Current Events > Xbox Scarlett will have two console models. One streaming and one traditional

(+) Yeah! (+)

https://www.thurrott.com/xbox/163896/details-microsofts-xbox-scarlett-game-streaming-service

Back at E3, Microsoft mentioned that they were working on a next-generation console. At that time, I noted that this new console is a family of devices and was going by the name of Scarlett.

Since uncovering that little bit of info, I was able to dig up a few tiny bits of content about how Microsoft is developing its next-generation consoles. And yes consoles because right now, they are planning two different pieces of hardware.

First, Microsoft is building a traditional console that you would expect from the Xbox brand. I think its important to point this out so that those who prefer to have all their hardware locally, will have an option with the next generation Xbox.

As for specs for this device, thats still not known at this time as its the early days of development for that piece of hardware. But what I am starting to hear more about is the second device, a streaming box that is designed to work with the companys upcoming game streaming platform.

Scarlett Cloud as one person called it, is the game streaming service that we have all been envisioning ever since Microsoft showed off a demo game streaming at its all-employee meeting back in 2013. But this time, Microsoft has a path to bring it to market.

The second console that the company is working on is a lower-powered device that is currently planned to ship with the next generation device that is designed for game-streaming. But the catch here is that Microsoft thinks it has figured out how to handle the latency sensitive aspects of gaming.

The cloud console will have a limited amount of compute locally for specific tasks like controller input, image processing, and importantly, collision detection. The downside of this is that it since more hardware is needed locally, it will raise the price of the streaming box but it will still cost significantly less than what we are accustomed to paying for a new-generation console which should help expand the platforms reach.

When it comes to games, all Scarlett games will run on all Scarlett devices. Meaning, both consoles will be first-class citizens and there is not expected to be an awkward this game only runs on the non-cloud Scarlett.

The cloud version of Scarlett is further along in the development cycle than the traditional console that will also be released in 2020. This device does make me wonder if it has any relationship to the Xbox Hobart streaming device that was nearly released two years ago but was canceled late in the development cycle.

Interesting. Surely they plan for the streaming service to be on Windows as well.
---

The streaming one will be trash
---

I thought they solved all latency issues by letting the game play itself with only minimal input from the player?

Streaming is lame.

Blue_Inigo posted...

The streaming one will be trash

---

Wow, streaming games...now that's something I never knew I didn't want.
---

Interesting. The streaming console could be a real game-changer if they truly have solved the major issues with latency
---

Isn't calling something next gen stupid

Wait an Xbox 4?

Or rather, two Xbox 4's?

Dang how did I get so far behind? My most recent home console is a PS3...
---

Xbox 4? What happened to 2 and 3?

DevsBro posted...

Wait an Xbox 4?

Or rather, two Xbox 4's?

Dang how did I get so far behind? My most recent home console is a PS3...

You aren't missing much. 90% of newer games are the same old but with fancier graphics

Bacon_Pancakes posted...

Isn't calling something next gen stupid

Not if it truly is in the next generation of consoles
---

It sounds like the streaming console does some stuff to help deal with latency but we'll see. Still needs to be cheap.

Bacon_Pancakes posted...

Isn't calling something next gen stupid

What do you mean?
---

In a world where most ISPs enforce shitty data caps, a streaming-only console just seems silly.

Cool that they're giving people the option though.
---

Xbox Unity would be a good name imo.
---

Cloud gaming? OMEGALUL
---

I'm really not ready for a new console generation. Can't we push this off at least a few more years?
---

s0nicfan posted...

I'm really not ready for a new console generation. Can't we push this off at least a few more years?

Not coming until November 2020.
---

GregShmedley posted...

Why do I feel like they chose Scarlett as a code name before?

Xbox One was Durango
---

s0nicfan posted...

I'm really not ready for a new console generation. Can't we push this off at least a few more years?

It says 2020. I expect Sony to release PS5 that year too. That would be 7 years since the launch of PS4 so that's plenty of time for a game generation.

The second console that the company is working on is a lower-powered device that is currently planned to ship with the next generation device that is designed for game-streaming. But the catch here is that Microsoft thinks it has figured out how to handle the latency sensitive aspects of gaming. The cloud console will have a limited amount of compute locally for specific tasks like controller input, image processing, and importantly, collision detection. The downside of this is that it since more hardware is needed locally, it will raise the price of the streaming box but it will still cost significantly less than what we are accustomed to paying for a new-generation console which should help expand the platforms reach.

So...don't buy this one, then.
---

xXboXx
---

I bet they name it Xbox 5280.
---

game pass is such a good value so Im excited to see how this will play out, but I did just buy the one x like a year ago so I am nervous to jump into a new console so quickly
---

I have fiber internet and game streaming(Geforce Now) still feels like dogshit if you're doing any kind of latency-sensitive game. Wonder how much input latency can be shaved off by having some of the processing done locally, and how much more cost that adds. Also leads to the obvious question of, will some games be "streaming optimized" and play great while others don't do any local processing or will local processing be automatic for all games on the streaming SKU? If they can shave 1 or 2 frames off the typical input lag for streaming, that would go a long way to making it at least somewhat viable.

I guess its also pretty questionable about how much it costs compared to the local SKU. If the "normal" SKU is $399, but the streaming box is $199, I don't see the appeal. But if the streaming box is $99, that's a whole different situation.
---

Frankly my dear, I don't give a damn.
---

Darmik posted...

It sounds like the streaming console does some stuff to help deal with latency but we'll see.

Seems reminiscent of 32X, when the video passthrough cable is disconnected.
The stock Genesis underneath handled mostly the logic and hitboxes (and some graphics), while the 32x overlayed its pretty graphics right on top.

