Video Games: Join us... It is your Destiny

[Shryke]

Well, keep in mind that outside of the US the world has significantly better broadband, and it's getting better every day. Japan, for instance, is massively wired comparatively. As to the developing world there's very little actual money coming from there right now - and the places that it is fairly decent (Brazil, Indonesia, Kenya) have better broadband and wireless carriers than the US does as well.

Basically using the US as a metric of 'is this hard' is not a good one. The US is the backwater here.

I'm not using the US, which is why I said the developed world. Broadband penetration is only high in the western developed world. And if you are gonna argue that the rest of the world isn't a major market, then you have to accept that the US dominates the console sales compared to other countries and so the state of it's infrastructure is EXTREMELY relevant.

Let's not forget the reaction to the original XOne announcements here. This is not as straightforward as you like to think.

Everyone going on about streaming while ignoring that the backbone for video streaming for large numbers of people isn't even in place, let alone for the much higher demands of video game streaming.

And that's assuming you can sell the idea of an only-online-ever console to people.

There are large technological, infrastructural and social barriers here.

As to why you would do it - because being able to get subscriptions and monetize hardware is much better for businesses overall than selling actual hardware units + specific games. Having a game subscription model and service makes more money overall. It's far easier to service thousands of machines in a server farm than it is thousands of machines at people's houses. Add to this that it allows that service provider to give customers experiences that they can't get with a traditional console - things like upgrading graphics without any work whatsoever, or being able to stream to devices other than your TV - and it's hugely lucrative.

Not having to have massive infrastructure in place to manufacture consoles or the supply chain for them? Huge win.

Being able to upgrade system values on the fly? Huge win.

Being able to give consumers experiences on different platforms and scale them easily to the bandwidth and system they have? Huge win.

Subscription model instead of console model? Huge win.

There are some technological issues to deal with - mostly in predictive gaming and whether you can make competitive gaming still competitive - but these are known concerns with fairly good answers. And quite frankly this is where the industry is going. It's not an if - it's a when.

Firstly, you still have to manufacture the hardware and ship it. You just don't have to ship it quite as many places. You are sending it to specific server farms around the globe. You then have to take on the cost of maintenance and running the damn things. (Imagine the RROD in a streaming world. /shudder) It's not easier for them because they aren't servicing anyone's machines at home now. It's an added cost.

Being able to upgrade systems on the fly? There goes every advantage of console development out the window. And this kind of behaviour makes your system all or nothing. There's no compatibility with a traditional model and that's a HUGE problem.

The industry is certainly preping for the market to maybe go that way, but they aren't making any major moves in that direction. It's all feeling it out and seeing if they can even get it to run. (the PS3 streaming service being the biggest example) But streaming companies existed before and they collapsed because the business model was not as cost-effective as you are claiming.

[Kalbear]

What you don't want to do is go a stream only route and have a huge swathe of players unable to utilize it and force those who cannot either afford or get that fast of internet to go with a competitor.

Like...netflix? That seemed to work out okay for them.

Here's the thing - if you're doing this as a console maker - whatever that means - you don't care if your competitors have a console. Because your customers are still going to subscribe to you to get various content in places they want. You might do both, mind you - have a hardware version and a streaming version (much like netflix) but at the end of the day you're not really doing anything special or meaningfully different.

Firstly, you still have to manufacture the hardware and ship it. You just don't have to ship it quite as many places. You are sending it to specific server farms around the globe. You then have to take on the cost of maintenance and running the damn things. (Imagine the RROD in a streaming world. /shudder) It's not easier for them because they aren't servicing anyone's machines at home now. It's an added cost.

You really don't know anything about large scale data centers, do you? I don't meant that as an insult - I mean that to indicate just that this isn't at all what you're talking about.

The SKUs for the datacenters don't use specialized hardware. They are literally off-the-shelf parts. They aren't going to need tons of awesome GPUs because, well, they can just throw cheap-ass shit at it and deal with it in volume. Or rent other data centers and use them to process as they need. They don't even need to have their own datacenters; they can rent other CPU cycles and scale up as necessary. You're not creating any new systems; you're utilizing existing stuff. You I think have this image of millions of racks of xboxes sitting around waiting; that's not how it works.

Being able to upgrade systems on the fly? There goes every advantage of console development out the window. And this kind of behaviour makes your system all or nothing. There's no compatibility with a traditional model and that's a HUGE problem.

