lostatsea Posted March 26, 2009 Share Posted March 26, 2009 OnLive promises on-demand, streaming games So supposedly this is going to replace console. Its a box that hooks to your TV and to the internet and you can stream games just like watching a video on youtube. Here is the article. http://videogames.yahoo.com/feature/new-tech-could-make-consoles-obsolete/1299562 Here is the official site. My computer at work doesn't have flash so i can't really check it out http://www.onlive.com Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
desensitizedbyu Posted March 26, 2009 Share Posted March 26, 2009 I don't play many new video game consoles solely because of how expensive they are and how cheap I am, but if this works I'd buy it. It seems to good to be true and you know what they say about that. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lostatsea Posted March 26, 2009 Author Share Posted March 26, 2009 I don't play many new video game consoles solely because of how expensive they are and how cheap I am, but if this works I'd buy it. It seems to good to be true and you know what they say about that. True...I haven't bought a new system since Xbox. I like video games and I think if I did buy a new system I would play it all day and night long. That is the last think I need. This would be fun to try once it is up and running. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
desensitizedbyu Posted March 26, 2009 Share Posted March 26, 2009 Agreed. That is another reason I don't buy new video games, no time. The newest system I have on that is the DS and I get sucked into those games. I want Pokemon Platinum though haha. Last game I played was the Zelda one, soo fun. How much will this cost?As we get closer to our launch we will be disclosing more details about pricing and availability. Damn. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest smccown13 Posted March 26, 2009 Share Posted March 26, 2009 I don't play many new video game consoles solely because of how expensive they are and how cheap I am, but if this works I'd buy it. It seems to good to be true and you know what they say about that. True...I haven't bought a new system since Xbox. I like video games and I think if I did buy a new system I would play it all day and night long. That is the last think I need. This would be fun to try once it is up and running. Yeah..nothing like starting a game and looking at the clock and it's already 5 a.m. That was my problem. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
andrew13 Posted March 26, 2009 Share Posted March 26, 2009 i read this earlier today, and it'll never work i bet. no big ticket game is going to be developed for a flat rate monthly subscription, and i think most people are like me in that they will not pay $60 for a new game and not get a physical copy. i have no problem with the cheap stuff on the arcade, where if my xbox fails i don't lose much money... but for a $60 game i'd be pissed. plus if the company ever were to go belly up, like they likely would fast (M$ or $ony would buy them if they were real competition) they would just shut down the servers and you'd be SOL. like that stupid yahoo music service did last year. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kidamnesiac Posted March 26, 2009 Share Posted March 26, 2009 Our internet is going to have to come a long way before it can handle streaming 1080p games with the quality of MGS4, but this does intrigue me. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
andrew13 Posted March 26, 2009 Share Posted March 26, 2009 oh, i forgot the main reason this will fail. no retailer will carry it. Walmart, Kmart, Best Buy, and the rest of them all make a killing on game sales. if all they have to sell you is the initial console, they get screwed and cut out a ton of their profits. without shelf space, you're left with either infomercials or online sites like amazon, and i doubt most americans would buy one like that. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
amsteel Posted March 26, 2009 Share Posted March 26, 2009 I liked this better when they did this 15 years ago and called it Sega Channel. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mediocore Posted March 26, 2009 Share Posted March 26, 2009 Cloud gaming is years away -- too many bandwidth restrictions currently. It'll be pretty cool once they fine-tune it and figure out a proper distribution model though. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
flicker Posted March 26, 2009 Share Posted March 26, 2009 yeah, if this gets reliable, we might see an impact, but right now, i cant even stream on netflix in full quality with a reliable connection very often. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
smailtronic Posted March 26, 2009 Share Posted March 26, 2009 Cloud gaming is years away -- too many bandwidth restrictions currently. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rtw88 Posted March 26, 2009 Share Posted March 26, 2009 i read this earlier today, and it'll never work i bet. no big ticket game is going to be developed for a flat rate monthly subscription, and i think most people are like me in that they will not pay $60 for a new game and not get a physical copy. i have no problem with the cheap stuff on the arcade, where if my xbox fails i don't lose much money... but for a $60 game i'd be pissed. plus if the company ever were to go belly up, like they likely would fast (M$ or $ony would buy them if they were real competition) they would just shut down the servers and you'd be SOL. like that stupid yahoo music service did last year. I think you're wrong on some points here. There are tons of gamers who don't need physical copies of games. Look at Steam. They're making massive amounts of profits by making their games downloadable. Also I doubt you would lose the games if your system crashed. I would assume and hope that it would be account based like Steam, where you just log in to an account, and all of the games are accessible to you. I think you're right about servers though. It would be like Hellgate London. My friend paid like $60 for it last year, and I believe they've taken down all the servers now. Maybe they could work out some kind of contract with the gaming companies that they have to host the game for a certain amount of time. This is definitely where gaming is going though. No manufacturing costs for the companies = huge profits. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sgoodcore Posted March 26, 2009 Share Posted March 26, 2009 Until the US can get some high-end broadband, our speeds are a 1/10th most developed nations, services like this are going to flounder. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
