Yeah but I mean if Nintendo partnered with IBM they'd be working with one of the big companies in cloud computing as well. Huge if, like it's never happening.
-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
Yeah but I mean if Nintendo partnered with IBM they'd be working with one of the big companies in cloud computing as well. Huge if, like it's never happening.
From what i understand. You can play every game offline. But you can get better performance & gfx if you are going to connect to cloud. So it's a win win situation.
IBM's main focus is cloud and mobile technology.
Watson's heavily based in cloud computing.
No-one can really increase system performance over the internet. The bandwidth is too low and the latency is too high. They could fire off to another system to do some calculations in the background that didn't need to be realtime but I would imagine there's not much use for that.
Anthony Soprano
Member
it's good this is being outsourced since nintendo's online infrastructure knowledge (or implementation) is historically near non-existent.
BUT..it's incredibly upsetting that this seems like a weird meld of remote play/folding@home/bitcoin mining/spotpass for these reasons;
1.) potential waste of bandwidth, which is still capped in most parts of the US
2.) it basically encourages always on networking, which is a waste of electricity and will be offputting
3.) effectively a logistical nightmare for the console's later life cycle when people stop using it
4.) shoddy connections (firewalled or connected to routers on a different floor, in another room, etc). the average consumer knows absolutely nothing about networking and most american households have poop 2-in-1 modem router combos.
doesn't make me feel good about the graphical power of the primary console, if the rumors of the 2 device deployment are to be true.
to conclude, this is basically just onlive, but for mobile gaming deployment and everyone's console is the host? it seems very pointless and the jitter/artifacting that will likely be introduced will prob make games not very pretty.
BUT..it's incredibly upsetting that this seems like a weird meld of remote play/folding@home/bitcoin mining/spotpass for these reasons;
1.) potential waste of bandwidth, which is still capped in most parts of the US
2.) it basically encourages always on networking, which is a waste of electricity and will be offputting
3.) effectively a logistical nightmare for the console's later life cycle when people stop using it
4.) shoddy connections (firewalled or connected to routers on a different floor, in another room, etc). the average consumer knows absolutely nothing about networking and most american households have poop 2-in-1 modem router combos.
doesn't make me feel good about the graphical power of the primary console, if the rumors of the 2 device deployment are to be true.
to conclude, this is basically just onlive, but for mobile gaming deployment and everyone's console is the host? it seems very pointless and the jitter/artifacting that will likely be introduced will prob make games not very pretty.
What makes you think that?
1. We don't know what the bandwidth requirements are. Sony's PSNOW only requires 5Mbps for example.
2. The wiiU's network card is already always on it's how they deliver advertisements to the gamepad and uses spotpass functions.
3. That's why Nintendo has dedicated servers.
4. The chances of someone's network setup being the limiting factor is slim to none. Even if they can't run a wire to it even the worst routers on the market (yes even modem router combos) should be able to easily eclipse their outgoing connection speed.
It's also worth noting a few things found in outside of gaf analysis
http://www.techinsider.io/nintendo-nx-patent-photos-2015-12
If I understand it well:
1.Nintendo will step away with nx from the wii brand
2. You can use more systems to play the games. Using Mobile phones, pc, new handheld or console from nintendo.
3. All can be played offline. To get better gfx local, you can use extra power systems that you can use to increase the speed.
4. If you are outside, you still can play offline on handheld. But you can also increase the power by connecting on the cloud and use power from other users or your power systems from home? And play on other devices to.
5. The user that share their devices get extra credit to get discount on games.
6. Everyone can decide howmuch they spend on it.
How could this be not the perfect match? It seems to good to be true.
Isn't it possible to rent games also. Or a price/month to access a library of games?
1.Nintendo will step away with nx from the wii brand
2. You can use more systems to play the games. Using Mobile phones, pc, new handheld or console from nintendo.
3. All can be played offline. To get better gfx local, you can use extra power systems that you can use to increase the speed.
