Live data from Hacker News

Sony and Microsoft set rivalry aside for cloud gaming alliance

asia.nikkei.com

241–250 of 268 posts

Re: Sony and Microsoft set rivalry aside for cloud gaming alliance

#241

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>I have no idea how reliable it is This is not reliable at all. You can really feel 100ms latency. That's why in the world of pro music, barely anything above 10ms keypress-to-sound latency is deemed acceptable. Quake III will make all these streamed games feel slow .

Well sound uses different neural pathways than audio, so it's not a totally fair comparison.

you mean video? "pathways than audio"

Re: Sony and Microsoft set rivalry aside for cloud gaming alliance

#242
post #217

Earlier quoted context omitted.

But stadia can't use these techniques. The game engine and rendering isn't done on the client side. Normally a network game the client displays the user's actions immediately, and the lag is only seen from other player's perspectives. On a streamed game, all interactions need a round trip before the user sees any response.

Didn’t Google say something about using AI for this kind of game state prediction at Stadia presentation?

Game state prediction doesn't cut it, or rather there's no point to it. The rendering is done server-side - remember they're streaming HD AAA games to televisions and tablets. There's always going to be a round trip between pushing a button and something happening onscreen. Google did say something about device inputs being sent straight from the controller to the server. Maybe this means they will cut down on latency between the input and the server, but it's still a trip back down from the server to the display on top of that.

Re: Sony and Microsoft set rivalry aside for cloud gaming alliance

#243

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What kind of games were played? Whether or not latency is an issue is hugely dependent on the title. A game like Sekiro: Shadows Die Twice where the bulk of the game play revolves around precision timing is going to be killed by any significant amount of latency. Unless it does something smart like trying to compensate for the latency on the client end (e.g. make a block succeed even if it was late, if it suspects th…

Whether or not latency is an issue is hugely dependent on the title. It's hugely dependent on particular network conditions. I wonder if SpaceX Starlink might have an option to optimize for latency?

It certainly will but it will be premium for high frequency trading.

Re: Sony and Microsoft set rivalry aside for cloud gaming alliance

#244
post #56

It seems like all the major players are taking game streaming seriously. I'm still not very sure about the viability. There's the obvious DRM win. Accessibility will be higher with way lower or non-existent hardware costs. These probably look very enticing on a cooperate slide deck. Not to mention the subscription model. On a more technical side game streaming is only really desirable for games that don't run well on…

The Stadia trial convinced me that streaming is a near-term viable option. Latencies were not an issue. Bandwidth was, but when I got to play on a 50Mbps+ connection any issues I had encountered disappeared. Moreover I was able to play a AAA title on my 2011 Macbook Air and that was fantastic.

That's right. If Stadia does what Google says it does then gaming console business faces long term risk. I was quite impressed with Stadia demos.

Re: Sony and Microsoft set rivalry aside for cloud gaming alliance

#245
post #136

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I followed up on the wiki article. The citation was a just eurogamer article that had little to with human perception of latency. It did have this nugget: “Criterion said it was aiming for 50ms latency [for burnout paradise]” which agrees with what I’ve heard making handheld electronics. The goal was always Personally I noticed a significant improvement switching to a 165hz monitor in basically every first person gam…

Hm... the topic is quite complex. Human perception is actually much slower than many people want to believe. Parts of the human vision system react no faster than around 1/25th of a second (other parts are faster - its complicated!). Hearing is similarly divided. AFAIK, auditory and visuak stimuli are processed together and merged over a rather large time window (to the point where one system can induce illusions in…

There is a reaction delay but it is added on top of all the other delays. If the monitor is delayed by 1/25th of a second and your perception is delayed by 1/25th of a second then the worst case latency is 2/25th of a second. That is a 100% increase in reaction delay. If you think a 100% increase isn't significant what do you think about the 250% (or more) increase that streaming will cause?

Re: Sony and Microsoft set rivalry aside for cloud gaming alliance

#246
post #98
post #56

It seems like all the major players are taking game streaming seriously. I'm still not very sure about the viability. There's the obvious DRM win. Accessibility will be higher with way lower or non-existent hardware costs. These probably look very enticing on a cooperate slide deck. Not to mention the subscription model. On a more technical side game streaming is only really desirable for games that don't run well on…

Latency isn't an issue with games that have high time to kill or are purely exploration based, which seems to be something Stadia developers have noticed in the examples. There will have to be local rendering for nearby objects and particles, but this is feasible. DRM isn't totally likely, REnouveau does exist, and basic reverse engineering tools could be created to document the most common game engine functions. Twi…

Streaming based DRM doesn't need cloud rendering to be effective. The client can download 3D models and use prediction and local collision detection while the server is still responsible for the secret sauce like combat rolls, item drops, missions. Reverse engineering is still possible but even the private MMORPG server scene is actually pretty "dead" compared to the actual games they are cloning. Adding content is expensive and replicating content is sometimes impossible so the developers basically end up building what amounts to a custom game which uses the same rendering engine as an existing game. Becoming an indie dev and working for free on your own game ideas is a far better strategy although the chances of success are low.

Re: Sony and Microsoft set rivalry aside for cloud gaming alliance

#247
post #56

It seems like all the major players are taking game streaming seriously. I'm still not very sure about the viability. There's the obvious DRM win. Accessibility will be higher with way lower or non-existent hardware costs. These probably look very enticing on a cooperate slide deck. Not to mention the subscription model. On a more technical side game streaming is only really desirable for games that don't run well on…

Outside of most FPS and some really tight-action platformers streaming pioneered by OnLive is more than enough especially for the casual gamer. When OnLive was operational I had no trouble playing Batman (something something Arkham?) on their American servers from a MacBook Air in Sweden. I had a similar experience later with LiquidSky which was running regular games downloaded from Steam in their cloud and streaming…

The casual gamer is perfectly happy with cookie clicker or Fortnite on mobile. 2D games should be able to run on almost any platform and 3D games can be toned down until they run well too. The only type of gamer that isn't served by the things above is the "core" gamer that wants high fidelity 3D graphics and real time experiences. Really the only need that streaming serves is to make DRM possible which means the companies want to have complete control over the user experience and they certainly are going to abuse that control as much as they can.

Re: Sony and Microsoft set rivalry aside for cloud gaming alliance

#248
post #69

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Without net neutrality, the companies running game streaming services will be able to pay for prioritized transmission to reduce latency and jitter.

Won't have much to do with net neutrality really since they will want the traffic onto non public fiber as fast as possible for more direct routes which will have a bigger effect

Yeah the bandwidth needs are going to be high enough that laying dedicated fiber is not only an advantage in terms of latency but also absolutely necessary because the regular lines will be at maximum capacity if everyone streams video games at 20mbit/s but ISPs will still refuse to upgrade their infrastructure.

Re: Sony and Microsoft set rivalry aside for cloud gaming alliance

#249
post #63
post #18

Google finally advances Linux+Vulkan gaming using a side door that bypasses the market share blocker altogether. MS and Sony don't like it and plan to mirror Google. Instead, they should stop being lock-in jerks, and should support Vulkan as well.

I'd be happy if Valve became a middleperson for AAA titles native on Linux+Vulkan. They have SteamOS and a decent controller ready to resurrect, and everyone to slap on PC hardware consoles again, given a makeover. (Things like Wine are effectively sabotage.)

Wine and Proton are exactly the type of solution that I want. It works and it will get better every year. Linux users can run software without explicit vendor support. (software freedom 0 [0]) It doesn't burden corporations with expensive Linux support. Everyone is happy.

[0] https://www.gnu.org/philosophy/free-sw.html

Re: Sony and Microsoft set rivalry aside for cloud gaming alliance

#250

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Hm... the topic is quite complex. Human perception is actually much slower than many people want to believe. Parts of the human vision system react no faster than around 1/25th of a second (other parts are faster - its complicated!). Hearing is similarly divided. AFAIK, auditory and visuak stimuli are processed together and merged over a rather large time window (to the point where one system can induce illusions in…

There is a reaction delay but it is added on top of all the other delays. If the monitor is delayed by 1/25th of a second and your perception is delayed by 1/25th of a second then the worst case latency is 2/25th of a second. That is a 100% increase in reaction delay. If you think a 100% increase isn't significant what do you think about the 250% (or more) increase that streaming will cause?

I am not arguing against the existence of such an effect. I am loathe to state that the cause is that your eyes see more images per second on screen. I am not convinced that a higher framerate improves perception of the image content when over ~50Hz. I'm rather suspecting that the traditional coupling of game simulation and input processing rates to screen refresh rate is the cause: games seem more responsive because input sampling is more precise when the game loop runs faster.
Post reply on HN