Nelly ? Why he will buy a Xbox One

Just this reason alone

And besides he has widely talked about the game during the past 6 months,and with this game promising no connection problems then its made in heaven for Nelly .

Yeah. Nelly just loves the cloud is the impression I got too.

No it isn't. It still talks about host advantage which is [censored]. It's "coding for the majority" that is the problem and all that technical stuff is simply sales talk.

Plus I hate the xbox controller because I am not Jeremy Beadle.....

Your missing the point as they are going to use cloud servers so nobody is the host and it's equal

From what I read about it all, it's a positive move for Microsoft to make it easier for games devs to use their 'Azure' computer resources to act as scalable servers that are importantly, cheap enough, to allow far more games publishers to include dedicated servers for online gaming.

This emphasis on 'money' begs the question though... are games publishers like Activision, Ubisoft and EA skint? Look at how much money they've made from their respective blockbuster titles/franchises and ask yourself why they never paid for more dedicated games servers in the first place? To me, it's because online gaming on 2nd gen consoles was more of an after-thought, something you could do not something that the system was going to be properly good at without the proper dedicated server support.

But - I think it's all very positive as the guy says, dedicated server rental isn't exactly cheap but that also makes me wonder why MS/Sony etc didn't give people the option to hire servers themselves as with PC gaming then the cost to publishers wouldn't be part of the equation?

Also - on a technical side: I think Nelster's knowledge of how online gaming works, even on dedicated servers, is much better than our own understanding. There's more to it all as other forum readers have mentioned, like server side/client side collision detection systems and also plenty of latency jibbery-pokery going on to even out latency differences between players all connecting to one server.

Well. Not sure you're gonna read this anyway. Might as well whistle in the wind.

It's all hype mate. They are simply dedi's but on the cheap.

Now if they matchmake "honestly", rather than placing the emphasis on reduced lobby waiting times, that would be interesting.

In reply to a post by SPOOKish:

Also - on a technical side: I think Nelster's knowledge of how online gaming works, even on dedicated servers, is much better than our own understanding. There's more to it all as other forum readers have mentioned, like server side/client side collision detection systems and also plenty of latency jibbery-pokery going on to even out latency differences between players all connecting to one server.

I think Toady understands the arithmetic more than most, or is at least confident enough to stick his head above the parapet.

You'd be surprised how defensive people with extremely high K/D ratios get when you explain how it works to them.

what I find funny is dedicated servers for multiplayer fps were around 10+ years ago but it started to become the trend to use a p2p system instead (probably to save costs) but I guess after complaints from gamers they nowreverting to a dedicated server system again.

Yeah me too. Saving money by giving console owners a cra.ppy experience online. It's not like how the online game plays online is important or anything...

The only benefit in terms of Microsoft's cloud could be the number of servers. Larger "regional" dedicated servers can be self defeating, but obviously cheaper to operate.

I think this is the idea behind the "300,000 servers" propaganda MS were touting around E3. Virtual servers some say, but the number of locations is the more important dynamic. That improves the likelihood of populating them with players of similar latency. That in turn reduces the impact of latency compensation coding.