You're misunderstanding me. I said upgrade capabilities on the fly. The advantage you have of server farms and datacenters is that everything is virtualized, meaning everything can be replicated. If you want to run on platform A, you can. If you want it to run on the new platform, both can exist simultaneously without doing, well, anything to either. It's just spinning up another VM. This is actually how the Xbox architecture is designed right now, just in a console form - and it allows for things like the changing of OS features fairly quickly. It's the same principle only magnified on a grand scale.

But yes, imagine if you would that you can have, at your fingertips, any platform emulator that you want. That's what cloud computing can do. If you want an xbox one? It's there. If you want a PS3? It's there. If you want a PC? A PC running win2k? Running Dos 6.1? A game boy emulator? That's all right there for you, and it'll take at best a minute to get it up and running and available.

There is a cost of maintenance and running the things. That's where the monetizing hardware comes into play. And it's still way cheaper than creating custom hardware and designing it all yourself. It's way cheaper than having an entire supply chain dealing with shipping and forecasting and manufacturing and storage.

The industry is certainly preping for the market to maybe go that way, but they aren't making any major moves in that direction. It's all feeling it out and seeing if they can even get it to run. (the PS3 streaming service being the biggest example) But streaming companies existed before and they collapsed because the business model was not as cost-effective as you are claiming.

Like what? To my knowledge the streaming companies existed before and got bought by bigger companies, and are now basically the foundation of where we're going now. Gaikai got bought at a huge profit and is now part of the PS model. XBox took some stuff in OnLive, though apparently OnLive is also doing well. NVidia is doing well with their SHIELD system. The biggest barrier to the streamer's entry was that they didn't have a big subscription base nor did they have the library of games. Do you honestly believe that's a problem for Microsoft or PS? Especially Microsoft, which already has data centers galore?

[aceluby]

You're completely ignoring the infrastructure and ISP issues. With movies this is already an issue and that's static streaming. A constant back and forth that's required for video game streaming just isn't there and won't be for decades in the US due to the socio-political climate and what's required to support such an infrastructure.

Without the infrastructure, streaming can't exist. Without the biggest market along for the ride, streaming can't exist. At least not in the way you're talking about.

[Kalbear]

If you say so. It appears to be working just fine for Destiny, Titanfall, Diablo 3 and most MMOs. Oh wait - I don't actually agree with you!

The problem that you're addressing is the notion of symmetric streaming. The issue is that this isn't really a requirement at all. A game doesn't have to give as much information as it takes in. The information it takes in is literally the same as a movie streaming is. The information it puts out is literally the same as the information that any game currently does. The primary difference is that lag makes a bigger difference since you're not rendering everything on your side and then getting server information that updates you, meaning predictive systems aren't going to work as well. The good news is that they largely gave you the illusion of controlling things anyway.

The infrastructure in the US is problematic not because of the constant back and forth (which has already been addressed by every single online game since Quake) but because of the actual bandwidth requirements. Cable and DirecTV already have problems with streaming high-res videos to people in real time due to bandwidth constraints - at least in the US. In other countries this isn't an issue at all. The good news is that you can get around this by not having to do 1080p all the time unless your bandwidth supports it. And there's a lot of evidence to indicate that this wouldn't be nearly as problematic - because you're not streaming 1080p to tablets and phones.

On the ISP sides there's a lot of good progress for this right now anyway, and companies like google and apple and MS are already making fairly big strides.

[Jabronius Maximus]

You're completely ignoring the infrastructure and ISP issues. With movies this is already an issue and that's static streaming. A constant back and forth that's required for video game streaming just isn't there and won't be for decades in the US due to the socio-political climate and what's required to support such an infrastructure.

Without the infrastructure, streaming can't exist. Without the biggest market along for the ride, streaming can't exist. At least not in the way you're talking about.

^I agree. When you have the likes of Comcast slowing down and blaming Netflix (instead of expanding), there is a long way to go before something as demanding as gaming will be properly accommodated by the networks.

[aceluby]

I don't think you really understand what the infrastructure issue is. It goes beyond what an ISP, Google, Apple, M$ can do on their own. Delivery is the issue and we're using a delivery system that is 50 years old with no incentive to make that better. It's physical lines to homes and how we can do it. Like I said before, there is already issues with movies being streamed and the amount of bandwidth it consumes, gaming will be FAR worse using the same old system we have now. And that's not taking into consideration that there are lots of people who can't even get the crappy service most of us are able to get.

We're a long, long way off before streaming games is the norm.

[Melphis Amekia]

So, I'd like to ask you all who played Divinity Original Sin on how to build my characters. See, the first time(a month ago when i got the game) I tried to build them myself, I failed miserably outside of Cysael(though I did OK doing everything I could there). The male character(because he is me, and I always play as rogue in any game possible) will, however much you want to change my mind, be a rouge character. When I get level 2 on him, I'll give him the Pet Pal talent, but what should I do with and after lvl 4(lvl 3 is for that +2 attributes skill) and which attributes should I take for him? I guess Dexterity and Speed are the way to go, but I'm not sure on the Speed part, so I'd like some opinions.

Also, which type of witch/wizard starts with fire skills? There are many places where I need to use fire(to get rid of poisonous ground/air etc.). I can easily get Air and Water skills via Jahan, but I don't want to need to wait till lvl 3 or 4 to get some fire spells for my female character.

Since I'd also like to get into Wasteland 2, what do you think of my planned squad build:

Me(Sniper):

Attributes: Coordination - 6, Luck - 4, Speed/Intelligence - 5/4(depends which one I need more), else - 3

Skills: Sniper Rifle, Computer Science, Toaster Repair, Outdoorsman, Surgeon(in case Medic falls down)

Field Medic:

Attributes: Intelligence - 6, Luck - 4, Speed/Awereness - 5/4, else - 3

Skills: Submachines(or Handguns), Field Medic, Surgeon, Barter(?), ?

Tank:

Attributes: Strength - 6, Luck - 4, Charisma - 6, else - 3

Skills: Assault Rifles/Shotguns, Leadership, Hard Ass, Smart Ass, Brute Force

Scout:

Attributes: Awereness - 6, Luck - 5, Intelligence - 5, else - 3

Skills: Assault Rifles/Shotguns, Safecracking, Lockpicking, Demolitions, Perception

Is it solid enough? If I should, what should I change? Thanks in advance.

[Jabronius Maximus]

I don't think you really understand what the infrastructure issue is. It goes beyond what an ISP, Google, Apple, M$ can do on their own. Delivery is the issue and we're using a delivery system that is 50 years old with no incentive to make that better. It's physical lines to homes and how we can do it. Like I said before, there is already issues with movies being streamed and the amount of bandwidth it consumes, gaming will be FAR worse using the same old system we have now.

Fair enough, but the bolded part was more or less what I was trying to say. And when you have state laws barring municipalities from installing their own fiber optic networks (which I believe is in place in an absurd number of states), change isn't coming soon at all.

[Kalbear]

I don't think you really understand what the infrastructure issue is. It goes beyond what an ISP, Google, Apple, M$ can do on their own. Delivery is the issue and we're using a delivery system that is 50 years old with no incentive to make that better. It's physical lines to homes and how we can do it. Like I said before, there is already issues with movies being streamed and the amount of bandwidth it consumes, gaming will be FAR worse using the same old system we have now. And that's not taking into consideration that there are lots of people who can't even get the crappy service most of us are able to get.

I think I understand the infrastructure work significantly better than you do.

Most people are not using a delivery system that is 50 years old. Most broadband is cable-based, which is at best 30 years old and is usually replaced every 10 years. Almost none of the cable done 30 years ago exists in the ground or on poles now. Cable, by itself, is pretty good for this, and if everyone had cable internet the gaming community would be absolutely fine. The next biggest chunk of broadband is 3G/4G/LTE, actually, which has more than enough bandwidth for gaming on that lower resolution platform. If we were relying heavily on phone lines you'd be right - but the vast majority of broadband is not phone lines.

And companies like google and MS and Verizon are aggressively rolling out significantly faster internet pipes. The problem isn't the physical limitations at that point - it's how much bandwidth the providers can put out.

There are issues with movies being streamed but those issues are primarily around who owns the bandwidth and who gets to pay for it. This has a lot less to do with physical infrastructure and a lot more to do with who wants to get paid for owning the roads. There's nothing stopping Netflix from sending out a whole lot of traffic on a physical basis. The issue is that Comcast (and others) want to make them pay for it more.

I will say that if the US doesn't get their act together and get better ideas of who pays for what in bandwidth, streaming gaming will be difficult to catch on. But it really doesn't have to be a competitor to consoles as we understand it, either, and that's sort of the awesome thing. Most people own Netflix and DVDS and Cable TV. A streaming game provider that went solely that way could very easily make a lot of money saying 'sure, play on the PS5 or XB2 or whatever - OR play on our streaming system anywhere, any time, with no special equipment and on any device that we support - and we support emulating about a trillion games'. Think that wouldn't sell?

[aceluby]

I will say that if the US doesn't get their act together and get better ideas of who pays for what in bandwidth, streaming gaming will be difficult to catch on.

Which ties right in with my argument. The socio-political environment is a LONG way off from getting anywhere near solving this problem.

