Tom Clancy's The Division

15-08-2014 2:38pm

FAILSAFE 00 wrote: »

They switched lead platform.

The rumour was out there in May that they were going to move and by June they had switched to the Xbox One and announced exclusive DLC for XB1 and they announced today they have a playable version of The Division already made on Xbox One. They are showing a demo of it at conferences.

The game is going to be almost identical on both and the only difference will be the exclusive DLC which will most likely only be a timed exclusive.

FAILSAFE 00 · 15-08-2014 2:39pm

gizmo wrote: »

My point was more the term "lead platform" in this case will ultimately (and in all probability) mean **** all difference outside of some exclusive DLC.

It will mean that they will optimise the hell out of it for Xbox One which will make it look good and work good on both console platforms with the edition of some exclusive DLC on XB1.

ZiabR · 15-08-2014 2:56pm

Looking forward to this now, it looks great.

gizmo · 15-08-2014 2:59pm

FAILSAFE 00 wrote: »

It will mean that they will optimise the hell out of it for Xbox One which will make it look good and work good on both console platforms with the edition of some exclusive DLC on XB1.

Which is what I said initially in my first reply.

To be clearer though, any additional resources Massive get from MS as part of their current arrangement will only really help ensure platform parity. The exclusive DLC issue is entirely separate and, imo, unwelcome issue anyway.

15-08-2014 3:14pm

I'm wondering if this switch has anything to do with Ubisoft already having the game look and play as good as it will on the PS4 and have opted to use the time between now and launch to concentrate on getting the One version to run as good as the PS4 version.

FAILSAFE 00 · 15-08-2014 3:44pm

Deleted User wrote: »

I'm wondering if this switch has anything to do with Ubisoft already having the game look and play as good as it will on the PS4 and have opted to use the time between now and launch to concentrate on getting the One version to run as good as the PS4 version.

I highly doubt it. Its a deal with Microsoft across the board hence the switch. The game is still very much in development across all platofrms. They are focusing on Xbox One has the lead, IMO I'd say they probably need the Azure servers for their grand plan.

gizmo wrote: »

To be clearer though, any additional resources Massive get from MS as part of their current arrangement will only really help ensure platform parity. The exclusive DLC issue is entirely separate and, imo, unwelcome issue anyway.

We don't know if fairness so we'll have to wait and see.

ems_medic · 15-08-2014 3:53pm

FAILSAFE 00 wrote: »

IMO I'd say they probably need the Azure servers for their grand plan.

Giving Ubisofts is not exactly great at online gameplay (putting it nicely) I'd say this is really where MS are helping them and the Azure servers are an important part of it as there's alot of processing power to be harvested by Ubisoft and the developers there.

gizmo · 15-08-2014 3:58pm

FAILSAFE 00 wrote: »

We don't know if fairness so we'll have to wait and see.

But of course, I'm simply going by previous precedent with a sprinkling of common sense.

FAILSAFE 00 wrote: »

I highly doubt it. Its a deal with Microsoft across the board hence the switch. The game is still very much in development across all platofrms. They are focusing on Xbox One has the lead, IMO I'd say they probably need the Azure servers for their grand plan.

Well they confirmed awhile back that the game will use dedicated servers for an unknown portion of the online game. I'd imagine that's what will rely on Azure.

15-08-2014 4:05pm

FAILSAFE 00 wrote: »

I highly doubt it. Its a deal with Microsoft across the board hence the switch. The game is still very much in development across all platofrms. They are focusing on Xbox One has the lead, IMO I'd say they probably need the Azure servers for their grand plan.

No doubt development is ongoing but I would imagine that they have the game working as good as it can on the PS4 given all the earlier comments regarding the console made by the developer. The One has been the more difficult of the two to programme for so it makes sense that they would focus more on the One, especially if Microsoft are throwing some money their way. I still don't see there being much of a gap come launch day and I'd expect if anything the PS4 version to run better.

