-
Ever wanted an RSS feed of all your favorite gaming news sites? Go check out our new Gaming Headlines feed! Read more about it here.
-
We have made minor adjustments to how the search bar works on ResetEra. You can read about the changes here.
[Rumor] Brad Sams: Xbox Scarlett Cloud box information leaked (Next-gen; Traditional system as well)
- Thread starter Iichter
- Start date
You have a digital library just like you do with movies or music. I think preservation is better then what we have in the past where it's tied to a console and you have to go on ebay to buy another console (if you old console breaks) to play the damn game.
They are usually late to the party, they were with games, phones, tablets, and many things . it's why they have gotten trashed by Apple, google. Their bread and butter is still windows and business. With consumer products ms is often late.
Point a single post out please, there is not one post in this thread or page that was even saying what you were implying, if tfere was why can;t you point one out? Just saying read the page doesn't make it so. I'll wait.
I didn't have a chance to respond to a post I saw on this last night, so I'll just pose this as a general question.
First off is how do you want the "streaming" service to be handled in terms of functionality and pricing? Second is how you think it'll be handled.
For me, I'd want game streaming to just be built into Game Pass for the same monthly price of $10. Let folks who subscribe stream whatever games they want on the Cloud console, but also have the option to stream instead of downloading on the traditional console too. Games you've outright purchased digitally should be available to stream with no extra fees.
Now that I'm past my "wants", I could totally see them charging a $5-$10 premium over Game Pass or making streaming it's own separate service. Worst-case scenario would be that you need to pay a monthly "streaming" sub fee even if you're playing games you've bought digitally.
First off is how do you want the "streaming" service to be handled in terms of functionality and pricing? Second is how you think it'll be handled.
For me, I'd want game streaming to just be built into Game Pass for the same monthly price of $10. Let folks who subscribe stream whatever games they want on the Cloud console, but also have the option to stream instead of downloading on the traditional console too. Games you've outright purchased digitally should be available to stream with no extra fees.
Now that I'm past my "wants", I could totally see them charging a $5-$10 premium over Game Pass or making streaming it's own separate service. Worst-case scenario would be that you need to pay a monthly "streaming" sub fee even if you're playing games you've bought digitally.
False on the Windows. Windows hasn't been their biggest driver in years.
"Business and Windows"..... I meant Business software and services by business, I never said Just Windows.
Because you said you do read the thread, then you should find it out easily, even the one in this page is quote from last page.
I read it, in fact i was posting a few pages ago, waiting for you to post a single post that said all you complained about, still waiting.....guess you cannot find one than? You know how to quote a post why won;t you?
Because you said you do read the thread, then you should find it out easily, even the one in page 34 is quote from page 33.
I can do this forever til mods tell me stop.
Has anyone brought up the possible benefits the streaming box/dongle would have for owners of even the console 'prime'? Imagine a home that owns multiple consoles now, or ones that would own multiple if the cost wasn't as high; Now imagine the streaming device allows you to stream from the 'prime' console OR use the 'Xcloud' service in conjunction with a streaming GamePass service.
In this utopia, I would have one 'prime' console and every other television in my home would have the streaming device connected. This can already be done with streaming to PC, but there isn't an intuitive way to use only a controller and have a simplified UI for the whole process. Microsoft should take this opportunity to break down barriers in cost and usability. If they've used some sort of sorcery to substantially limit associated lag and intelligently integrate the two pieces of hardware into a unified ecosystem that cross-communicate, this could be a boon for Microsoft and a shift in how the industry functions.
Or, everyone will hate it, Microsoft will do little to convince anyone that it is worth it or that they believe in it and they will unceremoniously bury the whole thing and pivot to something else. I for one hope that it is as described above and I can have access to the next 'prime' Xbox on every TV in my home with nearly the same investment as two Xbox One X's currently #fingerscrossed
In this utopia, I would have one 'prime' console and every other television in my home would have the streaming device connected. This can already be done with streaming to PC, but there isn't an intuitive way to use only a controller and have a simplified UI for the whole process. Microsoft should take this opportunity to break down barriers in cost and usability. If they've used some sort of sorcery to substantially limit associated lag and intelligently integrate the two pieces of hardware into a unified ecosystem that cross-communicate, this could be a boon for Microsoft and a shift in how the industry functions.
