skip to main content
research-article

Cloud Gaming with Foveated Video Encoding

Published:17 February 2020Publication History
Skip Abstract Section

Abstract

Cloud gaming enables playing high-end games, originally designed for PC or game console setups, on low-end devices such as netbooks and smartphones, by offloading graphics rendering to GPU-powered cloud servers. However, transmitting the high-resolution video requires a large amount of network bandwidth, even though it is a compressed video stream. Foveated video encoding (FVE) reduces the bandwidth requirement by taking advantage of the non-uniform acuity of human visual system and by knowing where the user is looking. Based on a consumer-grade real-time eye tracker and an open source cloud gaming platform, we provide a cloud gaming FVE prototype that is game-agnostic and requires no modifications to the underlying game engine. In this article, we describe the prototype and its evaluation through measurements with representative games from different genres to understand the effect of parametrization of the FVE scheme on bandwidth requirements and to understand its feasibility from the latency perspective. We also present results from a user study on first-person shooter games. The results suggest that it is possible to find a “sweet spot” for the encoding parameters so the users hardly notice the presence of foveated encoding but at the same time the scheme yields most of the achievable bandwidth savings.

References

  1. Hamed Ahmadi, Saman Zad Tootaghaj, Mahmoud Reza Hashemi, and Shervin Shirmohammadi. 2014. A game attention model for efficient bit rate allocation in cloud gaming. Multim. Syst. 20, 5 (Oct. 2014), 485--501.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  2. Zahid Akhtar and Tiago H. Falk. 2017. Audio-visual multimedia quality assessment: A comprehensive survey. IEEE Access 5 (2017), 21090--21117. DOI:https://doi.org/10.1109/ACCESS.2017.2750918Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  3. Rachel Albert, Anjul Patney, David Luebke, and Joohwan Kim. 2017. Latency requirements for foveated rendering in virtual reality. ACM Trans. Appl. Percept. 14, 4, Article 25 (Sept. 2017), 13 pages. DOI:https://doi.org/10.1145/3127589Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  4. Ayub Bokani. 2014. Empirical evaluation of real-time video foveation. In Proceedings of the Workshop on Design, Quality and Deployment of Adaptive Video Streaming. ACM, 45--46.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  5. Speedtest by Ookla. 2019. Monthly Comparisons of Internet Speeds from Around the World. Retrieved from https://www.speedtest.net/global-index.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  6. Wei Cai, Min Chen, and Victor C. M. Leung. 2014. Toward gaming as a service. IEEE Internet Comput. 18, 3 (May 2014), 12--18. DOI:https://doi.org/10.1109/MIC.2014.22Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  7. Wei Cai, Conghui Zhou, Victor C. M. Leung, and Min Chen. 2013. A cognitive platform for mobile cloud gaming. In Proceedings of the IEEE 5th International Conference on Cloud Computing Technology and Science, Vol. 1. 72--79. DOI:https://doi.org/10.1109/CloudCom.2013.17Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  8. Kuan-Ta Chen, Yu-Chun Chang, Hwai-Jung Hsu, De-Yu Chen, Chun-Ying Huang, and Cheng-Hsin Hsu. 2014. On the quality of service of cloud gaming systems. IEEE Trans. Multim. 16, 2 (2014), 480--495.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  9. Kuan-Ta Chen, Yu-Chun Chang, Po-Han Tseng, Chun-Ying Huang, and Chin-Laung Lei. 2011. Measuring the latency of cloud gaming systems. In Proceedings of the 19th ACM International Conference on Multimedia (MM’11). ACM, New York, NY, 1269--1272. DOI:https://doi.org/10.1145/2072298.2071991Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  10. Zhenzhong Chen and Christine Guillemot. 2010. Perceptually-friendly H.264/AVC video coding based on foveated just-noticeable-distortion model. IEEE Trans. Circ. Syst. Vid. Technol. 20, 6 (June 2010), 806--819. DOI:https://doi.org/10.1109/TCSVT.2010.2045912Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  11. Sharon Choy, Bernard Wong, Gwendal Simon, and Catherine Rosenberg. 2012. The brewing storm in cloud gaming: A measurement study on cloud to end-user latency. In Proceedings of the 11th Workshop on Network and Systems Support for Games (NetGames’12). IEEE Press, Piscataway, NJ, Article 2, 6 pages. Retrieved from http://dl.acm.org/citation.cfm?id=2501560.2501563.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  12. Mark Claypool and Kajal Claypool. 2006. Latency and player actions in online games. Commun. ACM 49, 11 (Nov. 2006), 40--45. DOI:https://doi.org/10.1145/1167838.1167860Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  13. Jonathan Deber, Ricardo Jota, Clifton Forlines, and Daniel Wigdor. 