Will Crackdown 3 Prove Gamer Hypocrisy?

Seems these days there's always a repetitive article on the site about Crackdown 3's Gamescom demo and the cloud compute destruction target for the multiplayer in Crackdown 3. Everyone and their grandmother is turning up their hype meter and turning down their critical thinking based on this demo.

What are my thoughts on it? Well I'm just going to say that the lot of you who are foaming at the mouth may be in for a harsh reality check when the game has to contend with real user conditions and not a conference demonstration meant to sell you the idea.

But my opinions of the tech shown is not what this blog is about. No, this blog is about the proceeding demands after viewing the demo coming from easily manipulated/pleased and possibly hypocritical gamers.

Since seeing the demo, you probably can't find a Crackdown 3, Cloud Compute, or even an Xbox One article loosely discussing either of those topics without comments demanding 3rd party studios use Cloud Compute from now on and replicate Crackdown 3's still unproven tech in their games. Now the Xbox One fans are starting to use the "#NoParity" in their comments and saying the PS4 is holding back the Xbox One. Hilarious.

So why do I say that these gamers are possibly hypocrites? What is the point of the title question?

Simple. Always Online.

Demanding 3rd party developers use cloud compute is demanding that every game be always online. But... wait a minute? Does anyone remember what the Xbox One's original vision was when it launched?

Hmm... Let me think....

Oh that's right, it was to have an always online, DRM riddled console. And what happened when the Xbox One was launched? 99.999999999999% of gamers all over the world blasted Microsoft a new hole for even thinking of doing something so stupid.

So why are you telling Microsoft and all the third party developers that you now want an always online console?

Queue Incoming Arguments
=========================

"There's still going to be single player, offline campaigns. Crackdown 3 has one."

But you don't care about them. You're demanding cloud compute be used, likely even in the single player campaigns, which necessitates always online because you can't use cloud compute offline.

"Why do you even have a current gen console if you're not going to play online?"

Variety. Choice. Basic consumer rights. There are more people who prefer offline single player than you might think. Especially as new gamers come in and play online, as you get older you get annoyed much easier with say the 12 year old kids throwing temper tantrums, or the cheaters making online lose any semblance of enjoyment, etc... Plus, a game with a solid single player campaign generally has a great story and clearly more effort put into the game than one that focuses so heavily on online.

"This clearly isn't the same thing as what MS proposed at the initial launch of the Xbox One."

Isn't it? You demand a game use a feature that necessitates the console being online the entire time you are playing that game, a feature that will not work if you are offline, diminishing your experience. So while the Xbox One proposed a situation in which your game would flat out not work at all if the console was not online, you've simply traded in that situation for the lesser of two evils, but an evil all the same.

Here's the rub. Games like these can easily be used to reintroduce MS' original vision in a much more subtle way. By demanding this tech be used by all 3rd party studios (which is a laughable demand that will never happen for a myriad of reasons) what you're doing is sending the message that you're perfectly fine with always online DRM so long as it's introduced to you in a nice package. When it was just the Xbox One launching, it infuriated you. But put the DRM behind Crackdown 3's destruction, and you'll ignore it completely because you're foaming at the mouth at "Teh Powah of Da Kloud"

So what was the point of arguing with Microsoft about an always online console if you're going to then demand an always online console?

You tell me.

[Gazondaily]

"You're demanding cloud compute be used, likely even in the single player campaigns. "

No. That's a sweeping statement. Some don't mind if the SP has cloud compute. I don't see people demanding en masse that SP portions have mandatory cloud features.

Not all genres are suited to it but many are. Heck, no one moans about Destiny being online only.

This always online slippery slope argument seems like a big overreaction to me.

" Well I'm just going to say that the lot of you who are foaming at the mouth may be in for a harsh reality check when the game has to contend with real user conditions "

Well many people have said lets wait and see until its out but whats wrong with foaming at the mouth about this tech. Many of us find it exciting.

And you know what, people are right to stick it to the naysayers who made "Teh powah of teh cloudz" jabs. That's where the real hypocrisy arises. These 'but Sony can do it too!' comments are puzzling when prior to Gamescom, the very same people ridiculed it as being impossible or marketing spiel.

So many from certain camps are obviously praying that this fails (and not for any noble reason about always online).

It has been hilarious witnessing the meltdowns and flip flopping the Crackdown demo caused. It's a new piece of tech ffs and its downright delusional to assume that a big part of the skepticism against cloud compute isnt rooted in 'console wars'.

If it works thats great. It doesn't mean DRM is back. Take Crackdown as an example. The only and first one we have of how SP and MP with the cloud can work.

If the cloud enables experience otherwise not possible without it, what on earth is there to complain about? Realistically, it's application will be made in more MP orientated games and there is absolutely nothing wrong with that.

