Cloud gaming arrived in the UK on Thursday as OnLive landed on our shores following a preliminary year in the US.
But now you've had a chance to try out OnLive first hand. With free subscription, free 30 minute demos, a ﾣ1 offer for your first purchase and community features tat give massive insight into what others are playing,
If you've signed up to OnLive, you should have a fairly good idea of whether it's for you or not. You may have even been sold in the first instance and jumped right in with your first ﾣ1 purchase.
If you have had a cheeky peek at cloud gaming, what's your assessment? Were you impressed, disappointed or apathetic? Did OnLive work as it should or have you had connections that don't bode well for the future?
Were you impressed by the speed and graphical punch of the games on OnLive. The service is, after all supposed to be streaming from servers delivering an experience above and beyond that of the consoles.
More generally, what kind of impact do you think the cloud will have on the future of gaming? Has you first experience with OnLive led you to believe that Sony, Microsoft and Nintendo will have to rethink their console strategy entirely from now on or do they remain the big three in the industry?
Jot down every thought you have about OnLive in the comments section below. We'd love to know what you think.
Comments
68 comments so far...
RoKuShaKuBoJutSu on 25 Sep '11 said:
For the free demos I will check it out, but I will be damned if I sink my hard earned cash into a "glorified rental service". I mean look at their new games, Deus Ex for $49.99? lol I can get that cheaper on amazon, and have a physical copy, AND not need to rely on internet connection. At least with Steam you get the data on your PC. Also, it's only ever going to be a 3rd party game hosting service, don't expect to see Gears or Uncharted on there any time soon...
Mmmmgrolsch on 25 Sep '11 said:
Hype? No CVG it is not! I couldn't get on all day today because it was full. Imagine that being your platform of choice eh?
The only people hyping this utter s**t is you CVG! ffs enough about Onlive its s**t FACT!
Its also a rip off. No one in their right mind would hope it goes from strength to strength. It is a overly Glorified rental service hyped up to s**t with all this money they are splashing out on the likes of you reporters to wrirte nice things for lots of cash.
Lance Uppercunt on 25 Sep '11 said:
No.
damoxuk on 25 Sep '11 said:
Sorry but the whole concept is flawed. Over reliance on stable/speedy connections and no mention of ISP bandwidth caps if this service affects them.
Some reports say an hour of gaming eats 2gb of data!! Een the companies what after "unlimited" will soon change there mind when gamers are racking over 100's gbs a month just to stream - sorry rent games.
I know the future is digital that fact I can live with (the collector in me can't however) but only if I can download the game to my computer/console and play at my leisure. Having to rely on your net connection/onlive servers no thanks.
The lack of scalably graphic options is a worry meaning this service is suited to people with truly ancient PC's or netbooks.
Oh and of course after the trial period of £1 1st game or cheap 3 month first crap then the prices truly are borked considering unlike steam you can't download or worse if cancel onlive the games can't be played anymore.
snake2011 on 25 Sep '11 said:
No thanks hate it looking forward to the next gen will always want a proper console not this joke of a service.
The_KFD_Case on 25 Sep '11 said:
Do I plan on using OnLive's glorified rental service that charges full retail price? No.
Did OnLive work for me? No; I spend time in different countries - in this case I have a broadband connection that easily surpasses OnLive's recommended speed yet while I can install OnLive I can't access the games.
Am I impressed with OnLive? No, I am singularly unimpressed even though the idea on paper is neat.
Do I think OnLive bodes well for the future in terms of being in the best interest of customers? No, not at all. In fact, I would be happy to see this die a quick, public death and left to the annals of history.
The_KFD_Case on 25 Sep '11 said:
This.
CVG, I'd like to encourage your staff to look up the word/concept "integrity".
nezzko on 25 Sep '11 said:
Nonsense! Nonsense! Nonsense!
That's all this OnLive debacle is, it's not like i couldn't rent a game cheaper elsewhere as it is but i DON'T RENT GAMES.
And after all that hacking fuss with you not 'owning' your Ps3, at least it's in front of you,purring away like a dark, plastic adopted kitten.
OnLive is probably controlled by a hive mind of chin strokingly smug uni grads all rolled into one large gelatinous, pulsing blob who feed on the tears of small children.
but that's just my opinion, probably alright really.