4. If you are outside, you still can play offline on handheld. But you can also increase the power by connecting on the cloud and use power from other users or your power systems from home? And play on other devices to.
5. The user that share their devices get extra credit to get discount on games.
6. Everyone can decide howmuch they spend on it.
How could this be not the perfect match? It seems to good to be true.
Isn't it possible to rent games also. Or a price/month to access a library of games?
Fourth Storm
Member
I haven't meant to ignore you blu. Lemme catch up here. This patent has been some work to digest.
Yeah, I think the physical link with the console (whatever form factor it may work with) is one of the bigger questions here and will say much about what kind of boost they intend the SCD to provide. They do use a wire as an exemplary connection throughout the patent.
Could even be ethernet, I suppose (they talk below about the SCD possibly having its own power supply), if the enhancements they plan are to be "cloud appropriate." I don't see much point in that, though, unless they want to make it like a router. Doubtful. This seems like something intended to be very close to the console in proximity (if not an outright Megazord).
A few more interesting bits:
Edit: I dunno, this part sounds like they do have low bandwidth applications in mind. Maybe it is intended to connect via ethernet. Why leave out USB or other high speed solution, but name every other plausible solution the writer could think of?
Yeah, I think the physical link with the console (whatever form factor it may work with) is one of the bigger questions here and will say much about what kind of boost they intend the SCD to provide. They do use a wire as an exemplary connection throughout the patent.
Could even be ethernet, I suppose (they talk below about the SCD possibly having its own power supply), if the enhancements they plan are to be "cloud appropriate." I don't see much point in that, though, unless they want to make it like a router. Doubtful. This seems like something intended to be very close to the console in proximity (if not an outright Megazord).
A few more interesting bits:
Edit: I dunno, this part sounds like they do have low bandwidth applications in mind. Maybe it is intended to connect via ethernet. Why leave out USB or other high speed solution, but name every other plausible solution the writer could think of?
This kind of sounds like this
Albeit physically separate.
I think the idea is to provide incremental upgrades over multiple generations instead of swapping out an entire console.
blu
Wants the largest console games publisher to avoid Nintendo's platforms.
Well, wireless surely is an option. I mean, look at the wiiU. One can claim it's an extreme example of the patent - the gamepad, as dumb as it seems, is a stand-alone computing device (on-board CPU, RAM, etc). It's just so weak it cannot play anything on its own, and ergo is useless for such purposes when untethered. This 'disbalance' in the power distribution across the gamepad / main-body posed a major problem with the public perception of the gamepad - people saw the off-tv play as great potential, but it all ended there. A similar-to-wiiU power envelope could have produced a very different result had the gamepad had the stand-alone capabilities of, say, 2DS.
So after reading the different breakdowns, basically what we're getting from this patent is:
I buy the "NX device", and a "Supplimental computing device". On the road my NX device can run and play games, but at lowered specs, but I can boost some of them with the "power of the cloud", and at home, I can turn my handheld NX device into a console of varying power, depending on what SCD I get, and if I want to use the cloud in conjunction with it. Also some graphical capabilities will be enhanced.
Sounds amazing to me, count me in! I hope they release "Basic SCD" , "Gamer edition", and "Ultimate or Elite edition". And if it can be daisy chained, what could be the real world limit on "power increase"? How many devices could one "link up" before the power increase becomes non existant? Like could I connect enough of them together to give my "NX device" the power of my 980?
I buy the "NX device", and a "Supplimental computing device". On the road my NX device can run and play games, but at lowered specs, but I can boost some of them with the "power of the cloud", and at home, I can turn my handheld NX device into a console of varying power, depending on what SCD I get, and if I want to use the cloud in conjunction with it. Also some graphical capabilities will be enhanced.
Sounds amazing to me, count me in! I hope they release "Basic SCD" , "Gamer edition", and "Ultimate or Elite edition". And if it can be daisy chained, what could be the real world limit on "power increase"? How many devices could one "link up" before the power increase becomes non existant? Like could I connect enough of them together to give my "NX device" the power of my 980?
