onlive - Is This The Future of Gaming?

Robert1986 · 30 Mar 2009 at 15:59

cheets64 said:
They are trying to reinvent the console.

and major props to them for trying. We need companies out there crazy enough to at least try and shake things up. onlive might not be for the hardcore, but it could big a big hit for casual gamers. If you don't want to upgrade your pc to play crysis, just play the onlive version.

If Nintendo didn't change the way we play games, there would be no xbox 360 or PS3 today.

cheets64 · 30 Mar 2009 at 16:12

Robert1986 said:
and major props to them for trying. We need companies out there crazy enough to at least try and shake things up. onlive might not be for the hardcore, but it could big a big hit for casual gamers. If you don't want to upgrade your pc to play crysis, just play the onlive version.

If Nintendo didn't change the way we play games, there would be no xbox 360 or PS3 today.

I agree about companys trying but they are trying to take on the best with a product that is taking away the simple idea of a console. Why have the big 3 not pushed an idea like this out, because it is just not worth all the headaches.

Is the market big enough for a 5th player, we have the PC market, then the console market, Wii/360/PS3, its already saturated.

Look at the Phantom, plenty of hype, was built on download games only, that was easier to implement than onlive and it failed. The money saved by not making hardware will be eaten up by server and network costs, they will need to have a huge number of subscribers in the first 2 years or it will just bomb.

Robert1986 · 30 Mar 2009 at 18:31

cheets64 said:
Look at the Phantom, plenty of hype, was built on download games only, that was easier to implement than onlive and it failed.

The Phantom failing has nothing to do with onlive. The Phantom came out when writting a letter and sending it using snail mail was faster than email.

Kreeeee · 30 Mar 2009 at 18:42

Robert1986 said:
The Phantom failing has nothing to do with onlive. The Phantom came out when writting a letter and sending it using snail mail was faster than email.

Er... http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Phantom_(game_system)

It's first prototype was in 2004, was due for release in 2006 but ultimately never was released.

TheVoice · 30 Mar 2009 at 18:51

Robert1986 said:
The Phantom failing has nothing to do with onlive. The Phantom came out when writting a letter and sending it using snail mail was faster than email.

The Phantom failing had everything to do with the company making it out to be the most amazing thing ever, and having virtually nothing in terms of hardware, infrastructure or developer/publisher support to show for it. It was obvious the whole thing was going to be a farce from the get-go, I can still remember how ridiculously over-ambitious the company's website was.

OnLive has at least got support from publishers and and something of an infrastructure behind it, but I just don't see how they're going to pull it off just yet. It seems far too good to be true, given the current technology.

kdd · 30 Mar 2009 at 20:03

http://kotaku.com/5190494/playstation-moving-into-the-cloud

soz if it's a repost but now sony are lookin into the onlive system

Tobes · 30 Mar 2009 at 20:16

kdd said:
http://kotaku.com/5190494/playstation-moving-into-the-cloud

soz if it's a repost but now sony are lookin into the onlive system

No they are not. They trademarked the name "PS Cloud". If it is something to do with a cloud system then it has nothing to do with onlive.

BassPunk · 30 Mar 2009 at 21:48

I cant even stream Iplayer or youtube let alone a 720p video in real time at home! Its the future but not for UK home users. Maybe at work it might be possible http://www.speedtest.net/result/340350004.png

dbmzk1 · 31 Mar 2009 at 05:42

This is just not going to work. For a start the lag, which not only would include the time for the signal to get to the server and back, but the time for it to be rendered, compressed, decompressed and displayed would mean any moderately paced game would be unplayable.

Additionally, each connected user would need a dedicated high-end gaming PC at the other end, capable of running any and all games at a solid 60 FPS at max detail at 1280x720, and a second system to compress the video stream in real time. It would require a vast infrastructure that is not only not present, but is not financially viable now or in the foreseeable future. And that is just for 720p.

kdd · 31 Mar 2009 at 14:25

Tobes said:
No they are not. They trademarked the name "PS Cloud". If it is something to do with a cloud system then it has nothing to do with onlive.

I meant according to the article Sony are possibly looking at something similar

Tobes · 31 Mar 2009 at 14:28

kdd said:
I meant according to the article Sony are possibly looking at something similar

Not really. It's just cloud computing. Sony don't need to do anything onlive are doing because the consumer already has a high spec machine under their tv.

VeNT · 2 Apr 2009 at 16:37

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/technology/7976206.stm

in case anyone missed it

Streeteh · 2 Apr 2009 at 16:44

He needs to accept that a large proportion of gamers, the serious ones, the ones that bring in a large quantity of the money, will not put up with even a millisecond more input lag then they have to. He states that the best it offers is 30 to 40 milliseconds of input lag which would just get annoying in any shooter.

Then maybe he'll accept its just too early for his idea.