2015. How much faster is fast enough? User perception of latency 8 latency improvements in direct and indirect touch. In Proceedings of the 33rd ACM Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (CHI’15), 1, 1 (2015), 1827--1836. DOI:https://doi.org/10.1145/2702123.2702300Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  14. Agostino Gibaldi, Mauricio Vanegas, Peter J. Bex, and Guido Maiello. 2017. Evaluation of the Tobii EyeX eye tracking controller and Matlab toolkit for research. Behav. Res. Meth. 49, 3 (01 June 2017), 923--946. DOI:https://doi.org/10.3758/s13428-016-0762-9Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  15. Chun-Ying Huang, Cheng-Hsin Hsu, Yu-Chun Chang, and Kuan-Ta Chen. 2013. GamingAnywhere: An open cloud gaming system. In Proceedings of the 4th ACM Multimedia Systems Conference (MMSys’13). ACM, New York, NY, 36--47. DOI:https://doi.org/10.1145/2483977.2483981Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  16. Chun-Ying Huang, Cheng-Hsin Hsu, Yu-Chun Chang, and Kuan-Ta Chen. 2013. GamingAnywhere: An open cloud gaming system. In Proceedings of the 4th ACM Multimedia Systems Conference (MMSys’13). ACM, New York, NY, 36--47. DOI:https://doi.org/10.1145/2483977.2483981Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  17. Wijnand Ijsselsteijn, Yvonne de Kort, Karolien Poels, Audrius Jurgelionis, and Francesco Bellotti. 2007. Characterising and measuring user experiences in digital games. In Proceedings of the International Conference on Advances in Computer Entertainment.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  18. Gazi Illahi, Matti Siekkinen, and Enrico Masala. 2017. Foveated video streaming for cloud gaming. In Proceedings of the IEEE 19th International Workshop on Multimedia Signal Processing (MMSP’17). 1--6. DOI:https://doi.org/10.1109/MMSP.2017.8122235Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  19. Laurent Itti. 2004. Automatic foveation for video compression using a neurobiological model of visual attention. IEEE Trans. Image Proc. 13, 10 (Oct. 2004), 1304--1318. DOI:https://doi.org/10.1109/TIP.2004.834657Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  20. JVT. 2003. Joint video team (JVT) of ISO/IEC MPEG and ITU-T VCEG. Draft ITU-T recommendation and final draft international standard of joint video specification (ITU-T Rec. H264 ISO/IEC 14496--10 AVC), document JVT-G050d35, 7th Meeting.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  21. M. Jarschel, D. Schlosser, S. Scheuring, and T. Hoßfeld. 2011. An evaluation of QoE in cloud gaming based on subjective tests. In Proceedings of the 5th International Conference on Innovative Mobile and Internet Services in Ubiquitous Computing. 330--335.DOI:https://doi.org/10.1109/IMIS.2011.92Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  22. Teemu Kämäräinen, Matti Siekkinen, Antti Ylä-Jääski, Wenxiao Zhang, and Pan Hui. 2017. A measurement study on achieving imperceptible latency in mobile cloud gaming. In Proceedings of the 8th ACM on Multimedia Systems Conference (MMSys’17). ACM, New York, NY, 88--99. DOI:https://doi.org/10.1145/3083187.3083191Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  23. Zhicheng Li, Shiyin Qin, and Laurent Itti. 2011. Visual attention guided bit allocation in video compression. Image Vis. Comput. 29, 1 (2011), 1--14. DOI:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.imavis.2010.07.001Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  24. Pietro Lungaro, Rickard Sjöberg, Alfredo J. F. Valero, Ashutosh Mittal, and Konrad Tollmar. 2018. Gaze-aware streaming solutions for the next generation of mobile VR experiences. IEEE Trans. Vis. Comput. Graph. 24, 4 (Apr. 2018), 1535--1544. DOI:https://doi.org/10.1109/TVCG.2018.2794119Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  25. Pietro Lungaro and Konrad Tollmar. 2017. QoE design tradeoffs for foveated content provision. In Proceedings of the 9th International Conference on Quality of Multimedia Experience (QoMEX’17). DOI:https://doi.org/10.1109/QoMEX.2017.7965669Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  26. Twan Maintz. 2005. Digital and medical image processing. Universiteit Utrecht (2005).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  27. Loren Merritt and Rahul Vanam. 2006. x264: A high performance H. 264/AVC encoder. Retrieved from http://neuron2.net/library/avc/overview_x264_v8_5.pdf.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  28. Iman S. Mohammadi, Mahmoud-Reza Hashemi, and Mohammad Ghanbari. 2015. An object-based framework for cloud gaming using player’s visual attention. In Proceedings of the IEEE International Conference on Multimedia Expo Workshops (ICMEW’15). 1--6. DOI:https://doi.org/10.1109/ICMEW.2015.7169781Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  29. Sebastian Möller, Dennis Pommer, Justus Beyer, and Jannis Rake-Revelant. 