andrew13 Posted March 26, 2009 Share Posted March 26, 2009 where i live, the internet sucks ass. there is a lot of rural land in the US that real fast internet is years away, or decades. i have DSL and i'm lucky to get 25K/sec on torrents. i left the 360 on for 2 and a half days to try and download Halo Wars demo and it was only like 70% there, so i said fuck it and just bought it. last week out DSL was out for 2 days for no reason at all, the whole southern half the county was that way. this may fly on college campuses and major cities, but any sort of smaller town or rural area is going to be totally left out. and i think the people in small towns and rural areas are some of the most hardcore gamers, since we have nothing else to do with our time. i only talk to about 30 people around here, and 20 of them have a 360 and about half of those are on live nightly. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mediocore Posted March 26, 2009 Share Posted March 26, 2009 I have FiOS and it's way fucking fast. Wish everybody could get their hands on it. I'm getting 16MB down/3.5MB up according to: http://www.dslreports.com/stest Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kirbypuckett Posted March 26, 2009 Share Posted March 26, 2009 No thanks. I want to play my games even if the Internet is down. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
andrew13 Posted March 26, 2009 Share Posted March 26, 2009 i got 216k down, 84k up... which i have never seen close to either of those speeds. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sonix Posted March 27, 2009 Share Posted March 27, 2009 I have trouble believing that little box harbors enough juice to play graphical intensive games. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rtw88 Posted March 27, 2009 Share Posted March 27, 2009 I've got great internet. It's just Cox, but according to that test I get 14.2 down, 1.1 up. My internet also never cuts out. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rtw88 Posted March 27, 2009 Share Posted March 27, 2009 I have trouble believing that little box harbors enough juice to play graphical intensive games. Skeptical? So were we, until we actually sat down and played with an OnLive box last week. Even a blisteringly fast racer like Burnout Paradise was totally playable over the service, and top-spec shooter Crysis: Warhead -- which normally requires an expensive gaming PC -- ran excellently too. It's all rolled together with a slick interface that requires just a few button-presses to get playing. They just need to change that stupid looking controller. Reminds me of the controller I used when I used to play Comix Zone on my PC in the 90s. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mediocore Posted March 27, 2009 Share Posted March 27, 2009 I have trouble believing that little box harbors enough juice to play graphical intensive games. It wouldn't be the box rendering graphics. Basically, from my understanding, an instance of whatever game you're playing is created on an offsite server with more than enough juice to handle the game. That instance is then streamed to your house where you control it remotely. All the heavy lifting is done elsewhere; all the box does is serve the instance to your location. So, in essence, it's kind of like having a movie streamed to your TV, except you're controlling the action. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jercjast Posted March 27, 2009 Share Posted March 27, 2009 This sounds like a scam like that console the Phantom that was supposed to play xbox, ps2, and gamecube games. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thomas Posted March 27, 2009 Share Posted March 27, 2009 This sounds like a scam like that console the Phantom that was supposed to play xbox, ps2, and gamecube games. Haha. I remember that thing. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
andrew13 Posted March 27, 2009 Share Posted March 27, 2009 I have trouble believing that little box harbors enough juice to play graphical intensive games. It wouldn't be the box rendering graphics. Basically, from my understanding, an instance of whatever game you're playing is created on an offsite server with more than enough juice to handle the game. That instance is then streamed to your house where you control it remotely. All the heavy lifting is done elsewhere; all the box does is serve the instance to your location. So, in essence, it's kind of like having a movie streamed to your TV, except you're controlling the action. i couldn't see this ever working without pure fiber connections by the users and some sort of a super computer for a server with an insane amout of upload speed. plus the 1million+ people to be running at any one time different games on a single server (or even muliple), each game needing it's own instance, and split second reactions that are needed having to travel potentially 1000's of miles to the server then back again in time for the next event to be rendered sounds like a logistical nightmare. i see this being a tremendous failure. and if you had a different super server for each game, which would be a logical solution to one part of the above problem, then you're looking at a very high capital investment to hook up each server and it's internet connection, which if the game flops it wouldn't be able to justify. thus again people would end up with the plug pulled on them for a game that may not be an instant hit. i think this is more or less an attempt to get gullible old people to buy one for their grandkids that will only play out of copyright 70's and 80's games. that or an attempt to get a ton of venture capital poured into the project so the inventor can pay himself a ton of money and get rich by screwing stupid investors. either way, sounds like a scam to me that will never work, at least not for a decade or more. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.