OnLive - Page 4

Fog · 03-26-2009, 10:56 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Erumaron

Until bandwidth catches up, couldn't they just do Tivo for gaming with basically the same product.

I don't understand. You mean watching games, and not playing them? Is there really a market for that? (Besides competitive e-sports sorts of things.)

Erumaron · 03-26-2009, 11:03 PM

lol? - I like how you got watching games out of that but sure. As in, you don't have instant access to the games but they download to your unit and you can play it later. It's effectively pointless over current PCs/consoles but at least they aren't screwing themselves by attempting to stream to people.

Szlia · 03-27-2009, 02:55 AM

The whole point of their system is that the game in rendered at their end so the user can have a machine that only needs to display a video feed and send a user input feed. If you upload the game to the user and have them render the game it means they need powerful and expensive hardware which is exactly what they don't want.

Caliane · 03-27-2009, 07:02 AM

The more I think about it. The worse this idea sounds.

Hardware costs constantly plummet. A DS probably puts out as much quality video as this thing can really handle.

Smocca · 03-27-2009, 03:49 PM

This isn't a terrible idea but I just don't see them having a market. I think we can all agree that enthusiasts just aren't going to use this service. Between downtime, lag, mods, hacks, piracy and other problems, enthusiasts will just find it much more satisfying to have their own console/pc in spite of the cost.

That leaves the more casual gamer who doesn't care nearly as much about graphics. Their potential audience doesn't even know what running Crysis on full at 60fps means. Basically, think of the typical Wii owner. They want the fun of gaming, the experience of the game, not the OMFG POLYGONS. You can play fun games with pleasing (read: but not cutting edge) graphics on incredibly cheap hardware. You can buy a 360 for like 200 bucks, or a Wii for 250.

Also, as the Gizmodo article explained, graphics on this thing are necessarily going to be crippled even in the best of circumstances (a demo for the press where they are located only 50 miles from the host). So the people who don't know what Crysis is are supposed to be pleased they can play it at full but with graphical glitches and lag.

30 bucks a month to Dell or Capital One to own a console/PC to play all their favorite games GUARANTEED or 30 bucks a month to play a weird feeling and looking version of those high end games they have never even heard of (assuming they have the unrealistically reliable ISP to support it). Sounds like a winning business plan to me!

Fog · 03-27-2009, 04:20 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Erumaron

lol? - I like how you got watching games out of that but sure. As in, you don't have instant access to the games but they download to your unit and you can play it later. It's effectively pointless over current PCs/consoles but at least they aren't screwing themselves by attempting to stream to people.

I was confused by your earlier post because this has nothing to do with their product. The point of their service is that they abstract the hardware and give you a thin client.

Araxen · 03-29-2009, 04:36 PM

Maybe if we had the Internet infrastructure of Korea this would work, but we are at least a half-century away from getting that kind of bandwidth in the US. I love the idea though but it is hampered by the US slow internet infrastructure.

Jovec · 03-29-2009, 10:14 PM

Properly designed, distance is largely irrelevant in the network. The bigger issue is going to be local bandwidth sharing at your house - little brother with active torrents, little sister with youtube vids, mom on skype to her sister, dad streaming netflix, etc. all competing with OnLive. It will be like going back the dial-up days trying to share a single phone line between voice and data.

Rythonn · 03-29-2009, 10:45 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Araxen

Maybe if we had the Internet infrastructure of Korea this would work, but we are at least a half-century away from getting that kind of bandwidth in the US. I love the idea though but it is hampered by the US slow internet infrastructure.

I am not sure even that would work. The article has the server 50 miles away and most likely in prime condition for the test and still has some lag. Someone more knowledgeable then me might know but given the very best Tech out there would this even be possible 100 miles from the server? 500?

Zuuljin · 03-29-2009, 11:24 PM

This might be a stupid question, and I may already know the answer, but if anyone here has more insight, maybe then can explain.

If OnLive strikes a deal with your ISP, how is this any different then receiving HDTV? Right now my internet and TV come through the exact same cable, and I have no issues watching TV while I'm online. So obviously they have the bandwidth to give me HD content. What does it matter on my end if its Crysis or Comedy Central? Its just another "channel" that I happen to be controlling.