BofaDeezNuhtz · 15-08-2014 4:06pm

FAILSAFE 00 wrote: »

Great news for Xbox One owners

Ahh xbox schmexbox

ems_medic · 15-08-2014 4:10pm

[Deleted User] wrote: »

No doubt development is ongoing but I would imagine that they have the game working as good as it can on the PS4 given all the earlier comments regarding the console made by the developer. The One has been the more difficult of the two to programme for so it makes sense that they would focus more on the One, especially if Microsoft are throwing some money their way. I still don't see there being much of a gap come launch day and I'd expect if anything the PS4 version to run better.

Thats interesting Id love to have a read of those comments have you any links????

I dont know about running better on PS4 Im not a techy person but Id imagine Xb1 is lead console for a considered reason. Have Ubisoft come out and daid the PS4 version is working yet???

15-08-2014 4:18pm

ems_medic wrote: »

Thats interesting Id love to have a read of those comments have you any links????

I dont know about running better on PS4 Im not a techy person but Id imagine Xb1 is lead console for a considered reason. Have Ubisoft come out and daid the PS4 version is working yet???

This is a quote from awhile back that has already been linked to in this thread.

"PlayStation 4 is the more powerful hardware and we feel it is easier to develop for. Snowdrop works better on PS4 and even if Microsoft do want us to shift lead platform that's not something that has happened." said Massive Entertainment.l

ems_medic · 15-08-2014 4:28pm

Deleted User wrote: »

This is a quote from awhile back that has already been linked to in this thread.

Thanks it's 8 pages of posts which post # is it so I can go read the full context? Also in fairness thats only one comment not lots of comments and that one comment has since been proven wrong with the lead console changing.

Do you know if they have a fully working game yet on PS4??? I can't seem to find anything that says either way

gizmo · 15-08-2014 5:07pm

ems_medic wrote: »

Thanks it's 8 pages of posts which post # is it so I can go read the full context? Also in fairness thats only one comment not lots of comments and that one comment has since been proven wrong with the lead console changing.

Do you know if they have a fully working game yet on PS4??? I can't seem to find anything that says either way

It's from my post above and nothing was proven wrong. While FAILSAFE 00 claimed they had switched lead platform there's no actual evidence of this, including the link to the interview on Total Xbox.

From the last couple of reports, they don't have a full game working on anything yet. Just an engine with, I imagine, a chunk of the world built for demonstration purposes.

FAILSAFE 00 · 15-08-2014 8:27pm

gizmo wrote: »

It's from my post above and nothing was proven wrong. While FAILSAFE 00 claimed they had switched lead platform there's no actual evidence of this, including the link to the interview on Total Xbox.

From the last couple of reports, they don't have a full game working on anything yet. Just an engine with, I imagine, a chunk of the world built for demonstration purposes.

From the article they said they have a working version of the game on Xbox One and that after E3 last year they started to talk to Microsoft about what they needed and what Microsoft could offer and sealed the deal.

When it comes down to multiplayer at this level Microsoft is the only choice given it's expertise and resources in dedicated servers.

Also your last couple of reports are dated back to January.

EoinHef · 15-08-2014 9:50pm

FAILSAFE 00 wrote: »

When it comes down to multiplayer at this level Microsoft is the only choice given it's expertise and resources in dedicated servers.

"At this level"?? Please explain to me what new level of multiplayer gaming this is? Or why this games multiplayer will be any different on PS4? Sounds like rubbish to me,some proof/link would also be nice.

Making ridiculous statements about a game that has not even got a release date:(

2Mad2BeMad · 15-08-2014 10:08pm

EoinHef wrote: »

"At this level"?? Please explain to me what new level of multiplayer gaming this is? Or why this games multiplayer will be any different on PS4? Sounds like rubbish to me,some proof/link would also be nice.

Making ridiculous statements about a game that has not even got a release date:(

at this level I think he meant as in been able to go in and out of zones from pvp to playing with friends with out any loading screens etc in such an open world (more open then destiny by the sounds of it).... don't think he meant anything as in its different to ps4
So basicly it will need alot of power to run this on dedicated servers (I hope) and MS is the answer to that for the xbox one version at least, their servers are superior to sonys, (not saying sonys are bad, their perfectly capable of handling it, but MS ones are better)

also its hardly ridiculous
MS are known for their software
Sony are known for their hardware
so I guess MASSIVE is getting best of both worlds from both companys
MS cloud sounds like rubbish and all talk but it really is impressive in what it can do. Whether or not it implies to this game (sounds like it will) we won't know unless they tell us

but hopefully it will, give it a chance to really shine and show people what it can do, if not , well then I guess we will be stuck with ubi servers and no one wants that...

