Howdy, Stranger!
It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
Quick Links
'Console killer' OnLive to launch in June
arctarus
Member UncommonPosts: 2,581
" A gaming service that aims to kill off the traditional gaming console will begin streaming popular games over the internet in June this year.
OnLive, which launched to much fanfare in 2009, announced details of its service at the GamesBeat conference.
Instead of games taking hours to download or buying them off the shelf, OnLive promises games on-demand.
"OnLive breaks the console cycle. We don't need new hardware devices," said company founder Steve Perlman.
That sentiment was echoed by his chief operating officer Mike McGarvey.
"We want to take your dollars from hardware and let you spend it on software. We are a new platform and we're building a network and infrastructure to last for the next 30 years of gaming, not the next five years," Mr McGarvey told reporters.
'Disruptive'
OnLive has been in development for eight years and will officially become available on June 17.
The company said it will deliver on-demand video games via the cloud to the PC, Mac or TV and that it could provide high quality gaming on low-end machines.
OnLive relies on video compression technology, which instantly streams video via the internet so if feels like the game is playing locally.
The reality is that all the heavy lifting is done by remote data centres that can be no more than a thousand miles away.
Players use a PC or TV hooked up to a broadband connection to connect to the system.
"It could be very disruptive to the console vendors," Billy Pidgeon, an independent game analyst told Bloomberg News.
"This also wouldn't be good for retailers or anybody selling physical software formats."
Research group NPD reported that last year, US video-game sales fell 8% to $19.6bn (£13bn).
Instant gratification
OnLive said that it was reacting to a change in gamer's habits, as they increasingly migrate online.
"There is this huge shift from download and use later to use it right now. The bytes coming in are not being stored. They are being consumed the moment they arrive," said Mr Perlman.
Dean Takahashi of website GamesBeat believes instant success is not guaranteed.
"It is going to be small at first. At the beginning it becomes one more great channel for the game companies to pursue. But at some point, yeah there is going to be a transition," he said.
OnLive will be available for a monthly rental fee of $14.95 (£9.99) for subscribers to then buy or rent games over the internet.
It will have titles such as Assassin's Creed, Prince of Persia and Borderlands.
No date was given for when OnLive will be available in the UK, Europe and the rest of the world. "
news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/technology/8556874.stm
Bye bye ps4 and xbox 720???
RIP Orc Choppa
Comments
Yeah, try again. 14.99 just to join, and then separate fees to rent/buy the game? They better have some pretty damn good games.
I'm actually pretty curious. In the long run, especially since they will probably offer annual reduced rates, this may save money for most people. If a game costs 60 bucks outright, that is already 4 months worth. I know for myself I generally play in bulk due to school, so finish them in two weeks or so and then move on to another. I probably get a game a month. Even with resell value, you're doing better in the long run.
If it works with no hardware, awesome. I hope it turns out to be legit. Also..I think this may be the future, especially with the 50 MB connections only getting faster.
So, it sounds basically like playing a game through a remote connection, and then they just send you the video..... which sounds like it could work.. though, due to lag, ping, etc. etc. you'll basically be playing SP games with ping and network problems attached. If the costs were low enough, I would consider it a possibility. If they are going to support console games, then they better be able to support all controller types.
Playstation 3 cost 399$ when it was released, that's 2 years 2 months of onlive service at current price. If they grow big, they should also be able to sell the games cheaper than in stores, since there's no additional distribution costs.
I think prices aren't the issue. I think the issue is, if they grow big, net service providers will start fight against it because of the bandwith costs. If they won't grow big, they won't get enough support from game developers and publishers.
I'll be honest ONlive won't kill consoles. Hell, it probably won't even affect much of their income.
Vrika hit the problem perfectly. Its all a matter of bandwidth. Sure most peoples pipes are big enough to sqeeze compressed video down on the fly. But even 640x480 video, which is a pretty terrible resolution for gaming adds up to huge bandwidth costs in only several hours. Most providers have a cap around 75~200Gb/month depending on how lucky you are. Some claim to be unlimited, but really frown when you have several successive months worth of huge bandwidth usages. Then you get 'the' phone call and see just how unlimited it really is. Then typically they either start legal action, or simply block these mega bandwidth services, citing network overburden. See hulu, netflicks etc etc.
this won't kill consoles because. 1, it's just like gametap and thats on life support. 2, they said they will bring it to consoles at later date. this will have to be really good to do so because steam is great service and consoles still gain ground.
I'm actually very interested in this device. The idea behind it is really interesting. I can only hope it works as intended and proves successful; however, I imagine the price tag of the hardware and the subscription service required will be so expensive that few will be able to enjoy it.
~Miles "Tails" Prower out! Catch me if you can!
Come Join us at www.globalequestria.com - Meet other fans of My Little Pony: Friendship is Magic!
