On-Live, What are your thoughts about it?

clartymarty · 21 Feb 2012 at 13:18

I don’t know if this can be created in 'PC Games' but will have ago anyways. What do you guys thing about On-live, I Know I thought it was a good idea because I didn’t have a computer or the funds to build 1. I have a laptop and I thought it was great that I could play the latest games just by streaming.

What do you think about the On-live box for your TV
What you like about it?
What you doing like about it?
Can you see this taking over consoles or Microsoft/Sony making their own versions of this?

iv-tecman · 21 Feb 2012 at 13:22

Erm, tired it when it was on free trial. IMO, utter garbage however I can see how it 'could' be great given increases in bandwidth etc...

Its a great idea sadly each game i had a go was super low detail, had some type of black edge to the textures and generally looked poor, and didn't perform too well...

I tried it on my laptop using a 50" plasma TV.

No I don't see it taking over from consoles just yet - but it has potential.

Simi · 21 Feb 2012 at 13:30

iv-tecman said:
Erm, tired it when it was on free trial. IMO, utter garbage however I can see how it 'could' be great given increases in bandwidth etc...

Its a great idea sadly each game i had a go was super low detail, had some type of black edge to the textures and generally looked poor, and didn't perform too well...

I tried it on my laptop using a 50" plasma TV.

No I don't see it taking over from consoles just yet - but it has potential.

Totally agree. It's a great idea and could be an awesome service if only the games could be streamed in higher detail than they currently are.
If/when that becomes possible I'll definitely pay for it. I do sometimes use it as a demo service though, being able to play any game free for an hour(if I remember right) is great when on the fence about buying a game.

Megahurtz400 · 21 Feb 2012 at 13:34

I won the Onlive console through work before Xmas, and I still havent even opened it

Sleepery · 21 Feb 2012 at 13:34

There's a huge thread on it if you do a search. General consensus seemed to be that it was potentially great, but just didn't have the bandwidth to support it yet. People with the actual Onlive set-top box seemed to find it better than people streaming over PCs for some reason.

clartymarty · 21 Feb 2012 at 13:35

Yes I also tried it out in its early stage, but Iv'e heard that they are looking towards using higher graphics. Like I said its only talk.

Your right it does have potential, but I think id only use it for Demo's

You can play half an hour? dunno if it is for all games they have, but when I tried it again I wasnt impressed with the amount of games available.

Calm · 21 Feb 2012 at 13:37

I imagine with certain types of games it'll work perfectly fine, but twitch based game have a very perceivable delay that makes them damn near unplayable for me.

ZombieFan · 21 Feb 2012 at 14:07

I think it's pretty good as long as you've got a decent net connection.

I recently played through the first 30 minutes of Just Cause 2 on my old Dell Inspiron 6400 laptop (Core 2 Duo 1.66 GHz, 1 GB) and it played pretty well. There is no chance my laptop could play an installed version of that game.

My net connection is around 12Mb/s. The only problem I have is that it really sucks up your data usage.

valkia · 21 Feb 2012 at 14:44

to me, doesn't interest me at all. I can understand the idea and sounds like it could be great just something is just really uninteresting to me.

cHk4 · 21 Feb 2012 at 14:48

I found it good, I have a really old crusty PC at work and can play games very well over Onlive on it. I like it

The-Plethora · 21 Feb 2012 at 14:56

From what I have read on various forums (not tried it myself) is that people have been mainly positive about it and suprised that it works so well. I am a little suprised that I haven't seen more advertising about it.

It's an attractive idea, all your games on hand from where ever you are, instantly even on lower powered laptops with a controller on a PC or through their micro console with no annoying fan noise or need to upgrade your PC / console regularly.

The only thing I dislike about the idea is there is no physical product such as getting a boxed game, but I suppose that is the way things are going. I hope to get a micro console at some point.

Dauthi · 21 Feb 2012 at 16:41

It remind me of where steam was really when i launched all i will say is it being out there now could create brand recognition for when it speed needed does come.

