OnLive gets a launch date - June 17th

D

Dario ff

Where'd That 6th Toe Come From?
Just spotted this over at RPS(Rock, Paper, Shotgun):

http://www.rockpapershotgun.com/2010/03/10/onlive-launches-june-17th/

The OnLive “Games On Demand” service will launch in the US on June 17th for Mac and PC, and it will cost $15/month.
Click to expand...

Launch titles for the streamed-games service include Assassin’s Creed II, Metro 2033 and Prince of Persia: The Forgotten Sands. Which kind of makes sense, because you really will have to be “always on” connected if you want to play the games.
Click to expand...

Does anyone have any thoughts on it? Revolutionary, Great, Ok, Bad, terrible idea, bullshit, the doom of gaming PCs and consoles?

Minimum requirements are a 1.5 mbps connection.
 
Only three launch titles, shitty image quality, inevitable lag and connection issues... I predict epic fail.
 
Huh? Ive heard about this before, and didnt believe this would actually be done. Im no expert on the issue but wouldnt some lag be inevitable? In shooters (especially online) that would be real killjoy, even if the lag was small.
 
Ratty said:
Only three launch titles, shitty image quality, inevitable lag and connection issues... I predict epic fail.
Click to expand...

I agree. It has empty promises and hype written all over it. But we'll see.
 
Possibly a stepping stone that will one day lead to some type of system that changes the way we play games.

Right now at this current time however I see it not being a success.
 
Ratty said:
Only three launch titles, shitty image quality, inevitable lag and connection issues...
Click to expand...

Sums up my expectations pretty much. I was surprised this is coming to reality actually. Unless they have figured a miracle compression algorithm with low latency(which I doubt it) it's bound to fail, at least these years.

Maybe it's too soon, because someone that's not near the USA(that's where their servers are right?) won't have a smooth experience.

One of the features that catched my interest about it is that it'll record the last minutes of your gameplay and store it in your account. You can choose if you want to save some of your last minutes in case you did something extraordinary or worth showing(though that'd be great for something like an old platforms game).

But as BN said, we'll have to wait and see...
 
Don't get me wrong, I think the concept has definite potential, but not in this incarnation and not until there is fiber-optic cabling to every household. Maybe in five years or so.
 
Small games library, high prices, generally customer-unfriendly (pay a fee just to able to "rent" games) and technically very difficult to get working... I say it will crash and burn, possibly run with a loss for a while.
 
You know how I was initially skeptical about this OnLive thing? Well, I was wrong. Very wrong. Behold the future of gaming:

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zpFzpF0msrU[/youtube]
Yes, that's Borderlands being played on a fucking iPad!

A new era is upon us, gentlemen. Processing power and memory size are about to become non-factors for playing video games, and even the most graphically sophisticated triple-A game will be playable on any device capable of connecting to the Internet, rendering video and accepting input. Say farewell to your PCs and Xboxes, to your Core i7s and GeForces - the future is here, and it has no place for them. We are at a point where there are practically no technical obstacles to playing fucking Avatar on your smartphone while busing to work. That's Avatar the movie, in all its CGI glory. Seem far-fetched? All you need to render photorealistic graphics is a large enough server farm - incidentally, that's exactly what OnLive is!

PS: This is the key to defeating video game piracy. There, I said it.
 
-Installed it for the lulz. Expected hilariously bad input lag.

-Went to the Free Trial mode and chose Deus Ex to give this bitch a run.

-Main menu... FUUUUUUUUUU- mouse lag, mouse lag everywhere.

-Uninstalled.


Future of gaming indeed.
 
I gave it a free try months ago and it sucked balls. I wouldn't pay a cent for this service.

1) Input lag. There was a noticeable delay in FEAR 2. It wasn't too bad, however, and I was able to finish my free trial (albeit on easy diff). Then I tried CMR: Dirt, a racing game. That's when the seriousness of the input lag became apparent. Racing games require more precise inputs, but when you're battling with lag, this is impossible. I was constantly driving in a zigzag.

2) Poor graphical quality. The quality of the stream just doesn't cut it. Anyone who cares about the graphics of their games will be somewhat disappointed. This kinda defeats a major part of the purpose of Onlive.

3) Stream periodically stops while you're playing, as Onlive's servers cannot guarantee a constant high-speed connection.

4) The games crash and stutter when the server is over-loaded.

Let's face it, internet isn't fast enough in most areas of the world for Onlive to work well. Unless you live close to an Onlive server park and have a very fast connection, you'll have problems. It works OK with slow-paced games that don't require precise, fast inputs and don't have fancy graphics. But then again, your own PC is probably capable of running those.

I wager that Onlive will be out of business within the next 2-4 years.
 
Well, if it worked as advertised, it would be the present of gaming, rather than the future. :D Two issues must be solved before OnLive becomes gaming's Netflix:

1) Internet connections. This is the greater of the two issues. Majority of Internet users don't have access to Internet connections that allow streaming of HD content. Even for those who do, the speeds aren't anywhere near constant enough to provide consistent quality of the stream. For a service like Netflix this isn't a huge issue, since all communication is one-way, and input lag is a non-factor. This problem will solve itself as fiber-optic connections become widely available, and as mobile carriers begin to offer 4G data transfer rates (real 4G, not the incremental upgrade of 3G that carriers like AT&T and Verizon peddle nowadays under a false moniker). My prediction: five years from now fiber-optic links will be the dominant last-mile technology in urban areas, and a 100 Mbps connection will cost $15/month.

2) Processing power on the server side. Solution is simple - buy moar servers.
 
Nevermind providers like comcast who impose data caps. I'm sorry, played too much vidja games? Have fun not playing vidja games. Or doing much else.
 
^ Yeah, I think it's like 200GB "unofficial" cap or something like that. OnLive is guaranteed to bust through that for all but casual gamers.

before OnLive becomes gaming's Netflix:
Click to expand...

You mean an overpriced renting monopoly? :P
 
Comcast is 250. And it's non-optional, and non-negotiable/nonappealable. It's also why I'll never use comcast. If Verizon or anyother big ISP's refuse to implement them, they'll always have a one up on Comcast.
 
Senna M said:
Don't get me wrong, I think the concept has definite potential, but not in this incarnation and not until there is fiber-optic cabling to every household. Maybe in five years or so.
Click to expand...
Make that 20 years for the states. Fiber-optic to the majority of households in the states is a long, expensive way off. Steam and it's offspring are the wave of the future for now
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top