I know, that's why I suggested IBM as a partner, they've supplied CPUs to Nintendo in the past and now Nintendo wants to do cloud stuff, which IBM coincidentally does
Schnozberry
Member
The patent allows for a lot of wiggle room in regards to the software applications. It's hard to know which design choices were made for the final product. Maybe we're dealing with a more powerful than expected handheld that doesn't rely on this cloud hub device very much, or maybe we are dealing with nearly identical devices that are able to do parallel processing when connected to one another. The patent is general enough in it's descriptions that you're tossing darts at which features could have made it into a final retail product.
Cheeseman Battitude
Member
This kind of sounds like this
What is that?
I hope the NX Handheld and NX Home Console are the SCD's being referred to in this patent. I don't wanna have to buy more than two game systems or devices in order to noticeably improve a game.
Also, I hope this means 6 or more people can play Mario Kart 9 at once. Two on the TV, four using handhelds.
Also, I hope this means 6 or more people can play Mario Kart 9 at once. Two on the TV, four using handhelds.
madstarr12
Member
Hmm, wonder if the central hub of this system will be a home Console, while other units (mobile, semi-stationary, etc) will be their own thing, but can work in tandem with the central hub as extra resources, or maybe even streaming. Can't wait to see if this actually becomes something and isn't just a zombie-patent that never comes alive.
Rushersauce
Banned
Project ARA, I guess
WaterAstro
Member
Cheeseman Battitude
Member
I've been thinking about the practicalities of this system and what it means for Nintendo and what it means for us.
The best experience will probably come from a console and multiple SCDs in the same house either daisy-chained to the console physically or connected by wifi. So if they're connected by wifi they will each require a power supply. But what about using a physical connection to the console? Will they draw power from the console itself? If the SCDs aren't powered by the console in a physical connection scenario (a massive oversight if so,) they will need their own wall socket. Very annoying. The Wii U has 4 USB ports, so you could use the system and connect 4 pro controllers at the same time and the system would power them. If the SCDs do draw power from the system when connected physically it gives us an idea of how powerful the SCDs may be. They will probably contain the same tech as the handheld so that they don't have huge power requirements.
Next, Nintendo has never offered a built-in hard drive in their systems and I don't see this changing. The console will probably come with 32GB of flash like the Wii U. USB hard drives will still be supported but I think the SCDs will come with either an additional 32GB of flash or an SD card slot for us to add our own, and so on as you add SCDs. So if the SCDs are based on the hardware that's in the handheld, don't have a hard drive and are powered by the console, the SCDs are likely to be very small devices like a Playstation TV.
OK, we're on day 1 of NX launch and we've all got the console, handheld and more importantly, a network of SCDs in our houses. What benefits could that bring, to have a network of Nintendo devices distributed around your home? Perhaps the SCDs have HDMI out and can be used for in-home game streaming from the console. Or maybe they will support apps like Plex and they will be able to share your content to each room that has an SCD connected to a TV.
This could have some good possibilities.
The best experience will probably come from a console and multiple SCDs in the same house either daisy-chained to the console physically or connected by wifi. So if they're connected by wifi they will each require a power supply. But what about using a physical connection to the console? Will they draw power from the console itself? If the SCDs aren't powered by the console in a physical connection scenario (a massive oversight if so,) they will need their own wall socket. Very annoying. The Wii U has 4 USB ports, so you could use the system and connect 4 pro controllers at the same time and the system would power them. If the SCDs do draw power from the system when connected physically it gives us an idea of how powerful the SCDs may be. They will probably contain the same tech as the handheld so that they don't have huge power requirements.
Next, Nintendo has never offered a built-in hard drive in their systems and I don't see this changing. The console will probably come with 32GB of flash like the Wii U. USB hard drives will still be supported but I think the SCDs will come with either an additional 32GB of flash or an SD card slot for us to add our own, and so on as you add SCDs. So if the SCDs are based on the hardware that's in the handheld, don't have a hard drive and are powered by the console, the SCDs are likely to be very small devices like a Playstation TV.