AnimaOnline on 26 Sep '11 said:
Not interested. I like to try and keep my games in one place. I'm already with PlayStation, Xbox, Nintendo and Steam. God knows why I need yet another console/service to get my games for. If cloud computing for games takes off then then Sony, Microsoft and Valve wont be too far behind. For now however I'm happy with my retail games and lovely box art. Besides, when broadband goes down I expect to still be able to enjoy my video games. I can't do that with Onlive and it's not an acceptable trade-off for me.
nihilism on 26 Sep '11 said:
Even if you can play high quality pc games in the likes of crysis, this is still video streaming, or remote play and the video quality isnt that good, but i only like the idea of the demos, i hope sony adopts this next gen for the demos so it doesnt take ages to download the demos, but other than that WAKE UP PEOPLE!! THEY WANT TO CONTROL WHEN OR HOW WE PLAY RAISE UP!! f**k YOU I WONT DO WHAT YOU TELL ME!!
humanhand on 26 Sep '11 said:
It's a bad idea, and the answer is no.
tmulford on 26 Sep '11 said:
No it's not and, as others have already said, it's only here that is hyping the site. I wouldn't pay to buy games on a service like this until they were proven. We are currently in a economic situation where very big and established companies have disappeared very quickly. Onlive is neither of these and if I was to buy a game from them and then find the company had hit the wall I've got nothing. With bought games I still have the disc to play from and with downloaded games I still have the files on my PS3.
TOKEN on 26 Sep '11 said:
I could do but overpricing and remember you pay for game manual,disc,limited edtions,no its not worth it.
I think the thought is nice but £7 for old games for one month is a no,althought i like the larger player,maps pc version of the games.
kinobick on 26 Sep '11 said:
HA! From reading all the comments the answer is a big fat no then!
Padua on 26 Sep '11 said:
Yeah there is an issue with logging in to the servers at peak times but their server capacity will grow as they get more subscribers. I play very late at night/early morning and can get in most times. The 30 minute free demos beat Youtube and even reading game reviews
Also for £1 UK users can get a game with full-play pass for free. 
You don't even need to play the games yourself - you can use the Arena feature to watch live game play from other gamers and interact with giving Thumbs Up or Thumbs Down to their performance. Next-Gen Voyeurism for free! I can even do this from my Android device with an OnLive Viewer app (which doesn't support play on phones yet)
I don't think I would buy a full-price game on OnLive until prices get much better - but the business model of paying £6.99 a month with access to over 100 games (possibly 15 if you rule out the crap games
) is tempting. I'm still playing my £1 game (Batman Arkham Asylum) on my crappy PC until I get a better feel for the service - it certainly beats any game App that I bought on Apple or Android devices!!
I don't think CVG is helping things with the headlines it is using to convey Onlive as a new Gaming platform. Your not going to convert the masses by portraying the OnLive people as a bunch of arrogant mofos
Padua on 26 Sep '11 said:
True - but for someone who doesn't buy a lot of games I found a lot of stuff I wanted to play (but didn't want to pay) and it is great value. Most people can play a game and finish it in a few days so the five day pass would be ideal.
Of course it would help if they got new games at the same time as they are released on other consoles
skintrade on 26 Sep '11 said:
I for one will give this a go, I like the concept, I won't however proclaim it to be the future of gaming. My PS3 is currently under no threat, but I refuse to say it's crap and a waste of time.
It still ranks higher than the Wii for me tho...
rhyfel69 on 26 Sep '11 said:
well cvg from the comments its plain and simple that gamers dont want "onlive" me personally i hope it falls on its arse., and the pricing is another joke. come on gamers stick two fingers up to the games industry like thay have been sticking two fingers up to us.
buffig on 26 Sep '11 said:
I have played 3 games using onlive which I also own on PC/PS3, the Onlive experience pales in comparison by a considerable margin. The lag is noticable, the video jerks and stutters and there is an overwhelming feeling of disconnect. It's how you would imagine it would be interacting with a poor youtube video. I'm on a 10mb connection and get the full 10mb. I couldnt play for significant periods of time because onlive detected my internet connection may be intermitent, despite being able to stream iplayer HD without a single hitch. If I was to pay full price for a game and be stuck with this horrendous service I wouldn't be best pleased. Pull your socks up CVG, you can't be impressed with this service. How about an impartial write up of the service, tested in the homes of several members of staff? terrible terrible start onlive.
steve_2003 on 26 Sep '11 said:
No, CVG it's not worth your hype.
slimify d on 26 Sep '11 said:
digital services dont really interest me, onlive even more so after all you cant play one of my fav power cut pass times (video game box jenga) with a bunch of streamy gigabytes
Weezer on 26 Sep '11 said:
Well I signed up to see what it was all about and despite my (supposed 20Mbps) Sky broadband being rated at well over 6Mbps (USwitch online test), OnLive said it couldn't sustain the video - so I just deleted it. I doubt my broadband will be able to support OnLive any time soon.
