4 ms·

Hey Mark, Send an email to NVIDIA's GeForce Now bizdev guy. Develop a cheap-o streaming device and put all the juice in the display. Congratulations, I just

Hey Mark, Send an email to NVIDIA's GeForce Now bizdev guy. Develop a cheap-o streaming device and put all the juice in the display. Congratulations, I just made you billions of dollars. Donate my cut to PETA.

babypuncher 3y ago
streaming + vr seems like a recipe for disaster. even if you don't mind a few extra frames of latency when playing games on your TV, you absolutely will when head tracking is involved. streaming + mouse & keyboard for shooters still feels like shit, even when I tried it on google stadia over google fiber. honestly i kind of hope this game streaming fad never really takes off, because so far it just seems to make games worse. i'm convinced publishers want it as a means to further erode user ownership of the software they buy. "oh, sorry, the single player game you bought four years ago on a streaming platform is no longer available due to rights issues. would you like to buy the sequel for $70?"
- AmericanOP 3y ago
  Playing ultra-settings Starfield on an old retina MacBook air is mindblowing. GeForce Now, imo, is quietly the killer app of 2023. > game streaming fad never really takes off I am in the opposite camp. I want game developers to be freed from local hardware constraints, and indy developers to have access to the same graphical fidelities as AAA. Real, meaningful innovation in gaming is a possibility.
  - babypuncher 3y ago
    > and indy developers to have access to the same graphical fidelities as AAA The bottleneck here isn't performance, it's the cost of producing high quality assets on a AAA scale. Streaming won't solve this. As for "local hardware constraints", I've yet to see any streaming games that were not possible on local hardware. Personally, I'd rather upgrade my GPU or video game console every 5 years than lose all the very tangible benefits that come with running games on my own hardware (ownership, mods, preservation, etc.) I will say that I think services like GeForce Now are the best use case for the technology. Since it is essentially a rentable high end gaming PC in the cloud, the user brings their own games. If GeForce now shuts down, you still have the option of downloading all the games you bought for on it to a PC. Nvidia is smart to position this as an additive experience, rather than a replacement like Stadia was.
fxtentacle 3y ago
While I like your idea, that needs to come with a cleaning service included :p For a mainstream VR headset, you really need low latency. It's almost as bad as hard real-time machines because your users will get a mean headache and literally start to vomit if the latency between moving their head and the picture updating becomes too high. Rumor has it that reducing the screen latency by re-projecting a previously rendered frame was one of the big contributions that John Carmack developed to make Oculus feasible at all. So that means you now either need to stream ultra high resolution panoramas, which is too much data for even current 8k H265 codes to handle, or you need a streaming service with such an extremely low latency that just due to speed of light it basically has to be inside your city. Or well, you just accept that people will feel sick from the latency and reduce your target market to the 1% that can tolerate a 10ms delay on their vision.
dougmwne 3y ago
They have discussed working on it for years. The problem is that very few people are close enough to a data center with rock solid internet and Wi-Fi to be able to hit the very narrow latency constraints. I played HL Alyx for a few hours by streaming from PlutoSphere. It worked poorly due to frame drops and lag spikes.

babypuncher 3y ago

streaming + vr seems like a recipe for disaster. even if you don't mind a few extra frames of latency when playing games on your TV, you absolutely will when head tracking is involved. streaming + mouse & keyboard for shooters still feels like shit, even when I tried it on google stadia over google fiber. honestly i kind of hope this game streaming fad never really takes off, because so far it just seems to make games worse. i'm convinced publishers want it as a means to further erode user ownership of the software they buy. "oh, sorry, the single player game you bought four years ago on a streaming platform is no longer available due to rights issues. would you like to buy the sequel for $70?"

AmericanOP 3y ago
Playing ultra-settings Starfield on an old retina MacBook air is mindblowing. GeForce Now, imo, is quietly the killer app of 2023. > game streaming fad never really takes off I am in the opposite camp. I want game developers to be freed from local hardware constraints, and indy developers to have access to the same graphical fidelities as AAA. Real, meaningful innovation in gaming is a possibility.
- babypuncher 3y ago
  > and indy developers to have access to the same graphical fidelities as AAA The bottleneck here isn't performance, it's the cost of producing high quality assets on a AAA scale. Streaming won't solve this. As for "local hardware constraints", I've yet to see any streaming games that were not possible on local hardware. Personally, I'd rather upgrade my GPU or video game console every 5 years than lose all the very tangible benefits that come with running games on my own hardware (ownership, mods, preservation, etc.) I will say that I think services like GeForce Now are the best use case for the technology. Since it is essentially a rentable high end gaming PC in the cloud, the user brings their own games. If GeForce now shuts down, you still have the option of downloading all the games you bought for on it to a PC. Nvidia is smart to position this as an additive experience, rather than a replacement like Stadia was.

fxtentacle 3y ago

While I like your idea, that needs to come with a cleaning service included :p For a mainstream VR headset, you really need low latency. It's almost as bad as hard real-time machines because your users will get a mean headache and literally start to vomit if the latency between moving their head and the picture updating becomes too high. Rumor has it that reducing the screen latency by re-projecting a previously rendered frame was one of the big contributions that John Carmack developed to make Oculus feasible at all. So that means you now either need to stream ultra high resolution panoramas, which is too much data for even current 8k H265 codes to handle, or you need a streaming service with such an extremely low latency that just due to speed of light it basically has to be inside your city. Or well, you just accept that people will feel sick from the latency and reduce your target market to the 1% that can tolerate a 10ms delay on their vision.

dougmwne 3y ago

They have discussed working on it for years. The problem is that very few people are close enough to a data center with rock solid internet and Wi-Fi to be able to hit the very narrow latency constraints. I played HL Alyx for a few hours by streaming from PlutoSphere. It worked poorly due to frame drops and lag spikes.