[Kalbear]

I think that'll resolve itself fairly quickly due to the tech giants simply having too much sway. Telling MS, Google, Apple, Amazon, Netflix, Disney, Hulu, ESPN, the NFL and most other content providers to go fuck themselves isn't going to work well from a lobbying perspective.

[The Mance]

significantly faster internet pipes

Tubes. Pretty sure they're tubes.

:leaving:

[The Anti-Targ]

Shadows of Mordor looking like it's getting some good reviews. A definite maybe for me. Can't say more than that as I don't know when I'll be able to fit it in my limited gaming time with Dragon Age coming very soon, lots of half finished games in the pipeline and some good titles coming out next year.

[Black Wolf Smith]

The closed the treasure cave so I searching the moon, and think I might have found something.

I was going down towards the City of Bones, and did a melee threw some guys, turn the corner and started down a ramp. A swarm was at the bottom, and the first came at me, I pulled the trigger, and shot it once, and ran out of bullets. Instead of charging me, it backed up, then the rest of his group started coming. I killed them, and then another 2 or 3 started charging, coming from around the corner I couldn't see. I just stood there killing them in 2's and 3's. After about 10 swarms(30-40 creatures), I went down and picked up some of the ammo, and spears, and saw 1 single, and shot him as I realized it was the one I had first shot. I tried to get it to start again, but couldn't.

[Jabronius Maximus]

Well at the moon there's that sword of crota level. You get to the point where the temple door opens, then kill the swarm. Make sure to die before killing everything and entering the temple, and you'll respawn at the point where the swarm comes out of the temple. Rinse and repeat. It's boring of course, but it got me a lot of loot.

[Black Wolf Smith]

Well at the moon there's that sword of crota level. You get to the point where the temple door opens, then kill the swarm. Make sure to die before killing everything and entering the temple, and you'll respawn at the point where the swarm comes out of the temple. Rinse and repeat. It's boring of course, but it got me a lot of loot.

I thought that got "fixed". I was looking for it(didn't know where it was) but the doors never opened.

[Alex.]

I'm taking the plunge today. Getting a PS4 with Destiny but also picking up FIFA 2015 as I have a suspicion Destiny might be shite. HJaving not played a FIFA game since ~2006 is the new one likely to confuse the life out of me?

[Muttering Bill]

The closed the treasure cave so I searching the moon, and think I might have found something.

Not just the treasure cave. They destroyed pretty much all of the engram farming locations. Various treasure caves removed. Mission exploits removed. Queen's gear no longer dismantles into Ascendant materials.

There's no point in doing the Queen's Bounties anymore.

Supposedly the increased Engram rewards on Strikes, but I haven't done any yet to see it.

Skywatch was a lot more fun before the cave. But that was in the Beta, and we were all level 8. It doesn't have the same charm at level 20-something. They need to add higher level Patrol areas to keep these places interesting.

Give it a few days and some new spot will be found. Skywatch is still a good farming area, even with this change. There are 4 points where enemies spawn from, so action is pretty constant. I farmed the area in the Beta. You just can't stand in one spot to do it anymore.

At least they're going to add voice chat and address some balance issues, so that's a win.

Well at the moon there's that sword of crota level. You get to the point where the temple door opens, then kill the swarm. Make sure to die before killing everything and entering the temple, and you'll respawn at the point where the swarm comes out of the temple. Rinse and repeat. It's boring of course, but it got me a lot of loot.

Possibly the Dark Within that you're thinking of? The trick was to kill all the Thralls and then die to the Knights (killing the Knights would initiate the next checkpoint). Yeah, they removed the Knights, and reduced Engram drop rates for a short period after hard-wipe. So that's gone.

I have a suspicion Destiny might be shite.

Depends on your expectiations. If you like loot grinding, then you'll enjoy this. If you want a good story, you're going to hate it. If you like co-op then you'll probably be fine. If you like PVP you may disappointed or furstrated due to balance issues, but you might still like it anyway.

[Fez]

Re: Destiny

Unless its been changed too, there's also the Fallen/Vex "war" in front of the entrance to the Nexus strike on Venus. Its a large area, so you can't stay still, but its always swarming with enemies.

There's also that somewhat hidden area behind the Forgotten Shore on Earth, although all the enemies there are lvl20, so you can't be completely mindless there.

[aceluby]

I think that'll resolve itself fairly quickly due to the tech giants simply having too much sway. Telling MS, Google, Apple, Amazon, Netflix, Disney, Hulu, ESPN, the NFL and most other content providers to go fuck themselves isn't going to work well from a lobbying perspective.

It still boils down to who is going to pay for it and who will receive the profits.