2013. Factors influencing gaming QoE: Lessons learned from the evaluation of cloud gaming services. In Proceedings of the 4th International Workshop on Perceptual Quality of Systems (PQS’13). 1--5.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  30. Jim Mullin, Lucy Smallwood, Anna Watson, and Gillian Wilson. 2001. New techniques for assessing audio and video quality in real-time interactive communications. IHM-HCI Tutorial 2001, Lille, France. 1--63.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  31. Shruti Patil, Yu Chen, and Tajana Simunic Rosing. 2015. GazeTube: Gaze-Based adaptive video playback for bandwidth and power optimizations. In Proceedings of the IEEE Global Communications Conference (GLOBECOM’15). IEEE, 1--6.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  32. Romass Pauliks, Konstantins Tretjaks, Kirils Belahs, and Romass Pauliks. 2013. A survey on some measurement methods for subjective video quality assessment. In Proceedings of the World Congress on Computer and Information Technology (WCCIT’13). DOI:https://doi.org/10.1109/WCCIT.2013.6618758Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  33. Feng Qian, Lusheng Ji, Bo Han, and Vijay Gopalakrishnan. 2016. Optimizing 360 video delivery over cellular networks. In Proceedings of the 5th Workshop on All Things Cellular: Operations, Applications and Challenges. ACM, 1--6.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  34. Yashas Rai, Marcus Barkowsky, and Patrick Le Callet. 2016. Role of spatio-temporal distortions in the visual periphery in disrupting natural attention deployment. In Proceedings of the Conference on Human Vision and Electronic Imaging (HVEI’16). 1--6. DOI:https://doi.org/10.2352/ISSN.2470-1173.2016.16HVEI-117Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  35. Yashas Rai and Patrick Le Callet. 2017. Do gaze disruptions indicate the perceived quality of non-uniformly coded natural scenes? Electron. Imag. 14 (2017), 104--109. DOI:https://doi.org/10.2352/ISSN.2470-1173.2017.14.HVEI-124Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  36. Michele Rucci, Paul V. McGraw, and Richard J. Krauzlis. 2016. Fixational eye movements and perception. Vis. Res. 118 (2016), 1--4.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  37. Jihoon Ryoo, Kiwon Yun, Dimitris Samaras, Samir R. Das, and Gregory Zelinsky. 2016. Design and evaluation of a foveated video streaming service for commodity client devices. In Proceedings of the 7th International Conference on Multimedia Systems (MMSys’16). ACM, New York, NY, Article 6, 11 pages.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  38. Natela Shanidze, Saeideh Ghahghaei, and Preeti Verghese. 2016. Accuracy of eye position for saccades and smooth pursuit. J. Vis. 16, 15 (2016), 23--23.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  39. Ryan Shea, Jiangchuan Liu, Edith C.-H. Ngai, and Yong Cui. 2013. Cloud gaming: Architecture and performance. IEEE Netw. 27, 4 (2013), 16--21.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  40. Ivan Slivar, Mirko Suznjevic, Lea Skorin-Kapov, and Maja Matijasevic. 2014. Empirical QoE study of in-home streaming of online games. In Proceedings of the 13th Annual Workshop on Network and Systems Support for Games. 1--6.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  41. Rand S. Swenson. 2006. Review of Clinical and Functional Neuroscience. Retrieved from https://www.dartmouth.edu/rswenson/NeuroSci/index.html.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  42. Tobii. 2015. Developer’s Guide Tobii EyeX SDK for C/C++. Retrieved from http://developer-files.tobii.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/03/Developers-Guide-C-Cpp.pdf.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  43. Niraj Tolia, Mahadev Satyanarayanan, and David G. Andersen. 2006. Quantifying interactive user experience on thin clients. Computer 39, 3 (2006), 46--52. DOI:https://doi.org/10.1109/MC.2006.101Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  44. Brian A. Wandell. 1995. Foundations of Vision. Vol. 8. Sinauer Associates, Sunderland, MA.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  45. Zhou Wang and Alan C. Bovik. 2006. Foveated image and video coding. In Digital Video, Image Quality, and Perceptual Coding, Hong Ren Wu and Kamisetty Ramamohan Rao (Eds.). CRC Press, Boca Raton, FL, 431--457.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  46. Zhou Wang, Ligang Lu, and Alan. C. Bovik. 2003. Foveation scalable video coding with automatic fixation selection. IEEE Trans. Image Proc. 12, 2 (Feb. 2003), 243--254. DOI:https://doi.org/10.1109/TIP.2003.809015Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  47. Alireza Zare, Alireza Aminlou, Miska M. Hannuksela, and Moncef Gabbouj. 2016. HEVC-compliant tile-based streaming of panoramic video for virtual reality applications. In Proceedings of the ACM on Multimedia Conference (MM’16). ACM, New York, NY, 601--605.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library

