OnLive

[Skjalg]

Its not physically possible. Even the lag when sending a single ping packet is too much on those distances, let alone a 0.1mb (super compressed by bs techonology) image per frame, theres no way you'll get even 24fps per second with decent delay.

[Mazy]

so i am predicting an epic fail ! but lets try it again in 5- 10 years

By then the only things we'll be playing games with are sticks and stones

http://gdc.gamespot.com/video/6206692/

GDC conference video, slightly less skeptical now, and after I had one of the coders at work tell about the actual numbers required to make this work then it actually sounds very plausible, if there's a dedicated hub in each country that is

So yeah, maybe in 2 years in the US, 5-10 for the rest of the world

[Hourences]

And in 30 years in Belgium. 25 GB a month traffic cap \o\

They did manage to convince all those publishers so maybe they do something right, and the pros of doing this are obviously really big, but really. I don't see this technically possible right now.

If it is, then this will be the last generation of real consoles.

[KungFuSquirrel]

I'm skeptical of them having the coverage and server density to support a large customer base. Even a single game release or update can drop Steam, a high-volume platform that's been going for years, and there's no continuous download by the time the game is launched and game servers for MP tend to be third-party.

ISPs are doing all sorts of bandwidth quota-ing and usage charges, I suspect not because they can't handle the loads but because they see the future in digital distribution and want their own cut. They must love this.

I suspect publishers like it because it removes piracy and re-sale from the equation, and also leaves them in control of the game, not the consumer. Developers would get a boost from only having to develop for a single platform and hardware spec, however.

This becoming the standard delivery platform would likely kill all user customization as we know it.

It's a cool piece of technology, and if something like this works this soon on the current infrastructure I'll be very impressed... But I'm not sure I like this direction overall.

edit: Wow, I'm really bumbling around on this one, haha. I'm really back-and-forth on it though. For all the questions and concerns, the system is working impressively well, but just doesn't sound ready to be the new face of the game industry... yet.

[Warby]

i am watching / listening to that onlive 50 minutes video here are some random thoughts:

- the prince of persia demo seams very authentic or very cleverly faked he is still in the beginnign in the tutorial phase exactly as far in as i would expect him to play it in order to prepare the game for the live demo ! (of course there is no proof they dont just have a 360 running behind the curtain)

- they state the exact problems that we all instantly jumped on but they claim to have SOLVED the issues but they don't say HOW. you be the judge why !?

- if this works i am sure its gonna be the next big thing but i am still convinced that it wont work

[Grinwhrl]

They go on to explain a lot more and showcase more games being played.

They also tell you towards the end of the video during questions that its a North American market only right now. If you are on the east cost, you cannot play with west coast players until there is a central server location. Overall they have a lot more work ahead of them then they make it seem.

What I think will be great is if the service works anyone with a mac or an old laptop can play quality games without the hardware normally needed. So its interesting at least to see something like this progress.

[-HP-]

http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/gdc-w ... rk-article

[Izuno]

I played Crysis on it briefly at GDC yesterday. However, "played" is a loose term since I only had five minutes and an OnLive rep was talking at me the whole time about the tech, much of which distracted me from playing (with a console controller, not a M/KB). Also, the scene I was in was a semi industrial environment with a fair amount of plants and no enemies shooting back at me...nothing to really shoot at at all and by the end I moved around like 30 feet in the game cause they kept distracting me with information about the potential of the system. Then I had to go to another meeting.

So it was not a fair test. I saw a ton of video of games but it just didn't feel like it was ready yet. There are a ton of technical things to overcome for mass adoption, not to mention the penetration of truly dependable multiple megabit bandwidth. FFS my Time Warner cable connection has hiccups all the time and I get lag issues in games semi frequently. In a traditional online game like TF2 or WoW you can live with it. I'm not sure if I could live with my single player Crysis or whatever game having hiccups like that.

I'm pissed I didn't get to see it more, but my opinion right now is: prove it, OnLive, prove it. And even when you prove it, prove it again. And again. Eventually I'm all for it or similar / competing service but I think it's going to be a while before this gets critical mass.

Oh I think the analysis in this thread is pretty dead on. Woot.

[sarge mat]

Its what’s going to happen but its more likely Microsoft will buy them and use there tec and Sony will have something along the same lines or both are working on their own thing.

[Chunks]

If they can shore up the capital to actually launch the service I will be surprised. Assuming they do I predict they would go out of business within 2 years. That's not to say that they are headed in the right direction, but the masses aren't ready for this and the technology isn't in place yet.

Give it a decade and this will be how games are played. Let's face it, it would benefit the publishers and developers if games were distributed this way... assuming the technology was in place to effectively deliver it there wouldn't be many downsides to the consumer.

This is not something I necessarily look forward to as I like to feel like I 'own' the game instead of just a license to play it, but I am not going to deny the fact that things are going to head in this direction whether we like it or not so we might as well learn to like it.

[Buddy]

Have doubts, but looking forward to it.

[Izuno]

Interestingly, by the end of GDC my simultaneous amazement and skepticism gave way to the belief that most likely the owners were looking to sell the company to a larger entity. Bottom line, it's going to take a HUGE capital investment to make this a reality and it will still take years, so why not cash out now and use GDC to generate press and fan investor interest?

Keith Boesky has a very detailed blog post about the likelihood of an OnLive buyout at http://boesky.blogspot.com/2009/04/onli ... ition.html. He doesn't claim to understand the tech and isn't analyzing that part, but it's a great post on the business perspective of OnLive.

[Furyo]

Thanks for posting that Jeremy, I was waiting for a post like this. Yes the bewilderment is natural to have for all gamers, but it was the business side of it all that had me more interested.

[FrieChamp]

Some good points in that article and an interesting way to look at the model aside from "does it really work??". Thanks for sharing!

[Pclloh]

And the hardware industry lobby?

How they will react to it?

I didn´t see many people talking about here but it´s a part of the problem...