Or, everyone will hate it, Microsoft will do little to convince anyone that it is worth it or that they believe in it and they will unceremoniously bury the whole thing and pivot to something else. I for one hope that it is as described above and I can have access to the next 'prime' Xbox on every TV in my home with nearly the same investment as two Xbox One X's currently #fingerscrossed
and not one said anything that you implied, the post on page 34 doesn't....so keep trying.
Yeah no point to this, it's clear what you are doing, ignored.
Not a mod, but please take this inane bickering to PMs for our sanity.
Yes you are right, sorry, dudes on ignore now so i'm done.
Never said "anywhere on the world". I already said in another post within this thread that data centers have to be relatively local as well (by relatively local, probably within 5 to 10 hours of where you live). Obviously in some Xbox markets, Microsoft will need to expand their Azure coverage for this to work.
When 1-5ms is discussed, it's relative to 50ms currently. It's all relative. Bottom line is that latency is supposed to reduce drastically. If latency reduced by 80%, we'd be close to a local experience for many US and Western European markets. It's supposed to reduce by more than that.
After getting quoted and debunked for my idiocy multiple times in this thread, I went ahead and researched more articles. Nowhere could I find claims that latency will be similar to what it is today. That defeats one of the biggest benefits of upgrading our internet infrastructure in the first place.
So yes, the switch to Azure is supposed to speed up drastically. It's not magic. It's new technology. The infrastructure and way info travels is different.
Ignore that person keep pretending, no next time i guess.
This man gets it! Man I hope it works that way that would be super cool. And I too would buy remote boxes for every extra tv in my house.
Sounds weird at first glance. The "latency solution" I mean.
Other than that I don't know if that's what the market wants, but it totally sounds like stuff MS would pull out.
1 / Ultra low price (for consoles) weak ass streaming device -> #4ThePlebs
2 / Pricey powerful "classic" console -> #4TheGamers
Or maybe it's just all fake what do I know.
Other than that I don't know if that's what the market wants, but it totally sounds like stuff MS would pull out.
1 / Ultra low price (for consoles) weak ass streaming device -> #4ThePlebs
2 / Pricey powerful "classic" console -> #4TheGamers
Or maybe it's just all fake what do I know.
No, MS are usually always there early. They were in the smartphone industry and tablet industry before Google or Apple. They've also been involved with games longer than Sony. Microsoft's problem was always an inability to capitalise properly on being there first.
Sorry, I must have not been clear. The lower tier subscription would be the baseline and the higher tier would be increased fidelity. Not that devs develop for a lower target, but a higher target.
On the transition from tech to consumer 100%. Their R&D have always been top notch. Surface has been around longer then IPhone and Android and such.
Hell, the facial login has been in Windows 10 for, what, 3 years?
This is the same thing I was thinking would be my use case for it as well. Not crazy to think that the XCloud box could stream games from your PC as well, a la Steam Link or Nvidia Shield.
R and D sure..but I mean late as in late to market with a competing consumer product. Being early doesn;t mean much when competitors capitalize on it and you don't.
YES. This is the "utopia". This is what everyone wants. You can already do this with PS4 to PSTV or PC & Xbox One to PC, so this seems like a no brainer to be a function of the next Xbox as well. Especially if they get the lag down. So many possibilities.
The competition between this and the next Switch is gonna be really interesting. Seems like both concepts have weaknesses that play to the strengths of the other, it's just gonna come down to who executes the best out of MS and Nintendo.
Lol indeed, Azure is their money maker now. *cough*Cloud*cough*
Windows was their money maker in the 90s.
Sometimes being the first to market isn't a benefit as shown in many cases by Microsoft. Many times in the past they let hardware and services fade to irrelevance due to their inability to capitalize, even with their huge bank of resources. I think their restructuring will certainly help with new products specifically capitalize. Microsoft's early Windows Mobile efforts were available prior to iOS/Android, but were not generally user friendly and focused primarily on enterprise and business use cases. The Zune was a great piece of hardware that suffered because of lackluster software and limited advertising; what's worse is they killed the brand just as it was hitting its stride with the Zune HD which is crazy considering it was the second in market share at the time they pulled the plug. Apple has been aping the Surface line left and right for the past few years with the pen, the type cover, the 'pro' line, and so on.
Microsoft just needs people in charge of hardware and services that are able to guide their development, production and marketing. I have some faith with their continued support of Surface in the face of early resistance and seeming failure and now with their increased investment with Xbox. I just hope the captains of these ships continue to advocate as they have been and remain open to expanding their scope or products and services beyond the traditional.
