TheMailMan78IM NOT PAYING A DIME SO YOU CAN GAME BUDDY!

You can and you will, if some politician can lump some capital for this into the "2011 SAVE THE CHILDREN FROM ONLINE PREDATORS BY BRINGING CLOUD COMPUTERS TO THE THIRD WORLD" act.

If you vote against it means you hate children!

mdm-adphYou can and you will, if some politician can lump some capital for this into the "2011 SAVE THE CHILDREN FROM ONLINE PREDATORS BY BRINGING CLOUD COMPUTERS TO THE THIRD WORLD" act.

If you vote against it means you hate children!

I'd vote against it.

BOSEIs your face purple yet?

:( <--

DrPepperI'd vote against it.

Me too. I admitedly hate children. :)

erockerMe too. I admitedly hate children. :)

Prepares for flaming from parents :p

mdm-adphYou can and you will, if some politician can lump some capital for this into the "2011 SAVE THE CHILDREN FROM ONLINE PREDATORS BY BRINGING CLOUD COMPUTERS TO THE THIRD WORLD" act.

If you vote against it means you hate children!

That wouldnt work, because we all know that Video Games turn kids in to violent killers. :slap:



And i would vote against it as well. Online predators in 3rd world country...heh.. thats funny. Have you seen what the kids look like in 3rd world country? Who would want to take advantage of them?

BOSEThat wouldnt work, because we all know that Video Games turn kids in to violent killers. :slap:



And i would vote against it as well. Online predators in 3rd world country...heh.. thats funny. Have you seen what the kids look like in 3rd world country? Who would want to take advantage of them?

Garry Glitter.

Yeah.. i dont get the joke.

BOSEYeah.. i dont get the joke.

The brits who watch the news will ... I hope.

DrPepperGarry Glitter.

Now that was sarcastic humor at it'd finest! LOL :toast:

DrPepperI'd vote against it.

erockerMe too. I admitedly hate children. :)

Neither one of you are politicians. If you were a politician, you'd vote for it. That's how government works. ;)

mdm-adphNeither one of you are politicians. If you were a politician, you'd vote for it. That's how government works. ;)

How do you know we're not :p Erocker is actually barack obama and I'm gorden brown (damn I pulled the short straw)

erockerMe too. I admitedly hate children. :)

Me too. I have 3 kids. lol.

Kids smell funny, cover things in goo, and have no qualms about playing in their own poo.

Then there's 3rd world country kids...

I'd vote no. :p

This is the future.We just have the interface where all the processing is at the moon perhaps...

zCexVeThis is the future.We just have the interface where all the processing is at the moon perhaps...

This certainly is not the future

ShadowFoldThis certainly is not the future

for sure not...

even if they can deliver 60FPS lag free over the net... doesn't that stuff STILL have to be rendered somehow? if 5,000 people wanna play crysis at 720P on ultra high at a constant 60FPS, don't you still need 5,000 GTX 260's or HD 4870's (or equivalent power) to render it?

how can this make any money, unless it charges out the A$$, is beyond me. And what happens when they need to upgrade?... are we all going to pay $200 to maintain the service? or will we have to buy another $200 network card, so that they can upgrade their server?

Forget it. the technology is not there, nor is it moving in this direction. Thin client is like public transportation - good idea on paper, but inevitably the experience sucks.

phanbueyfor sure not...

even if they can deliver 60FPS lag free over the net... doesn't that stuff STILL have to be rendered somehow? if 5,000 people wanna play crysis at 720P on ultra high at a constant 60FPS, don't you still need 5,000 GTX 260's or HD 4870's (or equivalent power) to render it?

how can this make any money, unless it charges out the A$$, is beyond me. And what happens when they need to upgrade?... are we all going to pay $200 to maintain the service? or will we have to buy another $200 network card, so that they can upgrade their server?

Forget it. the technology is not there, nor is it moving in this direction. Thin client is like public transportation - good idea on paper, but inevitably the experience sucks.

