Game streaming can never be a viable replacement for local processing, as Gabe Newell made the case at DICE. The main point the Valve boss makes is that cloud gaming is not a technology that can scale. Ironically, its success would be its undoing. Another hurdle would be lag-sensitive hardware.
The Scalability Challenge
“Cloud gaming works until it starts to be successful – at which point, it falls over,” Gabe Newell said. “All the spreadsheets ignore the producing levels that consumer networks use. When everyone starts using a continuous network connection in order to get their applications, prices are going to go through the roof.”
Newell’s argument hinges on the scalability of cloud gaming. As more users adopt cloud gaming, the demand on network infrastructure increases exponentially. This increased demand can lead to higher costs for both providers and consumers. For instance, data centers would need to expand their capacity to handle the surge in traffic, which is not only costly but also time-consuming. Additionally, the increased data flow could strain consumer internet connections, leading to potential slowdowns and increased latency.
Moreover, the geographical distribution of users adds another layer of complexity. Data centers are often located in specific regions, and the physical distance between a user and the nearest data center can significantly impact performance. This is particularly problematic for gamers who require low latency for a seamless experience. Even a few milliseconds of delay can be the difference between victory and defeat in competitive gaming.
Lag-Sensitive Hardware
Another critical issue is the lag-sensitive nature of gaming hardware. Unlike streaming movies or music, where a few seconds of buffering might go unnoticed, gaming requires real-time interaction. Any delay can disrupt the gaming experience, making cloud gaming less appealing for serious gamers.
For example, consider a fast-paced first-person shooter game. The player needs to react instantly to in-game events. If the game is being streamed from a remote server, even a slight delay in input response can result in a frustrating experience. This is why local processing, where the game runs directly on the user’s device, is often preferred. Local processing ensures that the game responds immediately to user inputs, providing a smoother and more enjoyable experience.
Furthermore, the quality of the gaming experience can be affected by the user’s internet connection. Not everyone has access to high-speed internet, and even those who do might experience fluctuations in speed and stability. These issues can lead to inconsistent performance, making cloud gaming less reliable compared to local processing.
“Let’s say our industry had never done consoles or consumer clients. Even if we just started out with cloud gaming, you’d actually go in the direction of pushing intelligence out to the edge of the network, simply because it’s a great way of caching and saving you on network resources,” Newell added.
Newell’s point here is that even if the gaming industry had started with cloud gaming, the natural progression would have been to move towards local processing. This is because local processing can help reduce the load on network resources by caching data closer to the user. This approach not only improves performance but also makes the system more scalable and cost-effective.
In conclusion, while cloud gaming offers some exciting possibilities, it faces significant challenges that make it unlikely to replace local processing entirely. Issues related to scalability, network infrastructure, and lag-sensitive hardware need to be addressed before cloud gaming can become a viable alternative. For now, local processing remains the preferred choice for delivering a high-quality gaming experience.
Source Rock, Paper, Shotgun
Latest Geeky Gadgets Deals
Disclosure: Some of our articles include affiliate links. If you buy something through one of these links, Geeky Gadgets may earn an affiliate commission. Learn about our Disclosure Policy.