OK, we're on day 1 of NX launch and we've all got the console, handheld and more importantly, a network of SCDs in our houses. What benefits could that bring, to have a network of Nintendo devices distributed around your home? Perhaps the SCDs have HDMI out and can be used for in-home game streaming from the console. Or maybe they will support apps like Plex and they will be able to share your content to each room that has an SCD connected to a TV.
This could have some good possibilities.
Anthony Soprano
Member
I misread something in this topic about Nintendo going third party outsourcing for netcode/infrastructure, very sorry.
But with PSNow, that's DOWNSTREAM on your end right from Sony's servers.
This method factors in UPSTREAM from another client device over the internet and then downstream from your connected different client network over the internet.
As for the WiiU's network card being always on - downloading brief trailers and doing momentary website pings are not the same as having a constant upload stream for game features. It sounds like a nightmare and I wouldn't want it sapping my bandwidth, I have other stuff to worry about, like other household members using my internet and a high resolution internet security system that I need to be able to access at all times from outside of my network.
If another device on the host network decided it was going to start uploading stuff and it sapped the bandwidth from this streaming service, it would result in poor service, wouldn't it? Take streaming video on twitch, for example, not all households can do it - especially with multiple devices going at the same time.
The plus side of all of this gamble is that it will likely allow for free netplay, unlike Sony and Microsoft's strategies.
Fourth Storm
Member
Interesting analysis. Especially in light of the patent mentioning that the "game console" may in fact be a computational terminal. As Schnoz said, the patent really does leave it's doors open, so it's really hard to say. But I do think you're on the right track with trying to envision a configuration which would be easy to market and understand. This was filed in June 3rd of 2014 when in March of that year, Iwata said they already had a somewhat clear idea of their next dedicated gaming platform. I'm leaning towards this being one part of the overarching NX environment (number of hardwares might increase, as Iwata mentioned), but I would not rule out this patent, or parts of it, applying to a stationary NX console either.
There are definite logistical issues they need to work out, but I still think it shows promise. The patent allows you to set when you share your SCD resources over the cloud and for how long. It's an opt in proposition and they talk about potential compensation. Also of note is that the SCD would not be streaming video or audio, but raw computational data. The patent makes a point of saying that A/V drivers might only be handled by the console.
I think the cool thing about this patent is that you can get all the benefits of the extra cloud processing without using any internet bandwidth using a local/physical connection.
Here's my read of the patent, or at least my hypothesis of how it could be used in a (potentially) commercially viable product.
In late 2016, Nintendo releases a home console which we'll call the NX (forget about handhelds for the moment). The NX has performance levels less than or equal to the PS4 and XBO.
In 2018/2019, the PS5 and next Xbox are released. Nintendo releases a box, which we'll call the NX+, which effectively just holds an SoC (roughly as powerful as the PS5, etc.) and a hard-drive, and connects to the NX. The NX+ has two functions, the first being a straightforward system upgrade to allow the NX to play "next-gen" games on par with the competing consoles. The second function is to stream these games over the internet to NX owners who don't own the NX+.
Of the two major issues with current game streaming services, the NX+ would eliminate one and significantly reduce the other. On the cost side, Nintendo wouldn't have to charge a subscription fee, as they don't have huge server farms to maintain. Regarding latency, the natural distribution of NX+ units would result in massively reduced typical latency compared to a server farm approach, as it's extremely likely that you would be able to be linked to an NX+ very close to you to stream from.
If well implemented, it would give Nintendo a very powerful message at the start of the next generation: "you can play next-gen games on our current-gen console". No need for a subscription, just purchase and play as you usually would. For NX+ owners, they would be incentivised to opt-in to the streaming service by earning eShop coupons for every X hours their NX+ is used by other players. Only a small proportion of NX owners would need to buy an NX+ to make the service available to everyone.
