4 ms·

I think the problem with Cloud gaming is the latency. And the network requirements push it to solving a problem for a very small subset of users (games which wh

I think the problem with Cloud gaming is the latency. And the network requirements push it to solving a problem for a very small subset of users (games which where latency doesn't matter can usually dont need cloud gaming).

teen 6y ago
The primary issue is the games catalog, something neither Amazon or Google can crack a dent in
- ineedasername 6y ago
  Yes. All I want is a latency-optimized EC2 (I'm no twitch gamer, <= 25ms is fine) instance with a decent streaming client on pc/mobile. Let me decide to install steam or epic or origin or whatever and use my own stuff. This is where NVidia went wrong. They're basically providing that sort of thing, but wanted to present it as their own game service as though all the other storefronts were just backend plumbing. Not a bad consumer experience, but also not what publishers are licensing when they stick their game on Steam.
  - erhk 6y ago
    25ms is a huge ask
    - bluescrn 6y ago
      Even locally, on a console, you’ll not get latency (input to visible response on screen) down to 25ms these days. Some LCD TVs alone can add 40-60ms of latency, and software can add another couple of frames. Often 30hz frames, too... Which kind of sucks if you grew up on CRTs and arcade games that often managed much lower latency. But I guess it means that game streaming really could offer a console-like experience if as much non-network latency as possible was eliminated...
      - Moru 6y ago
        I believe that's the joke. I wish latency was getting better but every new thing that comes along moves the acceptance further away. Many don't even notice 500 ms delay from click to something actually happening. On my Atari I often had the feeling something started happening before the mouse button was all the way down.
        ZephyrBlu 6y ago
        I can't believe that people wouldn't notice 500ms of latency when playing a game. Even 150-200ms is very noticeable.
        Moru 6y ago
        Sure, in 3D games it's a different topic but I have seen people playing with wireless mouse that lags behind quite significantly without noticing.
    - ineedasername 6y ago
      It's no better than my normal broadband, which is 10 to 20ms, but I suppose you're right. I've streamed games with up to 100ms without much issue with input lag so I suppose that would be fine, although 100ms would probably be too high for some types of games & multiplayer.
  - didibus 6y ago
    Under 25ms is less than current game consoles deliver. Most deliver around 100ms latencies.
    - ineedasername 6y ago
      I think you're missing the point: Yes, multiple pieces of equipment in the process adds some ms in between input, computer processing it, and screen outputting it. The issue here is how much will ping time add to that when streaming a game. Consoles hover in the 100ms are depending on game. PC's it's highly dependent on video hardware, but I good gaming system, display, and keyboard/mouse will be around 70ms. The issue of streaming game ping ms in part comes down to human reaction time, which averages around 200ms-250ms. Given this, you want a ping time that doesn't add enough latency to the setup to put you above that 200-250ms reaction time, or you start to perceive more noticeable input lag. Given 70-100ms baseline, you want a bandwidth ping absolutely no more than about 100ms on top of that. The math squares with my personal experience as well. I've played a few streaming services, and when my ping gets to the 100ms area I start to notice a little difference. It's often sill playable, but if it gets higher it can be very distracting.

teen 6y ago

The primary issue is the games catalog, something neither Amazon or Google can crack a dent in

ineedasername 6y ago
Yes. All I want is a latency-optimized EC2 (I'm no twitch gamer, <= 25ms is fine) instance with a decent streaming client on pc/mobile. Let me decide to install steam or epic or origin or whatever and use my own stuff. This is where NVidia went wrong. They're basically providing that sort of thing, but wanted to present it as their own game service as though all the other storefronts were just backend plumbing. Not a bad consumer experience, but also not what publishers are licensing when they stick their game on Steam.
- erhk 6y ago
  25ms is a huge ask
  - bluescrn 6y ago
    Even locally, on a console, you’ll not get latency (input to visible response on screen) down to 25ms these days. Some LCD TVs alone can add 40-60ms of latency, and software can add another couple of frames. Often 30hz frames, too... Which kind of sucks if you grew up on CRTs and arcade games that often managed much lower latency. But I guess it means that game streaming really could offer a console-like experience if as much non-network latency as possible was eliminated...
    - Moru 6y ago
      I believe that's the joke. I wish latency was getting better but every new thing that comes along moves the acceptance further away. Many don't even notice 500 ms delay from click to something actually happening. On my Atari I often had the feeling something started happening before the mouse button was all the way down.
      - ZephyrBlu 6y ago
        I can't believe that people wouldn't notice 500ms of latency when playing a game. Even 150-200ms is very noticeable.
        Moru 6y ago
        Sure, in 3D games it's a different topic but I have seen people playing with wireless mouse that lags behind quite significantly without noticing.
  - ineedasername 6y ago
    It's no better than my normal broadband, which is 10 to 20ms, but I suppose you're right. I've streamed games with up to 100ms without much issue with input lag so I suppose that would be fine, although 100ms would probably be too high for some types of games & multiplayer.
- didibus 6y ago
  Under 25ms is less than current game consoles deliver. Most deliver around 100ms latencies.
  - ineedasername 6y ago
    I think you're missing the point: Yes, multiple pieces of equipment in the process adds some ms in between input, computer processing it, and screen outputting it. The issue here is how much will ping time add to that when streaming a game. Consoles hover in the 100ms are depending on game. PC's it's highly dependent on video hardware, but I good gaming system, display, and keyboard/mouse will be around 70ms. The issue of streaming game ping ms in part comes down to human reaction time, which averages around 200ms-250ms. Given this, you want a ping time that doesn't add enough latency to the setup to put you above that 200-250ms reaction time, or you start to perceive more noticeable input lag. Given 70-100ms baseline, you want a bandwidth ping absolutely no more than about 100ms on top of that. The math squares with my personal experience as well. I've played a few streaming services, and when my ping gets to the 100ms area I start to notice a little difference. It's often sill playable, but if it gets higher it can be very distracting.