Start worrying about OnLive

[QUOTE="jimkabrhel"]

[QUOTE="amaneuvering"]

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.

Bigboi500

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.

OnLive simply needs to get TV manufacturers to integrate the OnLive service into their TVs, like many companies have done with Facebook, Netflix, Freeview etc already, and the developers will be supporting it as a matter of default without any extra effort or collaborations needed on their part at all (they've already sorted licensing and stuff with OnLive etc if they've got their games on it's service in the first place because Onlive is primarily a service and not really a hardware solution).

OnLive is such a simple install and probably a tiny bit of code etc to add to any TVs that are going to support basic Internet services anyway that I really see this happening in the near future as long as the service keeps growing and nothing crazy out of the blue happens that could stop it in it's tracks in the meantime.

[QUOTE="jimkabrhel"]

[QUOTE="amaneuvering"]

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.

amaneuvering

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.

I agree with your point in regards to some PC gaming, but a large part of the market is console gaming, and I don't think those companies will be as eager to jump on this bandwagon, unless Microsoft and Nintendo start releasing TVs.

Lol, Onlive :lol: Biggest joke this gen.

I don't know why some are hating on OnLive for.

I think as a PS3 owner this would be the cheapest most convenient add-on to be able to have PS3 exclusives + PC Exclusives + maybe best Multiplat games.

so maybe PS3 and Onlive would go good with each other.......I mean if you don't want to shell out for a PC gaming rig or a 360 (to pay for XboxLive).

[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:

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

im sorry but how is having gaming, movies, and possibaly music all in one device a " Massive Mess"? and what, you expect all that to be free? of course theres gonna be a Subscription fee.. .you make no sense. :roll:

I'm confused... what am I supposed to be worried about? More people having access to games? Video games becoming an even more mainstream part of our society?

[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:

LP4EVA2005

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

im sorry but how is having gaming, movies, and possibaly music all in one device a " Massive Mess"? and what, you expect all that to be free? of course theres gonna be a Subscription fee.. .you make no sense. :roll:

The only people that need to worry about OnLive is the stockholders and anyone foolish enough to "buy" a game from them.

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.

amaneuvering

If i can download 10 real gilrs each month for free, i may consider getting this otherwise totally indifferent and boring service

Console users are very defensive of the limitations of their systems, arguing that the conveniences offered by the console system outweigh the restrictions to freedom. Now comes along a service, admittedly in need of improvement, but one with the potential to offer even more convenience than a console; while offering the same game play experience. All that's required is they give up a little more of the freedoms they already gave up to play on consoles.

The response? Great hostility.

So all the mods in the world, the high resolutions and quality settings, freedom from being under a console companies foot. All this wasn't enough to get console gamers interested in PC, because consoles were cheaper and more convenient. Onlive is cheaper and more convenient than consoles, and yet all the sudden user freedom becomes an issue?

What's the problem? You don't like upgrading a PC, but you don't mind upgrading a console every generation; when under Onlive you never have to upgrade. Look at System Wars, how many problems could be completely negated if hardware was taken out of the picture? No Blu-ray read speed or DVD capacity arguments.

Some stores don't let you trade PC games; and you want to be able to trade old console games for new ones. With Onlive's upcoming $9.99 subscription you don't need to be able to trade games; because you have unlimited access to the entire library. You don't like PC because you want to be able to play on the couch; and you don't want to move a PC around. Onlive works on a TV with a game pad and on a PC with a mouse & keyboard, without having to move anything.

High speed connection install base is expanding, Onlive library will increase in time if people support it, latency and image quality can be improved on in time. You may not legally own the game, but a lot of people seem to treat gaming as disposable fun, trading it in for the latest blockbuster when they are bored of it.

I get the impression there is more to this than just disagreements with the current state of the service, issues can be improved on in time. People want it to fail. They feel threatened by it for some reason, when in nearly every comparison; it should be the console gamers dream system. Onlive may very well fail, but this is down the pipeline; regardless of what people think about it. It's something they are going to have to become comfortable with, because right now this is the "only" solution in sight for the unsustainable nature of the console business model.

Console users are very defensive of the limitations of their systems, arguing that the conveniences offered by the console system outweigh the restrictions to freedom. Now comes along a service, admittedly in need of improvement, but one with the potential to offer even more convenience than a console; while offering the same game play experience. All that's required is they give up a little more of the freedoms they already gave up to play on consoles.

The response? Great hostility.

So all the mods in the world, the high resolutions and quality settings, freedom from being under a console companies foot. All this wasn't enough to get console gamers interested in PC, because consoles were cheaper and more convenient. Onlive is cheaper and more convenient than consoles, and yet all the sudden user freedom becomes an issue?

What's the problem? You don't like upgrading a PC, but you don't mind upgrading a console every generation; when under Onlive you never have to upgrade. Look at System Wars, how many problems could be completely negated if hardware was taken out of the picture? No Blu-ray read speed or DVD capacity arguments.

Some stores don't let you trade PC games; and you want to be able to trade old console games for new ones. With Onlive's upcoming $9.99 subscription you don't need to be able to trade games; because you have unlimited access to the entire library. You don't like PC because you want to be able to play on the couch; and you don't want to move a PC around. Onlive works on a TV with a game pad and on a PC with a mouse & keyboard, without having to move anything.

High speed connection install base is expanding, Onlive library will increase in time if people support it, latency and image quality can be improved on in time. You may not legally own the game, but a lot of people seem to treat gaming as disposable fun, trading it in for the latest blockbuster when they are bored of it.

I get the impression there is more to this than just disagreements with the current state of the service, issues can be improved on in time. People want it to fail. They feel threatened by it for some reason, when in nearly every comparison; it should be the console gamers dream system. Onlive may very well fail, but this is down the pipeline; regardless of what people think about it. It's something they are going to have to become comfortable with, because right now this is the "only" solution in sight for the unsustainable nature of the console business model.

AnnoyedDragon

I am a primarily a console gamer. while I do play some PC games, the vast majority of games that I enjoy playing are exclusive to consoles. While I would love to have a TV and game system built into one, with easy connection to the internet and even streaming games, the truth is that OnLive, despite it's pros, wouldn't satisfy my gaming needs as a primarily console gamer.

Until there is a system that can provide all those console exclusive games, this wouldn't suit my needs. I'm sure I'm not the only one in that situation.

Until there is a system that can provide all those console exclusive games, this wouldn't suit my needs. I'm sure I'm not the only one in that situation.

jimkabrhel

360 doesn't have PC and PS3 exclusives, PS3 doesn't have 360 and PC exclusives, PC doesn't have PS3 and 360 exclusives.

You are placing an impossible expectation.

I might get OnLive upon release. Looks like it could be pretty good. At $100, it's at least worth a chance

[QUOTE="amaneuvering"]

[QUOTE="jimkabrhel"]

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.

jimkabrhel

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.

I agree with your point in regards to some PC gaming, but a large part of the market is console gaming, and I don't think those companies will be as eager to jump on this bandwagon, unless Microsoft and Nintendo start releasing TVs.

Obviously the current console manufacturers and 1st party developers aren't going to jump on this, I don't think anyone expects that, but I think it's a perfect prospect for all the 3rd party developers out there who are already making hundreds of games for all these various individual consoles anyway (Capcom, Konami, Take Two, Sega, Activision, Electronic Arts etc etc etc), and those developers making games for the PC/Mac too, and they could quite easily add OnLive to the list of platforms they support.

Think of OnLive as basically a forth console system, or more precisely a games and entertainment service, but unlike other companies that have tried and failed to compete in the same market as the likes of Nintendo, Microsoft and Sony, OnLive actually has a real shot at not only competing with them but potentially beating them at their own game, pun intended, if they get it right.

[QUOTE="jimkabrhel"]

[QUOTE="amaneuvering"]

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.

amaneuvering

I agree with your point in regards to some PC gaming, but a large part of the market is console gaming, and I don't think those companies will be as eager to jump on this bandwagon, unless Microsoft and Nintendo start releasing TVs.

Obviously the current console manufacturers and 1st party developers aren't going to jump on this, I don't think anyone expects that, but I think it's a perfect prospect for all the 3rd party developers out there who are already making hundreds of games for all these various individual consoles anyway (Capcom, Konami, Take Two, Sega, Activision, Electronic Arts etc etc etc), and those developers making games for the PC/Mac too, and they could quite easily add OnLive to the list of platforms they support.

Think of OnLive as basically a forth console system, or more precisely a games and entertainment service, but unlike other companies that have tried and failed to compete in the same market as the likes of Nintendo, Microsoft and Sony, OnLive actually has a real shot at not only competing with them but potentially beating them at their own game, pun intended, if they get it right.

Your last phrase hits it right on the button. IF Onlive get's it right, it has the potential to be a game changer. However, impressive and logical technology isn't always adopted, or adopted immediately. There can be a great many missteps here, and there's always the potential of another company following suit, and doing it better.

Much like Kinect, I think the OnLive's tech is sound, but it needs to be implemented and marketed properly. Another concern is the infrastructure of many countries, even the USA. Most have area that don't have high-speed internet access, and until that is changed, this kind of gaming is going to be secondary.

I cant see myself being worried about onlive until the time comes that devs start making exclusives for it. Then it would be time to worry.

I cant see myself being worried about onlive until the time comes that devs start making exclusives for it. Then it would be time to worry.

vaderhater

Oh I don't know, knowing something trying to penetrate the market like Onlive; it would probably fund its own exclusives initially. As we know, 3rd party activity reflects market trends; not 1st party activity.

Consoles do it all the time during launches. In fact they lie a lot. Showing cross platform games, games still in need of lots of development; and even games that don't exist as being launch exclusives.

-edit

The point of which is to encourage adoption, the install base established through hype enabling them to start meeting those promises. You are not going to attract major 3rd party support without a install base, so you hype people on what you "could" offer if they support your platform.

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

[QUOTE="vaderhater"]

I cant see myself being worried about onlive until the time comes that devs start making exclusives for it. Then it would be time to worry.

AnnoyedDragon

Oh I don't know, knowing something trying to penetrate the market like Onlive; it would probably fund its own exclusives initially. As we know, 3rd party activity reflects market trends; not 1st party activity.

Consoles do it all the time during launches. In fact they lie a lot. Showing cross platform games, games still in need of lots of development; and even games that don't exist as being launch exclusives.

-edit

The point of which is to encourage adoption, the install base established through hype enabling them to start meeting those promises. You are not going to attract major 3rd party support without a install base, so you hype people on what you "could" offer if they support your platform.

Not all PC gamers are solely PC gamers. I play on my PC, Xbox, PS3, DS, PSP, and now I also play on OnLive. :Prolo107

And yet Onlive cannot offer what your PC does.

You cannot tweak game engines, you cannot mod, you cannot use any controller you want to, you cannot change the graphical settings (which aren't always max in Onlive) etc.

PC differenciates itself from Onlive, where as Onlive can offer the console experience; only cheaper and more convenient. Two console sales pitches.

Well its here. What are they?

vaderhater

It's a new company, they don't have the financial reserves that the likes of Sony and Microsoft have. They can afford to go billions in the red because they are receiving funding from other departments of the company, Onlive doesn't have that luxury.

Instead they have to rely on the hype as I explained earlier, and accumulate funds through existing games and services. That or perhaps, if they are lucky, they can get funding from a stake holder like BT.

Why should we worry?

We're still getting games.

Console users are very defensive of the limitations of their systems, arguing that the conveniences offered by the console system outweigh the restrictions to freedom. Now comes along a service, admittedly in need of improvement, but one with the potential to offer even more convenience than a console; while offering the same game play experience. All that's required is they give up a little more of the freedoms they already gave up to play on consoles.

The response? Great hostility.

So all the mods in the world, the high resolutions and quality settings, freedom from being under a console companies foot. All this wasn't enough to get console gamers interested in PC, because consoles were cheaper and more convenient. Onlive is cheaper and more convenient than consoles, and yet all the sudden user freedom becomes an issue?

What's the problem? You don't like upgrading a PC, but you don't mind upgrading a console every generation; when under Onlive you never have to upgrade. Look at System Wars, how many problems could be completely negated if hardware was taken out of the picture? No Blu-ray read speed or DVD capacity arguments.

Some stores don't let you trade PC games; and you want to be able to trade old console games for new ones. With Onlive's upcoming $9.99 subscription you don't need to be able to trade games; because you have unlimited access to the entire library. You don't like PC because you want to be able to play on the couch; and you don't want to move a PC around. Onlive works on a TV with a game pad and on a PC with a mouse & keyboard, without having to move anything.

High speed connection install base is expanding, Onlive library will increase in time if people support it, latency and image quality can be improved on in time. You may not legally own the game, but a lot of people seem to treat gaming as disposable fun, trading it in for the latest blockbuster when they are bored of it.

I get the impression there is more to this than just disagreements with the current state of the service, issues can be improved on in time. People want it to fail. They feel threatened by it for some reason, when in nearly every comparison; it should be the console gamers dream system. Onlive may very well fail, but this is down the pipeline; regardless of what people think about it. It's something they are going to have to become comfortable with, because right now this is the "only" solution in sight for the unsustainable nature of the console business model.

Console users are very defensive of the limitations of their systems, arguing that the conveniences offered by the console system outweigh the restrictions to freedom. Now comes along a service, admittedly in need of improvement, but one with the potential to offer even more convenience than a console; while offering the same game play experience. All that's required is they give up a little more of the freedoms they already gave up to play on consoles.

The response? Great hostility.

So all the mods in the world, the high resolutions and quality settings, freedom from being under a console companies foot. All this wasn't enough to get console gamers interested in PC, because consoles were cheaper and more convenient. Onlive is cheaper and more convenient than consoles, and yet all the sudden user freedom becomes an issue?

What's the problem? You don't like upgrading a PC, but you don't mind upgrading a console every generation; when under Onlive you never have to upgrade. Look at System Wars, how many problems could be completely negated if hardware was taken out of the picture? No Blu-ray read speed or DVD capacity arguments.

Some stores don't let you trade PC games; and you want to be able to trade old console games for new ones. With Onlive's upcoming $9.99 subscription you don't need to be able to trade games; because you have unlimited access to the entire library. You don't like PC because you want to be able to play on the couch; and you don't want to move a PC around. Onlive works on a TV with a game pad and on a PC with a mouse & keyboard, without having to move anything.

High speed connection install base is expanding, Onlive library will increase in time if people support it, latency and image quality can be improved on in time. You may not legally own the game, but a lot of people seem to treat gaming as disposable fun, trading it in for the latest blockbuster when they are bored of it.

I get the impression there is more to this than just disagreements with the current state of the service, issues can be improved on in time. People want it to fail. They feel threatened by it for some reason, when in nearly every comparison; it should be the console gamers dream system. Onlive may very well fail, but this is down the pipeline; regardless of what people think about it. It's something they are going to have to become comfortable with, because right now this is the "only" solution in sight for the unsustainable nature of the console business model.

AnnoyedDragon

Like the internet, Onlive is a shared system.

Onlive don't offer true mobility since it requires good WWAN broadband connections with no cap/no throttal plans.

USA's WWAN plans from http://mobile-broadband-services-review.toptenreviews.com/

For beyond 5GB limit (and limited to state of Alaska), I select ACS WWAN 2 year plan i.e. (($80.00 x 12)x2) + 35 + 15 = $1970 USD.

I can buy a good gaming laptop PC with $1970 USD cost.

Good luck in beating GFWL's $0.99 USD games.

[QUOTE="110million"][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.amaneuvering

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

:roll:

There been quite of few OnLive threads now-a-days. Must becoming popular.

:P

I live in America. going to be a while before we all have access to internet speeds that aren't complete ****

Have fun with onlive once the new net neutrality ruling is passed. Usage based pricing and onlive don't mix well.

I don't know why people say it sounds like a terrible idea. The only reason I can see for calling this a bad idea would be out of fear. Because this is genuinely a great idea. Not that I'm going to get it, it just seems like a great idea.

I don't know why people say it sounds like a terrible idea. The only reason I can see for calling this a bad idea would be out of fear. Because this is genuinely a great idea. Not that I'm going to get it, it just seems like a great idea.

Nogard229

Read the many threads, there have been a lot of reasons given, the least of which is the horrible quality.

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

I don't know why people say it sounds like a terrible idea. The only reason I can see for calling this a bad idea would be out of fear. Because this is genuinely a great idea. Not that I'm going to get it, it just seems like a great idea.

Nogard229

I live in America. going to be a while before we all have access to internet speeds that aren't complete ****

HavocV3

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 valueamaneuvering

Console users are very defensive of the limitations of their systems, arguing that the conveniences offered by the console system outweigh the restrictions to freedom. Now comes along a service, admittedly in need of improvement, but one with the potential to offer even more convenience than a console; while offering the same game play experience. All that's required is they give up a little more of the freedoms they already gave up to play on consoles.

The response? Great hostility.

So all the mods in the world, the high resolutions and quality settings, freedom from being under a console companies foot. All this wasn't enough to get console gamers interested in PC, because consoles were cheaper and more convenient. Onlive is cheaper and more convenient than consoles, and yet all the sudden user freedom becomes an issue?

What's the problem? You don't like upgrading a PC, but you don't mind upgrading a console every generation; when under Onlive you never have to upgrade. Look at System Wars, how many problems could be completely negated if hardware was taken out of the picture? No Blu-ray read speed or DVD capacity arguments.

Some stores don't let you trade PC games; and you want to be able to trade old console games for new ones. With Onlive's upcoming $9.99 subscription you don't need to be able to trade games; because you have unlimited access to the entire library. You don't like PC because you want to be able to play on the couch; and you don't want to move a PC around. Onlive works on a TV with a game pad and on a PC with a mouse & keyboard, without having to move anything.

High speed connection install base is expanding, Onlive library will increase in time if people support it, latency and image quality can be improved on in time. You may not legally own the game, but a lot of people seem to treat gaming as disposable fun, trading it in for the latest blockbuster when they are bored of it.

I get the impression there is more to this than just disagreements with the current state of the service, issues can be improved on in time. People want it to fail. They feel threatened by it for some reason, when in nearly every comparison; it should be the console gamers dream system. Onlive may very well fail, but this is down the pipeline; regardless of what people think about it. It's something they are going to have to become comfortable with, because right now this is the "only" solution in sight for the unsustainable nature of the console business model.

AnnoyedDragon

P.S: short of them lanning together loads of servers..which I doubt they will do.

I don't want onlive because A) I don't ALWAYS have a good internet connection. B) I want more exclusives and more games in general. C) Borderlands is a great game but please refer to B.

ok unless all of these people posting about onlive are acutally rikusaki in disguise, then i think its time to create a name for them.

ok unless all of these people posting about onlive are acutally rikusaki in disguise, then i think its time to create a name for them.

antifanboyftw

Rikusaki clones.

[QUOTE="antifanboyftw"]

ok unless all of these people posting about onlive are acutally rikusaki in disguise, then i think its time to create a name for them.

Rikusaki clones.

/thread subrosian

Yea im getting worried about their selection of 10 games that if you buy you cant even keep. :roll:

there are no freedoms given up between pc and Consoles

WilliamRLBaker

OK, change something in a game the developers didn't officially support you changing, anything.