[DragonKnight]

"No. That's a sweeping statement. Some don't mind if the SP has cloud compute. I don't see people demanding en masse that SP portions have mandatory cloud features. Not all genres are suited to it but many are. Heck, no one moans about Destiny being online only."

Most don't mention online or single player when they demand third party devs use cloud computer. They simply demand that it's used. And actually no one moans anymore that Destiny is online only, but they used to and they still should.

"Well many people have said lets wait and see until its out but whats wrong with foaming at the mouth about this tech. Many of us find it exciting."

P.T. Barnum said it best. "There's one born every minute." He was talking about suckers. People who've been conned. Best way to con someone is to show them something that gets them to foam at the mouth, then under deliver, or not at all. Again, the Milo Effect. Remember what was promised, even shown, vs. what was the reality.

"And you know what, people are right to stick it to the naysayers who made "Teh powah of teh cloudz" jabs. That's where the real hypocrisy arises. These 'but Sony can do it too!' comments are puzzling when prior to Gamescom, the very same people ridiculed it as being impossible or marketing spiel."

Why are they? We've been shown a demo, not real world conditions. This is still up in the air. And realistically, Sony COULD do it to. I personally don't care and wouldn't be bothered if they did or didn't either way, but both companies have access to cloud compute so it's not a falsehood to say Sony could do it to. I'm sure they won't though. And about the possibility, well let's see when Crackdown 3 releases and hits the uncontrollable wild market.

Personally whether or not this fails currently has no impact on my gaming experience. But the demands being made to 3rd party studios are laced with hypocrisy. You can say that "realistically its application will be made with more MP oriented games" but you really don't know that. There is no actual reason to restrict it to MP only when there are plenty of SP games with online only because publishers like EA give B.S. reasons of "it has to be" and it's not.

I see people forgetting that they were against always online and now completely for it because it was wrapped up in a nice box with a pretty bow.

[Gazondaily]

You can't just simplify this and lump it into the 'always online' argument. It's not that simple.

If Xbox gamers want this then what's the problem? I don't see any cause for concern about this.

"Personally whether or not this fails currently has no impact on my gaming experience."

But it impacts mine and a lot of fans enjoyment and we want this to work!

"But the demands being made to 3rd party studios are laced with hypocrisy."

Why? Asking third parties to support cloud compute doesnt mean completely shut off single player sections. Third parties could utilise it for their mp titles.

Cloud and MP appear to go hand in hand. I want this to work and I want third parties to embrace it too. Why am I a bad guy?

[DragonKnight]

"You can't just simplify this and lump it into the 'always online' argument. It's not that simple."

Yes actually I can because my argument is about the people, not the tech itself. Everyone knows the tech requires always online, but the people making blanket demands that it be used by all third party developers conveniently forget that they also didn't like the idea of always online when the Xbox One launched and threatened single player games among other things.

"If Xbox gamers want this then what's the problem? I don't see any cause for concern about this."

Then why didn't you want an always online DRM box when Don Mattrick gave it to you?

"But it impacts mine and a lot of fans enjoyment and we want this to work!"

It working or not is not the point of this blog.

"Why? Asking third parties to support cloud compute doesnt mean completely shut off single player sections. Third parties could utilise it for their mp titles."

IF that's how it works, cool. But in a world of Diablo 3s and Sim Citys, do you put it past developers to make single player campaigns always online? Hell, just today there was a Dying Light 2 article where Techland used the "our ideas may be too ambitious for current consoles" statement and people were like "use cloud compute." Have you played Dying Light? It's SP is vastly stronger than its MP, not to mention it's a seemless experience the way AC Unity or Watch Dogs is for MP. It uses the same campaign as SP, and the same map. So using cloud compute for Dying Light 2 effectively forces the SP to be always online. This is the problem.

"Cloud and MP appear to go hand in hand. I want this to work and I want third parties to embrace it too. Why am I a bad guy?"

Again, it working or not is not the point of this blog. Especially in regards to MP. The point of this blog is that in one breath always online sucks, and in another it doesn't because a game made people's nipples hard.

[freshslicepizza]

"Yes actually I can because my argument is about the people, not the tech itself. Everyone knows the tech requires always online, but the people making blanket demands that it be used by all third party developers conveniently forget that they also didn't like the idea of always online when the Xbox One launched and threatened single player games among other things."

all you are doing is conveniently putting everything into one box to satisfy your own argument. this isn't about required all games to be online, this is about the idea of using the cloud in more games that are already going to be online. you will still have offline games and the console itself will not magically be the original vision of the xbox one. consumers spoke loud and clear about that. imagine a world where consumers can actually decipher wanting games to utilize the cloud in some games and also not have every game require a connection. i know that's difficult but try.