Fail.
KK-Headcharge78 on 26 Sep '11 said:
No.
Not one bit.
liquidphantom on 26 Sep '11 said:
Tried it and it's crap. Graphical detail is lost due to the encoding of the video stream, it looks like a 720p trailer video on youtube at best, with terrible artifacting where edges contrast, and to top it off controls are sluggish.
sabre2011 on 26 Sep '11 said:
To all the people who are slamming Onlive, especially those who are just determined not to even mention its name. Just try the service I assure you while its not the same as a high priced pc game rig it is as good as a console game and lets be honest it makes Xbox live look like last years technology.
Just try it and for more than a few mins before you comment on it. Some of the nonsense I have read on these forums about Onlive is just laughable. It is obvious that some of the commentators have not even tried the service. Please just try it before you comment on it.
Like the quote above. You can get Deus Ex on Onlive for $37.00 with the 30% playpack option. Also yes you do have teh data on your drive when you download from steam however you do realize that Steam can remove that game from your system? You do realize that when your o/s becomes obsolete they can remove access to any games you have downloaded? Don't believe me then Google it.
Channel4 on 26 Sep '11 said:
ATM It's only good for playing demos without having to download huge files. We all know the picture quality is terrible and it has serious latency, but i'm surprised that nobody mentions the sound. It is truly terrible. I was only using stereo and everything sounded echo-ey and fuzzy, I would not like to hear it try surround sound.
The biggest failure of Onlive though is that it's main selling point is being able to play on poor hardware, yet it doesn't have Crysis, Battlefield 3 doesn't look likely and Metro 2033 runs at about 15fps with lag!
People are slamming it for good reasons, and no, for the most part the games aren't as good as they are on consoles due to horrible picture quality and lag in single player. Add to that that you can't get console exclusives on it and it just isn't a good service. I appreciate it's technicle achievements but it is not as impressive as people (CVG) would have you believe.
gmcb007 on 26 Sep '11 said:
Yet another Onlive article that shows how 'hyped' it really is between users. I'm sure the same attitude is present on other forums as well. The biased praise here and the silly little fanboys are laughable.
The_KFD_Case on 26 Sep '11 said:
I tried it and it didn't work. Thanks, but this "wave of the future" is stillborn. The sooner it goes the way of the dodo the better.
Furthermore, you and I have already debated exhaustively in two other OnLive threads. The points I raised then still stand and nothing you nor OnLive have stated has done a single thing to allay or refute those points. OnLive is simply not good enough. Full stop.
c3dpo on 26 Sep '11 said:
^^^
Thanks Damo!!
If this is confirmed then pretty much every ISP in this country will throttle you after X ammount of hours!!!
Until that's sorted and wider actual BB (50mb+) then this isn't looking good.
Heck, most of us have all played a 36 hour session before! With this it even 4 hour "pick up and play" sessions will be gone.
slader on 26 Sep '11 said:
What's up with the majority of commenters on this article, the article clearly stated, share your experience of OnLive. But the majority of comments is people bashing OnLive without even trying it. What's up with these people, are they afraid that when OnLive takes over, it's over with upgraiding their falus symbol PCs. What will those guys do when OnLive runs games that require multiple servers chained together to run, I guess then their dick PCs will not look that big anymore.
MonkeyWrench127 on 26 Sep '11 said:
I dunno, so far my gaming site of choice (you) hasn't offered an any drawbacks, so I don't think so considering it's being plugged as "Teh greatest thang EVAR!!!!!!!!!!!" when in fact it offers an unreliable service to those who don't live in areas with internet that is quick enough to cope with this thing, and the fact that image quality is comparable to a low quality youTube video...
unclejibjab on 26 Sep '11 said:
Got a free microconsole at the Eurogamer Expo. First time i powered it on i played the 30 minutes demo of AC: Brotherhood and was underwhelmed by the graphics. On a plus point i would say that it seemed relatively responsive with no percievable input lag.