Now to answer my own question if this is correct, the problem does not lie at our end, but the cable providers end. Sending me Comedy Central is just pushing me 1 stream. Everyone who wants Comedy Central gets the same stream. As long as the cable company can push out 1000 channels (or however many there are right now) things are ok, since millions of people can just pull from the same 1000 streams.

Now with OnLive, they may have to push out hundreds of thousands of "channels", which might not be currently possible.

Something like that...?

Neph · 04-02-2009, 07:55 AM

Interestng article from the CEO of Onlive

BBC NEWS | Technology | OnLive games service 'will work'

Quote:

Originally Posted by Steve Perlman

"The round trip latency from pushing a button on a controller and it going up to the server and back down, and you seeing something change on screen should be less than 80 milliseconds.

"We usually see something between 35 and 40 milliseconds."

What's also interesting is that they started the algorithm transferring video the size of a stamp and slowly increased the resolution. I'm pretty excited about this, but I'll stay skeptical until I'm actually using it.

Darus Grey · 04-02-2009, 08:03 AM

35-40 MS for *control input* is...beyond unacceptable. For things like FPS and RTS, this pushes the input to be worse than consoles, which I think will be their major problem, if I was a PC gamer on a budget, there is no reason for me to use this service over simply switching to console gaming, most major PC games come out for consoles and I'm sure the subscription fee would be more than the cost of a console over it's lifetime.

I just don't see the market for this, though I've said before I think it's a scam anyways, it's probably a real product, but the creators are just living easy off some VC well it goes nowhere.

Ayeshala · 06-05-2009, 03:13 AM

So these guys were not present at E3 proper but did have a site set up to demo the tech:

Impressions: online and live with OnLive [update]

OnLive In-Home Demo - Part 1 | OnLive Fans Blog

Still nothing very new in there but interesting to note that they're ramping up for Beta.

Dumar · 06-05-2009, 04:11 AM

this is obviously the (far) future of computing, but it's way before its time. us net is absolutely awful, and we'll all be dead before this is a reality.

Ayeshala · 06-05-2009, 05:07 AM

A fact that I thought was interesting:

"OnLive's backers include Time Warner through its Warner Bros. unit and the software company Autodesk."

Source: Game Over for Game Consoles?: Financial News - Yahoo! Finance

03-27-2009, 02:55 AM	#48 (permalink)
Szlia Conquest Join Date: Mar 2002 Location: Switzerland Posts: 6,143 +31 Internets	The whole point of their system is that the game in rendered at their end so the user can have a machine that only needs to display a video feed and send a user input feed. If you upload the game to the user and have them render the game it means they need powerful and expensive hardware which is exactly what they don't want. __________________ -retrosabotage-

03-27-2009, 07:02 AM	#49 (permalink)
Caliane Registered User Join Date: Jun 2006 Posts: 1,873	The more I think about it. The worse this idea sounds. Hardware costs constantly plummet. A DS probably puts out as much quality video as this thing can really handle. __________________ MBirkhofer. http://mbirkhofer.deviantart.com/

03-27-2009, 03:49 PM	#50 (permalink)
Smocca Registered User Join Date: Sep 2007 Posts: 1,259 +51 Internets	This isn't a terrible idea but I just don't see them having a market. I think we can all agree that enthusiasts just aren't going to use this service. Between downtime, lag, mods, hacks, piracy and other problems, enthusiasts will just find it much more satisfying to have their own console/pc in spite of the cost. That leaves the more casual gamer who doesn't care nearly as much about graphics. Their potential audience doesn't even know what running Crysis on full at 60fps means. Basically, think of the typical Wii owner. They want the fun of gaming, the experience of the game, not the OMFG POLYGONS. You can play fun games with pleasing (read: but not cutting edge) graphics on incredibly cheap hardware. You can buy a 360 for like 200 bucks, or a Wii for 250. Also, as the Gizmodo article explained, graphics on this thing are necessarily going to be crippled even in the best of circumstances (a demo for the press where they are located only 50 miles from the host). So the people who don't know what Crysis is are supposed to be pleased they can play it at full but with graphical glitches and lag. 30 bucks a month to Dell or Capital One to own a console/PC to play all their favorite games GUARANTEED or 30 bucks a month to play a weird feeling and looking version of those high end games they have never even heard of (assuming they have the unrealistically reliable ISP to support it). Sounds like a winning business plan to me! __________________ Put your gamertag here too. Wii Code: 4250 4436 6536 6872