"Then why didn't you want an always online DRM box when Don Mattrick gave it to you?"

you have no respect at all to answering anyone honestly. just more drivel to help your own cause. can you still not grasp the idea that gamers want some games to utilize the cloud if it can actually do things AND also not want every game or the system to be required to connect online? no you can't because you are set on your own agenda here and that is to make sure crackdown 3 doesn't gain any traction out of fear the world will end as we know it because everyone else will get onboard and single player games will cease to exist.

"It working or not is not the point of this blog."

people are realizing you don't actually have a point. you just want to gloss over how you never had any hope the cloud would do anything special and now that many are talking about it you're on full damage control.

"But in a world of Diablo 3s and Sim Citys, do you put it past developers to make single player campaigns always online? Hell, just today there was a Dying Light 2 article where Techland used the "our ideas may be too ambitious for current consoles" statement and people were like "use cloud compute." Have you played Dying Light? It's SP is vastly stronger than its MP, not to mention it's a seemless experience the way AC Unity or Watch Dogs is for MP. It uses the same campaign as SP, and the same map. So using cloud compute for Dying Light 2 effectively forces the SP to be always online. This is the problem."

once again the consumer will speak like they spoke about the original plans for the xbox one. you don't squash ideas become you think it could lead us to disaster. that way of thinking is non-productive.

"The point of this blog is that in one breath always online sucks, and in another it doesn't because a game made people's nipples hard."

it sucks for you because you don't want to give it a chance even if it does add to the experience. this is what happens when you take a position without trying it all because you persuaded yourself always online is a bad idea even if they show the potential. it's like telling a child strawberry ice cream is good but wants to stick to chocolate. is that what we have here, a grown adult with his arms folded and shaking his head, 'no i don't want to try it. you can't make me'?

have fun living in the past.

[Concertoine]

The 8th gen's sorest spot is the lack of innovation, and while cloud computing deserved initial skepticism as it didn't demonstrate itself for 3 years, there's no reason to hate on it now other than bitter pessimism.

You don't seem informed as to to the nature of the tech, either.
"when the game has to contend with real user conditions and not a conference demonstration"
The game is targetting a 2-4 megabyte per second connection, as explained by the devs. Thats a very accessible speed, MS would be dumb to sell a AAA game to a minority of super connections.

Also, what's with the always online talk! The single player supposedly works like the older games, and lacks the cloud computing perks. Of course the multiplayer is online only. What's the big deal here, again?

[Volkama]

Hypocrisy doesn't seem to be the right word at all.

For a lot of people the Crackdown tech demo gave them a clearer understanding of what cloud compute could do. Changing your mind based on new information is not hypocrisy. Stupidity in some cases, sure.

There is also a large swathe of people hoping to see cloud compute widely adopted for multiplayer only, and still maintaining that it shouldn't be used for single player. That's not hypocrisy either, as it is consistent with the view that console should work offline.

And of course there are people like me, who would have accepted always-online back then and would still accept it now. Again you might want to paint me with the stupid brush, but you can't really call me a hypocrite.

There are probably a small number of hypocrites out there reciting whatever opinions they are manipulated into, but I would think/hope that's a small minority.

[NewMonday]

CD3 seems like more of a proof of concept demo, the absent thing was both game design and creative design , is there a point to destroying something objective wise?

real world material are made of several different things and break apart differently, in CD3 everything seems to be made out of cardboard.

CD3 world looks very digital, more like the world in Tron, not an immersive believable world like you expect sandbox games to be.

also why don't other MS 1st party games use it, because its just practical and just gets in the way.

[donthate]

Oh gawd!

This blog is so full of drivel. Xbox Live Cloud Compute is here to stay. Deal with it!

If consumers demand it, or if consumers are fine with Cloud Compute in single player games, it will come too. What is the big deal?

If consumers don't want it in single player games, it will go away. Consumers now have a choice. What is the point of constructing an argument generalizing gamers and reaching a BS conclusion.

Xbox Live Cloud Compute is real, and in a couple of years the competitors will also join in. This will be the gold standard for online multiplayer games.

[spicelicka]

This pretty much summarizes my thoughts as well.

"So what was the point of arguing with Microsoft about an always online console if you're going to then demand an always online console?"

I don't see anyone demanding an always online console, where did you get that statement from? The whole purpose of the argument was being FORCED to have an always online console.

You can have an always online GAME without having an always online CONSOLE. It comes down to player's choice. If it's incorporated in a game, it's up to the player if they want that game or not.

This is a completely redundant argument against crackdown here. The only portion of the game that's "always online" is multiplayer, which is always online anyway....

[Rookie_Monster]

"Simple. Always Online.

Demanding 3rd party developers use cloud compute is demanding that every game be always online. But... wait a minute? Does anyone remember what the Xbox One's original vision was when it launched?"