EoinHef · 15-08-2014 10:28pm

2Mad2BeMad wrote: »

at this level I think he meant as in been able to go in and out of zones from pvp to playing with friends with out any loading screens etc in such an open world (more open then destiny by the sounds of it).... don't think he meant anything as in its different to ps4
So basicly it will need alot of power to run this on dedicated servers (I hope) and MS is the answer to that for the xbox one version at least, their servers are superior to sonys, (not saying sonys are bad, their perfectly capable of handling it, but MS ones are better)

also its hardly ridiculous
MS are known for their software
Sony are known for their hardware
so I guess MASSIVE is getting best of both worlds from both companys
MS cloud sounds like rubbish and all talk but it really is impressive in what it can do. Whether or not it implies to this game (sounds like it will) we won't know unless they tell us but hopefully it will, give it a chance to really shine and show people what it can do, if not , well then I guess we will be stuck with ubi servers and no one wants that...

Theres quoted articles from total xbox saying MS is working with Massive to get the best from Xbox,nothing about xbox being "lead platform". Ridiculos to make the jump. So rubbish comment.

So in your opinion only MS dedicated servers will run/are suitable for this game,why bother release it on any other platform then? Obviously there not essential. Again misleading rubbish,dedicated servers are nice to have but not essential.

Ive still yet to see what MS cloud can do,so far it has not done anything amazing that im aware of. Im not dismissing it but its unproven.

The game will most likely be the same on both consoles,bar maybe the resolution and maybe a few post processing effects.

Making sweeping statements about the game at this stage is imo ridiculous,theres just not enough known yet for half the assertions made here

AlmightyCushion · 15-08-2014 10:52pm

EoinHef wrote: »

Theres quoted articles from total xbox saying MS is working with Massive to get the best from Xbox,nothing about xbox being "lead platform". Ridiculos to make the jump. So rubbish comment.

So in your opinion only MS dedicated servers will run/are suitable for this game,why bother release it on any other platform then? Obviously there not essential. Again misleading rubbish,dedicated servers are nice to have but not essential.

Ive still yet to see what MS cloud can do,so far it has not done anything amazing that im aware of. Im not dismissing it but its unproven.

The game will most likely be the same on both consoles,bar maybe the resolution and maybe a few post processing effects.

Making sweeping statements about the game at this stage is imo ridiculous,theres just not enough known yet for half the assertions made here

A lot of what it does well is in the background that most users don't really see. It's pretty easy to develop for and it scales up and down very well. Instead of the devs managing their servers and ensuring they have enough hardware in place to cater for the demand they just let azure deal with it and they only pay for the amount of hardware they need. Think of when Sim City was released and people were waiting up to an hour to get a game because the servers were overloaded. If they had used something like Azure then Microsoft would just assign more servers to the Sim City pool and then when demand reduces a few days after launch day Microsoft just remove servers from the pool. It just removes a lot of the infrastructure management that can cause so much hassle.

I don't see any reason why the PS4 version wouldn't be able to use the Azure servers (it's possible something Sony's side or Microsoft's side blocks it but I doubt it) so this is a benefit to both consoles.

EoinHef · 15-08-2014 11:24pm

AlmightyCushion wrote: »

A lot of what it does well is in the background that most users don't really see. It's pretty easy to develop for and it scales up and down very well. Instead of the devs managing their servers and ensuring they have enough hardware in place to cater for the demand they just let azure deal with it and they only pay for the amount of hardware they need. Think of when Sim City was released and people were waiting up to an hour to get a game because the servers were overloaded. If they had used something like Azure then Microsoft would just assign more servers to the Sim City pool and then when demand reduces a few days after launch day Microsoft just remove servers from the pool. It just removes a lot of the infrastructure management that can cause so much hassle.

I don't see any reason why the PS4 version wouldn't be able to use the Azure servers (it's possible something Sony's side or Microsoft's side blocks it but I doubt it) so this is a benefit to both consoles.