03-29-2009, 04:36 PM	#52 (permalink)
Araxen A Bearded Gnome Join Date: Mar 2002 Location: Near Chicago, IL Posts: 6,449	Maybe if we had the Internet infrastructure of Korea this would work, but we are at least a half-century away from getting that kind of bandwidth in the US. I love the idea though but it is hampered by the US slow internet infrastructure. __________________ PSN: Araxen - Gamertag: Araxen II Currently Playing: Eve - Talendor Vsevius(Main), Beth O(Salvage Alt)) http://www.twitter.com/araxen

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Email this Page
Display Modes	Rate This Thread
Linear Mode Switch to Hybrid Mode Switch to Threaded Mode	Rate This Thread:

03-26-2009, 11:03 PM	#47 (permalink)
Erumaron yeap yeap Join Date: Mar 2003 Location: Yardley, PA Posts: 1,586	lol? - I like how you got watching games out of that but sure. As in, you don't have instant access to the games but they download to your unit and you can play it later. It's effectively pointless over current PCs/consoles but at least they aren't screwing themselves by attempting to stream to people.

03-29-2009, 10:14 PM	#53 (permalink)
Jovec Registered User Join Date: Sep 2002 Location: SoCal Posts: 543	Properly designed, distance is largely irrelevant in the network. The bigger issue is going to be local bandwidth sharing at your house - little brother with active torrents, little sister with youtube vids, mom on skype to her sister, dad streaming netflix, etc. all competing with OnLive. It will be like going back the dial-up days trying to share a single phone line between voice and data.

03-29-2009, 11:24 PM	#55 (permalink)
Zuuljin So there's this plane on a treadmill... Join Date: Jan 2005 Location: Southern California Posts: 3,316 +20 Internets	This might be a stupid question, and I may already know the answer, but if anyone here has more insight, maybe then can explain. If OnLive strikes a deal with your ISP, how is this any different then receiving HDTV? Right now my internet and TV come through the exact same cable, and I have no issues watching TV while I'm online. So obviously they have the bandwidth to give me HD content. What does it matter on my end if its Crysis or Comedy Central? Its just another "channel" that I happen to be controlling. Now to answer my own question if this is correct, the problem does not lie at our end, but the cable providers end. Sending me Comedy Central is just pushing me 1 stream. Everyone who wants Comedy Central gets the same stream. As long as the cable company can push out 1000 channels (or however many there are right now) things are ok, since millions of people can just pull from the same 1000 streams. Now with OnLive, they may have to push out hundreds of thousands of "channels", which might not be currently possible. Something like that...?

04-02-2009, 08:03 AM	#57 (permalink)
Darus Grey I can dance if I want to Join Date: Aug 2002 Posts: 2,089	35-40 MS for control input is...beyond unacceptable. For things like FPS and RTS, this pushes the input to be worse than consoles, which I think will be their major problem, if I was a PC gamer on a budget, there is no reason for me to use this service over simply switching to console gaming, most major PC games come out for consoles and I'm sure the subscription fee would be more than the cost of a console over it's lifetime. I just don't see the market for this, though I've said before I think it's a scam anyways, it's probably a real product, but the creators are just living easy off some VC well it goes nowhere.

06-05-2009, 03:13 AM	#58 (permalink)
Ayeshala Ballistic Join Date: Jan 2002 Posts: 644	So these guys were not present at E3 proper but did have a site set up to demo the tech: Impressions: online and live with OnLive [update] OnLive In-Home Demo - Part 1 \| OnLive Fans Blog Still nothing very new in there but interesting to note that they're ramping up for Beta.

06-05-2009, 04:11 AM	#59 (permalink)
Dumar Banned Join Date: Oct 2003 Posts: 3,496 -246 Internets	this is obviously the (far) future of computing, but it's way before its time. us net is absolutely awful, and we'll all be dead before this is a reality.

06-05-2009, 05:07 AM	#60 (permalink)
Ayeshala Ballistic Join Date: Jan 2002 Posts: 644	A fact that I thought was interesting: "OnLive's backers include Time Warner through its Warner Bros. unit and the software company Autodesk." Source: Game Over for Game Consoles?: Financial News - Yahoo! Finance