I agree, the pricing sounds pretty fair. Especially when you consider that the graphics would be better than consoles. PC games are always ahead of the consoles in that area, but most people can't keep up with the hardware. This would ensure that you get the best looking games in 1080p on a netbook. As for support, they already have several big name publishers on board.
I'm definitely skeptical about their claims of only 1ms of lag. Provided they can really pull that off, they've got a real game changer on their hands. But you won't see me trying this from day 1.
Sub: $15/month
Hardware: free browser plug-in or a $20 box to stream to your tv.
as i said before on peper it look and sound fine but when reality catch it they ll soon see compared to microsoft donnybrook
this idea pale .come on you pay for onlive and you pay for cable bill how much will it cost compared to futur ms donnybrook
lol ms donnybrook will use very little bandwith
onlive you stream the whole game not just the data that chqange like coord etc
donnybrook might lower my actual cable bill by 20 % onlive will raise it by 100% minimum!
so in the end only a very limited few will use onlive! i sure wont i ll be using donnybrook when game maker start using it to also save big dollars on their own cable bill!
I'll wait to see what the pricing is for renting and buying before judging but the big killer for me is that if for some reason your subscription lapses you lose everything you bought.SO if you bought a game outright on the service and then lapsed on your sub payment and then resubbed...you'd have to buy it again.
Also there is no news on how much the box you hook to your T.V will cost to buy or rent at this time.It is at least initially rolling out on PCs only at first.SO to those who are quoting console prices in comparison to the service to be fair you have to enter the cost of your PC into the equation too.
Also people's bandwidth concerns are justified.As stated before int his thread to play in HD resolution will take a hefty interent connection which most people still don't have.
I doubt Onlive will use more bandwidth than Youtube, since games are going to be compressed in video format, I believe that in the end it won't cause any drama in the bandwith departement.
If it works, this will mean, the death of ATI and Nvidia and possibly of the consoles too.
Keep in mind that a $300 laptop can run any of the game offered, so there will be no point in buying expensive PC, or consoles.
I hope it works.
I doubt Onlive will use more bandwidth than Youtube, since games are going to be compressed in video format, I believe that in the end it won't cause any drama in the bandwith departement.
If it works, this will mean, the death of ATI and Nvidia and possibly of the consoles too.
Keep in mind that a $300 laptop can run any of the game offered, so there will be no point in buying expensive PC, or consoles.
I hope it works.
Taken from onLive.com's own FAQ,important part in bold and underlined.
"What kind of Internet connection do I need to use the OnLive Service?
OnLive works over nearly any wired broadband connection (DSL, cable modem, fiber, or through the LAN at your college or office) with 5Mbps or greater for HD-resolution games. OnLive requires 1.5Mbps for SD-resolution, but initially at launch, OnLive will only offer HD-resolution. Although OnLive technically works over WiFi wireless networks, the reliability of wireless networks can vary greatly, due to interference sources such as microwave ovens, and other wireless networks sharing the spectrum. Initially at launch, OnLive will not support wireless networks.
What if I want to play OnLive on my PC or Mac—what are the minimum specs?
Since the game is running in the OnLive data center, our system requirements are pretty low. All you need is a PC running a current version of Windows XP®, Vista®, or Windows 7®, or an Intel®-based Mac running a current version of OS X®. Although OnLive has found that most computers with at least a 5Mbps wired residential Internet connection are sufficient for HD-resolution, many factors affect network quality and computer performance, including other application using computer resources, and other users sharing your network. As part of the registration process for OnLive, you will be sent a performance test to run to see if your computer and network configuration are sufficient to run OnLive."
So yes it will take significantly more bandwidth than youtube even when SD is available(and remember SD is not a very high resolution at all).
I don't see how this will be viable with cable companies putting caps on download rates. I barely have enough to download HD movie rentals, game patches, and stream TV shows.
I'm calling it now: This will have a very limited release when it comes out. If it ever grows beyond a few choice neighborhoods in a few choice cities I will be very, very surprised.
Streaming might work in a country where the net infrastructure is both smaller and faster like Japan or Korea, but it won't work in the US and Europe where the infrastructure is more spread out. Seriously, if their video compression is so bad ass, why are they wasting it on games when there are much more profitable business applications for it? This whole service just doesn't compute.
Meanwhile, Gaikai is planning on doing cloud gaming for free. Well, I'm assuming that it's going to be ad supported, but that's basically the same as free. Even though the web site says that they'll be running the games, Gaikai just partnered with Instant Action which makes me think that maybe they're taking a more traditional approach of embedding the games into a web page and streaming the content. Or it could be something like running the game logic and streaming the DirectX / OpenGL function calls to your graphics card(s). Either way it'll be way easier on your bandwidth than Onlive. And free!
It certainly is an interesting concept. I can't but wonder if the major cable companies are looking at this as an "add-on" to their service.
