OnLive video demo

T

theNoid

Supreme [H]ardness
Joined
Dec 23, 2003
Messages
7,441
Behold, whether you like it or not... the future of gaming. Anyone doubting the technology need only watch this. Dont rush to the demo, watch the entire video and soak in the presentation, how it works, and why every major publisher if they aren't already signed up will be shortly.

I manage rather large cloud systems for a living, this is the first real attempt at gaming. The guys behind OnLive are those who invented Apache, web publishing as you know it. These are not some shmucks with a startup company, they are successful brainiacs using existing technology with new technology to push the envelop.

I've heard every counter arguement to this type of service, but once all the publishers are on board, its not going to take long before you'll be streaming your games with zero ability to

1. Pirate
2. Buy used.

The publishers are going to finally control the market 100%, and they are not going to waver.


Prepare to say WOW when they play Crysis over the cloud.
http://tv.seas.columbia.edu/videos/545/60/79?file=1&autostart=true
 
I doubt this would be widespread as this will kill the market for Nvidia & ATI graphics card.

Also since it's in the 'Cloud', you really never own the game and that won't fly with majority of pcgamers.

I see this definitely being big for netbooks as this technology is better suited for it.
 
I watched the whole video and just wow... that is mind blowing.
 
Yes it's really good. I see it more tailored to online gaming than single player. Having real people spectate in a ladder match would be awesome.
 
criccio said:
I watched the whole video and just wow... that is mind blowing.
Click to expand...

I see this evolving into Cloud 2.0. Write a client app (not just games) for whatever platform, be it a Mac, Linux, Windows and turn into a cloud app that can run on any platform.
 
This will not take over anything. it'll be niche at best.

I'd probably just stop gaming if something like this took over. Doubt I'm the only one.
 
They even demo and speculate they can host worldwide tournaments, where they can host up to 100,000 viewers per session. This technology is mind numbing, and probably sounded a bit like pie in the sky to many people less than 1 year ago.

And yet here they are, delivering the goods. :eek:
 
Its amazing to think that people still don't see this ever working. At the rate technology advances, that is just a ridiculous notion.

And why on earth would you stop gaming if something like this took over?!? I see ZERO downsides.
 
pazhman said:
I'm in the beta, it's like playing a badly buffered youtube video.
Click to expand...

What state are you located in and how far are you from the nearest data center? Also, what is your home connection speed? Also, aren't you under NDA? Every report, and even the OnLive network engineers I have spoken with in person tell me otherwise.

I'd love for you to back it up.
 
criccio said:
Its amazing to think that people still don't see this ever working. At the rate technology advances, that is just a ridiculous notion.

And why on earth would you stop gaming if something like this took over?!? I see ZERO downsides.
Click to expand...

There are some downsides if you a PC gamer. Things like Eyefinity, multi-GPU processing, etc. How does all of this technology get incorporated into this service and how much is this going to cost OnLive? And the second is of course a constant and VERY reliable network connection.

Given time most of the big issues will be worked out but at the same time its not going to be a quick path either.
 
So you pay a subscription for the service, then you have a choice of either to rent or owning it. Now that might not be a bad thing for people who play/ends a game in 1 day then sell it the next. However, if you decide to buy it then you not only pay for the service but for the game.

So the next logical question is what happens if you cancel your subscription or loss of income, what happens then?

I see this definitely as niche service along side with what we have today. I don't see this supplanting the business model we have now for a long time.
 
SixtyWattMan said:
I can't think of one advantage of onlive has over PC gaming.
Click to expand...

It is simpler from the end user perspective and has a lower initial cost if you rent the game.

But I do believe the social issues will be as difficult as as the technical issues. And getting this up and running well is going to cost OnLine a TON and niche just aint going to cut it. They are going to need a bazillion subscribers to profitable.
 
Another OnLive viral shill? Hard to believe with that many years here you'd be that gullible after all we've seen.
 
NKDietrich said:
Another OnLive viral shill? Hard to believe with that many years here you'd be that gullible after all we've seen.
Click to expand...

Oh look, another Sony anit-viral shill? Hard to believe with that many years here you'd be that gullible after all we've seen
 
NKDietrich said:
Another OnLive viral shill? Hard to believe with that many years here you'd be that gullible after all we've seen.
Click to expand...

Why is he being gullible? Or at least more so than the bazillion other companies from Google to every other company with an financial interest in cloud computing, which is a term a I hate. Let's just call it what it was called in the 90's, thin client for crying out loud.

I think we can learn something from then. Why did thin-client not take of in the 90's? Poor networks for one. And DRAMATICALLY lower hardware costs along with DRAMATICALLY more performance from PC hardware.

Like the 90's, the "cloud" is supposed to be easier for end users and cost less. Easier I can understand. But costing less? That's the part I'm not so sure about. And networks have come along but in the US they still suck a lot.

And PC hardware continues to make amazing performance and cost strides.

Maybe this time the cloud will win out. In same ways that's happening because of the nature of computer use, Facebook, Twitter, etc. Low client performance network apps are ruling the roost. Now OnLive is trying to take it a step further.

But at the end of the day whether OnLive or the cloud becomes the real deal, its going to boil down to cost.
 
It needs 5mbps to do 720p. At least 10mbps to do 1080p or 1920x1200 which is what I PC game at.

Most people don't even have internet that fast. Knowing how slowly the US gets speed upgrades, I don't see bandwidth ever surpassing what's needed to run at the newest, highest resolution. In other countries, sure, but not here.

Even with my FIOS connection, I wouldn't go for this. I use my PC for other things, so having a powerful one isn't a waste. Also, consoles are cheap. I'd rather pay $299 upfront and actually own something instead of having a glorified rental.