What does that got to do with Crackdown where they clearly said The multiplayer portion will be the only mode to uses the cloud compute and there is still an offline campaign as well. Third party can just adopt to this philosophy and make their online portion of the game, which of course needs players to be online anyways, to feature such features. Example, Battlefield 5 can have a regular offline campaign while when online during MP, Battlefield online can add more enemies and AI, massive destruction and physics.

How is that DRM and ALWAYS online? Stop trying to move the goalposts when we know from day one that is always going to be the case with this technology.

also, this really contradict your own argument when you said this.

you said
Queue Incoming Arguments
=========================
"There's still going to be single player, offline campaigns. Crackdown 3 has one."

"But you don't care about them. You're demanding cloud compute be used, likely even in the single player campaigns, which necessitates always online because you can't use cloud compute offline. "

So if you are claiming "we xbox players don't care about offline single player campaign", then what is the issue here? They want to play Online MP games or the MP portion of the game like Destiny or COD MP, guess what? They have to BE ONLINE TO PLAY IT and it just so happen it is in the same space as cloud compute. Really confusing argument you got there Dragonknight.

[DragonKnight]

"What does that got to do with Crackdown..."

I'm sorry but you can't be serious. You can't have asked the dumbest possible question here. I would tell you to re-read my blog but obviously that wouldn't help. This has to do with Crackdown because people are demanding the use of cloud compute thanks to Crackdown. Understand now?

"How is that DRM and ALWAYS online? Stop trying to move the goalposts when we know from day one that is always going to be the case with this technology."

You just answered your own question. Next.

"So if you are claiming "we xbox players don't care about offline single player campaign", then what is the issue here? They want to play Online MP games or the MP portion of the game like Destiny or COD MP, guess what? They have to BE ONLINE TO PLAY IT and it just so happen it is in the same space as cloud compute. Really confusing argument you got there Dragonknight."

No, that's not what I'm claiming. I'm claiming that you don't care that SP games would require always online to use cloud compute. All you care about is cloud compute itself. Geez, it's like you didn't even read the blog at all.

[Rookie_Monster]

"This has to do with Crackdown because people are demanding the use of cloud compute thanks to Crackdown. Understand now?"

Dude, you are completely not understanding the context or just spinning it as you know better what I was trying to say. I was using Crackdown as an example of a game, the only game for that matter, that set an example to third party developers that MS is NOT mandating "ALWAYS ONLINE IN EVERY GAME" like you are claiming. Battlefield 5 is such an example I had just used in which they can play the game without being online as well, just like Crackdown 3. Please re-read your false assumption of "always online" with what I'd said regarding Crackdown again and you shall see the full meaning of its context.

"No, that's not what I'm claiming. I'm claiming that you don't care that SP games would require always online to use cloud compute. All you care about is cloud compute itself. Geez, it's like you didn't even read the blog at all."

single player only game, well that is another topic, isn't it?

You keep using term like ""DEMANDING" 3rd party developers use cloud compute is demanding that every game be always online."

LOL, MS is not demanding them to use cloud compute, it is an option for them to use it. Big difference. Again, you are way out of Context.

Also, that lead directly into the article regarding "Parity and the cloud".

you said, "Now the Xbox One fans are starting to use the "#NoParity" in their comments and saying the PS4 is holding back the Xbox One." Read the article again, all the comments are pertaining to "if 3rd party has that option to make their MP portion of their games better" then why not take advantage of it. Again, you are twisting words and what the context are.

and here is my replay to such article:
http://n4g.com/news/1772473...

Rookie_Monster 1d 20h ago
"Why not? If MS is willing to provide the technology, technical support for developers to use their Azure servers to make these games better, why not use it to their full advantage and get gaming moving beyond just prettier graphics like we had been seeing every generation."

"Now, of course we don't expect the single player campaign to be any different than any other versions on other platforms but adding physics based destruction or offloading resources to allow other additions to MP mode is what these developers should be thinking about on the XB1 version of the game."
#4

That is consistent with what I am saying here as well as many other Xbox gamers too. Does that sound like hypocrisy to you?

[DragonKnight]

Who the hell said anything about MS demanding anything? Geez, you really didn't read a single word I said. I'm wasting time talking to you as it would literally take forever to explain to you what I'm saying because you just refuse to pay attention.

[Rookie_Monster]

@Dragon ^^^

"Who the hell said anything about MS demanding anything? Geez, you really didn't read a single word I said."

Hmmm,....
This Blog by Dragonknight:
"Simple. Always Online.

DEMANDING 3rd party developers use cloud compute is DEMANDING that every game be always online. But... wait a minute? Does anyone remember what the Xbox One's original vision was when it launched?

Hmm... Let me think.... "

And yes, I get what you are saying in Your claim that xbox fans are the ones demanding and not necessarily MS but that is not what they are saying but just using Crackdown as a guideline of how the MP portion of the game should be able to use those same cloud processing resources to make them better if it is available. That is not demanding all games to be online when only the MP portion of those games are affected, like you are claiming us xbox fans are saying. Totally different than the 2013 DRM situation.

