Quantcast

Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!

OnLive - bringing PC gaming to the masses

NarishmaNarishma Member UncommonPosts: 74

Read this.

I could care less about the hardware itself, as I am a pc enthusiast and always use top of the line hardware, but what this could do for the state of pc gaming might be revolutionary.

Many games never make it to the pc simply because our userbase is small compared to that of the consoles, and PC titles generally sell less copies than those for consoles. 

Ignore the posts by the console fanboys beneath the article and focus on the fact that this machine will play PC games, not proprietary games built for their hardware.  This means that any joe nobody with a decent net connection speed will have the ability to play games as tough on hardware as Crysis at the highest settings without even owning a PC.  This also means that every joe nobody with outdated crap hardware on their pc will be able to do the same without even buying OnLives hardware, but just by subscribing to their service.  How many people subscribe to XBox live?

I really hope this works, and that they gain a large consumer base.  Why?  Simply because that would mean that more and more titles would be developed for the PC, and the best gaming platform on the planet wouldn't be treated like a second class citizen any longer.

Flop or not?.  If they want to come out swinging they're gonna need to do some really heavy advertising to reach console-only types.  They also haven't revealed their subscription model, and this sounds like an incredibly pricey endeavor, so I can't imagine that it will be cheap.  Of course, if this works according to their goals, you would never be forced to purchase new hardware again ever. 

And while I can't see myself buying their hardware, buying a cheap notebook and using their free software platform to game from the hotels I stay in all summer sounds like a great idea.

Comments

  • VrikaVrika Member EpicPosts: 6,690

    That sound like a really good idea. But let's be realistic here, most people don't have fast enough lagless net connections for the idea to really work. People won't be happy if their games lag at primetime and work well only during off-hours when the net has less traffic.

    It's definitely a great idea, maybe something like this will become popular year 2020. But the world isn't quite ready for it yet.

     
  • KanethKaneth Member RarePosts: 2,284
    Originally posted by Vrika


    That sound like a really good idea. But let's be realistic here, most people don't have fast enough lagless net connections for the idea to really work. People won't be happy if their games lag at primetime and work well only during off-hours when the net has less traffic.
    It's definitely a great idea, maybe something like this will become popular year 2020. But the world isn't quite ready for it yet.

     

    I think the make or break point for this service is going to be what games decide to publish via the service. They're going to need a ton of 3rd party support to make this work. Without the games everything else is a moot point, and I'm willing to wager that Microsoft, Sony, Nintendo and many big name PC developers are going to want to protect their own interests.

  • NarishmaNarishma Member UncommonPosts: 74
    Originally posted by Kaneth

    Originally posted by Vrika


    That sound like a really good idea. But let's be realistic here, most people don't have fast enough lagless net connections for the idea to really work. People won't be happy if their games lag at primetime and work well only during off-hours when the net has less traffic.
    It's definitely a great idea, maybe something like this will become popular year 2020. But the world isn't quite ready for it yet.

     

    I think the make or break point for this service is going to be what games decide to publish via the service. They're going to need a ton of 3rd party support to make this work. Without the games everything else is a moot point, and I'm willing to wager that Microsoft, Sony, Nintendo and many big name PC developers are going to want to protect their own interests.

     

    This won't be used for games published for the Xbox, Playstation, or Nintendo consoles.  It will be used for PC games, and pc game developers would profit from this.  According to the article, very little if any changes need to be made to the games already published.  The game you are playing is actually being processed on a pc in a remote facility, what you see on your screen is just a video stream, much like how HD video is streamed to your tv and/or pc, something that has been possible for some time.

    The net connection issue has relevence however, and I agree that this is the main thing that could hold this idea back.  However, from what I understand a 1.5mb connection is plenty to make this work.  I currently use a 5mb connection, and I know that the larger urban areas near where I live offer up to 20mb connection speeds.  In a lot of areas the speed needed to use this product would simply be impossible.  But the communication infrastructure is improving at such a rate that this won't be an issue for very much longer.   You must also realize that the US is far from being the leader in broadband availability and speeds worldwide.  We actually lag quite a bit behind a lot of other areas.  So this product might actually be better recieved in other countries at first than it is here. 

    Really though, the problem of a fast and reliable broadband connection being readily available nationwide will soon be a problem of the past, and while rural areas may not be properly served at the moment, the heaviest population centers already offer the infrastructure needed to make this service work.

  • PinkCatPinkCat Member Posts: 218

    What they are creating is revolutionary by leaps and bounds.  I am glad someone stills cares enough to help keep PC gaming alive.

    -----------------------
    ...I'm in your panties

  • KanethKaneth Member RarePosts: 2,284
    Originally posted by Narishma

    Originally posted by Kaneth

    Originally posted by Vrika


    That sound like a really good idea. But let's be realistic here, most people don't have fast enough lagless net connections for the idea to really work. People won't be happy if their games lag at primetime and work well only during off-hours when the net has less traffic.
    It's definitely a great idea, maybe something like this will become popular year 2020. But the world isn't quite ready for it yet.

     

    I think the make or break point for this service is going to be what games decide to publish via the service. They're going to need a ton of 3rd party support to make this work. Without the games everything else is a moot point, and I'm willing to wager that Microsoft, Sony, Nintendo and many big name PC developers are going to want to protect their own interests.

     

    This won't be used for games published for the Xbox, Playstation, or Nintendo consoles.  It will be used for PC games, and pc game developers would profit from this.  According to the article, very little if any changes need to be made to the games already published.  The game you are playing is actually being processed on a pc in a remote facility, what you see on your screen is just a video stream, much like how HD video is streamed to your tv and/or pc, something that has been possible for some time.