This comment i understand,the scaling they can use with the servers is good alright but how does that affect gameplay? It only puts more servers online if theres more players which is nice. Thats not going to change how the game plays. I doubt its going to be unplayable on the other platforms its released on because only MS servers can handle it.

AlmightyCushion · 15-08-2014 11:52pm

EoinHef wrote: »

This comment i understand,the scaling they can use with the servers is good alright but how does that affect gameplay? It only puts more servers online if theres more players which is nice. Thats not going to change how the game plays. I doubt its going to be unplayable on the other platforms its released on because only MS servers can handle it.

It certainly can affect gameplay. For example, they may want to have a few very large maps or loads of maps of different sizes and complexity. Using their own server infrastructure may make this more difficult and costly to implement. It may even prove not to be worth doing these few very large maps once they see what's needed to do it. Using something like Azure will help with that. Like I said above though, I imagine both platforms will be using the same back end servers so it won't mean the Xbox version gets better maps or features that the PS4 version will.

If it has been changed so that the XBox One version is the lead platform I imagine it's either a marketing effort by Microsoft to push their console or Microsoft has offered help in implementing the Azure service into the game and in return the devs have said they'll dedicate more time,resources,talent, etc. into working on and optimising and improving the XBox version so that it is better than it originally was going to be in areas such as graphics or frame rate.

EoinHef · 16-08-2014 12:16am

AlmightyCushion wrote: »

It certainly can affect gameplay. For example, they may want to have a few very large maps or loads of maps of different sizes and complexity. Using their own server infrastructure may make this more difficult and costly to implement. It may even prove not to be worth doing these few very large maps once they see what's needed to do it. Using something like Azure will help with that. Like I said above though, I imagine both platforms will be using the same back end servers so it won't mean the Xbox version gets better maps or features that the PS4 version will.

Devs are always going to be limited to the tech there using,bit of a stretch to say they may not implement certain game play aspects because all platforms not running azure. They have already stated the game will have dedicated servers on each platform,not like its going to p2p on any platform. But what does it matter to us,gamers,what it costs them to implement? As long as it works our end,great for Massive/UBI if MS offer there servers free for this game but means feck all to us.

Ive also yet to see any statement where Massive have said the Xbox 1 is "lead platform"......

That was stated but the article linked said no such thing,simply stated they have a great relationship with MS and are having a knowledge share with each other to get the most from Xbox 1 for the game. Great for Xbox owners,but some feel the need to then draw the conclusion the game is going to be lesser on other platforms as a result,which is nonsence based on no facts imo

2Mad2BeMad · 16-08-2014 12:17am

EoinHef wrote: »

Theres quoted articles from total xbox saying MS is working with Massive to get the best from Xbox,nothing about xbox being "lead platform". Ridiculos to make the jump. So rubbish comment.

So in your opinion only MS dedicated servers will run/are suitable for this game
Where did I say in my post only ms dedicated servers will run/ are suitbale for this game? no were. So stop putting words in my mouth. I said I would prefer dedicated servers, and if they use MS servers well then that would be brilliant, its well known MS servers are better then sonys, but I said in my post " Sony's are not bad, their just not as good, hardly saying this game should only be on xbox.

,why bother release it on any other platform then? See first reply

Obviously there not essential never said they were, either did failsafe, he just said ms is taking the lead, whether they are or not I don't know, but if they are to help improve the games servers then by all means it should be welcomed by both ps4/xbox fans.

Again misleading rubbish,dedicated servers are nice to have but not essential. Misleading? How so, I never stated them as facts, I said they would be nice to have, unless your talking about someone elses post, then thats your opinion I suppose.

Ive still yet to see what MS cloud can do,so far it has not done anything amazing that im aware of. Im not dismissing it but its unproven. as stated in my post. And if theirs any a good time to try it, The Division would be a good place to really stress test it and too see if the cloud really is all that.

The game will most likely be the same on both consoles,bar maybe the resolution and maybe a few post processing effects.
most likely. again dedicated servers would be nice, its a personal opinion, not a statement by any means.