[DragonKnight]

Read the blog again. Read it 50 times if you have to. You will NEVER see me saying MS demanding anything.

[sullynathan]

Truthfully, I'm just waiting for Crackdown 3 to prove that it will actually be a good or great game and can stand next to other open world games of the current gen because lets be serious here, the past 2 games were not.

[Concertoine]

Its never been much of a comparable series, to be fair. 2 sucked but i love the first one to death, it's still fun to play with a friend on co-op. The physics were incredible, it was so fun to blow up your buddy's car going a million miles an hour to propel it into a hidden gang hideout, or just make a million barrel explosion.

What other game can you literally tackle the final boss from the get-go if you feel up to the task? That's the kind of open world design sadly lacking from games today. Crackdown wasnt perfect (awful soundtrack, bleh) but had some great ideas.

[sullynathan]

I didn't beat either game, I really just played their demos which could last for an hour long and it gave me enough of an impression of the series.

The game has good enough controls and the melee system and platforming and jumping worked well.

Everything else from both games was mediocre at best or just bad. The graphics were abysmal and the story wasn't even interesting.

It was fun though but I don't think labeling a game as fun is enough to equate the game as being good since every game is fun to someone.

[Barnaby-Jones]

While I have seen a few people say they would not mind cloud being used in SP, I have not seen it as much as you say.
Just because people want 3rd parties to utilize the cloud, does not instantly mean they want the whole game, SP and MP, based around it. You are just applying your own interpretation on what they mean.

Also, what's the point of including your thought on the cloud in the beginning if you are just gonna say it's offtopic. It cleary shows you don't think it will work in real world conditions.

Honestly, I don't know why any gamer shouldn't be excited. 100% destruction is something worth being excited about imo.

[freshslicepizza]

"Honestly, I don't know why any gamer shouldn't be excited. 100% destruction is something worth being excited about imo."

of course it is. making everything a physical object is very demanding on the hardware. they have just shown the capabilities of the system and then utilized the cloud to offset some of the demand. i think they went past 12 servers which would make the frame rate on the xbox one at an unplayable state if they tried to do that offline. it is very impressive and opens up a whole bunch of possibilities.

microsoft finally showed what is possible and some people are in full damage control mode. they don't know what to say other than it might not work once everyone logs on because they fear they were wrong all along about what the potential of the cloud could do. this isn't like milo and kinect where it was all smoke and mirrors. they showed the actual physics being calculated and allowed others to try it out for themselves.

or they want to try and justify their concerns by suggesting this will pave the way to always online only games. which we all know is a load of garbage as there is still a very sizeable demand for offline games and will continue to be for many years.

[user9950279]

I never criticized MS for their original idea, so I can stay true to my convictions. I couldn't care less if I need to be connected to the internet to use my videogame console, as long as the benefits are substantial.

The sort of things that they demoed for Crackdown is substantial. IMO.

In 1 year pessimists will either be right or wrong. But I get a feeling they are just delaying the inevitable.

[guyman]

I've always 100% doubted the talk on the power of the cloud. Perhaps we will see good use of it when internet infrastructure significantly improves over the next ten or twenty years. Until then, gaming remains best offline. Admittedly, I am primarily an offline gamer, and i do have a suspicion that microsoft wanted to mask over DRM with cloud compute. In my opinion it's still just a failure of a PR campaign.

Crackdown 3 looks promising, but only time will tell.

[joeorc]

http://blog.us.playstation....

I will just leave this here, those who boast, oh no Sony cannot do that, or laughed @Sony in 2006/2007 for cloud compute are the very same ones boasting on and on about Microsoft's cloud compute.

2) the PS3 was able to be used as a server, the xbox360 was it being used as a server? How about the Xbox one is it being used as a server?

Well Microsoft does not have to..your right, but what I proved with out a shadow of a doubt cloud Compute is not Sony's 1st rodeo' like many seem to think.

Again, Sony was using Rack mounted PS3's to do cloud compute for gaming, the PS4 can in fact be used the very same way. For GPGPU cloud Compute, does Sony talk about it, no because last time they did they got laughed at for doing So.

The fact that Microsoft is doing it now is all the rage. Right..?

Oh' I know... Because unlike Sony microsoft, has a "Real" network...lol

The Absolute Arrogance is serving Microsoft just as well as it did for Sony for So many years.

[freshslicepizza]

what you are showing has also been done for many years on the pc. nobody is denying that sony does not have the capabilities to offer dedicated servers. games like m.a.g. on the ps3 allowed up to 256 players as well. this is all to host lag free gaming.

what crackdown 3 does is take it one step further, it is using the cloud to offload certain assets, in this case physics. and microsoft has invested a lot more into this type of cloud technology. it's why they are able to lease this out to anyone else. so in theory both nintendo and sony could use them but chances are they won't.