Second time i powered it on I was told that the service was pretty busy and that maybe i should try again later. Errrr ok. If i had paid money for it at this point i would have been p***ed.
Couldn't find anything on the list of games that i wanted to waste my £1 first purchase on so i'm holding off and hoping that either Dead Island or Driver SF make their way to the service before Oct 9 when the offer expires.
On the whole i would say that the could be potential but at the moment the negatives are outweighing the positives.
The_KFD_Case on 26 Sep '11 said:
Typed like a true ingrate. I am tempted to go over the many genuine concerns about OnLive, but frankly I doubt you'd be receptive to any sort of civilized exchange, so I shan't bother. Feel free to peruse the other OnLive threads to find those points.
rickimalone on 26 Sep '11 said:
In a word? No. Having played, or more accurately tried to play, on three occasions this week I’ve concluded the following;
1) What OnLive is trying to achieve is amazing. The slick interface and live integration is incredible. The concept is sound.
2) The internet infrastructure in this county is not ready. I have BT 20MB service, neither Virgin nor BT Infinity are available in my area, and in reality I probably get a 6-7MB at best. And here lies the probably, while playing the Dirt 3 and Metro 33 'free trails' the image quality went from OK to terrible, which destroys the experience.
Until I can get consistent image quality on par with my Xbox 360 or PS3 I will not pay a penny to play an OnLive.
clifton on 26 Sep '11 said:
Lot of haters on here but also a lot of genuine fears and concerns from gamers.
I can only go by own experience though. I signed up free just to check the tech and played a few demos.
I have to say I was impressed. I can plug my Xbox 360 controller in and games were loading up within 30 secs with no noticable lag upon playing.
However I have a BT Infinity connection at 35M/B d/l so hence mine will not be the typical experience.
They claim it runs at 720p (with 5MB d/l) which is my monitor max resolution anyway but the picture looked soft. It lacked the sharpness of playing via a PC video card or my Xbox 360/PS3.
But as a technical marvel it's suitably impressive. Although bandwidth usage is a major concern.
Pricing needs a LOT of work too.
Mmmmgrolsch on 26 Sep '11 said:
I've tried it and tried it several times and different times of the day on my connection that is apparently 3x faster than the recommended speed.
I stick with my initial opinion of when I 1st tried it. Its a rip off, its s**t, its worse than all other platforms.
And I assure you that it is not as good as a console game. It doesn't come close!
damoxuk on 26 Sep '11 said:
For all those (ok few) who like this product - well good for you. If you like subpar resolutions with - jaggies, no AA, slight lag (which is still lag) then go ahead use it but I've been playing in higher resolutions for over 10 years so I ain;t "downgrading"
snake2011 on 26 Sep '11 said:
sabre2011 that is a load of rubbish are you a Onlive employe? it is a step backwards not forwards.
Down with robots on 26 Sep '11 said:
Onlive is an amazing technical achievement, but it isn't really practical for the UK yet. Until we get proper unlimited broadband with guaranteed speeds then this is still one for the future. It is a great idea though.
mincedbeef on 26 Sep '11 said:
It's a great idea....but for those with shoddy connections it's not going to be ideal.
I think the large majority of gamers slamming this technology are console gamers that are associating OnLive as a threat to their wonderful lump of plastic. The graphics are 720p, they lack AA, it is sometimes sluggish....wow, sounds just like 360 and PS3 to me after enjoying 15 years of PC Gaming.
Regardless, it's something that will undoubtedly mature in the future......and it's great that they're paving the way for it now because its things like this that will get ISP's, and the UK's infrastructure into gear if can push boundaries and be a partial success now. What use is it if OnLive start rolling this out in 10 years time? We need to test and prove it now so that the next wave of electrical appliances have this sort of stuff built in as standard.
For those that insist they 'own' games or love 'Steam' (I am a big fan myself) be aware that we don't own any games anyway...merely a license to play it. All we own is a disc or an area of HDD space that the data sits on. As for people who love collecting/displaying game boxes, big deal, whatever tickles your fancy...it still doesn't change the fact that in 10 years time it will be a thing of the past and all you have is memories of physical media.