Making sweeping statements about the game at this stage is imo ridiculous,theres just not enough known yet for half the assertions made here I agree, but I would not call them sweeping statements, you seem real aggressive over it :pac: their statements, not facts, so chill

.

AlmightyCushion · 16-08-2014 12:26am

EoinHef wrote: »

Devs are always going to be limited to the tech there using,bit of a stretch to say they may not implement certain game play aspects because all platforms not running azure. They have already stated the game will have dedicated servers on each platform,not like its going to p2p on any platform. But what does it matter to us,gamers,what it costs them to implement? As long as it works our end,great for Massive/UBI if MS offer there servers free for this game but means feck all to us.

Ive also yet to see any statement where Massive have said the Xbox 1 is "lead platform"......

That was stated but the article linked said no such thing,simply stated they have a great relationship with MS and are having a knowledge share with each other to get the most from Xbox 1 for the game. Great for Xbox owners,but some feel the need to then draw the conclusion the game is going to be lesser on other platforms as a result,which is nonsence based on no facts imo

I actually said the opposite of that. I said both platforms are more than likely using Azure so both platforms benefit. Also, cost of implementation does matter for gamers because if something is considered too expensive to implement then it will get cut. Things get cut from games/applications/movies all the time because they are either too costly or too difficult to implement.

Like I said above, more than likely Microsoft are helping them out to make the XBox version better than it already was going to be in areas like graphics or something similar but it won't affect the core gameplay.

EoinHef · 16-08-2014 12:53am

@2mad2bemad,Apologies if i came across a bit aggressive,that was not my intent at all.

I quoted another poster who said at this level its only microsoft that have the expertise,thats the statement i classified as ridiculous. Not your one,think thats where the confusion came from when you mentioned his post. Again apologies if it came across aggressive.

I just dont see the big difference between servers on different platforms. Weather it be Xbox1/PS4/PC the online experience seems equivalent to me. That maybe was not the case a few years ago but imo is now. If one platform was p2p and the rest dedicated servers then i would be able to say yeah thats not right. But from what ive read all platforms will have dedicated servers,only difference is in case of XBox MS will provide them.

The problem i have with it is that if people come into the thread any see some of the posts they might start to believe the game is going to be much better on Xbox 1 when there is no one here that knows that for sure. To me them posts are misleading and need to be countered which is why i posted.

EoinHef · 16-08-2014 2:27am

AlmightyCushion wrote: »

I actually said the opposite of that. I said both platforms are more than likely using Azure so both platforms benefit. Also, cost of implementation does matter for gamers because if something is considered too expensive to implement then it will get cut. Things get cut from games/applications/movies all the time because they are either too costly or too difficult to implement.

Sure that could be said of any game though,course things are cut. Weather we can say in this case anything has is not provable. The game was never an MS exclusive so was not by its nature designed to rely on Azure. So cant see the servers being a limiting factor on any platform. Thats my point

AlmightyCushion wrote: »

Like I said above, more than likely Microsoft are helping them out to make the XBox version better than it already was going to be in areas like graphics or something similar but it won't affect the core gameplay.

I agree the above is whats happening,and is what was stated in the link earlier. Great for Xbox users and have no problem with that.

ems_medic · 16-08-2014 1:14pm

EoinHef wrote: »

The problem i have with it is that if people come into the thread any see some of the posts they might start to believe the game is going to be much better on Xbox 1 when there is no one here that knows that for sure. To me them posts are misleading and need to be countered which is why i posted.

We cant say which version will be better or the same and the Azure servers are not all about simply hosting multiplayer either.

It is possible that Ubisoft are using Azure so that they can implement features from the first "test" that was Titanfall. Regardless of your opinion of Titanfall the game uses Azure to handle all of the AI (and it is very advanced AI in fairness). This is turn frees up more resources for the Xbox to utilize towards gameplay and one of the reasons MS didn't feel the need to put as much grunt into their console.

If that is the case (which is indicated by the engineer / staff sharing) then the gameplay could well be different on the XB1 if Azure is handling different aspects of processing.

gizmo · 16-08-2014 2:55pm

ems_medic wrote: »

We cant say which version will be better or the same and the Azure servers are not all about simply hosting multiplayer either.