    The net connection issue has relevence however, and I agree that this is the main thing that could hold this idea back.  However, from what I understand a 1.5mb connection is plenty to make this work.  I currently use a 5mb connection, and I know that the larger urban areas near where I live offer up to 20mb connection speeds.  In a lot of areas the speed needed to use this product would simply be impossible.  But the communication infrastructure is improving at such a rate that this won't be an issue for very much longer.   You must also realize that the US is far from being the leader in broadband availability and speeds worldwide.  We actually lag quite a bit behind a lot of other areas.  So this product might actually be better recieved in other countries at first than it is here. 

    Really though, the problem of a fast and reliable broadband connection being readily available nationwide will soon be a problem of the past, and while rural areas may not be properly served at the moment, the heaviest population centers already offer the infrastructure needed to make this service work.

     

    3rd party developers will design their games on whatever platform(s) will serve their game well and earn them the most amount of cash. So in essence, if OnLive is a cheaper way of developing games for the masses, they could just stop developing for consoles, not likely, but there is a chance they might.

    More to the point though, Microsoft has their Live service for both Xbox users and PC users. They also do a lot of releasing of games on multiple platforms including PCs. OnLive will be direct competition with something like Xbox Live, with the major exception of having to go out and purchase a disc for the Xbox games. I doubt OnLive will have the support of Microsoft.

    SOE has their own subscription models and have the ability to pay a single monthly fee to access multiple online only games. OnLive would dip into that pot-o-gold, so I doubt Sony is going to support OnLive, at least not in a meaninful way.

    Blizzard just recently added the ability to merge your WoW account into a battlenet account, and from that point you'll be using that station access to add games to that account. With multiple games in development, they could potentially start charging a flat monthly fee to access WoW, whatever future mmos they make and possibly exclusive subscription only content for their single player games.

    The three above named companies account for a very large portion of the online gaming community. OnLive via their payment model, would potentially dip into the overall profits of developers. Now for smaller developers, OnLive could be the second coming of christ, but for companies that already have their own infrastructure for online gaming and they'll want every dime earned going to line their pockets.

    I just don't see OnLive making a real impact to gaming as a whole. While the theory behind the system is sound, the reality is there is just a lot of factors working against them.

    I could be underestimating the OnLive system as a whole though too.

  • NarishmaNarishma Member UncommonPosts: 74



    3rd party developers will design their games on whatever platform(s) will serve their game well and earn them the most amount of cash. So in essence, if OnLive is a cheaper way of developing games for the masses, they could just stop developing for consoles, not likely, but there is a chance they might.
    More to the point though, Microsoft has their Live service for both Xbox users and PC users. They also do a lot of releasing of games on multiple platforms including PCs. OnLive will be direct competition with something like Xbox Live, with the major exception of having to go out and purchase a disc for the Xbox games. I doubt OnLive will have the support of Microsoft.
    SOE has their own subscription models and have the ability to pay a single monthly fee to access multiple online only games. OnLive would dip into that pot-o-gold, so I doubt Sony is going to support OnLive, at least not in a meaninful way.
    Blizzard just recently added the ability to merge your WoW account into a battlenet account, and from that point you'll be using that station access to add games to that account. With multiple games in development, they could potentially start charging a flat monthly fee to access WoW, whatever future mmos they make and possibly exclusive subscription only content for their single player games.
    The three above named companies account for a very large portion of the online gaming community. OnLive via their payment model, would potentially dip into the overall profits of developers. Now for smaller developers, OnLive could be the second coming of christ, but for companies that already have their own infrastructure for online gaming and they'll want every dime earned going to line their pockets.
    I just don't see OnLive making a real impact to gaming as a whole. While the theory behind the system is sound, the reality is there is just a lot of factors working against them.
    I could be underestimating the OnLive system as a whole though too.

     

    Your not understanding how this thing is going to work.  This isn't like steam, xbox live, or playstation home.  This isn't simply a digital distribution service, and games will not be directly developed for this service alone.  If you were to play an mmo through this service you would still have to pay the mmo subscription fee.  This will not be competition for SOE, rather, it would bring them further profit.

    Xbox live is a completely different segment.  This will not nor will it ever have the ability to play xbox or any other console platform's games. 

    What this service claims to be offering is the following:  all rendering/processing of a pc game is done at their facilities.  User input from gamepad and/or keyboard and mouse is sent to that pc through their hardware/software infrastructure.  Output from the game (audio/video, etc.)  is then streamed to your home.  So in effect you get to play pc games at very high settings without having to invest thousands of dollars in a decent gaming rig.  In fact, you need not even own a pc yourself. 

    Potentially this could be competition for consoles, but it will only benefit pc game developers, and this includes valve/steam, soe, and any other online distribution service.  This could potentially add millions to the overall pc game player base.

    The subscription fee to use this service would be completely seperate and in addition to any fees you would pay to play a subscription based game, so no mmo developer would suffer from this platform.  They could only benefit.  The subscription fee you would be paying is so you can use their on-site hardware to play games from your location.  Any game you decide to play you would have to purchase through them, and the publisher of said game would profit.

  • drag9999drag9999 Member Posts: 252

    I can see a boycott by Intel/AMD, because this will mean less products will be sold.

  • This seems to be meant for a select group of individuals and when the rest of the world catches up the service won't be that attractive anymore.

    The hype is not justified in my opinion.

  • RedwoodSapRedwoodSap Member Posts: 1,235

    How can I order it?

    image

  • xdn119xdn119 Member Posts: 1

    Originally posted by RedwoodSap


    How can I order it?



     

    i also wander to know it haha

Sign In or Register to comment.