OnLive goes live on June 17 for PCs and Macs

[aigomorla]

I still dont see how this is better then you just getting a dedicated video card and getting the games on STEAM when there on sale.

You can OWN The game with unlimited downloads on STEAM, for less then 10 dollars on sales.
And steam doesnt charge you a download fee, or a unlimited download fee, or even a membership fee.

Im sorry, the thinking on this still doesnt make sense.

If you have a onboard video card... low ball hardware... your not a gamer.
If your not a gamer.. then you'd be more then happy at addictedgames.com

If you think this is a solution for you to game on your low end laptop... once again you have a series problem in your thinking.
(Wannabe Gamer is something that i would probably call you..)
A low end laptop is not designed for gaming... Cloud gaming just doesnt work unless its a low bandwith game.


What im trying to say is the "average" PC gamer doesnt get a low ball video card.
A low ball videocard isnt even in the vocabulary of a PC gamer.


And the fee's are just stupid once again.. charging on a daily basis, and then charging almost full retail price for unlimited?
Umm.. isnt that like charging for DEMO's?

 

[quadomatic]

I still dont see how this is better then you just getting a dedicated video card and getting the games on STEAM when there on sale.

You can OWN The game with unlimited downloads on STEAM, for less then 10 dollars on sales.
And steam doesnt charge you a download fee, or a unlimited download fee, or even a membership fee.

Im sorry, the thinking on this still doesnt make sense.

If you have a onboard video card... low ball hardware... your not a gamer.
If your not a gamer.. then you'd be more then happy at addictedgames.com

If you think this is a solution for you to game on your low end laptop... once again you have a series problem in your thinking.
(Wannabe Gamer is something that i would probably call you..)
A low end laptop is not designed for gaming... Cloud gaming just doesnt work unless its a low bandwith game.


What im trying to say is the "average" PC gamer doesnt get a low ball video card.
A low ball videocard isnt even in the vocabulary of a PC gamer.


And the fee's are just stupid once again.. charging on a daily basis, and then charging almost full retail price for unlimited?
Umm.. isnt that like charging for DEMO's?

They don't really charge on a daily basis, its 3 or 5 days. Prices aren't toooo bad.

Just because most of us at AT wouldn't care for something like this doesn't mean that there aren't plenty of other people out there who will enjoy this (namely console gamers once the microconsole shows up)

 

[taltamir]

I see a huge big humongous problem with the "play on a laptop with IGP" theory...

onLive does NOT support WiFi, period! WiFi introduces too much extra lag to its already laggy product. As such you must have a wired ethernet connection to use a laptop with it.

You know what they call a laptop that is tethered to one spot where you have an ethernet cable and cannot be moved from it at your leisure? a desktop!

 

[quadomatic]

I see a huge big humongous problem with the "play on a laptop with IGP" theory...

onLive does NOT support WiFi, period! WiFi introduces too much extra lag to its already laggy product. As such you must have a wired ethernet connection to use a laptop with it.

You know what they call a laptop that is tethered to one spot where you have an ethernet cable and cannot be moved from it at your leisure? a desktop!

They said it would support WiFi soon. Just give it a bit...I know they "launched" it, but this is really more like an open beta.

 

[taltamir]

They said it would support WiFi soon. Just give it a bit...I know they "launched" it, but this is really more like an open beta.

Thanks for this info; I was ignorant of that fact. the FAQ on their website says no support, if someone said otherwise in an interview then good for them (they should update their FAQ).

Although, I have seen them promise the moon and stars in interviews thus far

 

[quadomatic]

Thanks for this info; I was ignorant of that fact. the FAQ on their website says no support, if someone said otherwise in an interview then good for them (they should update their FAQ).

Although, I have seen them promise the moon and stars in interviews thus far

Personally, I still wonder how they'll compensate for the additional latency issues caused by using WiFi, but we'll see.

 

[Scouzer]

Personally, I still wonder how they'll compensate for the additional latency issues caused by using WiFi, but we'll see.

I used to use WIFI exclusively in my home before I got around to running ethernet. It added a massive oh noes 10ms of lag versus a wired connection.

It's not a big deal. All the WIFI stuff is FUD.

Anyway, tried OnLive today, pretty cool. I'll probably use it when games like GTA IV that run like shit on any PC will probably work better over OnLive.

 

[Red Storm]

Just a heads up, but they do support WIFI now. Though technically I've been running OnLive with a bridged WIFI from the beginning, it's nice to see them officially move out from the wired only stance.

I still haven't actually bought any games with them (it's a great demo'er), but I do think it's neat being able to play the latest games on a laptop that - before OnLive - had no business even dreaming of such things. :awe:

Looking forward to seeing their micro console in action.

