Is Forza 5 the first "cloud based" game?

[Xpider_MX]

From Amazon:

Forza Motorsport 5 from Turn 10 Studios is the latest edition of the highest-rated racing franchise of the past 10 years. Built from the ground up to take advantage of Xbox One and the infinite power of the cloud, no game better delivers the sensation of being behind the wheel. ?Forza Motorsport 5? sets a new bar for racing games and will be available exclusively for Xbox One at launch.

Amazon.com: Forza Motorsport 5: Video Games

 

[ArmisLt]

I hope not. Forza 5 is the only reason I would get the new xbox...
Had forza 4 for like 7 months and been playing it since, also no xbox live.

 

[RJ Priest]

You aren't getting the true Forza experience without xbox live. Some of the best parts of Forza are the community and online based features.

In Forza 4, I was hooked on rivals mode.

 

[smoledman]

I think that's fantastic. Auto racing is a great game to play against other live people.

 

[a5cent]

What exactly do you mean by "cloud based"?

Assuming our definitions are similar, I would argue that every MMO ever conceived is essentially "cloud based". The game "World of Warcraft" is one popular example, and that was released way back in 2004. The only difference is that back in the day, nobody was using the term cloud in the marketing/buzzword type of way it is being used today.

Even the WP7/WP8 game Galactic Reign could be argued to be cloud based, as it renders all its space battle footage in "the cloud".

Of the top of my head, I can't think of a way to define "cloud based" that would make Forza 5 the first of its kind.

 

[Xpider_MX]

What exactly do you mean by "cloud based"?

Assuming our definitions are similar, I would argue that every MMO ever conceived is essentially "cloud based". The game "World of Warcraft" is one popular example, and that was released way back in 2004. The only difference is that back in the day, nobody was using the term cloud in the marketing/buzzword type of way it is being used today.

Even the WP7/WP8 game Galactic Reign could be argued to be cloud based, as it renders all its space battle footage in "the cloud".

Of the top of my head, I can't think of a way to define "cloud based" that would make Forza 5 the first of its kind.

What I mean is using the cloud (azure servers) for helping with graphics.

 

[a5cent]

What I mean is using the cloud (azure servers) for helping with graphics.

Obviously, there is no way Microsoft's cloud infrastructure can participate in rendering anything you see during actual gameplay (internet latency is typically ~70ms across North America, while a racing game typically targets 60 FPS, but even 30 FPS is still entirely unachievable), so if that is what you were expecting, then you've been 'bamboozled'.

My Google search surfaced absolutely no credible information whatsoever regarding Forza 5's particular use of Azure. Just speculation. I wouldn't hold my breath for any major revelation. Generally speaking, Microsoft's cloud infrastructure doesn't allow players to do anything that wasn't already achievable 10 years ago. The differences are entirely on the backend, meaning the differences are much more interesting to IT administrators than to gamers.

 

[Coreldan]

They had a pretty good explanation about the games using that cloud computing, I'm just not sure where I read it.. but in short the point is not to render everything in the game. They mentioned that there are however several things that arn't "latency relevant" that can be done server side. I recall they mentioned a few things like fe. rendering smoke, explosions or for example some hair/clothing interacting with gravity and movement etc, lighting was also one of the things mentioned. All these take fairly much computing power from the device, but at the same time they arn't crucial for the game latencywise such as many other things in an online FPS game would be, for example.

If someone has the link, please link I did a quick search, but only found some short articles that paraphrased it.

EDIT: This at least has some of the things I recall reading:

Microsoft News | Microsoft Speaks About Cloud Computing Capabilities Of Xbox One

 

[_Emi_]

Obviously, there is no way Microsoft's cloud infrastructure can participate in rendering anything you see during actual gameplay (internet latency is typically ~70ms across North America, while a racing game typically targets 60 FPS, but even 30 FPS is still entirely unachievable), so if that is what you were expecting, then you've been 'bamboozled'.

My Google search surfaced absolutely no credible information whatsoever regarding Forza 5's particular use of Azure. Just speculation. I wouldn't hold my breath for any major revelation. Generally speaking, Microsoft's cloud infrastructure doesn't allow players to do anything that wasn't already achievable 10 years ago. The differences are entirely on the backend, meaning the differences are much more interesting to IT administrators than to gamers.