Someone else has already mentioned it but you only need to look at Steam's T&C's...they can pull the plug at any time and take your games library with it. Try not to get too attached!
At the end of the day, if you've tried OnLive and don't like it's 720p resolutions, jagged edges, input lag, slow frame-rates and slow network speeds then go back to your console....with 720p resolutions, jagged edges, input lag, slow frame-rates and slow network and let the people who like it get on with it. I'll continue to game at 1080p, with s**t loads of AA, AF, ultra high textures and multiplayer modes that non-PC gamers can only dream about.....until services like OnLive catch up in a few years time as the technology matures and we can all laugh at people who used to own consoles, don't like to stay on the pinnacle of gaming with an upgradeable PC and are adverse to change and have a spare room full of physical media and boxes.
groble on 27 Sep '11 said:
I gave fear 3 a whirl on my laptop, wireless connection. Super low latency and it looked pretty damn good I was very impressed.
However I've discovered you can't play games on the iPad you can only view other peoples. As the iPad playing aspect of the service was my big draw I've now been put off a lot
buffig on 27 Sep '11 said:
I am a PC & Console gamer. I have played games using onlive which I already own on console or PC. The image quality was far below that of my PS3. I do not have a problem with not owning a game, I have a problem with sub par services and not being able to play a game I've paid for. There is also a real feeling of disconnect. Please don't presume for 1 minute that people with misgivings about onlive are defending their beloved consoles. Onlive, for me at least has been incredibly poor and I have double the rquired internet speed.
LisVender on 27 Sep '11 said:
There are certain things you don't have to try to know they're bad ideas. Kind of like throwing yourself out of a thirty-story window.
The_KFD_Case on 27 Sep '11 said:
That's awesome, IMO.
Solm on 27 Sep '11 said:
Give me physical media over virtual any day. OnLive should be OnDead RIP.
tezza2001 on 27 Sep '11 said:
If the download could be installed into my PS3 or its added as part of the firmware I'd probably give it a go. £70 seems a bit much to link a controller to a streaming site and not physically own any purchases. I also like to think I could play something if my Internet connection has failed which has happened a few times. Its a good idea, we'll see.
Soviet1918 on 29 Sep '11 said:
+1 couldnt agree more,
In fact we all had better prey that this falls flat on its face "my guess it will" this would send a clear signal to Sony & MS
WE DONT WANT DIGITAL DONWLOAD ONLY GAMES what part of that are they having trouble with.
mincedbeef on 29 Sep '11 said:
Digital Distribution on platforms that have had it for years say the majority do want it. Digital ales overtook retail a few years ago and is going from strength to strength. What is there not to like about it.....other than some people insist having a DVD box with nice picture on it.
Physical media serves no purpose other than to get scratched, is an option to not install games (even though we all know future consoles need to sort out their paltry storage) and probably for most console gamers, an opportunity to sell/trade.
If console games weren't so shallow, short and un-moddable it would never be a problem. I don't think it will be too long before the second hand market is dead anyway. I really can't see what the fuss is about.
spaceman_DOUG on 29 Sep '11 said:
I don't have a problem with digital downloads, what I do have a problem with is the restrictions, DRM and lack of a real sense of ownership you get with them.
mincedbeef on 29 Sep '11 said:
There will always be arguments for and against which I appreciate and it won't be everyone's cup of tea.
It depends on the service, Steam for example (which will probably always come up in digital distribution discussions) imo has a good balance in which games can be played offline on multiple systems that you own and is DRM free (or non-intrusive) in most cases.
When console games lose their second hand market and/or start using online passes for multiplayer modes, I'm sure digital distribution will become a lot more appealing together with larger storage space. When PC games are still averaging 5-7GB when compressed ready for an installation there is little argument that Blu-ray based games are offering more to gamers just because they are are 25-30GB.
If anything BR just exposes lazy developing if lots of disc space is used and an install is mandatory, especially when PS3 games in 99.9% of cases are still 720p. RAW data only makes sense on games that are streamed directly from disc.
banned_aid on 30 Sep '11 said:
I‘ll admit I‘m yet to try OnLive. However, I am extremely interested in its potential for mobile gaming.
It has already been confirmed for Ipad and I can only pray that it will be coming soon to Android.
No matter that the resolution is somewhat jaggier than a gaming pc - it is still undoubtedly going to look better than anything which can be natively processed on a phone for a good while.