It would also allow Nintendo to introduce a mid-gen console now in order to get back into the console race, yet still compete properly with the PS5 and the next Xbox without existing NX owners feeling hard-done by.
There would, or course, be a number of challenges, both technical and practical, that would have to be overcome for this to work. Firstly, the practical challenges:
- The ratio of NX+ owners to NX owners would ideally want to be kept in a particular range. If the ratio were too low, all NX+ units would constantly be in use and NX owners would frequently be unable to connect to one to stream a game. At the other end of the spectrum, if every NX owner buys an NX+, then it sort of defeats the purpose of the streaming solution in the first place. Fortunately the reward scheme would operate as a sort of natural balance for this. With too few NX+ units, those who do own them would be earning a huge quantity of rewards, incentivising others to purchase one. Conversely, with too many NX+ owners, they would be streamed from very rarely and the rewards would be slim, reducing the incentive.
- When the NX+ is released, there would be a natural incentive for Nintendo for the price of the NX to be as low as possible, definitely under $200, but preferably $149 or even $99, to minimise the barrier of entry to streaming NX+ games. However, they should also be looking at using the NX to re-attract third parties to their platforms before the NX+ comes around, which would be best achieved by making the console more powerful, and hence less likely to be able to hit those low price points in a few years time. It would be a delicate balance to design a console that meets both those needs.
From a technical point of view, there are the following challenges:
- The obvious one is maintaining a high-quality, low-latency stream between two residential internet connections. Nintendo's experience with the custom streaming solution used for the Wii U gamepad would be valuable here. There is also a significant advantage in the fact that the two devices will be very close together in practical terms, which makes the challenge an easier one, but it's still not trivial.
- The less obvious technical problem is what to to when I'm streaming a game from someone's NX+, and then he wants to play a game himself? Obviously if you physically own a piece of gaming hardware you're not going to want to be locked out of it, so there would need to be some way of transferring a player to a different NX+, and doing so in a relatively seamless way. This would be, to put it mildly, a significant challenge, but isn't necessarily completely technically impossible.
It would definitely be an unusual business strategy for Nintendo, but if implemented extremely well (which is a big if), it would actually be a very disruptive, and potentially very successful strategy for them. The entire thing would hinge on creating a properly seamless streaming experience, but by spreading the streaming hosts throughout the world, rather than concentrating them all in a small number of server farms, they would actually set themselves up with a reasonable chance of achieving it.
In late 2016, Nintendo releases a home console which we'll call the NX (forget about handhelds for the moment). The NX has performance levels less than or equal to the PS4 and XBO.
In 2018/2019, the PS5 and next Xbox are released. Nintendo releases a box, which we'll call the NX+, which effectively just holds an SoC (roughly as powerful as the PS5, etc.) and a hard-drive, and connects to the NX. The NX+ has two functions, the first being a straightforward system upgrade to allow the NX to play "next-gen" games on par with the competing consoles. The second function is to stream these games over the internet to NX owners who don't own the NX+.
Of the two major issues with current game streaming services, the NX+ would eliminate one and significantly reduce the other. On the cost side, Nintendo wouldn't have to charge a subscription fee, as they don't have huge server farms to maintain. Regarding latency, the natural distribution of NX+ units would result in massively reduced typical latency compared to a server farm approach, as it's extremely likely that you would be able to be linked to an NX+ very close to you to stream from.
If well implemented, it would give Nintendo a very powerful message at the start of the next generation: "you can play next-gen games on our current-gen console". No need for a subscription, just purchase and play as you usually would. For NX+ owners, they would be incentivised to opt-in to the streaming service by earning eShop coupons for every X hours their NX+ is used by other players. Only a small proportion of NX owners would need to buy an NX+ to make the service available to everyone.
It would also allow Nintendo to introduce a mid-gen console now in order to get back into the console race, yet still compete properly with the PS5 and the next Xbox without existing NX owners feeling hard-done by.
