developers using azure cloud computing?

That's really not how it works.

For a start if the virtual server was only started when the call was made the load times would be much longer. Not to mention that it would be quite possible that the physical server(s) could be under heavy load from more active titles, therefore increasing
load times even further.

Virtual servers are always running, ticking along in the background. Think of it like an app process on your phone, you might not actively be using it but most of the time it is still running in the background.

What Azure does is not unique at all, what is is how Microsoft are allowing companies to access that ability.

Forgive me if I have missed some other points you've made. The lack of paragraphs in your post made it quite difficult to read.

 

@biscuit yeah sorry about the no paragraphs thing. I was posting from my phone and that, for me, makes it next to impossible to have paragraphs. Anyway, from everything i've read, and i've read alot, that is how it works. the ammount of servers scales to
compensate. now that being said, i'm sure they always have an overhead of servers for unpredicted increases in server population. The point i guess that we are all trying to make is that, with the ammount of servers and the technology behind them, you will
never have to worry about the discontinuation of servers for your any of your games any longer as long as those games are on xbox one, and to some extent xbox 360.

Azure is a very unique cloud because it is owned by microsoft. Sony doesn't provide this type of service to 3rd party developers. That means that if 3rd party developers want dedicated servers with computational abilities, they
have to buy it from amazon or some other cloud based infrastructior, and currently microsoft is the cheapest, and they are not offering that tech to 3rd party developers for developing games on oposing consoles. So once 3rd party devs start using azure to
process AI and Pysics opening up the One's hardware capabilites to do other things, we are going to see the xbox one running at better framerates. you'll start to see more action around your character on xbox one games. you'll see more bullets wizzing by your
head, more dirt, more enemies on screen, better AI.

It's not a matter of can it be done, it's a matter of when it will be done. If I were microsoft I would sign as many indie devs as I could and start buying as many new and old ip's that I could and I would start pumping out exlusive first
party titles that could only run with azure. Pulling the market of those on the fence console purchasers over to xbox. MS needs to show everybody just how powerfull games can be when running on Xbox One and Azure. I myself would buy out Obsidian and have them
make a new scifi space opera to counter Mass Effect, because there is nothing better for games than competition, and ME needs something to go up against it. And to tell the truth we all could use another scifi space opera. I mean there is always a counter
game to a AAA title. GTA has Saints Row. The elder scrolls has The Witcher, and Dragon Age. Halo has Titanfall. COD has BF. the list goes on and on, except in the case of Mass Effect. There just aren't any opposing scifi space opera RPG's out there. So sad...Bioware
PLEASE SELL KNIGHTS OF THE OLD REPUBLIC TO OBSIDIAN!! LOL

 

Destiny's coming... Isn't that a counter for ME?

 

@biscuitzor

At the moment the cloud amounts to dedicated servers nothing more, it's the same thing mmo's have been doing for years.

Even Jon shiring from respawn entertainment admitted as much.

 

@Blixstopher: Don't get me wrong. I'm a big believer in the power of Cloud computing but I think that Microsoft have an uphill battle getting third party developers to use it unless the game is exclusive to the Microsoft world (360, One, and PC) such as
with Titanfall.

After all, why design your game around a feature that the other huge market in the console world isn't going to be able to use. This is the same battle that I believe the Kinect has to fight.

Plus I do share some worries about what happens when a game eventually gets the off switch hit. People who think that it will never happen because of the Cloud are fooling themselves.

@JamboFirstBlood: This I already know. If you want to look back through the thread you will see where I mention that very fact.

 

Sorry must of missed it.

I agree about the cloud though even if they do manage a useable level of "cloud computing" no dev outside of first party is going to use it and exclude a larger audience, I doubt any would if the shoe was on the other foot.

 

I agree that its too much effort for 3rd party developers to use Azure - as they'd end up having to develop a different server back end for PS.

Worrying about when the game is switched off is, however, pointless - if anything games will have a longer life (if enough players keep playing the game). i.e. since there is no need for "dedicated" servers for games using Azure (servers firing up/running
relevant netcode on demand) then there's nothing stopping Azure servers continuing to support a game.

Of course you could argue about "what about when the Azure servers are shutdown for good" - but that's much less likely than a company running dedicated servers going bust. Azure is here to stay - and will probably be around longer than our lifetimes! (Except
me - I'm going to live forever!)

 

That's the thing though Satsumo, virtual servers aren't 'fired-up' when needed, they are always running along in the background.

They are always consuming resources. They still need to be maintained to ensure they are responding to calls correctly

So there will come a point where keeping those virtual servers running simply becomes more trouble than they are worth.

Plus take into account that 'The Cloud' is simply a lot of real hardware. That hardware will at some point develop a fault. At that time the people repairing it will have the choice of what to restore to the system. Will they really restore the virtual servers
of a game that people rarely use?

A games online will not run forever even with the power of the cloud.

What people have to decide is between whether they want the advantages The Cloud can bring, at the cost of maybe even losing access to the single player portion of a game at some point, against the ability to jump into a game at any time in the future.

 

If the virtual servers are always running in the background and are allocated as required then not a single game running on Azure should have an off switch... If no one is playing Forza 5 then those same virtual servers will be used for Evolve or Sunset
Overdrive.

Server farms have a butt load of redundancy so worrying about any faults or what a tech will restore during maintenance is just worrying about a problem that's not there. Even still, if one server sends out the message that its going to fail soon (I'm 100%
sure MS server farms have self monitoring and reporting technology) then they could just reroute traffic to another server (either in the same location or somewhere else) until its back up again.

 

Totally agree with @Burst.

@Biscuit - yes the servers take up resources, but the Azure servers aren't just for gaming. MS is committed to them running for a wide range of clients/processes. It's certainly more efficient to use the Azure servers than dedicated servers - and will
lead to longer life of games (if gamers still play the game). It's "dedicated" servers that are a potential waste of resource.

 

Well for a start things really aren't as simple as transferring to another server if things go wrong.

This isn't the movies, you don't just transfer to another server. That replacement server needs to have the exact same programs and responses as the one has just gone offline for things to work as you think.

If just transferring to another server was as easy as you think then Google and Facebook wouldn't have had such well publicised down times.

Just because a server is virtual does not mean it is not dedicated.

Satsumo. What you mention just makes things worse. Would Microsoft really keep old games running, servers hardware or virtual, if they can give that processing time and bandwidth over to another service?

I feel absolutely silly playing the devils advocate here as I really do think that cloud computing is the wave of the future. Yet it isn't this miracle solution that people seem to think.

 

@Biscuitz0r Of course the other server would have exact duplicates of what's required to run said programs. They probably have a bunch of servers in multiple locations with the same exact software. If they know how to effectively run their cloud system they
will.

I'm not saying that problems can't arise and result in some down time because ish does happen. I'm saying there is no wasted resources being used on a game no one is playing any more. Hence there would be no need to turn the games MP off.