Has it replaced music and movies? Their always will be a market for physical. As long as their is demand for it.
Well not just R&D. For example, MS was quite a big player in the early smartphone industry, and had decent market share with Windows Mobile. They definitely had a competing product there.
How is this different than Steam in-home streaming? I mean besides not being able to own your games.
Yeah, that's a different and way more likely scenario then.
But even that scenario though, either the hardware on MS end would have to be significantly more powerful (I'm talking a bigger difference than between the xb1 and x) or it may not be that noticeable, especially via streaming. So I wonder how feasible that would actually be.
You would still own the games. It is essentially the same as Steam-link streaming, just used within the historically more user friendly console space without the need to worry about hardware/software/UI pitfalls, whether it be compatibility or otherwise. It just adds the option of streaming for those that don't want to own the 'prime' console, or want to have separate use cases for each hardware setting.
This shouldn't turn into a "PC did it first" or "I've been able to do this since 20XX on PC" conversation. The fact is that given the lower barriers to entry in the console space, if communicated correctly and properly nourished this could be what Valve can only dream Steam machines and Steam-link could have been.
That, sure. But I would also say, not playing to their strengths. Microsoft is a software company, not a hardware company. That is why this report is so exciting. It's a refocus, on an inevitable software based future. Something Microsoft has already been doing with leadership changes, and will incorporate Xbox in a big way next gen.
This is not something Sony can just do, cause they feel like it. Sony is a hardware company.
Exciting if true.
Having a cheaper streaming device that can be impulse bought by anyone with a decent broadband connection is smart. Hopefully they have figured out the latency issues.
Having another SKU for those that don't want to stream or can't, brilliant.
Nintendo has the Switch, which is a play anywhere device that continues to be a success. MS will have their multi-tier consoles. I wonder what Sony will have up their sleeve for next-gen. Hopefully it's more than just a GPU/CPU upgrade.
Competition is good for the industry and these types of moves are especially good for us gamers.
Having a cheaper streaming device that can be impulse bought by anyone with a decent broadband connection is smart. Hopefully they have figured out the latency issues.
Having another SKU for those that don't want to stream or can't, brilliant.
Nintendo has the Switch, which is a play anywhere device that continues to be a success. MS will have their multi-tier consoles. I wonder what Sony will have up their sleeve for next-gen. Hopefully it's more than just a GPU/CPU upgrade.
Competition is good for the industry and these types of moves are especially good for us gamers.
I think there is a patent by Nintendo showing the Switch sharing computational resources through internet. Maybe it is something similar in concept. Switch will render at low fidelity when it is offline and high fidelity when it is online.
By 2020 they should be able to sell the switch for 150.
Indeed.
Who are these fictional people you speak of? Literally nobody is saying that. Read my post above if you can't understand what people are saying. To sum it up, power was a pivotal part in comparisons for the first 2-3 years. It was probably tied with price-point for reasons to not buy the console, i.e. the narrative that was commonplace: "why would I spend $100 more for a weaker console?"
People like to pretend that the used games and bad PR fiasco is the #1 reason that the launch was disastrous, and even though they certainly.played a part in the sum of things, those things never came to fruition. Meanwhile, what did undisputedly happen was the console was $499 (because of mandatory Kinect) and ran games worse than it's competitor that was $100 cheaper.
As already been noted, lots of revisionist history started to take place after the X dropped. On the old forum, I had a bunch of links saved up from gaming websites, media, and forum posters themselves and would copy/paste it whenever people would try to pretend it was insignificant in the grand scheme of things. It would shut them up quite nicely.
There is a reason "the most powerful console" was Microsoft's focal point first and foremost for many years, and why this E3 Phil made sure to promise Xbox Scarlet being the most powerful console [again]. Notice that now, "exclusives" are the big thing everyone talks about instead, and now Microsoft acquired 5 new studios and are planning to acquire moreto build their first-party portfolio.
Since the inception of your account from only a few days ago, 99% of your entire post history is a borderline parody of console warrior bullshit and massive hypocrisy. Anyone can take a mere glimpse and see this.