There would, or course, be a number of challenges, both technical and practical, that would have to be overcome for this to work. Firstly, the practical challenges:
- The ratio of NX+ owners to NX owners would ideally want to be kept in a particular range. If the ratio were too low, all NX+ units would constantly be in use and NX owners would frequently be unable to connect to one to stream a game. At the other end of the spectrum, if every NX owner buys an NX+, then it sort of defeats the purpose of the streaming solution in the first place. Fortunately the reward scheme would operate as a sort of natural balance for this. With too few NX+ units, those who do own them would be earning a huge quantity of rewards, incentivising others to purchase one. Conversely, with too many NX+ owners, they would be streamed from very rarely and the rewards would be slim, reducing the incentive.
- When the NX+ is released, there would be a natural incentive for Nintendo for the price of the NX to be as low as possible, definitely under $200, but preferably $149 or even $99, to minimise the barrier of entry to streaming NX+ games. However, they should also be looking at using the NX to re-attract third parties to their platforms before the NX+ comes around, which would be best achieved by making the console more powerful, and hence less likely to be able to hit those low price points in a few years time. It would be a delicate balance to design a console that meets both those needs.
From a technical point of view, there are the following challenges:
- The obvious one is maintaining a high-quality, low-latency stream between two residential internet connections. Nintendo's experience with the custom streaming solution used for the Wii U gamepad would be valuable here. There is also a significant advantage in the fact that the two devices will be very close together in practical terms, which makes the challenge an easier one, but it's still not trivial.
- The less obvious technical problem is what to to when I'm streaming a game from someone's NX+, and then he wants to play a game himself? Obviously if you physically own a piece of gaming hardware you're not going to want to be locked out of it, so there would need to be some way of transferring a player to a different NX+, and doing so in a relatively seamless way. This would be, to put it mildly, a significant challenge, but isn't necessarily completely technically impossible.
It would definitely be an unusual business strategy for Nintendo, but if implemented extremely well (which is a big if), it would actually be a very disruptive, and potentially very successful strategy for them. The entire thing would hinge on creating a properly seamless streaming experience, but by spreading the streaming hosts throughout the world, rather than concentrating them all in a small number of server farms, they would actually set themselves up with a reasonable chance of achieving it.
Fourth Storm
Member
Nice thoughts, Thraktor. I've also thought that this would be something they might choose to launch a year or two after the initial NX hardware, as the console itself will already be an investment for consumers. Also, what kind of message would it send if Nintendo's new hardware already needed a 32X-esque add-on right out of the gate? At the same time, I could see them marketing it as partially as external HDD/NAS, especially if they end up doing 2 NX console skus (one w/ optical drive and one w/ internal HDD), as that previous patent implied. In that case, it might make sense to release such a device sooner, if only to supplement the optical drive sku's storage.
It's hard to say. Blu has a point, that especially with them mentioning that the console could = a terminal, Nintendo could have a Wii U configuration with enhanced roaming/portable gameplay in mind. Against this, Kimishima recently stated NX wouldn't be a variation of Wii or Wii U, and that kind of setup sounds awful similar. The patent also repeats that this device is meant to be a supplement and could even lack A/V drivers, so that doesn't sound like the inventor had a standalone console in mind. Also to that effect, your point about the owner of the SCD potentially wanting to use the entirety of its resources locally would be even more problematic if the SCD=the home console.
Good question. I suppose it could just pause the game like when the Wii U Gamepad gets moved out of range if a disconnect happens unexpectedly. Perhaps one could automatically set to connect to the next closest available SCD if the device you're using has a specific timer associated with its use or in the case of a mobile device, it senses that you're moving out of range.
If we can take away anything from all of this, it's that at least the patents seem to indicate they are moving in the right direction. This cloud stuff, the digital console, and the mouse wheel shoulder buttons are alot more reassuring than the horseback rider and environmental sensor patents they were filing in the Wii days.