Index Terms

  1. Cloud Gaming with Foveated Video Encoding

          Recommendations

          Comments

          Login options

          Check if you have access through your login credentials or your institution to get full access on this article.

          Sign in

          Full Access

          • Published in

            cover image ACM Transactions on Multimedia Computing, Communications, and Applications
            ACM Transactions on Multimedia Computing, Communications, and Applications  Volume 16, Issue 1
            February 2020
            363 pages
            ISSN:1551-6857
            EISSN:1551-6865
            DOI:10.1145/3384216
            Issue’s Table of Contents

            Copyright © 2020 ACM

            Permission to make digital or hard copies of all or part of this work for personal or classroom use is granted without fee provided that copies are not made or distributed for profit or commercial advantage and that copies bear this notice and the full citation on the first page. Copyrights for components of this work owned by others than the author(s) must be honored. Abstracting with credit is permitted. To copy otherwise, or republish, to post on servers or to redistribute to lists, requires prior specific permission and/or a fee. Request permissions from [email protected].

            Publisher

            Association for Computing Machinery

            New York, NY, United States

            Publication History

            • Published: 17 February 2020
            • Accepted: 1 October 2019
            • Revised: 1 June 2019
            • Received: 1 August 2018
            Published in tomm Volume 16, Issue 1

            Permissions

            Request permissions about this article.

            Request Permissions

            Check for updates

            Qualifiers

            • research-article
            • Research
            • Refereed

          PDF Format

          View or Download as a PDF file.

          PDF

          eReader

          View online with eReader.

          eReader

          HTML Format

          View this article in HTML Format .

          View HTML Format