Start worrying about OnLive

  • 107 results
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3

This topic is locked from further discussion.

Avatar image for ronvalencia
ronvalencia

29612

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 0

#101 ronvalencia
Member since 2008 • 29612 Posts
[QUOTE="jalexbrown"][QUOTE="AnnoyedDragon"]

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.

Ironic. I've reject the concept of OnLive for the same reason that I've stayed away from most modern PC gaming: I reject the idea of digital distribution. I know that digital distribution isn't a 100% in the PC gaming market, but it's enough of a growing trend that it makes me feel uncomfortable about going into PC gaming anymore. I enjoy having my physical media, so I denounce both modern PC gaming (sorry Steam) and OnLive. Also, I don't so much feel hostility towards OnLive as I do indifference. If it doesn't step on my toes (ie threaten the complete annihilation of all physical media game distribution), then I couldn't care less rather it's successful or an utter failure.

Burn Steam backups into optical media.
Avatar image for Nogard229
Nogard229

208

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#102 Nogard229
Member since 2006 • 208 Posts
[QUOTE="Nogard229"]

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.

SteveTabernacle
Great ideas with horrible execution aren't worth a damn. Input lag, horrible quality, low resolution, gross overpricing. Not a winning formula.

Yes, I understand, but that doesn't make it a bad idea. I'm talking about the idea of cloud gaming. I don't care if the price is high, or the resolution is bad. The idea is still good. That doesn't make it a bad idea. It's like making a new device that can teleport objects but some times they break; the idea is still great (teleporting objects ).
Avatar image for rpgs_shall_rule
rpgs_shall_rule

1943

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 0

#103 rpgs_shall_rule
Member since 2006 • 1943 Posts

[QUOTE="SteveTabernacle"][QUOTE="Nogard229"]

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

Great ideas with horrible execution aren't worth a damn. Input lag, horrible quality, low resolution, gross overpricing. Not a winning formula.

Yes, I understand, but that doesn't make it a bad idea. I'm talking about the idea of cloud gaming. I don't care if the price is high, or the resolution is bad. The idea is still good. That doesn't make it a bad idea. It's like making a new device that can teleport objects but some times they break; the idea is still great (teleporting objects ).

Is it necessarily great...? Imagine the military applications. Teleport nuke into your country. Boom, goodbye.

Same thing with OnLive. No ownership whatsoever, not even implied.

Avatar image for spacedog1973
spacedog1973

1144

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 7

User Lists: 0

#104 spacedog1973
Member since 2007 • 1144 Posts

[QUOTE="Nogard229"][QUOTE="SteveTabernacle"] Great ideas with horrible execution aren't worth a damn. Input lag, horrible quality, low resolution, gross overpricing. Not a winning formula.rpgs_shall_rule

Yes, I understand, but that doesn't make it a bad idea. I'm talking about the idea of cloud gaming. I don't care if the price is high, or the resolution is bad. The idea is still good. That doesn't make it a bad idea. It's like making a new device that can teleport objects but some times they break; the idea is still great (teleporting objects ).

Is it necessarily great...? Imagine the military applications. Teleport nuke into your country. Boom, goodbye.

Same thing with OnLive. No ownership whatsoever, not even implied.

At least come back with a sensible rebuttal.

The point made was the idea is good. Execution obviously gets better in time.

The 'it will never work' brigade, appear to be getting more numerous every year, at least on this site. PC users are not really an aimed market for Onlive, this is a console-centric idea; easy access, simple plug and play concept. Adding 'Gaming' to your Tv subscription plan will be a thing of the future and will replace consoles as we know it. Thats an idea that will never go away, like it or not.

Avatar image for antifanboyftw
antifanboyftw

2214

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#105 antifanboyftw
Member since 2007 • 2214 Posts
[QUOTE="AnnoyedDragon"]

[QUOTE="WilliamRLBaker"]

there are no freedoms given up between pc and Consoles

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

prestige lobbys with super speed and jumping... on the 360. it killed mw2.
Avatar image for SPBoss
SPBoss

3746

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 0

#106 SPBoss
Member since 2009 • 3746 Posts
Then one day the whole thing gets a DDoS and then people decide they would prefer physical hardware in their home rather than god knows where. Yep, I just told you how it all ends
Avatar image for Syn_Valence
Syn_Valence

2172

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#107 Syn_Valence
Member since 2004 • 2172 Posts

Why is it that is always people are afraid of change or some other crap like that when people say onlive is going to fail. The mere fact that you can't take your game in and trade it in for money or in store credit is a very legitimate excuse why it will never take off. Isn't gamefly the same thing as this service you pay a monthly fee rent a game keep it as long as you want, then just return it. Can I get ps3 or xbox exclusive on it?

Avatar image for ianuilliam
ianuilliam

4955

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#108 ianuilliam
Member since 2006 • 4955 Posts

Why is it that is always people are afraid of change or some other crap like that when people say onlive is going to fail. The mere fact that you can't take your game in and trade it in for money or in store credit is a very legitimate excuse why it will never take off. Isn't gamefly the same thing as this service you pay a monthly fee rent a game keep it as long as you want, then just return it. Can I get ps3 or xbox exclusive on it?

Syn_Valence

You can't even get any PC exclusives on it, yet. And the flat-rate thing isn't the same as Gamefly... Gamefly, you pay a monthly fee and keep a game as long as you want, with a great selection. New games, old games, ps3 games, 360 games, etc. Onlive, you pay a monthly fee, and get to play a limited selection of older titles. What few new games they have, you have to pay a seperate rental fee to play. And if you want to play games from a few years ago, you are out of luck, since they remove games after they've been on the service for three years (as confirmed in an email posted in a thread by Slimmin360). They don't have any games that aren't already available on consoles (for just as cheap or cheaper), and the graphical quality is worse than playing it locally on a console, and there is noticable input lag that makes the gameplay worse than on consoles. I'm not sure why console users should start worrying about Onlive when there is absolutely no advantage to it.