I'm not saying it will be the next steam just my concerns are the same as i had with steam.

Obviously excludeing the extra lag.

Kosmiche · 21 Feb 2012 at 16:50

Thoughts about it replacing a high end desktop pc for gaming are that the image quality is dire, I'd never move to it because of that.

Its a good way of demoing games, well I say good the image quality is rubbish so it could leave me with a poor impression of a certain game. Played Metro 2033, the quality was shocking and it really left me with no desire to play the game again as the experience was so ghastly. I still intend to purchase the game but my enthusiasm for it has been dimmed somewhat.

ChrisJSY · 21 Feb 2012 at 16:51

Dauthi said:
It remind me of where steam was really when i launched all i will say is it being out there now could create brand recognition for when it speed needed does come.

Bandwidth isn't the issue.

It's the current limitation of physics which won't allow more "speed", unless we have the crazy ideas like subspace communications, quantum etanglement or faster than light comms, you're not getting faster.

Which is the biggest problem if you live far from a onlive server.

--

But the people that seem to enjoy it are those who are oblivious to input delay and aren't bothered by 3rd rate graphics, frame-rates and low resolutions.

Although if costs is the limiting factor, go for it.
Otherwise, stay da hell away!

MeMeMeMe · 22 Feb 2012 at 20:13

ChrisJSY said:
Bandwidth isn't the issue.

It's the current limitation of physics which won't allow more "speed", unless we have the crazy ideas like subspace communications, quantum etanglement or faster than light comms, you're not getting faster.

This is what many game journalists said before they it was released. Afterwards, they ALL changed their tune.

The big problem with Onlive IS the bandwidth.
We had it for a week, and it was very handy for playing games on the tv from the sofa with a low-power laptop. The graphics were noticeably blurry compared to, say, my PC, but for a lot of people they may be the only way to play these games.

However, one member of the family played a lot of game called Fishdom, basically a browser game, and because OnLive streams video, she used up several GB per hour of play, and we had burned through half our 80GB cap in just a couple of days. After that, it had to go.

Shame because it had a lot of features, like the Showcase Arena thingy, where you can watch other people playing games live, and talk to them.

PiKe · 18 Aug 2012 at 15:00

Well they're gone bankrupt and laid off all their staff now.

The service will remain available though.

Spektor · 18 Aug 2012 at 15:14

The future of gaming fo sho, they just came along about 15-20 years too early. You can't have the average user in the US / most of Europe having around 5mbit/s connections and seriously launch a service like this, especially when for it to work properly you have to be pretty close to their data centres.

Utnac · 18 Aug 2012 at 15:25

Everyone thought Steam was garbage in 2004, and now you get these maniacs who won't buy a game anywhere else so just give it time
I'd say.

Of course it will be getting the time to develop which will be tricky.

Sleepery · 18 Aug 2012 at 15:29

RPS are reporting that it's been bought out now, with most of the staff being rehired, so someone's prepared to bet on it. I don't think the infrastructure is up to snuff in the British Isles yet though, needs another 10 years.

FrenchTart · 18 Aug 2012 at 15:45

MeMeMeMe said:
This is what many game journalists said before they it was released. Afterwards, they ALL changed their tune.

The big problem with Onlive IS the bandwidth.
We had it for a week, and it was very handy for playing games on the tv from the sofa with a low-power laptop. The graphics were noticeably blurry compared to, say, my PC, but for a lot of people they may be the only way to play these games.

However, one member of the family played a lot of game called Fishdom, basically a browser game, and because OnLive streams video, she used up several GB per hour of play, and we had burned through half our 80GB cap in just a couple of days. After that, it had to go.

Shame because it had a lot of features, like the Showcase Arena thingy, where you can watch other people playing games live, and talk to them.

I'm afraid you're completely wrong. Bandwidth is *not* the issue. This has been discussed to death in the previous thread(s) and all of our testing using the actual service has shown that bandwidth really is not the limiting factor.