[joeorc]

@Moldybread

That was operating on a cluster of

"PS3's"

Not pc's

And you think it was used just for dedicated service for the game only to offset Lag? It was also doing compute in the cloud for the game also!

It was offloading physics in warhawk also!
at GDC, for

example, that the makers of Warhawk are using a “software volumetric ray-tracer” on some SPUs to render the clouds in the game, mixing the software rendering on Cell with RSX’s hardware rendering. It’s exciting stuff!

Yes that was not only just local , but the PS3 cloud compute and local was unified offloading the physics in the cloud compute.

Again its a very simple Question: was the xbox360 and the xbox one designed as a server "itself"

Example:

https://gigaom.com/2008/07/...

The PS3 and again the PS4 are designed as "compute clustering grid computers themselves"

Again was the xbox360 itself clustered in a grid used as a games server?

How about the Xbox one?

Sony clustered racks of PS3's to do such for End users PS3's

The PS4 is also designed to do GPGPU clustering in a Grid!

Last time I checked, Microsoft does not need to do such because they have the largest data centers on the planet!

But on the same token, they do not have to build the Xbox one to be a GPGPU cluster itself.

Sony does, but again just because Microsoft built that large data center forvall these years, does not mean they built it just for gaming!

Sony's may not be as large @ Microsoft's data center, but it does not have to be as large. The cluster can be set to be used for many types of compute from cloud to streaming!

[Ravenor]

@Joeorc

Are you drunk maybe?

[joeorc]

Of course I get disagrees, when shown proof + the same people beating their d@mn chest about Microsoft's cloud compute ridicule Sony for doing cloud compute.

Its no wonder Sony's not talking about it, the way many gamers lambasted them all last generation, and people act like Microsoft and their fans get the worst of the hatred after bare a nare 2 years!

God the introverted complex that people claim on Sony fans is mimicked quite well not just on here but many forums doing exactly what they condemned the other side for.

Victims aren't we all.

LMAO

[freshslicepizza]

your example of warhawk pales in comparison. i played warhawk, it was an awesome game but the only thing of note was how lag free it was. nothing about the games servers displayed anything out of the ordinary beyond that.

crackdown 3 shows exactly what the cloud is doing, pushing physics beyond the capabilities of what the hardware can do on its own. you can still play warhawk without joining a server solo and warhawk also hosted games that were not on dedicated servers and guess what, the game looked the same. the difference is depending on the host the game would lag more than it would on sony's dedicated hosted servers.

[Ravenor]

I'd just let it go, he's on some kind of spirit journey for Kaz and Shuhei. He wanders around aimlessly in the woods and then...Adam Boyes appears a glowing apparition larger and more magnificent than you can imagine, he extends his hands smiling his gentle Canadian smile.

Sleep well sweet Joeorc, your journey is at an end.

[joeorc]

The PS4 Contains IGS built right into the PS4/on a hardware level.

Example usage

Sony has also integrated some of the Gaikai technology into the PS4 system architecture turning the console essentially into a game server and the PS Vita into a client with remarkably fast connection speeds.

The PS4 like the PS3 has integrated Game server technology inside the PS4, just like they built into the PS3 also contains IGS.

Why do you think Remote Play can be used offline from just a ps4 to your Vita. Yes Microsoft can Infact do this also with the XBox one, but as we have seen, Microsoft does not make their Xbox systems for server usage themselves.

That's the difference! Sony Infact does.
But go ahead give me more disagrees. But the proof is there the PS3 was racked as a server for warhawk. For our compute, and the PS4 itself can be clustering grid compute. That's not limits to just reduction of Lag only..LMAO
It can do more than one thing at a time!

[maniacmayhem]

"Well I'm just going to say ..."

You know maybe if you don't want people talking about if the tech works or not then maybe you shouldn't mention it in your own blog!

And your whole use of the term "hypocrisy" is completely wrong. How about instead of ranting and raving you give us examples of people actually wanting the old Xbox DRM back?

You completely fail to comprehend or even grasp that gamers are talking about the many ways a game can change due to this tech. Has absolutely nothing to do with wanting their console to be always online.

"turning down their critical thinking based on this demo."

Gawd, the ego on you. I love how you think that you're the one using critical thinking while everyone else is completely mad. Then you go on in your blog with no evidence, no facts, straw man arguments and wide sweeping assumptions based on your opinions and passing them off as facts.

"...Xbox One article loosely discussing either of those topics without comments demanding 3rd party studios use Cloud Compute..."

So how is this any different from before when older articles were filled with Sony fans claiming it's not true and it'll never work. Hilarious how you pick and choose your arguments now because 1) you were proven wrong about the tech, 2) your extremely mad that you have to eat crow 3) this blog is how you spin it instead of just admitting you were wrong.