Great analysis. One question about the ratio of NX+ to NX. Let's say Nintendo wants content streaming at launch and doesn't want to wait for an NX+ launch to implement it, but they also don't want to spend for a server farm (or the standard definition of a server farm)
Could they turn whatever NX in store kiosk they have planned into a supercharged NX server of sorts? If we assume that pretty much every Target and Walmart in the USA is going to have one of these kiosks and we have 4,177 Walmart stores and 1789 Target stores, that's 5,966 kiosks available to act as dedicated servers in the US alone (plus whatever super stores I am forgetting...maybe Toys R Us, Sears, and Kmart depending), and they'll already be in strategic locations around the country.
Would this be enough to get things started if the system sold lets say three million units in the first six months of availability? And if not, what kind of ratio are we talking about to make this feasible?
If it could work, it seems to me the cheapest way to go about things, since multi year distribution deals are already set up with those retail partners, and Nintendo already has their army of reps and technicians in place to deal with any issues they would have with kiosk maintenance.
Sorry I missed this post. Great discussion there as well!
Interesting points. There's one problem you didn't address though and that is getting the game to the source NX. If you are relying on the person having bought the game in the first place you are cutting down the number of available machines considerably. You would also need to have it stored digitally because none's going to be able to change disks, and therefore you would need so much storage it'd be impractical.
There's also the issue of data caps limiting the number of available systems. I basically think it'd be unworkable at present as an internet based system. However within your subnet I can see it working to some degree. I haven't read the entire patent yet but it seems like console and SCD's can process data requests from other consoles, with SCDs being limited by having no audio, controller etc. So you could have one in the bedroom, one in the lounge and use resources from each other if needed. I would still be concerned with latency and bandwidth, but if you're on say a wired network with 1-2ms latency, that's 4 both ways, so long as the other machine can render, encode and get the data back to you within 14ms (Or about 28 at 30fps) you might be able to use it as a rendering platform, a-la WiiU->GamePad.
It's all very interesting nonetheless.
I guess it will depend on the bus used. If they make them all connectable via PCIe, they would have significant throughput.
That could be one use but is that really that much of a feature. Why would a consumer want to bother allowing people to use their data connection when they can just get it from Nintendo's servers. I don't think the increased speed of downloading data would be particularly compelling unless as someone who was providing their resources, you saw absolutely no downside to it. No effect on your own gameplay, bandwidth usage (Still watch Netflix without your network draggging to a crawl) etc.
That's the patent system for you
blu
Wants the largest console games publisher to avoid Nintendo's platforms.
I'm glad a sensible discussion has formed in this thread : )
ed: I guess this warrants an elaboration.
The way added latency (be that from RF inputs, or because your computational unit is a couple of ms away on the network) is reduced is normally the following:
You send a command buffer to the display subsystem (the one thing that will eventually produce your front buffer on your display), and you immediately start computing the next fame, so basically while the player receives the current frame at their optical nerve (scanline by scanline, if we imagined a real slow-mo : ), the computations for the next one are in full swing. As part of those next-frame computations, you (a) get to trigger a work request to your supplement as well (thus incurring the round-trip you referred to), or (b) you don't, as the supplement knows in advance what it needs to compute for this new frame, so while you're computing parts of the next frame locally, the supplement does its portion as well, and sends it over when ready; but the point is both you and the supplement can have the exact same time spans to compute stuff for the next frame, subject to early "awareness" what needs to be done by the supplement. I hope this did not come out more confusing than helpful : /
Just a nitpick, but you don't need to limit the supplement to sub-frame (sub-16ms, sub-33ms) times - the supplement still has the full frame time to respond. The extra couple of ms of latency is usually on the player, exactly the same way it is on the gamepad or any other RF controller.
ed: I guess this warrants an elaboration.