How the Xbox One draws more processing power from cloud computing | Ars Technica

so you are commenting in something you really have no idea about?

well... there has been articles about xbox and cloud computing, thanks to ars article which is the one that made the nice interview about it...

but in resume... Azure servers could be used to render a whole game just like onlive but thats not the point of it since it needs too much fast great internet not many have.
the point of cloud computing is to render render stuff that dont need to be updated everyframe, they give an example of lighting and fog.
also the point of this technology is if you have internet you will get better experience and graphics, and if you dont, it should look still good but not as amazing as cloud. of course this depends on developers but you wouldn't need internet to play the game, only you wouldn't get the same quality.

that's why the 300,000 servers they talked about.
and its not confirmed forza or any other game its going to use it but since its an exclusive, you expect it to use it so it can show what cloud can do.


oh and so you know... World of warcraft have nothing to do with this technology... it only uses servers to "save" every move you make just like any other MMO and also so you would connect to other players, 5 or 200, and it would let you be in the same city interacting, and fighting and talking to the same npc and whatever.., that's normal massively multiplayer stuff.... but the whole game is in your computer and It doesnt render anything through the cloud. (also WoW looks like crap compared to new mmorpg, like aion, tera, blade and soul... so believing WoW uses cloud computing is just not right). its just not the same thing

 

[HeyCori]

I think, long-term, that cloud computing will be Microsoft's secret weapon against the horsepower of the PS4. Right now Microsoft is prepping 300,000 servers for cloud services, and as crazy as that sounds, that's not even a finite number. Microsoft can add more servers whenever they want. Based on what Microsoft would like to do with cloud computing, I foresee games that combine cloud computing and hardware rendering. Forza 5 can feature massive, hurricane style rainstorms that's done completely (or mostly) through the cloud. You wouldn't even notice the milliseconds difference because it would still look like one massive storm, but the visual improvement would be astonishing. That would free up system resources for better physics and other graphical effects that need to be rendered by the hardware. And if you don't have online access, then you just don't get as massive a rainstorm.

I don't see how anyone can look at the XO hardware and not believe that it wasn't designed to play games. In fact, a former AMD employee valued the XO's APU at over $3 billion dollars. Maybe I'm crazy but that sounds like an insane amount of money to develop a system "that can't play games." For the first time in a long time console systems have real differences in hardware, software and services. Gamers really need to get rid of this I can only buy one console mentality. That was fine when the only difference between consoles were the games but this gen should usher in unique experiences that simply can't be achieved by one console alone.

 

[Coreldan]

Gamers really need to get rid of this I can only buy one console mentality. That was fine when the only difference between consoles were the games but this gen should usher in unique experiences that simply can't be achieved by one console alone.

I can't necessarily even afford one of the consoles, so if I actually can afford one of them, I'll have to pick carefully which device does the most for me. Currently it seems it would be the X1, but it all depends on pricings..

 

[HeyCori]

I can't necessarily even afford one of the consoles, so if I actually can afford one of them, I'll have to pick carefully which device does the most for me. Currently it seems it would be the X1, but it all depends on pricings..

I agree, come launch I can only afford to get one console. However, I feel it's important to stay open-minded about other platforms because in one-year and a price drop later I should be able to buy a second console.

 

[smoledman]

I remain skeptical about cloud-rendering because of latency. There is no magic here.

 

[Coreldan]

I remain skeptical about cloud-rendering because of latency. There is no magic here.

How the Xbox One draws more processing power from cloud computing | Ars Technica

Did you read this? Cloud computing would be used for processes that don't need good latency.

 

[MerlotC]

While it probably will take some time to really be taken advantage of to its fullest (the cloud computing aspect), I think the future of Microsoft is definately with Azure and it will continue to grow. Probably the first thing gamers will benefit from is just the usual uses of servers for better multiplayer (faster, less lag/more players) and persistent worlds but there is great potential there.

 

[Robert Carpenter]

I remain skeptical about cloud-rendering because of latency. There is no magic here.

Cloud Rendering != Cloud Computing

 

[a5cent]

This at least has some of the things I recall reading

Thanks for that URL. I hadn't seen that yet.

However, I still seem to be missing an important document, because I don't see how some of you (not you Coreldan) get from this description of techniques that are obviously still in their experimental stages, to the dead certainty that Forza 5 will be using such techniques.

