• After 15+ years, we've made a big change: Android Forums is now Early Bird Club. Learn more here.

OnLive - Future Of Video Gaming?

P

Papworth

Lurker
What are all your thoughts on this? For those that aren't aware, OnLive is going to be worlds "highest performance" games on demand service. It's currently only in BETA testing but supposedly the official OnLive release date will be June 17th 2010.

Opinions? Will it take off like the 360 and PS3?
 
That has got to be the worst web design for the target audience I have seen yet. It looks like a magazine or newspaper web page. Let's hope the actual product is better than the web design.
 
Its the way of the future. However I'm not liking the price of $14.95 a MONTH... Course the console will be free but still.

It better have 99% of all games...
 
Covert_Death said:
looks okay but i just don't see it being that big of a hit, i mean how is multiplayer supposed to work? can it connect to PC games XBOX360 games? or PS3 games??? or ONLY onLive games.. cause that would suck and would stop ALOT of people from getting it
Click to expand...


Consoles aren't the only way to play games, there are a lot of people like myself that prefer PC's. Consoles can't match the quality of a good gaming PC, plus I hate game controllers, keyboard is much better IMO.
 
Lol... its not going to release.

I've been seeing adds for that for like 3 years now. Each claims "its coming out at ______ time".

I don't think it is going to catch on at all for a number of reasons.

1. You pay a monthly subscription
2. You pay for the game you want.
3. Infrastructure can't handle it.
4. People on pc have way higher standards than onlive can deliver.
5. Bandwidth caps being discussed.


Ok. On steam you can download a game as many times as you want to after purchasing it and there is no monthly fee. however, with online if you buy a game and don't pay your subscription fee you can't play a game you own.. that is a ripoff anyway you say it.

In America we don't have the capacity to handle millions of gamers playing.. I don't think people who believe "onlive" will work really stop to think about this. I know breakthroughs have been made in multicored processors and such..but, think about how many games lag on pc as it is.. with no interference.

Now Imagen this. Your motions being sent through the computer, the computer having to calculate the movement, sending it back and keeping in sync the entire time.. just not practicle.. if your computer ever lags on youtube.. imagen that except a million times worse.

Finally anyone who wants to game on pc is willing to pay for it. go to overclock.net and look at how much time/energy/money anyone into pc gaming puts into their rigs. I myself am dropping 1,300$ on a rig this year and that is *nothing* compared to how much some people put into it over time.

there is no way onlive (if it even works once a million users are all fighting for bandwidth/processor space) will be able to deliver the same experience as a 1000$+ computer and to think it can would make the term "delusional" an understatement.

Think about this.. a 12 core processor cost 1,000$ right now. Now think about how many would be needed to handle a million players. Think about how many servers/how much ram/how much everything would be needed.

Now think about the fact that people want to play crysis for high end graphics..
 
I think it will be the new way for computer gaming to go. As far as we all are concerned, it's all about money for game companies. Where PC is getting less and less attention, because of the consoles and the rapid technology that is provided for consoles those days.

We can always argue about which console is better, but facts now is that computer suffers because of the consoles and piracy. So they don't earn enough by developing it for computers, that is where I think OnLive will have the biggest benefits:

It erases the problem most computer developed games have at the moment, piracy.
For many people, they think getting a good computer costs money, this myth will be gone by having online servers since they can't get the games normal way there unless you hack the server and drain the info.

Snow_Fox: There is a system like this implanted in Norway, which have been some sort of talk where a ISP there provide servers with games on it. So far around 20,000 people use it everyday and they have no problem playing high end games like Crysis, COD MW2, CSS and those kind of games. The biggest problem though with those kind of systems is the internet you need to have. In that ISP's case, they have 3 different connections they sell.

1) 10 mbit in/out
2) 30 mbit in/out
3) 100 mbit in/out

Which shows that you need a quite good connection to make use of it and computer screen for that matter.


OnLive connection towards PS3/Xbox:

To be honest, I'm not sure if this is possible at the moment. While it also depends on Microsoft slightly as well, since if it will connect to one of the consoles, my bet would be Xbox Live. One of my reasons for that is the economical problems Sony have at the moment, where they can't afford to merge connections with a OnLive system.

But I do agree on the price system itself is way off and the users internet will need to have top notch connection to take adventage of online servers like this, but is it realistic? Yes, very so. Why? Quite many years ago, people and pc users alike said Consoles where dead with PS1 and N64. If look into it today, consoles is neck to neck with computers and that's why computer play need to envolve into something different.

Just my few cents.

Jeted-
 
Not the future at all. You have to pay monthly AND pay full price for games.

It's just a "cheaper" way for people with bad PCs to play games. But as it's not a one off payment, the cost will catch up on you.

Also it will lag, what you are seeing on your screen is not what the computer in their server is seeing, add that onto monitor lag, as well as the lag connecting to the game server. Must be unbearable. I'm guessing the videos will also be quite low quality HD streams, with a bit off loss which would be weird.
 
you will prbably need a really great connection speed to run this.
i dont think it will work and i am happy to stick with my PS3
 
I just started my Beta Testing for Onlive and I gotta say it is AWESOME. I can't go into many details but I have 0 lag in playing any games and there is little to no load times. I do have something like a 28Mbps/20Mbps internet connection so that probably helps a lot but either way OnLive is great and beyond any expectations I originally had for it.

I noticed some of the games I could play were using Xbox 360 controls so I am not sure if maybe you will be able to play with console gamers using OnLive. I will probably always keep my Xbox 360 and PS3 and play them more than OnLive but all of the "bad" things being said about it seem to be far from the truth from what I have seen so far. (I am not in anyway affiliated with OnLive :P)

- Scincidae
 
Scincidae said:
I just started my Beta Testing for Onlive and I gotta say it is AWESOME. I can't go into many details but I have 0 lag in playing any games and there is little to no load times. I do have something like a 28Mbps/20Mbps internet connection so that probably helps a lot but either way OnLive is great and beyond any expectations I originally had for it.