Instead you want to keep pointing the finger at Xbox fans that are discussing cloud compute after almost 2 years of being told it wasn't real.

"Now the Xbox One fans are starting to use the "#NoParity" in their comments and saying the PS4 is holding back the Xbox One."

How can you sit there and even type "hypocrisy"?? Seriously, especially since the start of this gen the sony fans were doing THE EXACT SAME THING. Commenting that the Xbox One was holding back the PS4 with absolutely no proof what so ever. Or did you forget the whole AC: Unity fiasco?

"Demanding 3rd party developers use cloud compute is demanding that every game be always online."

More assumptions, baseless opinions with absolutely no facts and more than likely you just took a few comments taken out of context or were specifically trolling about wanting to see all 3rd party devs use this in all their games.

Read the comments above Dragon, how are Xbox fans discussing the possibilities of cloud compute in their games even remotely related to wanting an always online console? They are just as confused as I am after reading this blog.

"So why are you telling Microsoft and all the third party developers that you now want an always online console?"

Who are you talking to Dragon? So far this is ONLY YOU asking this question. Please provide proof, links that the majority of Xbox fans are asking MS to make the Xbox One always online.

"Queue Incoming Arguments"

So now you're making up arguments from this fictional problem of cloud compute that you personally created and now answering them? Seriously?

Your crusade against an always online console has absolutely ZERO to do with cloud compute. A feature that would only benefit games if it works. A feature that would require you to be online just like you would when accessing PSNow, PSN, XBL or any other Multi Player game.

You keep talking about options, consumer rights and everything else but then forget that consumers also have options of picking other consoles and not just the Xbox One, making this whole rant of a blog irrelevant.

[BillytheBarbarian]

The power of the cloud shows it's a possible game enhancer and here's the Sony faithful all negative Nancy.

Xbox one is still basically always online. I've just accepted the generation for what it is. A connected generation. I think we should all just accept it. If you really need offline experiences there's the trusty PS3.

Crackdown is kind of the bottom of the barrel when it comes to franchises so for them to experiment cloud function on it is a great idea to get heat. The demo really set itself apart from the pack and put a little life back into a tired genre.

[gamer1138]

And here was me thinking this would be about the hypocracy of people who laughed at the idea of cloud compute and rubbished the idea it could ever push a console beyond its own physical limit.

[-Gespenst-]

If Crackdown 3 had've been ready for the Xbox One reveal, people probably wouldn't have rejected the always-online nature of the console so readily. There was outrage because, at least implicitly, gamers felt they weren't getting anything in return for the console being always-online. It was an inclusion that seemed to serve Microsoft only.

Now, with Crackdown 3, gamers think they're getting something in return, and they're more willing to embrace always-online. In other words, they think they're going away empty handed.

BUT, it remains to be seen how good an experience the game will actually be able to offer - it remains to be seen if gamers will actually get anything decent in return for embracing always-online. There's so much potential for the game to be a total disaster. Yeah the cloud is clearly capable of enhancing the performance of a console manifold, but when millions are playing it simultaneously it might be a different story. ISP's also mightn't be able to cope with that kind of demand. I mean, one thing can be said for certain: The game as we've seen it so far just isn't representative of the final product - the performance WILL be noticeably affected when the game gets a player-base. It might still perform decently, but it's just not possible for it perform like we've seen it perform so far.

So, if this game doesn't meet expectations, Microsoft ought to just give up their fight for always-online, because a poorly performing game isn't compensation enough for embracing it.

Even at that, as far I'm concerned, no game experience could be good enough to justify not resisting such a corporate power play as always-online. All it is, is consumers getting distracted and preoccupied with stupid, shallow, shiny toys while they get exploited and controlled by large corporations. I'm happy with games the way they are - all this crazy technology isn't a necessity. Some of my favorite games, to this day, are still SNES games. The technology we have already is enough to create a near infinite range of different experiences, and while that's not to say I oppose any further technological advances in videogames, I'll only embrace and accept such advances if they don't come at such a grave cost to myself and many others. I'm not going to sacrifice myself to a mega corporation. Corporations are encroaching more and more into our lives and we really ought to resist - we shouldn't let them mesmerize us with convenience and spectacle.

[Mystogan]

No game has ever had "millions" playing simultaneously. NOT EVEN CLOSE!!

The world record is 145.000.

An exclusive console game as big as Halo probably maxes out at 60.000 to 80.000 simultaneously. And then declines after launch week.

So Crackdown will likely max out at 30 or 40 thousand simultaneously.