Indeed. Also what about cpu calculations, They can't all be done on a gpu which is what I believe the server is based on. Massive gpu farms all calculating away but what about cpu instructions for physics. Surely you would need at least one core per user and thats alot of cpu's even quads or i7's also not to mention the cpu's to provide instructions to the gpu's and the hard drives constantly sending tons of data to the gpu's. It isn't economically possible considering hardware breakdown, cooling and unlike normal mail servers the massive increase in electricity and the backup for these servers.

Even in the future will still have problems, and then we will be saying again ''this definitely isn't the future''. Tech just isn't going to stop one day and we all say ''ok tech is as far as is going to go''(unless the world ends,lol). So there really isn't a ''future'' in the tech world as it will always be advancing.

DrPepperIndeed. Also what about cpu calculations, They can't all be done on a gpu which is what I believe the server is based on. Massive gpu farms all calculating away but what about cpu instructions for physics. Surely you would need at least one core per user and thats alot of cpu's even quads or i7's also not to mention the cpu's to provide instructions to the gpu's and the hard drives constantly sending tons of data to the gpu's. It isn't economically possible considering hardware breakdown, cooling and unlike normal mail servers the massive increase in electricity and the backup for these servers.

That's exactly what I was thinking... even if they found a way to make it 90% cheaper... all the heat and the electricity, the maintenance, used to support even a relatively tiny (100,000 users) all playing something like Crysis would just skyrocket the overhead costs... I wont even consider upgrade costs.

One thing that is good about this, and one thing only. This will stop people from cheating/hacking at online games, but only for those that use this device/service.

And no, they wont find a way around it, because they wont have any direct access to the PC from which data is streaming.

phanbueyThat's exactly what I was thinking... even if they found a way to make it 90% cheaper... all the heat and the electricity, the maintenance, used to support even a relatively tiny (100,000 users) all playing something like Crysis would just skyrocket the overhead costs... I wont even consider upgrade costs.

Its interesting to think imagine they used dunningtons. 6 Core monsters that consumes 130w. Say that server has 30 4870's at 250 watts max (assuming they can fit that many) 24/7. Say that serves 60 people so no doubt that server will have a ups and an extensive hard drive raid setup. Then think about how many other servers there will have to be in order to maintain a customer base of a thousand people.

Sigh... the only place in the world where this system would work would be korea, where the internet infrastructure is consistently good.

Agreed TK, its not going to work for PC and the ISPs are never going to go with it.
"You want to make it so we have much higher usage all the time!?!? NO WAY!!"

"spend hundreds to even thousands of Dollars regularly to keep our PCs up to date, to be able to play the latest PC games."

yeah, this is horse sh** right here.

Look at my system specs, yes my GPU is considered pretty damn old for these days. But I can play almost every new game to date at a reasonable frame rate. Crysis is the exception...as it is with most people. The only game I saw that's coming out that I MIGHT not be able to handle is the new Chronicles of Riddick game, but I'll probably even be able to play that on medium-high. This is my first what I consider "real" computer...I got lucky on a few parts but this thing was a one time investment of what a couple hundred dollars? And my next GPU is gonna cost me a whole $100...

I was on spikedhumor and someone uploaded a video about this stupid thing. It was terrible, just a huge sales ploy making seem like the godliest most coolest thing in the universe....720p oooohh that's so awesome..:shadedshu *yawn* that's like what 1024x768 on a normal screen? Yeah, that game is gonna look just fantastic...

I don't know, it's a dumb idea and I just had to say it....this won't work...the amount of powerful computers they will need to have, their servers will have to be crazy fast, the power consumption alone makes my head spin, and it's just plain stupid that I'm playing a STREAMED GAME! :banghead: And I just wonder how much these idiots will charge a month to use this service, plus how much you'll have to pay to "buy" the "game".

lol...when I saw this it kinda reminded me of Sega Channel...but Sega Channel worked :p I don't know if you guys remember it or if your cable service offered it...but you got this cartridge that you plug into the Sega, and the cartridge hooks up to your cable and you got 30 Sega games a month for $15...christ I was like 7 when I got that lol....

two words for this: epic fail

ongaku:
about the 720P thing, i've had a few console obsessed people hear me say my screen is 768P - better than 720P and they've drooled.

Tell a PC user its 1360x768 and they tend to laugh at how low it is.

I played the original unreal tournament at 1280x1024 FFS!