As somebody whose only gaming device is currently an Android phone I am very keen to be able to play a next-gen shooter on the move. f**k Angry Birds - and angry nerds too lol.
Soviet1918 on 30 Sep '11 said:
Sooooo you are in favour of discs then?
because with digital its not your hand so to speak.
sabre2011 on 30 Sep '11 said:
End of the day the media you hold in your hand is nothing more than a sliver of silicon with a stack of 1 & 0's on it. Oh and it usually has a nice picture on it for you to look at. I wonder how many mountains of discs are out there gathering dust or being used as coasters?
You guys who cling on to this "I want to hold my purchases physically" (I'm sure there is an adult joke in there somewhere lol) your days are numbered. I on the other hand will be able to play my games on my Pc, Micro console and oh look I can sit in Mc Donalds with my Ipad and play the same games and now I'm on the road and staying at a hotel and playing the same games on my Android tablet. Have fun holding onto your physical media I'm sure you will have fun with it on the go lolol
gmcb007 on 30 Sep '11 said:
Or maybe with the fact that with physical media you fully have it in your possession and don't have to rely on a remote server to access your games. After you said that utterly retarded thing about people playing old games you really have no credibility.Plus your last line in comment just potrays you as a spoilt little kid.
mincedbeef on 30 Sep '11 said:
Just as you don't with Steam, the game is installed on your local machine and doesn't need to authenticate with servers at all. If there is no online connection available, then you automatically play in 'offline' mode.
Mmmmgrolsch on 30 Sep '11 said:
There is no offline mode for Onlive. Or are you talking about something else?
Good luck with spending over a £1,000 pound on handheld devices to play in maccies
I really can't take you seriously. Some of your posts are utter stupidity.
And as you're a casual gamer as stated by yourself which would explain your massive lack of knowledge about anything. You can already remote play on other devices...
spaceman_DOUG on 30 Sep '11 said:
Not really, it's just that on steam it feels more like the game still belongs to them and they're letting me play it.
sabre2011 on 30 Sep '11 said:
ROFL! "Spoilt little kid" so instead of giving a constructive feedback to my comments you instead stick with the tried and tested insult. How many times do I have to say this.. I have an attic full of old games dating back to the 1980's lol. It really does not matter how much you like to play dated physical material. At the end of the day physical media is dying..Sorry if this makes you mad or upset but its a fact.....
Ok now cue the insults lol ....
gmcb007 on 30 Sep '11 said:
Yet you believe your replys have been constructive feedback. You seem to churn out the same "physical media is dying get used it" reply.
sabre2011 on 1 Oct '11 said:
I keep churning out the same statement because its true.. Google next gen console and virtual media and read the results. I rest my case. For example follow this link....
http://www.psxextreme.com/ps3-news/9798.html
Mmmmgrolsch on 1 Oct '11 said:
You forget its the consumers that decide what stays and what comes the next big thing. Trust me as long as there is a market for physical media it will always stay. Just like CDs and just like DVD. If gamers don't want cloud gaming or Download games then they won't be having to go that route. Companies do not decide what we spend our money on.
Get used to it. Onlive is s**t.
Kindly p**s off.
And to anyone saying yeah but what about music and films. Well music is easily copied onto multiple devices hassle free and cost next to nothing. Films cost a few quid.
But games cost £30-£40 near release, people want something for that sort of cash.
The_KFD_Case on 1 Oct '11 said:
As has been pointed out numerous times now by both myself and others, you saying that "our physical media days are numbered", "this is the future", "retro gaming is pointless" yada yada yada, not only fails to present an argument supported by empirical facts - you have also effectively not only come across as entirely unsympathetic (and thus highly unlikely to sway anyone who isn't already of your mindset to your point of view) and without much credibility.
Enjoy your increased reliance on unscrupulous companies and digital-distribution-only servers. I and others will be the ones laughing when we can still play our games and you can only sit there chagrined that whatever amount of money you've sunk in to OnLive has left you empty handed and more vulnerable than ever.
Oh, and as for playing games on an iPad while at McDonald's...No thanks. When I'm at McDonald's its to eat - I do check my online chat client, etc. but gaming while holding a greasy burger in one hand and a cold soda in the other? I think not.