"it's just not possible" - Every crow eating armchair developer ever

[Lennoxb63]

People are going to get enough of doubting MS. People said gaming over broadband wouldn't work. They were wrong. They said cloud computing wouldn't work. They were wrong. Now they're saying DX12 will do nothing for the X1. Well.... You know the rest. Don't you guys ever get tired of embarrassing yourselves?

[Mystogan]

People aren't*

[BlackTar187]

I don't believe you at all. Really it sounds like such made of nonsense and has no logic or reasoning behind it. Sorry that is pretty stupid.

The only thing i remember is xbox forcing you to use broadband when it was barely out yet and games didn't yet require that speed. Being upset that you can only go online with broadband and being upset at using broadband are not even remotely the same. You guys come on now

[BlackTar187]

who the hell said gaming over broadband wouldn't work?

We still have yet to see the cloud work on anything but a very secure closed environment and it won't even see a release to the mass until 3 yrs into a console cycle which is 1/2 way to the new one.

You seriously just listed 2 things not even out to the public yet and one that i highly doubt anyone said (Broadband)

[Mystogan]

They definitely did criticize the original Xbox for having broadband.

[Mystogan]

No reason to argue with you. You're just being salty about Xbox having something that the PS4 can't do and likely never will until its successor.

Why are you not criticizing PSnow? which also requires you to be online to play YOUR games that you already bought. And on a 5mbps connection while with Crackdown you need only at least 2mbps.

[DarXyde]

Probably because this blog is making light of hypocrisy. Just because DragonKnight is not criticizing PlayStation Now **in a blog about Crackdown 3** doesn't mean that user is in total support of it. In fact, you'd likely be challenged to find very many PlayStation users taking full advantage of PlayStation Now and praising it the way that the Xbox crowd praises the cloud.

Let's not make this a game of equivalencies. This blog was specifically aimed at Crackdown 3 and they did a pretty good job of staying on topic here.

Personally, I'm skeptical of the cloud. You should be too. Skepticism does not mean you're not a believer, it just means you need more evidence to be readily convinced and based on what we know about it, if you've taken it on full faith that it will go off without a hitch, that would be foolish. We've seen what we needed to for demonstration purposes, but the next step is to actually see it in use.

[gangsta_red]

I think you are confusing praising with excitement, which this blog also seems to be doing. This blog specifically aims at every Xbox fan saying they are praising the cloud when it might just be a few that are actually doing that.

It's okay to be skeptical, it's another to go into every cloud article and force your skepticism down fan's excitement and any discussion of how this tech could work or would work in other games.

I find it funny that this blog uses the word "hypocrites" when there is no relation at all between wanting to see the cloud work for games and wanting an always online console.

[DarXyde]

I wouldn't parse the two apart entirely, but I see your point.

I will however disagree with the notion that this is aimed at all Xbox fans. He does say, "those of you who are foaming at the mouth". Not everyone, just those who are, for lack of a better term, rabid about it.

Personally, I like the skeptics. I hear you on knocking on every door to give a lecture about its pragmatism, but only if unprovoked. I believe people get a little out of hand with some of the claims being made. I like to give friendly reminders to the people with unreal expectations when it gets a little out of hand, without being personally offensive, of course. And yes, that goes for the people who believe we're ever going to see PS4 games eclipse the Xbox One in quality and visuals. I just don't see that happening, ever.

As for seeing the cloud work, I interpreted what he meant as, "people didn't like the idea of an always online console and are now embracing it because cloud computing requires a connection". And actually, you're right that it doesn't really fit the definition of a hypocrite; rather, that of a flip flopping individual.

[DarXyde]

An interesting read.

The thing is, hypocrites or not, I would argue that the Xbox One's sales relative to its closest competition despite Microsoft's efforts are a testament to the fact that consumers haven't forgotten (or forgiven, really). The people who were in support of Xbox One's always-online plan were pretty much Xbox die-hards who were not planning to change their position, regardless of whether PlayStation 4 featured always-online DRM or not. That said, those people likely already own an Xbox One and are the ones you're hearing. A vocal minority, if you will.

Switching gears a bit, I'm glad you said something about the Crackdown demo in a controlled environment as well by the way. Another thing to consider is how well the game sells which could actually yield false reliability. If the game has lukewarm sales and an even smaller percentage use the online mode, the cloud is unlikely to really be tested and erroneously believed to be more reliable than it is. Now it could totally be reliable, but I'm saying we wouldn't have a great indication if the online user pool isn't really sufficient. I'd like to see how much strain it can take, personally. It'd give us some insight on how practical it is with "more computing power than the world in 1999".

[Dirkster_Dude]

The main difference between an XB1 always online DRM scheme and the Crackdown 3 using the cloud scheme is choice. Being an XB1 owner I can choose to buy or not buy Crackdown 3. Being a XB1 owner my only choice to avoid the always online DRM is to buy a PS4, which really isn't a choice if you don't like the controller or other aspects of the console design.