I believe that this is the future. However is pioneering the future not always a good idea. the first game company that tried to sell CD-roms instead of discettes went bankrupt fast.
I think you are right, the infra structure of most countries are not ready for this and it will only be used locally outside a few IT nations.
The idea might get in money 2020 or so but until then they will need a lot of money to keep it running. I don't see a consol killer soon here.
From me, im currently paying $46 for 10mbps unlimited connections. So its a good idea for us here. but yap, for the majority rest still need more time...
RIP Orc Choppa
Whoever uses this deserves to get hit in the face with a baseball bat...
Not a bad idea at least if you can try the games b4 buying them. With this service you can also not have to go to the store for anything either. I rarely buy games for my 360 unless they are top notch. It would save on xbox live also. Couple things though.
1. Many console games dont port well to the comp for instance the RE games.
2. Some people may not have access to a decent comp or the funds for it. SOme of the games may not run on thier comps so they would have to compensate for those player.
3. Put alot of stores out of business and people out of work that work at the game stores. Personally I like walking into the store and the clerk knows me by name as I give them alot of business. I would miss that.
I would definently use this service or at least give it a go. We'll see what happens.
(BBBBBWWWWWWWWAAAAAAAAHHHHHH sees the cover of people magazines and the heartbroken Khardashan sisters. Raving Rabbid takes them all on a tropic cruise on his yacht!)
All my opinions are just that..opinions. If you like my opinions..coolness.If you dont like my opinion....I really dont care.
Playing: ESO, WOT, Smite, and Marvel Heroes
Do you have proof of this?!
If so, then I wont touch the service. If I buy a lisence I want it retained even if I lapse or suspend my subscription to thier service. If I dont get to retain an account and retain my purchases then I wont do business with them.
This is why I think Steam is going places. This is also why I refuse to ever digitally download an EA product ever again. I purchased a game through thier DD and no longer have access to it. Baaaaad mojo.
Do you have proof of this?!
If so, then I wont touch the service. If I buy a lisence I want it retained even if I lapse or suspend my subscription to thier service. If I dont get to retain an account and retain my purchases then I wont do business with them.
This is why I think Steam is going places. This is also why I refuse to ever digitally download an EA product ever again. I purchased a game through thier DD and no longer have access to it. Baaaaad mojo.
i think the payment model on this is that you subscribe to the service which gives you access to a list of games, you dont actually buy the game, handy if you want to try a game out before buying the actual disk... its got possibilities.. but im not sure i'd rely on it for gaming...more of a try before you buy kind of thing. i give this one.. a definite maybe
I'm not really thinking OnLive will make a big impact for a while. Shortly after launch I imagine they will be having massive latency and connectivity issues due to a lack of consideration of usage. They were in a closed beta for a long time and I haven't heard of any stress testing or open beta's which concerns me. This service should undergo more stress testing than MMOs since they are going to be running graphics intensive games on thier servers in high resolutions.
I also think this service will only be available regionally. They say 1000 mile range but the only tests I've read about and released info I've seen was a 50 mile distance demo. My guess is most of California will get it first. Then New York and some sorrounding cities and not much more than that for a while.
Well i think Perlman ,definitely knows what he is doing ,he has been making millions with his ideas.He sold WebTv to Miocrosoft for 503 million,so i would say he is well off lol.Microsoft is no dummy either,they have made that back in the first 5 years,Perlman also merged another asset with Microsoft,so these guys know their stuff for sure.
I however feel their small circle of rich people are over looking us small guys lol.MOST of us,especially in Canada ,do not have unlimited bandwidth,it is extremely limited here,i pay 75 bucks for i think 120 gb,it might have come down,i know they were trying for 90-100.Anyhoot,it is only going to get worse and more costly.
Now i have seen some offers popup that claim unlimited bandwidth and at lower costs, i cannot see how that is possible so i never looked into it further,but maybe is time i did.
This idea imo will never replace consoles ,it is too costly and as far as exclusive games go,i cannot see that either,unless onlive figures an over exaggerated amount of customers to pay to have exclusive games developed.Developers make games at an already high cost and expect ALL the profits to come back to them,so to make a game for ONLIVE and share the profits,means some real cheap games or Onlive wil lhave to pay a little extra for sure.
I can see this offer being a very good idea for PC users,as you can eliminate the very costly upgrades.IMO this is the cost they are calculating,15 bucks a month is 180 a year and if figure an upgrade every 3 years that is only 540 bucks,much cheaper in the long run,IF of course you can handle the high bandwidth.They talk of high compression,so maybe it won't be that bad,but i think you are going to need to use up some serious bandwidth to handle high resolutions,with high quality graphics.We have seen some high quality already on the net however,with live Hockey/MMA ect ect in your browser.
Never forget 3 mile Island and never trust a government official or company spokesman.