on, you can expect the AI in Titanfall to be programmed so that mediocre players can still make their way through them, if only slower than better players. The emphasis will be far less on super powerful AI and more on the quantity of AI in this instance, hence latency is really a non-issue.
---
GT: ZiiX360 PSN: BoxFighter85
PC: i7 930@4Ghz | EX58 UD5 | GTX 460 SLI | 8GB DDR3 | 500GB Spinpoint | Vertex 2 180 SSD | Cooler Master HAF X | VG236H
#35MCC1701Posted 12/1/2013 2:16:58 AM
DesperateMonkey posted...
http://www.vg247.com/2013/10/15/xbox-live-compute-gives-free-cloud-tech-to-all-devs-including-dedicated-servers/

I'd like to see your link about Gaikai too since I've heard absolutely NOTHING about Gaikai being used for PS4 games. Its been advertised as Backwards compatibility from day one. They are looking into a contract with Rackspace for their PS4 gaming needs as far as I know and thats still a pending agreement.


As for the Azure thing, I don't know why you are hung up on it. No one said Azure is for XBL only. People are saying that Azure is what is powering XBL. Nothing about server power matters except capacity. Azure offers XBL practically unlimited capacity as Azure now has a huge overhead in server power. XBL usage of Azure is not considered a loss to Microsoft. They want as many people to use Xbox One online as possible. They want people online and to buy online and to use MS online in their living room. It is also fallacious to say that there is no direct revenue for those servers. Xbox Live is now $60 a year. I assure you that if more people used it and more people bought subscriptions, they would make MORE money, not less. Remember, server capacity is dynamic and scaled. If there aren't a lot of players, there isn't a lot of server traffic. If there is a lot of players, it will encourage XBL Gold sales. The price of XBL is surely far more than whatever it is costing them to maintain servers.

Hence Azure can never really lose money on XBL. More people playing = more subscribers. Less people playing = less active servers. This is the advantage of a scaled server distribution.

Sigh, before I'm done for the night:
Good to hear, I didn't really doubt you but wanted confirmation in case I was to bring it up later.

I never said it would be used for PS4 games, just that it would offer playing older games BUT it would be without downloading to the system. They have been vague about this(though I'm not a Sony fanboy so I don't stay on top of all of their news) but if they can pull it off it is a good step forward.

Maintaining servers is not cheap, but regardless I bring it up again and again because you are overestimating what Azure means for Xbox. They have a lot of servers, but won't be using more than they need, so unless you plan on arguing that XBL didn't have enough servers, I don't know what else needs to be said. If they can achieve what they need with 100 servers rather 200, that is 100 servers that will instead be used for website hosting, data storage, etc. for other companies. It also isn't a matter of covering the cost of maintaining the servers, but also recouping the costs of purchasing and setting up the servers.

Server usage is not going to be scaled quite like that, servers have to be configured to be used like that. 100 servers configured for XBL and 50 being used means 50 can take a break but can't be used to make money from other companies at the same time. And if the $$$ they make towards live divided by the amount of servers used for live is less what they would make by having virtual servers run on those servers and renting them out to other companies, that is considered losing money.

If you want to keep talking servers that's fine, though it is a silly argument, and kinda off topic.
---
36: Ancient
Awarded to users with at least 2000 Karma.
#36DesperateMonkeyPosted 12/1/2013 2:25:37 AM
Well it is about Cloud Tech so I would assume the server talk is quite relevant.

Also, either you are misinformed or MS is giving misinformation. Because from everything they've said, they are literally saying they can add more servers on a whim, practically instantly and disable it with the same ease and that these servers will not be taking up some kind of permanent space because they've been programmed for the game. Maybe not instaneously but extremely fast relative to how these things normally work.

It is extremely important that they have this huge overhead too. Its what makes it possible in the future for them to offer dedicated servers and Cloud support to developers. You can't do that without the overhead waiting for you otherwise you are making an extremely dangerous promise. Over the course of Xbox One's life, there are going to be hundreds of games which may take advantage of Cloud. Saying they have that many servers and are willing to dedicated them to XBL is reaffirming their commitment to the progress of online gaming even though it isn't being used yet.
---
GT: ZiiX360 PSN: BoxFighter85
PC: i7 930@4Ghz | EX58 UD5 | GTX 460 SLI | 8GB DDR3 | 500GB Spinpoint | Vertex 2 180 SSD | Cooler Master HAF X | VG236H
#37MCC1701Posted 12/1/2013 2:36:42 AM
DesperateMonkey posted...
Well it is about Cloud Tech so I would assume the server talk is quite relevant.

Also, either you are misinformed or MS is giving misinformation. Because from everything they've said, they are literally saying they can add more servers on a whim, practically instantly and disable it with the same ease and that these servers will not be taking up some kind of permanent space because they've been programmed for the game. Maybe not instaneously but extremely fast relative to how these things normally work.

It is extremely important that they have this huge overhead too. Its what makes it possible in the future for them to offer dedicated servers and Cloud support to developers. You can't do that without the overhead waiting for you otherwise you are making an extremely dangerous promise. Over the course of Xbox One's life, there are going to be hundreds of games which may take advantage of Cloud. Saying they have that many servers and are willing to dedicated them to XBL is reaffirming their commitment to the progress of online gaming even though it isn't being used yet.

Sorry, I meant the Azure usage talk is, not the server talk. I'm tired. U_U

Ah, I think I see the confusion here. Most servers today are either not real servers or aren't being used for one thing exclusively. Virtual servers has become BIG and I can guarantee MS is using them. Virtual servers will allow MS to "add more servers on a whim" but they won't be real servers. This isn't to say they will suck; you won't be able to notice any difference, it is just on their end that it matters. Virtual servers will also allow them to accommodate to demand without needing a lot of unused servers just sitting there. MS talking about servers could be referring to real or virtual, though it can be pretty easy to figure out which.

One server can run MANY smaller servers, each devoted to a game and they can be expanded upon if needed. Not instantaneously fast, but IE each Tuesday server usage gets reviewed and resources are relocated. A good system, but again not new or really something that can only be done by MS.
---
36: Ancient
Awarded to users with at least 2000 Karma.
#38DesperateMonkeyPosted 12/1/2013 2:47:35 AM(edited)
No its not new at all and yes it IS virtual servers, thats why they are able to do this and thats exactly what they say. It is a far more efficient way to allocate and reallocate resources.

We should take a rest. It was cool to have a real discussion about Cloud rather than get flooded with the usually ignorant troll responses like "lol Cloud isn't practical yet!" and that sort of ignorance. Its hilarious they think Cloud side processing for games is impossible because they don't even know what an MMO is. Hell I have someone from my ignore list who posted here and I bet its SoulTrapper peddling his "lol its not gonna work for consoles cause only stoooooooRAGE!"
---
GT: ZiiX360 PSN: BoxFighter85
PC: i7 930@4Ghz | EX58 UD5 | GTX 460 SLI | 8GB DDR3 | 500GB Spinpoint | Vertex 2 180 SSD | Cooler Master HAF X | VG236H
#39WeirdShroomPosted 12/1/2013 3:03:01 AM
Watching this conversation makes me want to float on the wonderful sea of possibilities on my cloud yacht.
---
GT: BxB402 - " A little trolling now and then is relished by the wisest men."
#40fartman21Posted 12/1/2013 5:05:13 AM
with this cloud thing are we no longer able to make more then 1 save like in some games i would make alot more then 1 save file without overwriteing older one's and select what save i wanted to load from.