 

[Nintendesert]

They just dumped the monthly fees. Seems like they are grasping for users now.

 

[skyofavalon]

Its the ultimate demo service.Get to play around with the full game for 30 minutes.Games are way too much money.

 

[taltamir]

They just dumped the monthly fees. Seems like they are grasping for users now.

Eh... with the monthly fee they offered a more expensive alternative to anything else on the market... this isn't a greenfield project. nearly every single gamer on earth already HAS a PC or a console. So they cannot say "well, our monthly fee is LESS then buying a new console"... it is an added cost.

Buying a game for existing PC: 50$
Buying a game for existing console: 60$
Buying a game for onLive: 60$ + monthly fee + buy a mini console (or already own a PC)

This made them the most expensive, and people are cheap. By dropping the fee they are at least on an even field with a console.
A monthly fee would only suit their model if and when they already have tons of users. In such a case those users are incentivized to pay the fee or lose access to all their already purchased games. And also consider the fee an equivalent a console / PC upgrade if they have been using onLive to the exclusion of consoles.

I don't see this move as "grasping for users" as much as "not being totally insane and actually trying to compete realistically"...
now, I happen to think that it is not enough and that they still provide the inferior service and that they will fail (in fact I hope they fail; due to reasons I have detailed before). But being less crazy and actually competing in the market is not really a sign of failure...

 

[htwingnut]

The only way they'll survive is to eliminate fees to buy individual games, and offer a monthly fee to play any game in their catalog. I'd pay $25/mo for something like that. The quality sucks, and the lag is kinda annoying but $25/mo would save me lots of money from blowing it on games that cost $40-$50 that suck.

 

[wirednuts]

ok now i get it. i finally tried this on a 6mb connection and im IMPRESSED. basically, it plays dirt2 on my crappy laptop just about as good as my gaming pc does. the resolution even looks great becasue im on a smaller screen. the ONLY problem is the input lag, but even on my wireless connection its a lot better then you would think.

this isnt for people who already have gaming pc's... this is for ipod/cellphone/nettop users. this service is going to be around for a LONG time if they can figure out the pricing. cloud computing is taking over everything else, these guys are just pushing the present envelope but it looks like they are off to a great start!

 

[Nintendesert]

The prices for a competent gaming computer are coming way down, and with the Fusion type processors even the netbook and notebook computers will be playing games at a better resolution with better quality than this can deliver.

The fact that they did drop their pricing scheme indicates an underlying business model problem and a lack of actual users. When you see businesses this early starting to make dramatic changes it indicates there is a problem.

I suspect they won't be in operation for the long term. Servers and the bandwidth costs will exceed what a cheap fusion type CPU will be able to deliver and with the big ISPs all moving towards capping bandwidth and in general having substandard quality the momentum for this isn't moving towards where they've positioned themselves.

 

[PingSpike]

Without the monthly fee they are closer to price competitive with consoles which do the same thing better. That said, the monthly fee will be back eventually. I don't see how they can afford to build and run data centers all over the country without it. And I doubt game companies are going to just give them licenses to their titles so that cost hasn't disappeared either.

This is a solution searching for a problem. Some one mentioned its good for demos, but I don't think their business model is to build a country wide network of powerful (and likely expensive) data centers to advertise other people's products for free.

 

[taltamir]

Without the monthly fee they are closer to price competitive with consoles which do the same thing better. That said, the monthly fee will be back eventually. I don't see how they can afford to build and run data centers all over the country without it. And I doubt game companies are going to just give them licenses to their titles so that cost hasn't disappeared either.

This is a solution searching for a problem. Some one mentioned its good for demos, but I don't think their business model is to build a country wide network of powerful (and likely expensive) data centers to advertise other people's products for free.

This is meant as a solution against:
1. Second hand market.
2. Modding (creating extra value for the consumer for free, making them less inclined to buy new games / DLC).
3. Piracy.

The actual claimed solutions ("play on anything") are just a red herring.

The idea is to demonstrate that it is possible to do that, and get companies to release games as onLive exclusives. Such exclusives cannot be pirated, resold, or modded and are lost if onLive closes (forcing repurchase from whatever streaming distributer replaces them).
As for where their money would come from... well, they do expect to get an increasing cut from the sale of each game (due to the above 3 reasons), but they will need to, realistically, include a monthly subscription fee as well.

 

[Scouzer]

Without the monthly fee they are closer to price competitive with consoles which do the same thing better. That said, the monthly fee will be back eventually. I don't see how they can afford to build and run data centers all over the country without it. And I doubt game companies are going to just give them licenses to their titles so that cost hasn't disappeared either.

