Hello Dovahkiin111 here to discuss possibilities of cloud integration. There’s been an awful lot of crap thrown around at that term these days, almost enough to introduce back the bubonic plague that took so many. When someone does mention that term they seem to be gawked at. many promises made, many not kept. Onlive has cloud but has no online multiplayer, Why? Latency issues! If you are going head to head with someone on one point of the earth versus the other point then your going to have some delay, the person with the fastest connection wins plus the cloud latency. Google Fiber 3gbps solves those problems. Will there be any implementations and/or partnerships made for cloud ai, gpu, cpu, to happen on a reasonable level besides just storage and information?
Hang on… you’re saying Google Fiber (which is currently planned for just three cities in the US - a minuscule number of people) solves the problem of some people having a faster internet connection than others?
Until the majority of potential players having at least the possibility of a fibre connection is closer than the distant future, there is no point thinking about it IMO.
I’m sure there will be some competition. 2014-2015 seems to be good years for it, let’s cross our fingers though, we could be waiting another 5 years for fiber and cloud to be seamlessly integrated into a doable method for multiplayer.
thanks for the input, I don’t want to get ahead of myself.
Well I live in rural England and I get about 4mbps (0.5MBps). Fibre won’t be available here for at least 4 years and probably longer.
Also you know ‘the cloud’ is just the internet? Stuff ‘in the cloud’ is just stuff on a web server. It’s nothing new.
I’m sorry you live in an area where fiber is a pipedream,but you know, there is a good old country called the US of A who could make those problems go away! I like your country,… just not as much as America. We have the technology. We can make you faster, stronger, cooler…, all you have to do is sign this waiver of your rights. I know the internet is considered cloud, they have been talking about it since the 90’s. What I am talking about is supercomputing utilization for AI/CPU/GPU with speeds that take less than 3 milliseconds to send and receive. This may be at our doorstep!
thanks again for your input, hope to hear a rebuttal soon to keep this conversation alive and on topic.
This amused me greatly. I much prefer living in England! But let’s not restart the War of Independence…
I would like to point out that in urban parts of this magnificent country, we do have reasonably good fibre-optic (note spelling) broadband, with more being rolled out all the time. Perhaps it’s not into the gbps, but as far as I can tell, it works perfectly well. The fact is the internet (regardless of local speed connection) is still reliant on the whole network to be speedy. It is only as fast as the slowest connection - whether that is an old server or cables.
Signals take time to get from one side of the planet to the other. But at the moment, everyone is in the same situation, so most people don’t really have an advantage (unless their internet is really bad… as mine sometimes is…).
Just my thoughts.
Gaming as a service is already available if you have a fast connection. Companies providing it offer loads of different games so as to appeal to as broad an audience as possible. They are not game developers.
Film studios don’t provide a streaming service for their films, they leave that to companies like Netflix for whom that is their whole business.
It just doesn’t make sense for a game studio to invest in that tech.
Regarding rural internet speed: Sure, people could move house to somewhere with fibre internet - in the UK that would be at most 20 miles in the majority of cases. But that’s irrelevant. No one is going to move house so they can play a game.
When you’re designing a game, you obviously can’t expect people to move house to be able to play it.
If you make fibre internet a requirement, you lose a significant percentage of potential customers.
Wow! Google has solved latency?!
Man, here I was thinking that information couldn’t move faster than the speed of light with the current understanding of how the universe works, and that connecting 2 points on the globe without having to physically add cables required signal switching.
Don’t I feel silly now.
Obviously, Google is working with Opera on neutrino routers!
Joke aside, didn’t Keith talk about something a bit similar, streaming parts of the game generated/stored server-side as you moved, at some conference?
We need that archive of the forum! I remember the video but can’t find it!
He… might have? Only speech I remember was about LOD.
If everyone had 3gbps speed prices would eventually drop, the people win. There would be no point in using the lowest connection because they all would be the same speed. My point is we need the same speed and competition that’s how we get the norm to those speeds. Companies like google are offering these speeds and as far as I can tell is only in the United States. Within five years google 3gbps should be available in most major cities in the US. My other point is more of an example and I will say one name “TITANFALL,” it has cloud AI, that’s a start. I’m hoping a moderator with more involvement in this engine could clarify if Cloud AI/CPU/GPU would be a possibility.
less than 3 milliseconds latency from one point of the earth to the other but you can see for yourself to further this discussion, I may have read something wrong not sure.
I think pretty much every multiplayer game with AI has had the AI server side - whether the game is hosted by one of the players or by Microsoft makes no difference except to free up CPU cycles for that one player who would otherwise be hosting. That’s nothing new and requires slightly less bandwidth than just adding more players instead of AI. - Titanfail only has 12 players in a game.
Lol at ‘cloud CPU’. Care to be more specific?
Cloud GPU/rendering: Sure it’d be possible but as with anything, it would take development time and I can’t imagine it being a priority. I look forward to seeing what @INovaeFlavien or @INovaeKeith have to say on it.
Also @INovaeKeith, what was that conference at which you gave a talk about the engine and your plans and there were a bunch of potential investors in the audience?
Speed of light in vacuum: c = ~299,792 km/s
Diameter of Earth: D[e] = 12,742 km
D[e] / c = 42.55 milliseconds
Note: I highly doubt Google has found a way to lay down fibre-optic cables through the centre of the Earth, or made a consumer-grade product able to transmit data at high rates using near-light-speed neutrinos (which could actually go through the centre of the Earth quite easily), so you’ll want to add another 25ms or so to take the long way 'round, and of course the usual routing delays.
the absolute minimum latency possible between any two opposite points on the surface of the earth, calculated with the circumference of the earth and the speed of light, assuming no latency lost to server hops which is probably impossible, is 66.8ms. Not sure what your talking about with 3 ms.
We can probably reduce that to like 40ms if we get some sort of internet that can be transmitted directly through the core of the earth… but that is (extremely) less than likely.
edit: runiat you bloody ninja.
I got mad skillz, yo!
By the way, it just occurred to me that even if you could make consumer-grade neutrino transceivers, unless you could focus the neutrinos into a beam (using gravity lensing, I guess?) it’d be like having the entire world using a single wifi router. In other words, getting 3gbps for every user might literally be impossible so long as speed of light delay still applies within computer hardware.
correction, they must be talking about player to player in one server so thank you for your E=mc 2. however it would be nice to stay on topic. I just have an idea and am trying to contribute my own article. I understand that nothing as we know so far can travel faster than the speed of light, however I think these are somewhat original ideas that maybe need a little tweaking but the ideas can work ai/cpu/gpu cloud even if it means just giving a slight boost in performance.
Okay, I’m still confused by what you mean with these 4 terms. My understanding of them is currently this:
AI = Artificial Intelligence (which we don’t have a true version of yet, just game approximations)
CPU = A computer’s processor
GPU = A dedicated graphics processor
Cloud = Storing things in the internet (meaning on a server somewhere)
If by “Cloud AI/CPU/GPU” you mean “all processing done across a network instead of locally”, that sounds like very hard work to implement. I also don’t see any way this would be better than what we have now.
So, if you could clarify why you keep listing all of these in one big lump, I would be much enlightened. Thanks.
I’ll make it more simple…, A beefed up computer sending all of its power to your screen without compromising your power. Xbox one is already doing this on some level. The problem is how long it takes to get to your screen, this is why we would need a faster internet. This kind of technology is still in its early years but will someday change the way we do things.