I noticed some of the games I could play were using Xbox 360 controls so I am not sure if maybe you will be able to play with console gamers using OnLive. I will probably always keep my Xbox 360 and PS3 and play them more than OnLive but all of the "bad" things being said about it seem to be far from the truth from what I have seen so far. (I am not in anyway affiliated with OnLive :P)

- Scincidae
Click to expand...

I also have a 1yr contract for free via online beta testers, haven't been able to test it yet, need to get my wired connection again sometime, such a shame it don't work via my wifi or mobile net :(

But I'l have wired again soon hopefully :)
 
the concept of thin client gaming on a mass scale for home users is total pie in the sky. its simply not possible to achieve remotely rendered games with low latency on current broadband infrastructures.

like Natal and 3ds, these is another technology that promises the world and significantly under delivers
 
mgillespie said:
the concept of thin client gaming on a mass scale for home users is total pie in the sky. its simply not possible to achieve remotely rendered games with low latency on current broadband infrastructures.

like Natal and 3ds, these is another technology that promises the world and significantly under delivers
Click to expand...


They're not released. Way to bring in your Sony fanboyism to even something like this...
 
the op asked what people thought about onlive, I responded.

forgive me, I thought free thought/speech was allowed here.

it seems its only allowed if it agreea with yours. I assume you also thought the Nazi movement was a good idea too..
 
mgillespie said:
the op asked what people thought about onlive, I responded.

forgive me, I thought free thought/speech was allowed here.

it seems its only allowed if it agreea with yours. I assume you also thought the Nazi movement was a good idea too..
Click to expand...

Where did I say that you shouldn't speak your mind? Am I not allowed to be annoyed with it? I just simply said that this topic has nothing to do with Natal and 3DS, but instead, it has to do with OnLive. You have never touched it, seen it, experienced it, etc etc.

Activision COO, Thomas Tippl, on Nintendo 3DS: "It's great to see that first parties are coming out with new innovations. I was particularly impressed by the 3DS, and it got a great reception. It's a brilliant product. Nintendo's figured out the glasses--or the lack thereof--are key."

Or is he just another one of those naive people on the Nintendo bandwagon? Anybody that praises Nintendo must be on it.

How in the world can you assume that I thought the Nazi movement was a good idea too? There's absolutely NO basis for that.
 
Vihzel said:
Activision COO, Thomas Tippl, on Nintendo 3DS: "It's great to see that first parties are coming out with new innovations. I was particularly impressed by the 3DS, and it got a great reception. It's a brilliant product. Nintendo's figured out the glasses--or the lack thereof--are key."

Or is he just another one of those naive people on the Nintendo bandwagon? Anybody that praises Nintendo must be on it.
Click to expand...

You clearly have no idea how insestious the gaming industry is.

Publishers HAVE to talk up products, simply because they have exclusive titles in production etc.

You really can't believe ANYTHING you read from the inside (including gaming blogs and such), it's only independents that can be trusted and they really are few and far between prior to a products launch.
 
mgillespie said:
the concept of thin client gaming on a mass scale for home users is total pie in the sky. its simply not possible to achieve remotely rendered games with low latency on current broadband infrastructures.

like Natal and 3ds, these is another technology that promises the world and significantly under delivers
Click to expand...

Until you've tried it or at least seen it at work for awhile you have no idea if it works or not. You're just blowing smoke.
 
thekarens said:
Until you've tried it or at least seen it at work for awhile you have no idea if it works or not. You're just blowing smoke.
Click to expand...

I know I can just about remote desktop on my LAN, in 2D at acceptable quality, and trying it over the internet is hopeless due to latency. This is ONLY 2D with lots of easilly compressible frames (as windows desktop, lots of areas stay the same frame by frame).

Common sense says that OnLive haven't invented time travel or some magic compression algorithm that makes huge data tiny and requires nothing to decompress.....

How easy do you think it will be to remotely render 3D frames for a million users at 30FPS? Basically the amount of hardware they will need (and bandwidth infrastructure) is beyond comprehension.
 
mgillespie said:
You clearly have no idea how insestious the gaming industry is.

Publishers HAVE to talk up products, simply because they have exclusive titles in production etc.

You really can't believe ANYTHING you read from the inside (including gaming blogs and such), it's only independents that can be trusted and they really are few and far between prior to a products launch.
Click to expand...

The thing is... who is truly "independent"? Even in the political world, independents will lean one way or the other.

I wonder if he was to say that it was a failure if you would be saying the same thing. I wonder how Sony Wand will be...
 
the only independants are non commercial which is why people that believe things the see and hear on the internet are frankly idiots.

the only 2 sources I really lay any trust in are the BBC and Reuters. everything else is out the for commercial gain and has advertisers, partners and sleeeping partners to keep happy.

as for natal and move, nobody knows until its in consumers hands, but from what I saw of e3, the move looked accurate and responsive with a wide choice of game genres from casual to hardcore, natal demo relied on fakery and Wii ripoffs.

this is what I saw too:

E3 2010: Microsoft Kinect demonstration 'extremely well choreographed but fake' - AllAboutTheGames

however when something promises so much some people just want to believe
 
Vihzel said:
BBC? lol Sorry, I have to stop now.
Click to expand...

I agree sometimes the BBC has editoral bias, (they LOVE apple stuff), but their UK outfit are totally non-commercial (funded by licence-fee payers), they are supposed to be totally unbiased, and 99% of their reporting is. Their non-UK operations are commercial (that's why you see ads if you access the BBC site from outside the UK).

You clearly don't understand how things work.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom