Start worrying about OnLive

  • 107 results
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3

This topic is locked from further discussion.

Avatar image for amaneuvering
amaneuvering

4815

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 5

User Lists: 0

#1 amaneuvering
Member since 2009 • 4815 Posts

http://www.engadget.com/2010/12/06/vizio-and-onlive-mulling-subscription-based-video-services-for-n/

It's already a pretty cool cloud streaming game service that makes things pretty simple for the casuals by streaming games directly through their computer/TV, without the need for annoying installs or expensive hardware upgrades all the time...and now they are adding streaming movies to the service too...

If they keep adding to this service, possibly bringing things like music and TV shows etc, they could have a full cloud streaming entertainment media service and one that has a much larger focus on PROPER games than the likes of Sky/Cable etc, that everyone can use really easily use and appreciate.

If this is the future of OnLive it could be absolutely huge and just like many people predicted this kind of cloud streaming service really could be a game changer and the future of home entertainment, including games.

When they start building this into new TVs, which I absolutely think could happen, it has the potential to change everything since you won't really need to worry about buying new consoles any more, or upgrading, or installing things, or having multiple entertainment subscriptions services that all cost per month.

Avatar image for AnnoyedDragon
AnnoyedDragon

9948

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#2 AnnoyedDragon
Member since 2006 • 9948 Posts

If Onlive was of interest to PC gamers they would already be console gamers. It is a convenience orientated service; and PC gamers already gave up some convenience for more freedom. Onlive sacrifices freedom for convenience, it just won't sit with PC gamers.

Console gaming on the other hand is a convenience orientated system, one that makes sacrifices to user freedom; with low cost and convenience being the advantages. Arguably then, Cloud gaming is a evolution of the convenience based gaming model; and is a threat to consoles. Provided they sort out the current issues like input lag and image quality.

Avatar image for amaneuvering
amaneuvering

4815

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 5

User Lists: 0

#3 amaneuvering
Member since 2009 • 4815 Posts

http://www.engadget.com/2010/12/02/onlive-ushers-in-the-microconsole-with-all-you-can-eat-game-plan/

Also, this is how they should be charging for the service in the first place imo; where you pay a single monthly subscription and then get free access to all the games and other services, which would be stunning once they add movies to the service.

I think they should have possibly 2 very simple payment options;

1: A single monthly fee as mentioned above with free access to all the games and stuff

2: Free subscription and then you pay/rent each game you want, like they currently have, but it needs to be much MUCH cheaper for each rental and full purchase than it currently it

Regardless I think these guys know exactly what they are doing and I think OnLive is just going to get better and better and offer more and more value

Avatar image for Bigboi500
Bigboi500

35550

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 10

User Lists: 0

#4 Bigboi500
Member since 2007 • 35550 Posts

Your theory sounds like a bit of a leap.

Avatar image for amaneuvering
amaneuvering

4815

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 5

User Lists: 0

#5 amaneuvering
Member since 2009 • 4815 Posts

If Onlive was of interest to PC gamers they would already be console gamers. It is a convenience orientated service; and PC gamers already gave up some convenience for more freedom. Onlive sacrifices freedom for convenience, it just won't sit with PC gamers.

Console gaming on the other hand is a convenience orientated system, one that makes sacrifices to user freedom; with low cost and convenience being the advantages. Arguably then, Cloud gaming is a evolution of the convenience based gaming model; and is a threat to consoles. Provided they sort out the current issues like input lag and image quality.

AnnoyedDragon
Well I think OnLive is more a service for all those potential "casual" gamers who really don't give a flying crap about going through the process of installing games on an ageing PC to play alone in their bedrooms, and those console gamers who just want everything in the world to be neater and all-combined and don't want to have multiple different systems under their TV that all do basically the same thing. Like you say, it's a service of convenience, and I think there's millions of people out there who would jump on something like this if it's easy to set-up, access, and use, and avoid all the hassle of PCs and consoles for playing game and watching movies altogether. In my opinion something like OnLive is potentially the Netflix of the games world, and potentially the Sky/Cable of the whole entertainment media future...
Avatar image for kate_jones
kate_jones

3221

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 0

#6 kate_jones
Member since 2007 • 3221 Posts

I'm worried alright, worried about the people who pay to use OnLive.

someone wake me up when they make OffLive.

Avatar image for amaneuvering
amaneuvering

4815

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 5

User Lists: 0

#7 amaneuvering
Member since 2009 • 4815 Posts

Your theory sounds like a bit of a leap.

Bigboi500
I'd say it sounds more like an inevitable evolution.
Avatar image for testfactor888
testfactor888

7157

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#8 testfactor888
Member since 2010 • 7157 Posts
Whole thing sounds terrible and something I would never use even if someday it became very popular.
Avatar image for AnnoyedDragon
AnnoyedDragon

9948

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#9 AnnoyedDragon
Member since 2006 • 9948 Posts

Well I think OnLive is more a service for all those potential "casual" gamers who really don't give a flying crap about going through the process of installing games on an ageing PC to play alone in their bedrooms, and those console gamers who just want everything in the world to be neater and all-combined and don't want to have multiple different systems under their TV that all do basically the same thing.

Like you say, it's a service of convenience, and I think there's millions of people out there who would jump on something like this if it's easy to set-up, access, and use, and avoid all the hassle of PCs and consoles for playing game and watching movies altogether.

In my opinion something like OnLive is potentially the Netflix of the games world, and potentially the Sky/Cable of the whole entertainment media future...amaneuvering

Sounding rarther aggressive towards PC there.

As I said, it will apeal to convenience orientated gamers. Serious PC gamers would take issue with the lack of control over the experience, with it being even more locked down than the consoles they have already rejected.

Avatar image for Bigboi500
Bigboi500

35550

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 10

User Lists: 0

#10 Bigboi500
Member since 2007 • 35550 Posts

[QUOTE="Bigboi500"]

Your theory sounds like a bit of a leap.

amaneuvering

I'd say it sounds more like an inevitable evolution.

By structure I agree, but who knows how the games themselves will evolve in the future?

Avatar image for amaneuvering
amaneuvering

4815

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 5

User Lists: 0

#11 amaneuvering
Member since 2009 • 4815 Posts

Whole thing sounds terrible and something I would never use even if someday it became very popular. testfactor888

So having a single cloud streaming service providing you with all the big name PC/Console games, movies, and potentially music and TV shows, all for an affordable monthly fee, with no installation or upgrade worries, and no need to sit in your room to use it or have multiple bulky hardware units sitting under your TV, sounds terrible to you...

Some people.

:roll:

It's basically justa better version of something like SKY/Cable but with PROPER games being just as significant a part of the service, and as well integrated as other parts of the service for once, so I don't see what your afraid of really.

Avatar image for amaneuvering
amaneuvering

4815

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 5

User Lists: 0

#12 amaneuvering
Member since 2009 • 4815 Posts

[QUOTE="amaneuvering"][QUOTE="Bigboi500"]

Your theory sounds like a bit of a leap.

Bigboi500

I'd say it sounds more like an inevitable evolution.

By structure I agree, but who knows how the games themselves will evolve in the future?

I'm not quite sure what you mean or how it's relevant to how OnLive works as a service. Can you elaborate?
Avatar image for testfactor888
testfactor888

7157

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#13 testfactor888
Member since 2010 • 7157 Posts

[QUOTE="testfactor888"]Whole thing sounds terrible and something I would never use even if someday it became very popular. amaneuvering

So having a single cloud streaming service providing you with all the big name PC/Console games, movies, and potentially music and TV shows, all for an affordable monthly fee, with no installation or upgrade worries, and no need to sit in your room to use it or have multiple bulky hardware units sitting under your TV, sounds terrible to you...

Some people.

:roll:

Yeah actually it sounds terrible to me. I do get the impression though that you are unable to cope with others opposing opinions.

I get the majority of the stuff you are talking about for free. I don't have an issue with installing games. I have not had to upgrade my computer for awhile now so that is not an issue to me in the slightest. It all sounds like just one massive mess with a subscription fee attached. I have no use for it

Avatar image for Bigboi500
Bigboi500

35550

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 10

User Lists: 0

#14 Bigboi500
Member since 2007 • 35550 Posts

[QUOTE="Bigboi500"]

[QUOTE="amaneuvering"] I'd say it sounds more like an inevitable evolution.amaneuvering

By structure I agree, but who knows how the games themselves will evolve in the future?

I'm not quite sure what you mean or how it's relevant to how OnLive works as a service. Can you elaborate?

I mean sure, in the future, just about all games will be delivered either by streaming into your home or downloaded via digital, but all we really know about the games themselves are they wont be super-expensive high budget, short flash games like what we've had this gen. Also they wont be just shallow casual games either. Once everyone gets over the stardom of "teh graphics", devs will be focusing on better choices that delve deeper into game worlds with tons more content. People are really going to be lost in them and they're gonna eat away peoples whole lives.

Avatar image for amaneuvering
amaneuvering

4815

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 5

User Lists: 0

#15 amaneuvering
Member since 2009 • 4815 Posts

[QUOTE="amaneuvering"]

[QUOTE="testfactor888"]Whole thing sounds terrible and something I would never use even if someday it became very popular. testfactor888

So having a single cloud streaming service providing you with all the big name PC/Console games, movies, and potentially music and TV shows, all for an affordable monthly fee, with no installation or upgrade worries, and no need to sit in your room to use it or have multiple bulky hardware units sitting under your TV, sounds terrible to you...

Some people.

:roll:

Yeah actually it sounds terrible to me. I do get the impression though that you are unable to cope with others opposing opinions.

I get the majority of the stuff you are talking about for free. I don't have an issue with installing games. I have not had to upgrade my computer for awhile now so that is not an issue to me in the slightest. It all sounds like just one massive mess with a subscription fee attached. I have no use for it

I get the impression you just like to be awkward and think the way you are with technology is the way the majority of people are with it when underneath you know that only you and a small minority of similar minded people think like you and would rather have it your way than what I'm suggesting, but you like to be a bit of a numpty like that.

Or maybe I've got that all wrong.

Avatar image for amaneuvering
amaneuvering

4815

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 5

User Lists: 0

#16 amaneuvering
Member since 2009 • 4815 Posts

[QUOTE="amaneuvering"][QUOTE="Bigboi500"]By structure I agree, but who knows how the games themselves will evolve in the future?

Bigboi500

I'm not quite sure what you mean or how it's relevant to how OnLive works as a service. Can you elaborate?

I mean sure, in the future, just about all games will be delivered either by streaming into your home or downloaded via digital, but all we really know about the games themselves are they wont be super-expensive high budget, short flash games like what we've had this gen. Also they wont be just shallow casual games either. Once everyone gets over the stardom of "teh graphics", devs will be focusing on better choices that delve deeper into game worlds with tons more content. People are really going to be lost in them and they're gonna eat away peoples whole lives.

That all sound reasonable enough to me, and your points seem valid, but what part of all that makes my theory sound like a bit of a leap, as you originally mentioned above, is what I meant?

Avatar image for Bigboi500
Bigboi500

35550

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 10

User Lists: 0

#17 Bigboi500
Member since 2007 • 35550 Posts

[QUOTE="Bigboi500"]

[QUOTE="amaneuvering"] I'm not quite sure what you mean or how it's relevant to how OnLive works as a service. Can you elaborate?amaneuvering

I mean sure, in the future, just about all games will be delivered either by streaming into your home or downloaded via digital, but all we really know about the games themselves are they wont be super-expensive high budget, short flash games like what we've had this gen. Also they wont be just shallow casual games either. Once everyone gets over the stardom of "teh graphics", devs will be focusing on better choices that delve deeper into game worlds with tons more content. People are really going to be lost in them and they're gonna eat away peoples whole lives.

That all sound reasonable enough to me, and your points seem valid, but what part of all that makes my theory sound like a bit of a leap, as you originally mentioned above, is what I meant?

Well I may have gotten what you said wrong, but I thought you were saying games of the future would mostly be simple and casual, mainly to appeal to the masses through services like OnLive.

Avatar image for testfactor888
testfactor888

7157

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#18 testfactor888
Member since 2010 • 7157 Posts

[QUOTE="testfactor888"]

[QUOTE="amaneuvering"]

So having a single cloud streaming service providing you with all the big name PC/Console games, movies, and potentially music and TV shows, all for an affordable monthly fee, with no installation or upgrade worries, and no need to sit in your room to use it or have multiple bulky hardware units sitting under your TV, sounds terrible to you...

Some people.

:roll:

amaneuvering

Yeah actually it sounds terrible to me. I do get the impression though that you are unable to cope with others opposing opinions.

I get the majority of the stuff you are talking about for free. I don't have an issue with installing games. I have not had to upgrade my computer for awhile now so that is not an issue to me in the slightest. It all sounds like just one massive mess with a subscription fee attached. I have no use for it

I get the impression you just like to be awkward and think the way you are with technology is the way the majority of people are with it when underneath you know that only you and a small minority of similar minded people think like you and would rather have it your way than what I'm suggesting, but you like to be a bit of a numpty like that.

Or maybe I've got that all wrong.

Where did I once say I was speaking for the majority of people out there? I don't jump on the technology band wagon just because its something new. If I have no use for it I don't purchase it and see no reason to praise it. I also don't have nor use a cell phone. I have no need of a 3D TV, or even an HDTV. I have no use for this OnLive service as I said. Through all that though I never once said I was speaking for the majority of people out there. That is you just trying to put words into other peoples mouths and coming off as a bit full of it.

Avatar image for amaneuvering
amaneuvering

4815

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 5

User Lists: 0

#19 amaneuvering
Member since 2009 • 4815 Posts

[QUOTE="amaneuvering"]

[QUOTE="Bigboi500"]I mean sure, in the future, just about all games will be delivered either by streaming into your home or downloaded via digital, but all we really know about the games themselves are they wont be super-expensive high budget, short flash games like what we've had this gen. Also they wont be just shallow casual games either. Once everyone gets over the stardom of "teh graphics", devs will be focusing on better choices that delve deeper into game worlds with tons more content. People are really going to be lost in them and they're gonna eat away peoples whole lives.

Bigboi500

That all sound reasonable enough to me, and your points seem valid, but what part of all that makes my theory sound like a bit of a leap, as you originally mentioned above, is what I meant?

Well I may have gotten what you said wrong, but I thought you were saying games of the future would mostly be simple and casual, mainly to appeal to the masses through services like OnLive.

Ah, I see.

No, I was basically saying the overall service will be much simpler and more of a combined cloud entertainment service as opposed to what a lot of people currently have for playing games and watching movies etc, which is usually a separate PC, multiple consoles, and multiple subscription services or costs and fees etc.

Basically I was just saying that OnLive now has the very real potential to be a great all-in-one cloud based streaming entertainment service. The fact that it also has a huge focus on gaming is obviously a major plus point from the perspective of people in this forum.

I just think it could be awesome in the future if I don't have to have 3 consoles and a cable/freeview box under my TV and multiple subcription services (cable, Netflix, etc), and instead I can have it all in one service that is potentially full of convenience, simplicity, and win imo.

The games on that service would be just as varied and fun etc as we currently see on any PC or console as far as I can see.

Avatar image for Miroku32
Miroku32

8666

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 43

User Lists: 0

#20 Miroku32
Member since 2006 • 8666 Posts
So what name should we call all these people that are promoting OnLive service on a forum that really isn't interested in it?
Avatar image for Barbie_Boy
Barbie_Boy

667

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#21 Barbie_Boy
Member since 2009 • 667 Posts

I am in Despair!

oh wait... no I am not
while OnLive might turn in to somthing stronger and viable it is FAR away from ever taking consoles place (which is debatable if it ever will)

Avatar image for Bigboi500
Bigboi500

35550

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 10

User Lists: 0

#22 Bigboi500
Member since 2007 • 35550 Posts

[QUOTE="Bigboi500"]

[QUOTE="amaneuvering"]

That all sound reasonable enough to me, and your points seem valid, but what part of all that makes my theory sound like a bit of a leap, as you originally mentioned above, is what I meant?

amaneuvering

Well I may have gotten what you said wrong, but I thought you were saying games of the future would mostly be simple and casual, mainly to appeal to the masses through services like OnLive.

Ah, I see.

No, I was basically saying the overall service will be much simpler and more of a combined cloud entertainment service as opposed to what a lot of people currently have for playing games and watching movies etc, which is usually a separate PC, multiple consoles, and multiple subscription services or costs and fees etc.

Basically I was just saying that OnLive now has the very real potential to be a great all-in-one cloud based streaming entertainment service. The fact that it also has a huge focus on gaming is obviously a major plus point from the perspective of people in this forum.

I just think it could be awesome in the future if I don't have to have 3 consoles and a cable/freeview box under my TV and multiple subcription services (cable, Netflix, etc), and instead I can have it all in one service that is potentially full of convenience, simplicity, and win imo.

The games on that service would be just as varied and fun etc as we currently see on any PC or console as far as I can see.

Yeah I agree. Don't know when it'll be that simple and easy, but it certainly will be at some point hopefully. It would be a much better system than our current convoluted reality with complicated hardware, accessories, add ons, dlc, upgrades, et cetera.

Just turning on your tv or hologram device, not have any clutter, no loud hardware, no tangled power cords, just easy access to great games and media. Sounds good to me.

Avatar image for amaneuvering
amaneuvering

4815

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 5

User Lists: 0

#23 amaneuvering
Member since 2009 • 4815 Posts

[QUOTE="amaneuvering"]

[QUOTE="testfactor888"] Yeah actually it sounds terrible to me. I do get the impression though that you are unable to cope with others opposing opinions.

I get the majority of the stuff you are talking about for free. I don't have an issue with installing games. I have not had to upgrade my computer for awhile now so that is not an issue to me in the slightest. It all sounds like just one massive mess with a subscription fee attached. I have no use for it

testfactor888

I get the impression you just like to be awkward and think the way you are with technology is the way the majority of people are with it when underneath you know that only you and a small minority of similar minded people think like you and would rather have it your way than what I'm suggesting, but you like to be a bit of a numpty like that.

Or maybe I've got that all wrong.

Where did I once say I was speaking for the majority of people out there? I don't jump on the technology band wagon just because its something new. If I have no use for it I don't purchase it and see no reason to praise it. I also don't have nor use a cell phone. I have no need of a 3D TV, or even an HDTV. I have no use for this OnLive service as I said. Through all that though I never once said I was speaking for the majority of people out there. That is you just trying to put words into other peoples mouths and coming off as a bit full of it.

The implication is that because YOU don't need or care about it that somehow makes it irrelevant, or as you said "the whole thing sounds terrible", and that is obviously just you looking at it from you tiny little perspective without seeing the big picture at all. It's maybe "terrible" to and for you but you are clearly in the minority if you think it really is terrible objectively as opposed to subjectively. Or maybe you just don't understand the potential of the service or what it could offer and the benefits and convenience it could bring etc. I didn't make the post to convince stubborn people who don't see beyond themselves and the way they think about this kind of technology, entertainment experience, and indeed consumer service. If you want to stay stuck in past doing things the same old clumsy and user-unfriendly way, from the perspective of the vast majority of average people out there who don't want to sit in front of a computer in their rooms all day using multiple different services and programs and other random unintuitive un-user friendly crap, or having countless bulky and expensive consoles and media boxes sitting under their TVs wasting space and just being a mess with all the wires and crap, then go for it...
Avatar image for 110million
110million

14910

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 2

User Lists: 0

#24 110million
Member since 2008 • 14910 Posts
So what name should we call all these people that are promoting OnLive service on a forum that really isn't interested in it? Miroku32
onlookers, because all they do is watch content and never actually own it. :o Lots of people are going to be feeling very silly when OnLive fails down the line, cloud computed gaming is a perfectly fine idea, but it is not one that will work in this generation. Its not even an idea "ahead of its time" its an idea they are trying to capitalize on far too early, its just not practical. It will never become standard, limited games, working well in limited areas, for potentially limited amount of times. Netflix does Movies and TV Shows, so it doesn't really matter in that regard.
Avatar image for DethSkematik
DethSkematik

3900

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 117

User Lists: 0

#25 DethSkematik
Member since 2008 • 3900 Posts
Even if it were a threat to consoles, it wouldn't matter to me (I'm less attached to consoles, since a new one comes out every gen, opposed to my PC, where I only need to upgrade parts...so as you can see, I've got a bunch of cool stickers on the case, some flashy keyboards, and gave my PC a human name :P). Anyway, OnLive is actually pretty cool. I'm probably never going to get the service, but I can see a lot of people jumping on the program in the next few years.
Avatar image for amaneuvering
amaneuvering

4815

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 5

User Lists: 0

#26 amaneuvering
Member since 2009 • 4815 Posts

[QUOTE="amaneuvering"]

[QUOTE="Bigboi500"]Well I may have gotten what you said wrong, but I thought you were saying games of the future would mostly be simple and casual, mainly to appeal to the masses through services like OnLive.

Bigboi500

Ah, I see.

No, I was basically saying the overall service will be much simpler and more of a combined cloud entertainment service as opposed to what a lot of people currently have for playing games and watching movies etc, which is usually a separate PC, multiple consoles, and multiple subscription services or costs and fees etc.

Basically I was just saying that OnLive now has the very real potential to be a great all-in-one cloud based streaming entertainment service. The fact that it also has a huge focus on gaming is obviously a major plus point from the perspective of people in this forum.

I just think it could be awesome in the future if I don't have to have 3 consoles and a cable/freeview box under my TV and multiple subcription services (cable, Netflix, etc), and instead I can have it all in one service that is potentially full of convenience, simplicity, and win imo.

The games on that service would be just as varied and fun etc as we currently see on any PC or console as far as I can see.

Yeah I agree. Don't know when it'll be that simple and easy, but it certainly will be at some point hopefully. It would be a much better system than our current convoluted reality with complicated hardware, accessories, add ons, dlc, upgrades, et cetera.

Just turning on your tv or hologram device, not have any clutter, no loud hardware, no tangled power cords, just easy access to great games and media. Sounds good to me.

Exactly, and I think OnLive is one of the first real-world examples that kind or service in the making.
Avatar image for testfactor888
testfactor888

7157

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#27 testfactor888
Member since 2010 • 7157 Posts

[QUOTE="testfactor888"]

[QUOTE="amaneuvering"]

I get the impression you just like to be awkward and think the way you are with technology is the way the majority of people are with it when underneath you know that only you and a small minority of similar minded people think like you and would rather have it your way than what I'm suggesting, but you like to be a bit of a numpty like that.

Or maybe I've got that all wrong.

amaneuvering

Where did I once say I was speaking for the majority of people out there? I don't jump on the technology band wagon just because its something new. If I have no use for it I don't purchase it and see no reason to praise it. I also don't have nor use a cell phone. I have no need of a 3D TV, or even an HDTV. I have no use for this OnLive service as I said. Through all that though I never once said I was speaking for the majority of people out there. That is you just trying to put words into other peoples mouths and coming off as a bit full of it.

The implication is that because YOU don't need or care about it that somehow makes it irrelevant, or as you said "the whole thing sounds terrible", and that is obviously just you looking at it from you tiny little perspective without seeing the big picture at all. It's maybe "terrible" to and for you but you are clearly in the minority if you think it really is terrible objectively as opposed to subjectively. Or maybe you just don't understand the potential of the service or what it could offer and the benefits and convenience it could bring etc. I didn't make the post to convince stubborn people who don't see beyond themselves and the way they think about this kind of technology, entertainment experience, and indeed consumer service. If you want to stay stuck in past doing things the same old clumsy and user-unfriendly way, from the perspective of the vast majority of average people out there who don't want to sit in front of a computer in their rooms all day using multiple different services and programs and other random unintuitive un-user friendly crap, or having countless bulky and expensive consoles and media boxes sitting under their TVs wasting space and just being a mess with all the wires and crap, then go for it...

Sounds like I hurt your feelings. If you can't deal with people opposing your opinion than don't make a thread and than cry about it

Avatar image for ChubbyGuy40
ChubbyGuy40

26442

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#28 ChubbyGuy40
Member since 2007 • 26442 Posts

I freakin' called it! It's becomming more crap than it already is. Conveience over quality the market always says.

So what name should we call all these people that are promoting OnLive service on a forum that really isn't interested in it? Miroku32

Rikusakis/Dodo Birds. Seriously this service is sad and really, really bad. I'd hate to see any console maker switch toward this market.

Avatar image for amaneuvering
amaneuvering

4815

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 5

User Lists: 0

#29 amaneuvering
Member since 2009 • 4815 Posts

[QUOTE="Miroku32"]So what name should we call all these people that are promoting OnLive service on a forum that really isn't interested in it? 110million
onlookers, because all they do is watch content and never actually own it. :o Lots of people are going to be feeling very silly when OnLive fails down the line, cloud computed gaming is a perfectly fine idea, but it is not one that will work in this generation. Its not even an idea "ahead of its time" its an idea they are trying to capitalize on far too early, its just not practical. It will never become standard, limited games, working well in limited areas, for potentially limited amount of times. Netflix does Movies and TV Shows, so it doesn't really matter in that regard.

Let's see in a few years if the service was a failure or a success shall we and then whoever is right can absolutely laugh in the virtual face of the other.

In terms of names for the people who are promoting cloud based gaming services like OnLive maybe we could call them raindrops or something; because they come from the cloud and they rain on everyone else's parade, well certainly those people who are stuck believing in an outdated gaming and entertainment model that is slowly but surely becoming irrelevant.

;)

Avatar image for 110million
110million

14910

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 2

User Lists: 0

#30 110million
Member since 2008 • 14910 Posts

I freakin' called it! It's becomming more crap than it already is. Conveience over quality the market always says.

[QUOTE="Miroku32"]So what name should we call all these people that are promoting OnLive service on a forum that really isn't interested in it? ChubbyGuy40

Rikusakis/Dodo Birds. Seriously this service is sad and really, really bad. I'd hate to see any console maker switch toward this market.

Yeah I can just imagine getting a PS4 or XBOX720 game on it. Oh man, Metal Gear Solid 5 is out! But I can't afford the bandwidth for this month, I guess I'll just play it next month! The Next Month: Epic cutscene full of story explanation: "And the one who did it all, it was.... *YOUR INTERNET CONNECTION WAS LOST, HAHA YOU SUCK". Complain about how back in your day, for a game, you could just buy it, throw it in your console, and play all you wanted, whenever you wanted. :|
Avatar image for ChubbyGuy40
ChubbyGuy40

26442

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#31 ChubbyGuy40
Member since 2007 • 26442 Posts

[QUOTE="110million"][QUOTE="Miroku32"]So what name should we call all these people that are promoting OnLive service on a forum that really isn't interested in it? amaneuvering

onlookers, because all they do is watch content and never actually own it. :o Lots of people are going to be feeling very silly when OnLive fails down the line, cloud computed gaming is a perfectly fine idea, but it is not one that will work in this generation. Its not even an idea "ahead of its time" its an idea they are trying to capitalize on far too early, its just not practical. It will never become standard, limited games, working well in limited areas, for potentially limited amount of times. Netflix does Movies and TV Shows, so it doesn't really matter in that regard.

Let's see in a few years if the service was a failure or a success shall we and then whoever is right can absolutely laugh in the virtual face of the other.

In terms of names for the people who are promoting cloud based gaming services like OnLive maybe we could call them raindrops or something; because they come from the cloud and they rain on everyone else's parade, well certainly those people who are stuck believing in an outdated gaming and entertainment model that is slowly but surely becoming irrelevant.

;)

No, no rain drops. I like the rain but I hate the OnLive fanboys/marketers. DODO BIRDS!

Avatar image for ChubbyGuy40
ChubbyGuy40

26442

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#32 ChubbyGuy40
Member since 2007 • 26442 Posts

[QUOTE="ChubbyGuy40"]

I freakin' called it! It's becomming more crap than it already is. Conveience over quality the market always says.

[QUOTE="Miroku32"]So what name should we call all these people that are promoting OnLive service on a forum that really isn't interested in it? 110million

Rikusakis/Dodo Birds. Seriously this service is sad and really, really bad. I'd hate to see any console maker switch toward this market.

Yeah I can just imagine getting a PS4 or XBOX720 game on it. Oh man, Metal Gear Solid 5 is out! But I can't afford the bandwidth for this month, I guess I'll just play it next month! The Next Month: Epic cutscene full of story explanation: "And the one who did it all, it was.... *YOUR INTERNET CONNECTION WAS LOST, HAHA YOU SUCK". Complain about how back in your day, for a game, you could just buy it, throw it in your console, and play all you wanted, whenever you wanted. :|

Back in my day we had to pray for the consoles to work! And we had dem dere fangled cartridges! If it don't work yall had to take it out, blow in it a few times right dere, den you done try again till it works.

Avatar image for amaneuvering
amaneuvering

4815

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 5

User Lists: 0

#33 amaneuvering
Member since 2009 • 4815 Posts

[QUOTE="amaneuvering"][QUOTE="testfactor888"] Where did I once say I was speaking for the majority of people out there? I don't jump on the technology band wagon just because its something new. If I have no use for it I don't purchase it and see no reason to praise it. I also don't have nor use a cell phone. I have no need of a 3D TV, or even an HDTV. I have no use for this OnLive service as I said. Through all that though I never once said I was speaking for the majority of people out there. That is you just trying to put words into other peoples mouths and coming off as a bit full of it.

testfactor888

The implication is that because YOU don't need or care about it that somehow makes it irrelevant, or as you said "the whole thing sounds terrible", and that is obviously just you looking at it from you tiny little perspective without seeing the big picture at all. It's maybe "terrible" to and for you but you are clearly in the minority if you think it really is terrible objectively as opposed to subjectively. Or maybe you just don't understand the potential of the service or what it could offer and the benefits and convenience it could bring etc. I didn't make the post to convince stubborn people who don't see beyond themselves and the way they think about this kind of technology, entertainment experience, and indeed consumer service. If you want to stay stuck in past doing things the same old clumsy and user-unfriendly way, from the perspective of the vast majority of average people out there who don't want to sit in front of a computer in their rooms all day using multiple different services and programs and other random unintuitive un-user friendly crap, or having countless bulky and expensive consoles and media boxes sitting under their TVs wasting space and just being a mess with all the wires and crap, then go for it...

Sounds like I hurt your feelings. If you can't deal with people opposing your opinion than don't make a thread and than cry about it

I think you are taking what I said the wrong way.

I'm not hurt in the slightest.

I just get wound up by people who clearly don't have a clue about anything to do with the discussion at hand but like to argue as though their opinion on the matter is relevant.

You blankly dismiss it because you clearly don't understand it, and in doing so you imply that how you subjectively think and feel about it must be the way it is as opposed to how it really is, which makes sensible discussion about it almost impossible, and that just bugs me.

Avatar image for amaneuvering
amaneuvering

4815

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 5

User Lists: 0

#34 amaneuvering
Member since 2009 • 4815 Posts

[QUOTE="amaneuvering"]

[QUOTE="110million"] onlookers, because all they do is watch content and never actually own it. :o Lots of people are going to be feeling very silly when OnLive fails down the line, cloud computed gaming is a perfectly fine idea, but it is not one that will work in this generation. Its not even an idea "ahead of its time" its an idea they are trying to capitalize on far too early, its just not practical. It will never become standard, limited games, working well in limited areas, for potentially limited amount of times. Netflix does Movies and TV Shows, so it doesn't really matter in that regard. ChubbyGuy40

Let's see in a few years if the service was a failure or a success shall we and then whoever is right can absolutely laugh in the virtual face of the other.

In terms of names for the people who are promoting cloud based gaming services like OnLive maybe we could call them raindrops or something; because they come from the cloud and they rain on everyone else's parade, well certainly those people who are stuck believing in an outdated gaming and entertainment model that is slowly but surely becoming irrelevant.

;)

No, no rain drops. I like the rain but I hate the OnLive fanboys/marketers. DODO BIRDS!

You get that I actually support OnLive right?

Avatar image for testfactor888
testfactor888

7157

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#35 testfactor888
Member since 2010 • 7157 Posts

[QUOTE="testfactor888"]

[QUOTE="amaneuvering"] The implication is that because YOU don't need or care about it that somehow makes it irrelevant, or as you said "the whole thing sounds terrible", and that is obviously just you looking at it from you tiny little perspective without seeing the big picture at all. It's maybe "terrible" to and for you but you are clearly in the minority if you think it really is terrible objectively as opposed to subjectively. Or maybe you just don't understand the potential of the service or what it could offer and the benefits and convenience it could bring etc. I didn't make the post to convince stubborn people who don't see beyond themselves and the way they think about this kind of technology, entertainment experience, and indeed consumer service. If you want to stay stuck in past doing things the same old clumsy and user-unfriendly way, from the perspective of the vast majority of average people out there who don't want to sit in front of a computer in their rooms all day using multiple different services and programs and other random unintuitive un-user friendly crap, or having countless bulky and expensive consoles and media boxes sitting under their TVs wasting space and just being a mess with all the wires and crap, then go for it...amaneuvering

Sounds like I hurt your feelings. If you can't deal with people opposing your opinion than don't make a thread and than cry about it

I think you are taking what I said the wrong way.

I'm not hurt in the slightest.

I just get wound up by people who clearly don't have a clue about anything to do with the discussion at hand but like to argue as though their opinion on the matter is relevant.

You blankly dismiss it because you clearly don't understand it, and in doing so you imply that how you subjectively think and feel about it must be the way it is as opposed to how it really is, which makes sensible discussion about it almost impossible, and that just bugs me.

So you were made upset (it bugged you) by what I said as I originally thought. So my original statement of don't make a thread and than cry about it later on when someone doesn't share your opinion on it still applies

Avatar image for testfactor888
testfactor888

7157

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#36 testfactor888
Member since 2010 • 7157 Posts

[QUOTE="ChubbyGuy40"]

[QUOTE="amaneuvering"]

Let's see in a few years if the service was a failure or a success shall we and then whoever is right can absolutely laugh in the virtual face of the other.

In terms of names for the people who are promoting cloud based gaming services like OnLive maybe we could call them raindrops or something; because they come from the cloud and they rain on everyone else's parade, well certainly those people who are stuck believing in an outdated gaming and entertainment model that is slowly but surely becoming irrelevant.

;)

amaneuvering

No, no rain drops. I like the rain but I hate the OnLive fanboys/marketers. DODO BIRDS!

You get that I actually support OnLive right?

I think hes making fun of you
Avatar image for 110million
110million

14910

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 2

User Lists: 0

#37 110million
Member since 2008 • 14910 Posts
[QUOTE="amaneuvering"] I think you are taking what I said the wrong way. I'm not hurt in the slightest. I just get wound up by people who clearly don't have a clue about anything to do with the discussion at hand but like to argue as though their opinion on the matter is relevant. You blankly dismiss it because you clearly don't understand it, and in doing so you imply that how you subjectively think and feel about it must be the way it is as opposed to how it really is, which makes sensible discussion about it almost impossible, and that kind just bugs me.

I don't think you have a clue on how all the technology behind it actually works. As it stands, the solution to make OnLive work everywhere is not for everyone to get super fast internet, but its for them to make a ton of OnLive center all over the country. Enjoy your 20 or 50 mbit internet, but if you're too far from a center, it won't work anyways. Next is bandwidth throttling, even rikusaki, the self-proclaimed jesus of onlive, has trouble with games sometimes because lots of ISPs in north america throttle bandwidth during high-use periods. These are commonly around prime time, when most gaming would take place. At this rate, it doesn't matter if you have 100mbit, and the OnLive center is across the street from you, it won't work correctly. So to be able to make all these centers, they would need a ton of players, but to get a ton of players, they would need to build more centers so more people could play without issues. Next is the resolution, so far its 720p, this is half the revolution PC gamers typically play it, its acceptable for console players I suppose. 1080p is coming, at double the bandwidth requirements, making even less people able to play it correctly unless the problems I previously mentioned are fixed. Then there is game selection, nothing new, the only games you can play for a monthly fee are old, very limited selection regardless. You're paying full price for old games, or a small monthly fee for games you probably played years ago. Great. Service.
Avatar image for deactivated-5bda06edf37ee
deactivated-5bda06edf37ee

4675

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 3

User Lists: 0

#38 deactivated-5bda06edf37ee
Member since 2010 • 4675 Posts

is see this as only a good thing for PC game development. more audience, even if they only "rent" the gaming PC performance.

e: damn, it uses a controller! i'm taking that statement back.

Avatar image for Bigboi500
Bigboi500

35550

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 10

User Lists: 0

#39 Bigboi500
Member since 2007 • 35550 Posts

I see OnLive as a test run, a rough draft/prototype gauge and experiment that is just the first baby step into how things are gonna be in the not-so-distant future. I also see people feeling threatened to change, kinda how people were so afraid of steam engine vehicles in the 1800s. They all laughed at it and thought their horses would always be the best means of transportation.

When the Nintendo DS concept and description was first introduced people were yucking it up and hee-hawing at the idea of two game screens and posting ridiculous pictures of a game system with thirty tangled tubes. People were dooming the Nintendo Wii before it left the gate and said it couldn't ever be successful, yet it leads the market and everybody is trying to emulate their designs now.

Surely you guys can't expect the same kind of business structure to stay relevant and successful over the next several generations? Look at all the headaches Sony experienced early on this generation from their over-priced behemoth PS3 phat design that cost them a fortune to make, and nearly lost their shirt trying to recoup their losses. Look at the disaster the 360 hardware design was after Microsoft rushed it out of the gate and had to eat all that money in replacement systems. Look at how PC hardware continuously gets smaller and more portable.

Significant change is gonna take place eventually whether you all like it or not.

Avatar image for 110million
110million

14910

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 2

User Lists: 0

#40 110million
Member since 2008 • 14910 Posts

I see OnLive as a test run, a rough draft/prototype gauge and experiment that is just the first baby step into how things are gonna be in the not-so-distant future. I also see people feeling threatened to change, kinda how people were so afraid of steam engine vehicles in the 1800s. They all laughed at it and thought their horses would always be the best means of transportation.

When the Nintendo DS concept and description was first introduced people were yucking it up and hee-hawing at the idea of two game screens and posting ridiculous pictures of a game system with thirty tangled tubes. People were dooming the Nintendo Wii before it left the gate and said it couldn't ever be successful, yet it leads the market and everybody is trying to emulate their designs now.

Surely you guys can't expect the same kind of business structure to stay relevant and successful over the next several generations? Look at all the headaches Sony experienced early on this generation from their over-priced behemoth PS3 phat design that cost them a fortune to make, and nearly lost their shirt trying to recoup their losses. Look at the disaster the 360 hardware design was after Microsoft rushed it out of the gate and had to eat all that money in replacement systems. Look at how PC hardware continuously gets smaller and more portable.

Significant change is gonna take place eventually whether you all like it or not.

Bigboi500
Well I'm not sure what the common consus was on the Wii's future success when it was first announced, but I was pretty sure most people knew it would be crazy successful solely based off the mainstream and non-gamer appeal... I wasn't here when the DS launched, so I don't know about that. I don't fear change, its just change doesn't always work out. They try so hard to be different to get new markets, but end up making some things worse. The Wii is a fine system, but plenty of games use motion needlessly, i.e DKCR, might be my GOTY, but the motion is still tacked on either way. This was a change that was unwelcome, lots of games use motion well, its true, but the change towards motion was not always successful. You are correct about OnLive being a test run, I can see this tech being more standard in say 10 years, when the infrastructure is there, but I also fear when OnLive fails, no one will want to try again when the infrastructure is in place. "Now that we have the tech, wana try cloud computed gaming?" "Nah, OnLive failed pretty hard, its not a worthwhile business decision". etc
Avatar image for tbolt76
tbolt76

987

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 15

User Lists: 0

#41 tbolt76
Member since 2008 • 987 Posts

When only 1/3 to 40% of the country has an internet connection able to efficiently use OnLive, it has a huge uphill battle. We in large metro areas take for granted that people in the middle of the country are relegated to very slow DSL or even worst, dial-up. Until this is corrected, OnLive will be a niche product. Seeing that the large providers don't see a reason (translated as enough return on their investment) this will continue to be the case for the foreseeable future.

Avatar image for Bigboi500
Bigboi500

35550

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 10

User Lists: 0

#42 Bigboi500
Member since 2007 • 35550 Posts

[QUOTE="Bigboi500"]

I see OnLive as a test run, a rough draft/prototype gauge and experiment that is just the first baby step into how things are gonna be in the not-so-distant future. I also see people feeling threatened to change, kinda how people were so afraid of steam engine vehicles in the 1800s. They all laughed at it and thought their horses would always be the best means of transportation.

When the Nintendo DS concept and description was first introduced people were yucking it up and hee-hawing at the idea of two game screens and posting ridiculous pictures of a game system with thirty tangled tubes. People were dooming the Nintendo Wii before it left the gate and said it couldn't ever be successful, yet it leads the market and everybody is trying to emulate their designs now.

Surely you guys can't expect the same kind of business structure to stay relevant and successful over the next several generations? Look at all the headaches Sony experienced early on this generation from their over-priced behemoth PS3 phat design that cost them a fortune to make, and nearly lost their shirt trying to recoup their losses. Look at the disaster the 360 hardware design was after Microsoft rushed it out of the gate and had to eat all that money in replacement systems. Look at how PC hardware continuously gets smaller and more portable.

Significant change is gonna take place eventually whether you all like it or not.

110million

Well I'm not sure what the common consus was on the Wii's future success when it was first announced, but I was pretty sure most people knew it would be crazy successful solely based off the mainstream and non-gamer appeal... I wasn't here when the DS launched, so I don't know about that. I don't fear change, its just change doesn't always work out. They try so hard to be different to get new markets, but end up making some things worse. The Wii is a fine system, but plenty of games use motion needlessly, i.e DKCR, might be my GOTY, but the motion is still tacked on either way. This was a change that was unwelcome, lots of games use motion well, its true, but the change towards motion was not always successful. You are correct about OnLive being a test run, I can see this tech being more standard in say 10 years, when the infrastructure is there, but I also fear when OnLive fails, no one will want to try again when the infrastructure is in place. "Now that we have the tech, wana try cloud computed gaming?" "Nah, OnLive failed pretty hard, its not a worthwhile business decision". etc

I'm not sure how next gen is gonna go, but by around 2020 the whole globe should be covered by a blanket of super-fast wifi internet that penetrates every nook and cranny on the map, so that won't be a problem. Hardware will be virtually obsolete by then too. Hell, even TVs will be gone and replaced by a hockey puck-sized device that will produce crisp visuals from a hologram image.

Technology is developing so fast, it's kinda scary.

Avatar image for amaneuvering
amaneuvering

4815

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 5

User Lists: 0

#43 amaneuvering
Member since 2009 • 4815 Posts

[QUOTE="amaneuvering"]

[QUOTE="testfactor888"] Sounds like I hurt your feelings. If you can't deal with people opposing your opinion than don't make a thread and than cry about it

testfactor888

I think you are taking what I said the wrong way.

I'm not hurt in the slightest.

I just get wound up by people who clearly don't have a clue about anything to do with the discussion at hand but like to argue as though their opinion on the matter is relevant.

You blankly dismiss it because you clearly don't understand it, and in doing so you imply that how you subjectively think and feel about it must be the way it is as opposed to how it really is, which makes sensible discussion about it almost impossible, and that just bugs me.

So you were made upset (it bugged you) by what I said as I originally thought. So my original statement of don't make a thread and than cry about it later on when someone doesn't share your opinion on it still applies

lol

So what we have established is you really don't know or understand much about the thing you are discussing, but you somehow think your opinion and pointless blanket statements are valid, and that annoys me.

Cooli Wooli

Avatar image for amaneuvering
amaneuvering

4815

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 5

User Lists: 0

#44 amaneuvering
Member since 2009 • 4815 Posts
[QUOTE="amaneuvering"]

[QUOTE="ChubbyGuy40"]

No, no rain drops. I like the rain but I hate the OnLive fanboys/marketers. DODO BIRDS!

testfactor888

You get that I actually support OnLive right?

I think hes making fun of you

Well anyone that might have something positive to say about OnLive I'd say.
Avatar image for amaneuvering
amaneuvering

4815

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 5

User Lists: 0

#45 amaneuvering
Member since 2009 • 4815 Posts

[QUOTE="amaneuvering"] I think you are taking what I said the wrong way. I'm not hurt in the slightest. I just get wound up by people who clearly don't have a clue about anything to do with the discussion at hand but like to argue as though their opinion on the matter is relevant. You blankly dismiss it because you clearly don't understand it, and in doing so you imply that how you subjectively think and feel about it must be the way it is as opposed to how it really is, which makes sensible discussion about it almost impossible, and that kind just bugs me.110million
I don't think you have a clue on how all the technology behind it actually works. As it stands, the solution to make OnLive work everywhere is not for everyone to get super fast internet, but its for them to make a ton of OnLive center all over the country. Enjoy your 20 or 50 mbit internet, but if you're too far from a center, it won't work anyways. Next is bandwidth throttling, even rikusaki, the self-proclaimed jesus of onlive, has trouble with games sometimes because lots of ISPs in north america throttle bandwidth during high-use periods. These are commonly around prime time, when most gaming would take place. At this rate, it doesn't matter if you have 100mbit, and the OnLive center is across the street from you, it won't work correctly. So to be able to make all these centers, they would need a ton of players, but to get a ton of players, they would need to build more centers so more people could play without issues. Next is the resolution, so far its 720p, this is half the revolution PC gamers typically play it, its acceptable for console players I suppose. 1080p is coming, at double the bandwidth requirements, making even less people able to play it correctly unless the problems I previously mentioned are fixed. Then there is game selection, nothing new, the only games you can play for a monthly fee are old, very limited selection regardless. You're paying full price for old games, or a small monthly fee for games you probably played years ago. Great. Service.

Because clearly they haven't thought about all this stuff.

:roll:

Avatar image for amaneuvering
amaneuvering

4815

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 5

User Lists: 0

#46 amaneuvering
Member since 2009 • 4815 Posts

is see this as only a good thing for PC game development. more audience, even if they only "rent" the gaming PC performance.

e: damn, it uses a controller! i'm taking that statement back.

groowagon
And it works on your TV as opposed to having to play it on a PC, so it's a perfect platform for console developers too.
Avatar image for deactivated-5b78379493e12
deactivated-5b78379493e12

15625

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 12

User Lists: 0

#47 deactivated-5b78379493e12
Member since 2005 • 15625 Posts

[QUOTE="Bigboi500"]

[QUOTE="amaneuvering"]

That all sound reasonable enough to me, and your points seem valid, but what part of all that makes my theory sound like a bit of a leap, as you originally mentioned above, is what I meant?

amaneuvering

Well I may have gotten what you said wrong, but I thought you were saying games of the future would mostly be simple and casual, mainly to appeal to the masses through services like OnLive.

Ah, I see.

No, I was basically saying the overall service will be much simpler and more of a combined cloud entertainment service as opposed to what a lot of people currently have for playing games and watching movies etc, which is usually a separate PC, multiple consoles, and multiple subscription services or costs and fees etc.

Basically I was just saying that OnLive now has the very real potential to be a great all-in-one cloud based streaming entertainment service. The fact that it also has a huge focus on gaming is obviously a major plus point from the perspective of people in this forum.

I just think it could be awesome in the future if I don't have to have 3 consoles and a cable/freeview box under my TV and multiple subcription services (cable, Netflix, etc), and instead I can have it all in one service that is potentially full of convenience, simplicity, and win imo.

The games on that service would be just as varied and fun etc as we currently see on any PC or console as far as I can see.

While I agree in part that such devices will be important in the future, in order to have such devices to include console games, you would require collaborations between companies, or mergers. I can see this happening a lot easier with PC gaming, though as already seen in this thread, the "hardcore" PC gamers will be resistant.

Avatar image for amaneuvering
amaneuvering

4815

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 5

User Lists: 0

#48 amaneuvering
Member since 2009 • 4815 Posts

If Onlive was of interest to PC gamers they would already be console gamers. It is a convenience orientated service; and PC gamers already gave up some convenience for more freedom. Onlive sacrifices freedom for convenience, it just won't sit with PC gamers.

Console gaming on the other hand is a convenience orientated system, one that makes sacrifices to user freedom; with low cost and convenience being the advantages. Arguably then, Cloud gaming is a evolution of the convenience based gaming model; and is a threat to consoles. Provided they sort out the current issues like input lag and image quality.

AnnoyedDragon
I agree with you and I think the potential of convenience based services like this is an order or magnitude greater than that of the current more inconvenient and un-user friendly PC based system that many people currently use for things like gaming, watching movies and so on.
Avatar image for Bigboi500
Bigboi500

35550

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 10

User Lists: 0

#49 Bigboi500
Member since 2007 • 35550 Posts

[QUOTE="amaneuvering"]

[QUOTE="Bigboi500"]Well I may have gotten what you said wrong, but I thought you were saying games of the future would mostly be simple and casual, mainly to appeal to the masses through services like OnLive.

jimkabrhel

Ah, I see.

No, I was basically saying the overall service will be much simpler and more of a combined cloud entertainment service as opposed to what a lot of people currently have for playing games and watching movies etc, which is usually a separate PC, multiple consoles, and multiple subscription services or costs and fees etc.

Basically I was just saying that OnLive now has the very real potential to be a great all-in-one cloud based streaming entertainment service. The fact that it also has a huge focus on gaming is obviously a major plus point from the perspective of people in this forum.

I just think it could be awesome in the future if I don't have to have 3 consoles and a cable/freeview box under my TV and multiple subcription services (cable, Netflix, etc), and instead I can have it all in one service that is potentially full of convenience, simplicity, and win imo.

The games on that service would be just as varied and fun etc as we currently see on any PC or console as far as I can see.

While I agree in part that such devices will be important in the future, in order to have such devices to include console games, you would require collaborations between companies, or mergers. I can see this happening a lot easier with PC gaming, though as already seen in this thread, the "hardcore" PC gamers will be resistant.

That's the conundrum right there, finding a neutral ground for all the opposing game companies to agree and come together on.

Avatar image for amaneuvering
amaneuvering

4815

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 5

User Lists: 0

#50 amaneuvering
Member since 2009 • 4815 Posts

[QUOTE="amaneuvering"]

[QUOTE="Bigboi500"]Well I may have gotten what you said wrong, but I thought you were saying games of the future would mostly be simple and casual, mainly to appeal to the masses through services like OnLive.

jimkabrhel

Ah, I see.

No, I was basically saying the overall service will be much simpler and more of a combined cloud entertainment service as opposed to what a lot of people currently have for playing games and watching movies etc, which is usually a separate PC, multiple consoles, and multiple subscription services or costs and fees etc.

Basically I was just saying that OnLive now has the very real potential to be a great all-in-one cloud based streaming entertainment service. The fact that it also has a huge focus on gaming is obviously a major plus point from the perspective of people in this forum.

I just think it could be awesome in the future if I don't have to have 3 consoles and a cable/freeview box under my TV and multiple subcription services (cable, Netflix, etc), and instead I can have it all in one service that is potentially full of convenience, simplicity, and win imo.

The games on that service would be just as varied and fun etc as we currently see on any PC or console as far as I can see.

While I agree in part that such devices will be important in the future, in order to have such devices to include console games, you would require collaborations between companies, or mergers. I can see this happening a lot easier with PC gaming, though as already seen in this thread, the "hardcore" PC gamers will be resistant.

Integrating something like OnLive into TVs at this stage should be almost child's play at this point, similar to how people are now integrating things like Facebook, Netflix, Freeview and other basic Internet capabilities into modern TVs etc, and I see that as a very likely future direction for OnLive.

The CEO of OnLive has even hinted at this kind of thing it himself as far as I remember.

Once you get something like this integrated into TVs out the box it's reign has absolutely come imo.