The_KFD_Case on 1 Oct '11 said:
Now that is impressive....A single link to a source of questionable reputation with even more questionable means to carry out any sort of scientifically accurate and meaningful research on the matter. I was particularly impressed by the length of the article - at under one A4 page in terms of text I simply can not take it, nor you (on this matter) seriously. Next.
The_KFD_Case on 1 Oct '11 said:
That right there (the underlined bit in bold) is the crux of the matter. Sabre's claims that a new technology will triumph are optimistic, to say the least. It could happen, true, yet history is littered with new technologies, some even superior to competing technologies at the time, that didn't catch on. One classic example is that of DAT tapes - at the time superior, smaller, faster, with more storage space than other tapes and yet it didn't catch on and the mass market turned to CDs around the same time.
Cloud computing may have its uses - I do not deny this. Yet as a customer I am not willing to spend money on cloud-computing only gaming products. End of discussion. If there are companies that continue to cater to my interests I will turn to them. If no gaming companies do then I'll find other things to spend my time and money on. Simple.
gmcb007 on 1 Oct '11 said:
So you link me to an opinion of the CEO of a failing publisher. Oh you definitely win this...
ricflair on 1 Oct '11 said:
There's a very good write up on Digital Foundry on EG.
The latency/lag they talk of on EG is comparable to 360 in some cases, but that certainly wasn't my experience on a 7/8Mb connection on my PC. Also the service is so variable - they said that sometimes sending an email on another computer on the network would cripple it, but sometimes you could watch iplayer and it would still maintain good performance.
Ultimately the connection/performance is my biggest problem. I'm not keen on the ownership stuff either, but the games simply don't look as good as 360/PS3 games when there's a lot of motion due to the video compression, let a lone a decent PC setup.
It also uses 2GB+ per hour download. ISPs are not going to be happy at all, even if you don't exceed your monthly allowance (and loads of Unlimited broadband deals have fair usage policies), alot of ISPs manage traffic at peak times.
sabre2011 on 1 Oct '11 said:
One very important note... I never ever said Retro gaming is pointless. Were did I ever say that???... I said quite the opposite. What has happened is so many people are twisting my words because they are angry that something new has arrived. Something that will change there gaming habits. No more spending hundreds on new consoles. How many people with launch Xbox's have had to purchase a new model? I have personally gone through 3. Onlive changes all of that. Once again i state I have an attic full of games dating back to the 80's. I like retro gaming. As for Mc donalds quote that was just an example yeah I admit greasy hands on a nice shiny Ipad not going to happen. I do have one question for you ..
"Enjoy your increased reliance on unscrupulous companies and digital-distribution-only servers. I and others will be the ones laughing when we can still play our games and you can only sit there chagrined that whatever amount of money you've sunk in to OnLive has left you empty handed and more vulnerable than ever."
?? I dont think you understand. With more and more companies switching to the always online option of DRM even with physical media how are you going to play those games when there authentication servers finally shut down? Those companies may indeed be Unscrupulous to you and others but even if you take cloud gaming out of the equation you still will not be able to play physical media years from now if that same physical media needs to authenticate while playing.
Ok to sum this all up, as its blatantly obvious with the constant insults that the majority of people posting here are to narrow minded to look at the possibilities a service like Onlive can give them. If you wish to carry on with consoles and physical media then great , good for you, glad you are happy with that. Its your call and I salute you for playing games.
I on the other hand will carry on supporting Onlive. The service is already over a year old and growing in rapidly. Like it or not Onlive is here to stay. The Uk launch was hugely successful and as stated in other posts the service has been growing fast in the USA for over a year. Onlive is changing the way we play and purchase games. Now I am going to take your advice and as you so delicately put it I shall....
"p**s off"
Good luck to you all and I hope that one day we can all be friends.
banned_aid on 1 Oct '11 said:
Sabre cutting right to the point again...
Cloud gaming can only improve from here on in. Once they up the resolution (only a matter of time) then there will be no need for un-environmentally friendly lumps of plastic anymore.
No more RROD, no more discs scratched by the 360, no more viruses, no more expensive upgrades, no pc nerdiness required, no running out of hard drive space, no annoying mates trying to borrow your games.
Once you‘ve paid for the game you have access to it for at least three years - it cannot be lost.
...and before anybody reminds me that the company could fold and result in loss of service, I would like to raise the assertion that the same thing could happen to Live once the cloud starts to smother it.