It is possible that Ubisoft are using Azure so that they can implement features from the first "test" that was Titanfall. Regardless of your opinion of Titanfall the game uses Azure to handle all of the AI (and it is very advanced AI in fairness). This is turn frees up more resources for the Xbox to utilize towards gameplay and one of the reasons MS didn't feel the need to put as much grunt into their console.

If that is the case (which is indicated by the engineer / staff sharing) then the gameplay could well be different on the XB1 if Azure is handling different aspects of processing.

The two examples are fundamentally different which would preclude them from working in a similar manner.

Firstly, the most basic point, Titanfall was an XBox One exclusive and so Respawn could build functionality around Azure knowing they wouldn't have worry about other platforms. Secondly, while the exact implementation of the Azure-driven AI systems in Titanfall is still unknown, at its core it was still only looking after a very small number of agents at any one time, a number quite different than one would find in a PvE game such as The Division. Again, while it's possible that the MS engineers working with Massive are somehow retooling their AI and Networking systems to accommodate for this functionality, it is highly unlikely from a technical perspective. It is far more likely they're working with them to ensure their core engine systems are utilising the XBox One to its (relatively speaking) full potential, something Massive probably wouldn't have been doing in the earlier stages of development for a number of reasons.

One other point that needs to be addressed is the idea that one of the reasons that the XBox One is underpowered compared to the PS4 is because of Azure. This is demonstrably false. It's been well documented that Sony took a gamble with some of the components used in the PS4 (namely the memory used) and it is that, combined with MS' decision to go in a similar route with the ESRAM in their platform as they had with the Xenon GPU in the 360 which has put them in this position.

GottaGetGatt · 16-08-2014 3:22pm

I saw a video a while back with them explaining the benifits iof the cloud servers for the game. Basically if a player damages a building car etc, that destroyed car or building etc will always be destroyed on that server,. Maybe someone can dig it up, I think it was one if the snowdrop videos

ems_medic · 16-08-2014 3:51pm

gizmo wrote: »

One other point that needs to be addressed is the idea that one of the reasons that the XBox One is underpowered compared to the PS4 is because of Azure. This is demonstrably false.

It's not false at all, MS have been planning this direction for a long time and taking all processing and calculation requirements out of the console and into the cloud. It's not just for Xbox One either it's for PC games too

Most recent video example of what they are doing and how complex it will be in terms of physics calculations and so on (more than just a few AI) at www. forbes.com/sites/davidthier/2014/04/04/microsoft-shows-off-power-of-the-cloud-for-xbox-one/

Note the video is captured using high end gaming PCs and not an Xbox One so the benefits to a console should be obvious

gizmo · 16-08-2014 4:57pm

ems_medic wrote: »

It's not false at all, MS have been planning this direction for a long time and taking all processing and calculation requirements out of the console and into the cloud. It's not just for Xbox One either it's for PC games too

Most recent video example of what they are doing and how complex it will be in terms of physics calculations and so on (more than just a few AI) at www. forbes.com/sites/davidthier/2014/04/04/microsoft-shows-off-power-of-the-cloud-for-xbox-one/

Note the video is captured using high end gaming PCs and not an Xbox One so the benefits to a console should be obvious

No one is saying it's not possible to offload some engine work cloud-side but that's completely different from saying it had any significant impact on the direction MS took with the XBox One. Look, I'm not going to get into a protracted debate about this, anyone with a modicum of software engineering experience is aware of this, one need only look at the specific hardware differences between the two platforms, maturity of the cloud-based feature and tool sets, history of the companies inter-division co-operation and hell, the basic release dates of the various platforms to know this is the case.

In terms of how it will apply to The Division, look at it logically, do you really think Ubisoft would allow their engine to be tied so intrinsically to Microsoft's cloud platform that it would have an overtly negative performance impact on on the most popular of the two next-gen platforms? This isn't some timed exclusive we're talking about here, this would be a major engineering dependency that would have implications across both current and future titles built with the engine.