This isn't going to "solve" latency at all, but probably exacerbate the effect. Seems like all that happens is the input delay being slightly moved around. Your guy registers as dead before the round trip to the server for the visuals, instead of in the middle.

HylianFox posted...

Frankly my dear, I don't give a damn.

Oh, he's our shortstop.
---

littlebro07 posted...

In a world where most ISPs enforce shitty data caps, a streaming-only console just seems silly.

Cool that they're giving people the option though.

Not to mention slow and easily disrupted service in rather large parts of the country.
---

halomonkey1_3_5 posted...

But if the streaming box is $99, that's a whole different situation.

I expect the hardware will sold at a loss, seeing as it's completely useless without the Game Pass subscription.

And I assume the streaming console won't have multiplayer disabled, or at least an option to filter it out. So enjoy having a bunch of laggy multiplayer games against anyone with the streamer.
---

DevsBro posted...

HylianFox posted...

Frankly my dear, I don't give a damn.

Oh, he's our shortstop.

Costello: "AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAARRRRRRRRRRRRRGHHHH!!!!!"
---

tainted_emerald posted...

littlebro07 posted...

In a world where most ISPs enforce shitty data caps, a streaming-only console just seems silly.

Cool that they're giving people the option though.

Not to mention slow and easily disrupted service in rather large parts of the country.

"Just move out of the boonies if ur internets sucks, lololol."
---

masterpug53 posted...

tainted_emerald posted...

littlebro07 posted...

In a world where most ISPs enforce shitty data caps, a streaming-only console just seems silly.

Cool that they're giving people the option though.

Not to mention slow and easily disrupted service in rather large parts of the country.

"Just move out of the boonies if ur internets sucks, lololol."

Or rather, buy the other version.
---

This "online only" shit can't die out fast enough.
---

DevsBro posted...

masterpug53 posted...

tainted_emerald posted...

littlebro07 posted...

In a world where most ISPs enforce shitty data caps, a streaming-only console just seems silly.

Cool that they're giving people the option though.

Not to mention slow and easily disrupted service in rather large parts of the country.

"Just move out of the boonies if ur internets sucks, lololol."

Or rather, buy the other version.

But the people that can't afford better internet (or can't afford to move somewhere for it) probably can't afford the better console.
---

SkittyOnWailord posted...

DevsBro posted...

masterpug53 posted...

tainted_emerald posted...

littlebro07 posted...

In a world where most ISPs enforce shitty data caps, a streaming-only console just seems silly.

Cool that they're giving people the option though.

Not to mention slow and easily disrupted service in rather large parts of the country.

"Just move out of the boonies if ur internets sucks, lololol."

Or rather, buy the other version.

But the people that can't afford better internet (or can't afford to move somewhere for it) probably can't afford the better console.

If there's money for cigarettes, there's money for Xbox. May even be cheaper in the long run, and marginally healthier.

SkittyOnWailord posted...

DevsBro posted...

masterpug53 posted...

tainted_emerald posted...

littlebro07 posted...

In a world where most ISPs enforce shitty data caps, a streaming-only console just seems silly.

Cool that they're giving people the option though.

Not to mention slow and easily disrupted service in rather large parts of the country.

"Just move out of the boonies if ur internets sucks, lololol."

Or rather, buy the other version.

But the people that can't afford better internet (or can't afford to move somewhere for it) probably can't afford the better console.

This is the way it has always been. People talk like cost of living and wages cancel each other out, but for items with a universal MSRP they don't and never have.
---

HylianFox posted...

This "online only" shit can't die out fast enough.

Not only is it not dying out, it's going to become more prevalent as internet quality improves.
---

Tyranthraxus posted...

HylianFox posted...

This "online only" shit can't die out fast enough.

Not only is it not dying out, it's going to become more prevalent as internet quality improves.

If they get flawless never dropping gigabit speeds, then I'll be cool with it because streaming is pretty convenient

Too bad that'll never happen
---

The technology isn't good enough for stable streaming yet.
---

Well also propagation delay will always be a thing. The lower bound worst-case round trip propagation delay is about 14ms.
---

littlebro07 posted...

Tyranthraxus posted...

HylianFox posted...

This "online only" shit can't die out fast enough.

Not only is it not dying out, it's going to become more prevalent as internet quality improves.

If they get flawless never dropping gigabit speeds, then I'll be cool with it because streaming is pretty convenient

Too bad that'll never happen

For most games it does not matter. You can play World of Warcraft on a peanuts connection. You can do it with most other games as well.
---

Game streaming will be a disaster in the US, with how bad our Internet is here.
---

GregShmedley posted...

Tyranthraxus posted...

littlebro07 posted...

Tyranthraxus posted...

HylianFox posted...

This "online only" shit can't die out fast enough.

Not only is it not dying out, it's going to become more prevalent as internet quality improves.

If they get flawless never dropping gigabit speeds, then I'll be cool with it because streaming is pretty convenient

Too bad that'll never happen

For most games it does not matter. You can play World of Warcraft on a peanuts connection. You can do it with most other games as well.

Are you referring to playing online or actually streaming the game like say PS Now?

I was referring to "online only" games but streaming the whole thing isn't that much worse.

I get that in one case you're streaming inputs and in another you're streaming the input and video but the streambox idea doesn't need that much bandwidth.

I use remote desktop all the time across the country in places like Dallas and Washington and it's all very responsive.

You can cut the video down to 30 fps 720p to dramatically improve responsiveness.
---

Xbox Scarlett sounds fucking awful.
---