This is a solution searching for a problem. Some one mentioned its good for demos, but I don't think their business model is to build a country wide network of powerful (and likely expensive) data centers to advertise other people's products for free.

Perhaps they'll introduce a monthly fee only if you want to play a game in "HD". It'd require say a 15mbps and would produce ingame quality similar to "High" in most games.

 

[n7]

Yeah i tried this out now that it's free.

Pretty slick interface, & definitely something i can see casual gamers w/ crappy PCs/notebooks taking advantage of.
Absolutely no point for anyone with a half decent PC though.

I personally found the lag unplayable, but i imagine they don't have servers really close to my location.

The rather neat thing about this is you can basically use it as a way to try out games (free demo essentially), for games that don't have demos.

 

[Lonbjerg]

I used to use WIFI exclusively in my home before I got around to running ethernet. It added a massive oh noes 10ms of lag versus a wired connection.

It's not a big deal. All the WIFI stuff is FUD.

Anyway, tried OnLive today, pretty cool. I'll probably use it when games like GTA IV that run like shit on any PC will probably work better over OnLive.

WiFi is HALF-duplex, wired is FULL duplex...google it.
WiFi dosnt't hold a candle to wired connection.

 

[Scouzer]

WiFi is HALF-duplex, wired is FULL duplex...google it.
WiFi dosnt't hold a candle to wired connection.

If you say so. I used it for years.

 

[Lonbjerg]

If you say so. I used it for years.

Are you being deliberatly "dumb"?

Wifi IS half-duplex.
You can send OR recieve, not both.
Unlike a wired connection (full duplex) where yo can send AND recieve at the same time.
It's nothing I just say, those are the facts.

Try plugging a wired connection in...the difference WILL be noticable.
Deny that and you are lying.

 

[Rebel44]

This is meant as a solution against:
1. Second hand market.
2. Modding (creating extra value for the consumer for free, making them less inclined to buy new games / DLC).
3. Piracy.

The actual claimed solutions ("play on anything") are just a red herring.

The idea is to demonstrate that it is possible to do that, and get companies to release games as onLive exclusives. Such exclusives cannot be pirated, resold, or modded and are lost if onLive closes (forcing repurchase from whatever streaming distributer replaces them).
As for where their money would come from... well, they do expect to get an increasing cut from the sale of each game (due to the above 3 reasons), but they will need to, realistically, include a monthly subscription fee as well.

1. Nobody is crazy enough to make their game OnLive exclusive - you would likely get less revenue from such game than what lots of indies get from Steam for some 5$ game.

2. Modding isnt considered problem by developers.

3. Steam is already killing used PC games market.

4. Providing such service is very expensive for OnLive and I dont think they can generate enough revenue to survive in long term.

5. Monthly data limint of many ISPs dont help.

 

[Scouzer]

Are you being deliberatly "dumb"?

Wifi IS half-duplex.
You can send OR recieve, not both.
Unlike a wired connection (full duplex) where yo can send AND recieve at the same time.
It's nothing I just say, those are the facts.

Try plugging a wired connection in...the difference WILL be noticable.
Deny that and you are lying.

Alright, sure. I've gamed for years on WIFI and noticed zero difference the day I plugged in. Whatever you say.

 

[dguy6789]

Are you being deliberatly "dumb"?

Wifi IS half-duplex.
You can send OR recieve, not both.
Unlike a wired connection (full duplex) where yo can send AND recieve at the same time.
It's nothing I just say, those are the facts.

Try plugging a wired connection in...the difference WILL be noticable.
Deny that and you are lying.

Any of the highest level pro FPS players could play on a good Wifi connection and they wouldn't notice.

 

[taltamir]

1. Nobody is crazy enough to make their game OnLive exclusive - you would likely get less revenue from such game than what lots of indies get from Steam for some 5$ game.

2. Modding isnt considered problem by developers.

3. Steam is already killing used PC games market.

4. Providing such service is very expensive for OnLive and I dont think they can generate enough revenue to survive in long term.

5. Monthly data limint of many ISPs dont help.

all reasons why onlive will fail. I said what it is meant to do, not that it is a good idea.
But I do have some corrections:
1. content owners have proven to be stupid enough to sabotage themselves in the past.
2. this is wrong, they do consider it a problem... modding is a free alternative to DLC, if there are mods, they (believe that they) cannot possibly sell DLCs.
3. Steam does a good job of this, yes, but steam games can be pirated (via a hacked steam executable).
4&5. which is why they would fail.