FAILSAFE 00 · 17-08-2014 4:20am

gizmo wrote: »

In terms of how it will apply to The Division, look at it logically, do you really think Ubisoft would allow their engine to be tied so intrinsically to Microsoft's cloud platform that it would have an overtly negative performance impact on on the most popular of the two next-gen platforms? This isn't some timed exclusive we're talking about here, this would be a major engineering dependency that would have implications across both current and future titles built with the engine.

They should. Ubisoft's online capabilities are horrible. A strategic partnership with Microsoft could be a massive benefit to them.

Microsoft have stated that they will provide free dedicated servers to development studios that make Xbox One titles. Already we have seen Titanfall running on Azure servers for both PC & Xbox. The question is if MS would allow the PS4 to use these servers for a title like The Division.

Azure would be perfect for the Snowdrop engine features shown in this video.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=R2NJSAvuiQ0

gizmo · 17-08-2014 5:09am

FAILSAFE 00 wrote: »

They should. Ubisoft's online capabilities are horrible. A strategic partnership with Microsoft could be a massive benefit to them.

Not if it proved detrimental to their partnership with Sony or, more specifically, the PS4 SKU itself.

FAILSAFE 00 wrote: »

Microsoft have stated that they will provide free dedicated servers to development studios that make Xbox One titles. Already we have seen Titanfall running on Azure servers for both PC & Xbox. The question is if MS would allow the PS4 to use these servers for a title like The Division.

Microsoft wouldn't stop Sony from using the servers, the question is whether it makes sense for Ubisoft to indirectly force Sony to have to use them by only supporting an Azure-based online solution.

Again, it's worth clarifying that there are two very different points being made here. The Division will be using dedicated servers, that's been confirmed. If those servers are run on Azure for the Xbox One that's totally fine. Sony could then host their services via their Rackspace-based solution they've been working on for the PS4 or anything else. What you argued above, however, was that engine work could be off-loaded to Azure with help from MS engineers working with Massive. This is what's highly unlikely to happen.

FAILSAFE 00 wrote: »

Azure would be perfect for the Snowdrop engine features shown in this video.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=R2NJSAvuiQ0

On the contrary, the only feature listed there that would be in any way suitable for server-side processing, even hypothetically speaking, is the procedural destruction of the environment.

heebusjeebus · 17-08-2014 8:29am

The Azure servers are not free either. You have to pony up once your game is published.
It's easier and cheaper for Ubi to develop and host their own server side code to work with all 3 platforms.

ems_medic · 17-08-2014 11:46am

heebusjeebus wrote: »

The Azure servers are not free either. You have to pony up once your game is published.
It's easier and cheaper for Ubi to develop and host their own server side code to work with all 3 platforms.

wrong - www. majornelson.com/2013/10/17/xbox-is-providing-free-dedicated-server-hosting-to-our-xbox-one-development-community/

heebusjeebus · 17-08-2014 9:12pm

ems_medic wrote: »

wrong - www. majornelson.com/2013/10/17/xbox-is-providing-free-dedicated-server-hosting-to-our-xbox-one-development-community/

Nope, you need to pay once your game goes live.
Don't think MS will last long if they offered them for free.

2Mad2BeMad · 17-08-2014 9:18pm

heebusjeebus wrote: »

Nope, you need to pay once your game goes live.
Don't think MS will last long if they offered them for free.

well considering ms said they will be free, theirs no really point in saying "nope" unless you have an article to prove, otherwise your just in denial :pac:

FAILSAFE 00 · 17-08-2014 9:28pm

heebusjeebus wrote: »

Nope, you need to pay once your game goes live.
Don't think MS will last long if they offered them for free.

Nope, again it's completely free as confirmed by Microsoft.

Microsoft makes huge profit from their cloud services they sell to businesses worldwide. This allows them to offer Azure services to game development studios at no cost to the studios.

This is to entice development studios to make Xbox One games.

FlyingIrishMan · 17-08-2014 10:27pm

FAILSAFE 00 wrote: »

Nope, again it's completely free as confirmed by Microsoft.

Microsoft makes huge profit from their cloud services they sell to businesses worldwide. This allows them to offer Azure services to game development studios at no cost to the studios.

This is to entice development studios to make Xbox One games.

