One thing that will be done with gaikai is that it will be deployed over time and maybe some other things will as well but assuming not everything goes to plan it might not be a bad thing to keep a few resources around until things stabilize with some measure of responsiveness. ...... Most of this is going over the PSN and while it is way better than it used to be it's unknown just what level of performance you are going to get after the introduction of a new platform with lots more functionality.
Right, most of this is going over PSN. But PSN is a collection of services and protocols requiring the PS4 to act as both a server and client for those services. When you're streaming your game over PSN you PS4 is running a video streaming server.
The 360 saves memory by pulling almost everything from the internet (no mandatory harddrive), disconnect the 360 and it's template graphics all over.
The 360 has to save memory because it has 32mb to work within, likewise the PS3 and its 50mb. And both interfaces run like crap compared to modern devices like the average smartphone, tablet or computer.
With the PS4 i think we see hints that Sony reserved all the needed memory for every game related service/function so that the games really won't have to worry about that.
I'd definitely expect everything to do with gaming to be memory resident
all the time. But I believe Sony, who are a consumer product company, are taking the immediacy much further, regardless of whether you or I want or need this.
These I consider either not needing to be instantaneously available (eg. you stop playing your game and load up your media player in a separate app that takes seconds to load), or they don't need much RAM at all if done sensibly.
Just because that's how you (and I come to that) would be happy for it to work, doesn't mean that is Sony's goal. But why don't you think these need much RAM? Video editing alone is memory intensive - you really don't want to be editing 15 mins of HD video from the HDD - and when it was demonstrated it was instant. Share -> Video -> Editing screen BAM!, no waiting.
Why would you need hundreds of megabytes constantly reserved to allow the very niche function of letting someone else play your game?
One, who said hundreds of megabytes? Two, the streaming isn't just needed for somebody to play your game but for others to watch it realtime. Niche to you maybe, but not to others if the popularity of game videos are anything to go by.
The whole video streaming aspect seems solved with dedicated hardware and working space to store and compress frames.
There is hardware to realtime encode video but not, to the best of my knowledge, act as a streaming server. There needs to be a software stack that manages remote requests for video streams, authenticates, captures the video output, encodes it and streams it - accounting for connection quality.
Just a ball-park estimate based on how much 1 GB really is.
Ah. You made it up. ;-) That's fine, we don't know, I was just curious if you'd seen something I hadn't.
No, because a system that stores oodles of thumbnails for video clips that are going to mostly be thrown away doesn't strike me as good use of resources.
You know the thing you want to send to people because
it just happened, so there's no need to have a catalogue of clips.
Sure there is, for editing the video. How else are you supposed to scrub through 15 mins of HD video? See the UI:
Tens of megabytes, depending on how much is cached. But the store front and most recently used needn't be huge. 1000 25kb JPEG avatars is 25 MB.
That's great, but many of the existing PS3 avatar graphics are around the 100kb mark in PNG. That's 100mb. Now add all the metadata that could be attached, like your friends statuses (online/offline), which game they're playing, if they're playing the game you are wouldn't be be cool to have it know their trophies so it can tell you when you're besting them.
Why are you running Netflix/DVD concurrently with a game?! I guess Remote Play could encourage that. BRD players often have significant RAM for bloated UIs. If Sony are serious about remote play, they'll not want to tie up the machine for other family members, which would be a reasonable justification.
Well, we don't know ;-) They may decide to have a single media interface for disc movies, streaming movies, the movies on the console in AVI/MPEG format. The last bit about Vita is something I've mentioned before. I'd really like the ability to continue to remote play a game on the Vita while the family use the PS4 to watch Netflix or a Blu-ray disc.
And people will be buying those tablets and TVs anyway, so leave the apps and the socialising to the tablets.
I agree, I really do. But judging by the popularity of social networks and people wanting to keep up with their friends, you and I may well be in the minority. And Sony will want to keep their platform appealing. If its UI is cruddy compared to their tablet, phone or computer, Sony may lose custom - that is somebody might chose to watch a movie streamed from iTunes rather than be a Video Unlimited customers.