Also, having a constant 80ms lagtime would blow. Especially in online games. At that point, you're just adding MS on top of MS and all of a sudden you have 200+ ms lag and you're getting owned.
 
Last edited:
heatlesssun said:
Why is he being gullible? Or at least more so than the bazillion other companies from Google to every other company with an financial interest in cloud computing, which is a term a I hate.
Click to expand...

Grandiose claims are the first giveaway. Phrases like "kill PC gaming" , "kill console gaming" or "kill digital distribution" and so on don't sit well with me. I have no doubt that something like OnLive can carve out a niche for itself, but just like consoles didn't kill PC gaming, neither will OnLive kill PC gaming or consoles.

I'm not impressed by the number of publishers they've got "signed on." Why? The publishers have nothing to lose. If OnLive flops, they just continue on with all their other distribution means. If OnLive succeeds, they aren't going to be stupid enough to go "Oh, by the way, everyone has to use OnLive to play our game now."

Even with the most generous expectations, OnLive will never be the one exclusive source of all major games.

Maybe I'll feel differently if and when they actually start selling the service, but I doubt it.
 
The real question is: How much does it cost? I have a feeling it will be $50/month minimum, $75-100 sounds more realistic

If by rentals, probably something like $9.99 a game for 24 hours gameplay
 
Tylerdurdened said:
The real question is: How much does it cost? I have a feeling it will be $50/month minimum, $75-100 sounds more realistic

If by rentals, probably something like $9.99 a game for 24 hours gameplay
Click to expand...

$100/month just to pay more to play games is ridiculous. I could see myself paying maybe $30/month assuming the service worked excellently. In my dreams, I guess.
 
NKDietrich said:
Grandiose claims are the first giveaway. Phrases like "kill PC gaming" , "kill console gaming" or "kill digital distribution" and so on don't sit well with me. I have no doubt that something like OnLive can carve out a niche for itself, but just like consoles didn't kill PC gaming, neither will OnLive kill PC gaming or consoles.

I'm not impressed by the number of publishers they've got "signed on." Why? The publishers have nothing to lose. If OnLive flops, they just continue on with all their other distribution means. If OnLive succeeds, they aren't going to be stupid enough to go "Oh, by the way, everyone has to use OnLive to play our game now."

Even with the most generous expectations, OnLive will never be the one exclusive source of all major games.

Maybe I'll feel differently if and when they actually start selling the service, but I doubt it.
Click to expand...

This is a very logical post and I agree with it 100% My point is that he's not the only one on Cloud 9, pun intended.

Actually the publishers have a LOT to potentially gain with this technology as do all content providers. Without physical access to code and data it becomes EXPONENTIALLY more difficult to pirate. But you are right, the publishers have nothing to lose and all to gain so the number of publishers signing up for this is no indicator whatsoever about the long term success of this endeavor.
 
theNoid said:
What state are you located in and how far are you from the nearest data center? Also, what is your home connection speed? Also, aren't you under NDA? Every report, and even the OnLive network engineers I have spoken with in person tell me otherwise.

I'd love for you to back it up.
Click to expand...

I'm on the beta as well, but unfortunately because of the ultra super strict NDA (which pazhman already broke) no one would be able to confirm or deny pazhman's claims even if they wanted to. If you want to know the quality of OnLive in its current state, try to get on the beta and make your own judgments first-hand.

Currently it appears that OnLive is giving priority to people with fast (10Mbit+) & reliable connections to/from their datacenter when choosing those to let into the beta. If you have a slower or unreliable connection, you probably wouldn't have a chance of getting accepted until a later phase of the Beta.

That said, I believe I've answered your first three questions, while the fourth (backing up any claim of quality of service) can't be answered because of the NDA.
 
Lol, I signed up for the beta. I have 25/15 (which is really more like 32/32) Fios so we'll see if I get in.

But the website says "coming winter 2009"... so... they have about 4 days to finish the beta....
 
EDIT: I'm going to reserve judgement.


BUT still point out that physics of data speed/latency cannot be defeated.
 
going from

You > Onlive > game server > Onlive > You

just seems like it would get... messy.
 
Cyberbeing said:
I'm on the beta as well, but unfortunately because of the ultra super strict NDA (which pazhman already broke) no one would be able to confirm or deny pazhman's claims even if they wanted to. If you want to know the quality of OnLive in its current state, try to get on the beta and make your own judgments first-hand.

Currently it appears that OnLive is giving priority to people with fast (10Mbit+) & reliable connections to/from their datacenter when choosing those to let into the beta. If you have a slower or unreliable connection, you probably wouldn't have a chance of getting accepted until a later phase of the Beta.

That said, I believe I've answered your first three questions, while the fourth (backing up any claim of quality of service) can't be answered because of the NDA.
Click to expand...

I understand that you're under an NDA but if I were to take a guess at what you're thoughts are, I'd have to so say that you're not that impressed. Not trying to egg you on, just my feeling that's all.
 
catsby said:
Lol, I signed up for the beta. I have 25/15 (which is really more like 32/32) Fios so we'll see if I get in.

But the website says "coming winter 2009"... so... they have about 4 days to finish the beta....
Click to expand...

We'll see this in a year or three. What I really want to know is how are they going to make money on this. The hardware to make this work has got to cost a VERY large fortune. Unless they are only expecting two user.
 
Sorry but this is never going to replace our computers at home and I sure as fuck hope it wont. No modding, no high res, no eyefinity, no graphics options at all, no nothing, just shit. Even P2P gaming is pure crap, I can only imagine attempting to play a game over this crap. Systems like Steam and digital distribution will work out in the end, OnLive will be one of those things we see in those articles that are just lists of hardware and software failures. OnLive might become an option, but it will never come close to replacing gaming as we know it today.
 
Anyway, what's the deal with watching people play games?

That's creepy. I don't want people watching me play something...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top