this post was submitted on 15 Oct 2024
409 points (91.1% liked)

Games

32385 readers
1168 users here now

Welcome to the largest gaming community on Lemmy! Discussion for all kinds of games. Video games, tabletop games, card games etc.

Weekly Threads:

What Are You Playing?

The Weekly Discussion Topic

Rules:

  1. Submissions have to be related to games

  2. No bigotry or harassment, be civil

  3. No excessive self-promotion

  4. Stay on-topic; no memes, funny videos, giveaways, reposts, or low-effort posts

  5. Mark Spoilers and NSFW

  6. No linking to piracy

More information about the community rules can be found here.

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] Aatube@kbin.melroy.org 10 points 3 weeks ago (2 children)

Well, I can't conceive anything other than streaming 4K satellite terrain data that could take up that much data and be nefarious. This is download activity, not upload, so I don't see it being like a botnet or something.

[–] Lost_My_Mind@lemmy.world 3 points 3 weeks ago (1 children)

How much upload activity is there?

[–] Donjuanme@lemmy.world 0 points 3 weeks ago (4 children)

But how much data does it take to send terrain information? Why not just send the picture of the terrain every moment (stream it) rather than whatever they're doing?

[–] ruckblack@sh.itjust.works 5 points 3 weeks ago (1 children)

That would require Microsoft to do something like running a 1:1 local render of everything the player is doing in their sim, for everyone playing the game, at all times. And then they'd have to stream that video feed to the player and somehow make sure the elsewhere-rendered terrain is synced up perfectly with the player's local game. Doesn't really seem reasonable.

[–] Donjuanme@lemmy.world 1 points 3 weeks ago (1 children)

But the bandwidth has to be more expensive in the long run...

[–] ruckblack@sh.itjust.works 1 points 3 weeks ago

Probably not more expensive than the immense computing power they would need to support something like the method I mentioned. I'm quite sure they've done a cost analysis on this lol.

[–] Aatube@kbin.melroy.org 2 points 3 weeks ago

Because it's 3D? Have you seen the advertizements?

[–] brygphilomena@lemmy.world 1 points 3 weeks ago (1 children)

Data vs compute

It's easy to send all the data in an x mile radius of the players position. Or to identify the players position, speed, camera angle, etc. render it all, compress it, and then send the computer, rendered, video fees.

[–] Donjuanme@lemmy.world 1 points 3 weeks ago

But obviously they're taking the more bandwidth intense route, that must cost them more money...

[–] intensely_human@lemm.ee 1 points 3 weeks ago

Because it requires computing power from the GPU to translate the terrain into an image of the terrain. They’re using your local GPU for that since GPUs are expensive, and also it minimizes latency between control input and view update. If you turn the camera you want that new view immediately, not 200ms later.