OP?

Is Forza 5 the first "cloud based" game?

Many games run on cloud based infrastructures. Rendering in the cloud and streaming the rendered video to the client also isn't new (although it working well would be). So, at least in general terms, there is nothing new about "cloud based" games.

More specifically, in terms of the techniques mentioned in the document Coreladan linked to, I don't know. Does anyone else? If Forza 5 were to, say, calculate a very large and detailed ambient occlusion map in the cloud which the game uses to improve fidelity of the real-time graphics rendered on the console, that likely would be a first. Maybe I'm wrong, but so far, I'm unaware of Forza 5 attempting any such thing.

recall they mentioned a few things like fe. rendering smoke, explosions or for example some hair/clothing interacting with gravity and movement etc, lighting was also one of the things mentioned... but in short the point is not to render everything in the game.

Actually, that isn't what the article suggests. At least some of you are confused.

What the interviewee was referring to was scene setup, not rendering! I'll use Coreldan's smoke example to illustrate. According to the interviewee, you could offload the calculations of how fast smoke should rise, how it may interact with other physical objects, and how it is blown about by the wind. But it would go no further. At that point, the results would be returned to the console and "fed" to the rendering engine, which does all of the actual smoke rendering. More generally, his point was that latency-sensitive things aren't suited to being offloaded to the cloud. Anything you are doing repeatedly, 60 times per second, obviously is latency sensitive, hence cloud based rendering isn't what they have in mind. Not sure if I've made that distinction clear, but I hope so.

 

[a5cent]

so you are commenting in something you really have no idea about?

Considering you've failed to grasp the finer aspects yourself, I'd be more careful with such rhetorical lines of questioning.

the point of cloud computing is to render stuff that dont need to be updated everyframe, they give an example of lighting and fog.

Not really. Based on what has been published, it is clear that XBOX developers can use MS' cloud based computing resources to do whatever they like. AI computation, rigid body dynamics, fluid dynamics, light- and shadow pre-processing, whatever. It isn't just about rendering "stuff". Actually, it isn't about rendering "stuff" at all, as I described in my previous post.

oh and so you know... World of warcraft have nothing to do with this [XBOX cloud] technology.

If by that you mean that WoW isn't run on MS' cloud infrastructure, then duh. I'm (apparently not obviously) coming at this from a more conceptual angle. I suspect Forza 5 will use MS' cloud infrastructure primarily to host multiplayer online races. I could be wrong, but until someone produces something stating otherwise, I wouldn't expect much more. Hosting a multiplayer online race in the cloud is simply a means of game state synchronization, and that is exactly the same thing Blizzard's WoW servers do. Both systems use server clusters to synchronize game state, despite one being cloud based while the other isn't. For the user sitting in front of the console, whether it's cloud based or not is irrelevant. From a users perspective, cloud based computing offers nothing that wouldn't have been possible 10 years ago. What I was trying to point out is that the OP's question isn't as relevant to end users as it is to IT administrators, where there are notable differences. That is what I was trying to say.

 

[Coreldan]

Actually, that isn't what the article suggests. At least some of you are confused.

What the interviewee was referring to was scene setup, not rendering! I'll use Coreldan's smoke example to illustrate. According to the interviewee, you could offload the calculations of how fast smoke should rise, how it may interact with other physical objects, and how it is blown about by the wind. But it would go no further. At that point, the results would be returned to the console and "fed" to the rendering engine, which does all of the actual smoke rendering. More generally, his point was that latency-sensitive things aren't suited to being offloaded to the cloud. Anything you are doing repeatedly, 60 times per second, obviously is latency sensitive, hence cloud based rendering isn't what they have in mind. Not sure if I've made that distinction clear, but I hope so.

You're probably right, all the technical terms easily get mixed up by someone like me who isn't really all that tech sawwy. So rendering was probably a bad word, but I suppose if we just replace it with serverside calculations, it would still be of real use in making the games feel more alive and whatnot while utilizing external resources.

 

[a5cent]

You're probably right, all the technical terms easily get mixed up by someone like me who isn't really all that tech sawwy. So rendering was probably a bad word, but I suppose if we just replace it with serverside calculations, it would still be of real use in making the games feel more alive and whatnot while utilizing external resources.

Absolutely.