The way added latency (be that from RF inputs, or because your computational unit is a couple of ms away on the network) is reduced is normally the following:
You send a command buffer to the display subsystem (the one thing that will eventually produce your front buffer on your display), and you immediately start computing the next fame, so basically while the player receives the current frame at their optical nerve (scanline by scanline, if we imagined a real slow-mo : ), the computations for the next one are in full swing. As part of those next-frame computations, you (a) get to trigger a work request to your supplement as well (thus incurring the round-trip you referred to), or (b) you don't, as the supplement knows in advance what it needs to compute for this new frame, so while you're computing parts of the next frame locally, the supplement does its portion as well, and sends it over when ready; but the point is both you and the supplement can have the exact same time spans to compute stuff for the next frame, subject to early "awareness" what needs to be done by the supplement. I hope this did not come out more confusing than helpful : /
This kind of speaks to the questions I was asking above. If the NX is a multi-generational project the stress put on Nintendo's personal servers over time would be insane. I imagine the upkeep would be prohibitively expensive if they went the traditional server farm route.
And there would have to be some kind of downside to letting someone use your personal resources, otherwise they probably wouldn't offer rewards for doing it.
That's why i'm thinking it will be a combination of regular users offering their services and NX kiosks offering a helping hand. Seems like converting kiosks, using already available infrastructure, and offering rewards to users who choose to offer their resources would be cheaper than renting/buying an ever expanding server farm.
Good points, I didn't think too deeply about it. So long as the new orientation can be sent across and received whilst both systems are doing "work" then yes you may reduce that latency. Although if they are both doing "the same" amount of work then the supplemental unit's output might arrive after the main unit has finished it's portion and swapped buffers, or it waits for the supplemental data. The former would result in screen tearing I'm guessing
Schnozberry
Member
The word supplemental has been floating around in my head for a few days now. I'm wondering if I've been looking at this all wrong, and the SCD is a PowerPC device that locally gives access to the legacy Wii U/Wii/GC game library, and also offers some cloud features like game streaming to the NX handheld or whatever cloud processing Nintendo has in mind for their new online infrastructure. The Wii U SOC is probably pretty cheap these days, and it would allow the NX to "absorb" the Wii U architecture as Iwata once described.
Nikodemos
Member
The thing I keep hanging on is the SCDs s/w config. The patent explicitly states that it has no GUI and no drivers of its own. It's basically a 'smart' NAS. If its computing resources are to be accessed it needs to run off the main unit's drivers. Or, in the case of a non-physical link, that would mean the main unit needs to stream its drivers (along with the game data) to the SCD while the SCD streams back the processed video/audio output. I find this a horrendously inelegant solution. Which is why I suspect the SCD will ultimately not boost the main unit's processing capabilities while in wireless mode (but only via physical link).
Not necessarily. The main downside to the user is that sharing the SCD over the Internet will eat up into your bandwidth and electricity bill. This distributed cloud compute network is a clever idea but in order for it to reach its full potential, hundreds of thousands, if not millions of SCD owners will have to commit to making their unit available as much as possible (without it eating into their own gaming time). It only makes sense for Nintendo to offer rewards to keep people engaged in the initiative.
POWERSPHERE
Member
Gee whiz! Sounds pretty tops.
That's what I was looking for. Thank you!
Edit: Scratch that. It's late and my thinking cap isn't on too tight at this hour. Unless this thing is a massive flop right out of the gate a few million users is very achievable early on in the launch cycle.
I'm going to bed now lol
Pokemaniac
Member
How exactly is this supposed to drive away third parties? Cloud is all trendy right now.
blu
Wants the largest console games publisher to avoid Nintendo's platforms.
I think it's obvious - no quad-core multi-gigahertz Skylake in a single box with tons of RAM and a nv GTX : )
Schnozberry
Member
It would, however, be very useful for emulation.
Plinko
Wildcard berths that can't beat teams without a winning record should have homefield advantage
LOL what? How in the world would this drive away third parties?
By OP's console example at the end, sounds like a handheld (as others have said) that provides gaming on the go, that connects via local cloud to a box at home that boosts graphics/capabilities and allows you to play on an HD TV (or display). And if you don't have the handheld and just the box, your tablet, phone, or device will connect to it and allow you to play. If that's the case, sounds awesome, and I wonder if it would let you game via your phone while not local by using your provoder? I wonder if Apple would have a cow?