I don't even know where to begin, but here you are in a thread that you probably have 100 of your 130+ posts saying "they" not having learned by now with the X being out for months; as explained above, who is this fictional "they?" Can you show me all these people pushing a "power is everything" narrative, because I have seen a dozen posts in this very topic saying either the exact opposite or that it was a combination of factors. Funnily enough, you make like a dozen posts with thread derailment asking people to point out and quote people saying things, and when they do you move them goalposts and either say it is hyperbole or dismiss it because it's from a different thread, and if they don't bother you tell them they are projecting:
Here
Here
Here
Here
Here
Here
Here
Here
Here
Here
I can keep going, too. You telling everyone you quote they have persecution complexes, blind faith, move goalposts, making things up, projecting, bringing up console wars, using hyperbole, or being obtuse is ironic considering you fit all these categories yourself.
https://chrome.google.com/webstore/detail/cloud-to-butt-plus/apmlngnhgbnjpajelfkmabhkfapgnoai
If anyone else would like to spice up this thread for themselves.
If anyone else would like to spice up this thread for themselves.
I would advise against putting so much blind faith in the Xbox side as well. This sort of thing goes both ways. I see alot of people (not you necessarily, just making a point) acting like Microsoft is just guaranteed to destroy PlayStation next gen because of some buyouts and assumptions about who has the buggest budget which is foolish imo.
Physical music is getting harder and harder to find, honestly, and imagine if these companies decided to start favoring streaming over local by making stream exclusive titles. I don't think other companies should follow suit just because Microsoft is doing it.
Agreed on your first points but can you quote these "lots of people?" Being so active on gaming forums and media websites, the consensus seems to be that they will be highly competitive this time around and positioned better than they ever have been in previous gens. I don't think I've ever seen a non satirical post with someone saying they will destroy the competition just because of some aquisitions, let alone "alot of people."
I mainly frequent Twitter and YouTube in regards to gaming. The sorts of things you hear there are insane.
Jesus...
Microsoft attempting to get everyone to enjoy their games on any device and folk STILL have to find a way to lord it over others...
I'm going to end the back and forth over stuff that all are speculating on, none can definitively prove. Truce! Think it's wearing us all down.
Main point is I hope latency is solved and this streaming thing can become a thing that works as well as local gaming. Yes latency with streaming will always be there...but hopefully we got the point of diminishing returns...like going from 60fps to 120fps.
If streaming works, it means power upgrades come as frequently as the owners of the data centers allow them. It means instantaneously playing something on Game Pass without waiting for a download. It means spontaneous remote sharing of games. There's a lot of potential benefits to gamers with features and benefits that aren't available today...if latency is solved and if it works.
Main point is I hope latency is solved and this streaming thing can become a thing that works as well as local gaming. Yes latency with streaming will always be there...but hopefully we got the point of diminishing returns...like going from 60fps to 120fps.
If streaming works, it means power upgrades come as frequently as the owners of the data centers allow them. It means instantaneously playing something on Game Pass without waiting for a download. It means spontaneous remote sharing of games. There's a lot of potential benefits to gamers with features and benefits that aren't available today...if latency is solved and if it works.
User Banned (2 Days): Repeatedly antagonizing other users + backseat modding
This is embarassing....what is this childishness? Going through post history and going after someone on a game forum? How sad is this. This is something a child would do, also nothing in my posts is "Console warrier" BS, you are seeing what you want to see. Take it to the mods or PM. In fact pretty sure this is against the rules.
There is a post in this very thread that said "Power is everything" so before you have a meltdown do your research and do not jump in on a conversation. In fact numerous posters Quoted this post, it's a few pages back.
I do, as well. You cannot seriously use YouTube comments and Twitter as a basis of argument; they are the cesspool of the internet. Also, I am not sure if you are viewing things with tinted shades but on those two social platforms there are equally foolish narratives pushed from all "camps."
I wouldn't frequent those two if I were you. Not sure how you haven't cringed yourself to death, lol.
What in the world are you talking about?
Our conversation was about 5G, not Azure, 5G will not reduce your latency when compared to an existing wired home connection.
Xbox Live is already in Azure; again, what in the world are you talking about?
We were discussing your endless BS about how 5g is going to "solve latency"; what you said repeatedly was wrong. 5G is not an "infrastructure" that is going to improve your connection to Azure; it is an improvement over existing WIRELESS internet providers (but not an improvement over WIRED providers.)
The internet backbones are improving over time to reduce the distance data travels, but there's only so much they can do as they are still limited by the speed at which the data an travel and there are bottlenecks. None of that has to do with 5G which you kept talking about.