I think we should take absolutely everything MS says with a grain of salt. There are obviously lots of conditions behind getting servers, and they're not going to give away servers for free to every studio.

heebusjeebus · 17-08-2014 10:28pm

FAILSAFE 00 wrote: »

Nope, again it's completely free as confirmed by Microsoft.

Microsoft makes huge profit from their cloud services they sell to businesses worldwide. This allows them to offer Azure services to game development studios at no cost to the studios.

This is to entice development studios to make Xbox One games.

I think you're misunderstanding what I'm saying. Azure is available for developers to use for free but once the game is published, they company needs to pay for the use of these cloud servers.
I'm sure they do deals to offer free live servers if you're exclusive to Xbox, but for the main 3rd party publishers, they need to pay up.

Going back to what I was saying originally, why would a 3rd party developer use Azure for a single platform (Xbox) if they still need to develop the back end architecture for running on PS4 & PC.
It makes no financial or logical sense to do this.
This is why you only see Azure being used by 1st or 2nd party MS game companies (Titanfall & Forza being the main examples).

gizmo · 17-08-2014 10:38pm

What heebusjeebus says is correct, there is still a fee involved for using Azure-based hosting. In the case of Respawn, here's what they said about what was offered.

How is this different from other dedicated servers?

With the Xbox Live Cloud, we don’t have to worry about estimating how many servers we’ll need on launch day. We don’t have to find ISPs all over the globe and rent servers from each one. We don’t have to maintain the servers or copy new builds to every server. That lets us focus on things that make our game more fun. And best yet, Microsoft has datacenters all over the world, so everyone playing our game should have a consistent, low latency connection to their local datacenter.

Most importantly to us, Microsoft priced it so that it’s far more affordable than other hosting options – their goal here is to get more awesome games, not to nickel-and-dime developers. So because of this, dedicated servers are much more of a realistic option for developers who don’t want to make compromises on their player experience, and it opens up a lot more things that we can do in an online game.

After having a quick look around, it seems Ubisoft have gone with Cloudscaling for their cloud-based hosting needs. The OpenStack-based infrastructure of Cloudscaling also happens to be similar to that used by Rackspace whom Sony have partnered with.

EoinHef · 17-08-2014 10:41pm

I wonder what happens when a game relys heavily on azure cloud computing and for whatever reason they(servers) went down,which has happened before. Or say a person for whatever reason cant access the internet,is the game still playable?

For instance does forza need a constant connection to the internet?

Dayum · 18-08-2014 12:45pm

I thought this was failing at concept level. Might not see this until 2016.

ems_medic · 18-08-2014 1:14pm

EoinHef wrote: »

I wonder what happens when a game relys heavily on azure cloud computing and for whatever reason they(servers) went down,which has happened before. Or say a person for whatever reason cant access the internet,is the game still playable?

For instance does forza need a constant connection to the internet?

If a person cannot access the internet for an online only game then think thats an obvious answer really.

If Azure went down then obviously that part of the game would go bye , bye too. Have yet to see Azure go fully down mind you. I know it did crash during Titanfall beta when they wanted a full on stress test and wanted to see exactly how many they could take before it crashed the servers.

They done the same thing during the Destiny beta but they didn't go down so I guess they obviously learned what they needed to.

Also, Forza doesn't need to be constantly online to play it, unless your looking to play multiplayer

MajesticDonkey · 19-08-2014 1:29pm

GottaGetGatt · 22-08-2014 1:58pm

Keep an eye on this lads channel for The Division content

SpuddMurphy · 18-09-2014 10:36am

Haven't really checked up on this in a while. any further info on when this might be released?

Shiminay · 18-09-2014 11:36am

They seem to have gone kinda quiet now that the convention circuit is done for the year

I wouldn't be surprised to see it get a mention with the winter holiday releases - maybe access to a beta as a pre-order bonus for some other Ubisoft titles?

GottaGetGatt · 18-09-2014 12:12pm

SpuddMurphy wrote: »

Haven't really checked up on this in a while. any further info on when this might be released?

I'd say around October or November next year.

EoinMcLovin · 12-05-2015 8:17pm

Delayed again, now out early 2016

Tom Clancy's The Division

Comments