They should have this for sure

halo 3 was the first game that I played that actually allowed me to record what I did without any outside hardware/programs. I love this so much, and I think everyone else does too. So what I think that Microsoft should do is simply make the XBOX 360 be able to record absolutley everything. The hardware on the 360 should just come with a thing that you press when you want to record, and it records everything. There are so many times that i've wanted to record so many of the things i've done in games, but haven't had the chance to. I think this would be really cool.

That's actually a pretty good idea, because sometimes something really cool will happen in a game or there will be a funny glitch but I can't show anyone becasue of the lack of a camera.

I would actually pay for a feature like that which would apply to all my games as long as it wasn't more than 800 MS points.

That's actually a pretty good idea, because sometimes something really cool will happen in a game or there will be a funny glitch but I can't show anyone becasue of the lack of a camera.

I would actually pay for a feature like that which would apply to all my games as long as it wasn't more than 800 MS points.

ColdP1zza

Check out OnLive, it's promising to be able to do just that.

[QUOTE="ColdP1zza"]

That's actually a pretty good idea, because sometimes something really cool will happen in a game or there will be a funny glitch but I can't show anyone becasue of the lack of a camera.

I would actually pay for a feature like that which would apply to all my games as long as it wasn't more than 800 MS points.

my_mortal_coil

Check out OnLive, it's promising to be able to do just that.

No its not, OnLive is promising to stream pc games on to your tv not allow you to record in game videos.

[QUOTE="my_mortal_coil"]

[QUOTE="ColdP1zza"]

That's actually a pretty good idea, because sometimes something really cool will happen in a game or there will be a funny glitch but I can't show anyone becasue of the lack of a camera.

I would actually pay for a feature like that which would apply to all my games as long as it wasn't more than 800 MS points.

ColdP1zza

Check out OnLive, it's promising to be able to do just that.

No its not, OnLive is promising to stream pc games on to your tv not allow you to record in game videos.

Did you even READ the link??

And I quote:

"OnLive's streaming technologies allow it to do some crazy stuff. Aside from being able to watch clips of games to see what they're like, you'll be able to spectate any game being played on the system. OnLive also lets you show off your coolest moments via the Brag Clip system. The service automatically records your gameplay at all times, and anytime you do something that looks cool, you can press a few buttons and save the last 15 seconds of footage. At that point you can share your saved clip with other friends who are part of the OnLive service."

I know 15 seconds isn't a long time, but if your "moment" needs longer than that it'll just bore people. This applies to EVERY GAME at ANY MOMENT that you play.

So, how exactly does it not allow you to record in game videos??

[QUOTE="ColdP1zza"]

[QUOTE="my_mortal_coil"]

Check out OnLive, it's promising to be able to do just that.

my_mortal_coil

No its not, OnLive is promising to stream pc games on to your tv not allow you to record in game videos.

Did you even READ the link??

And I quote:

"OnLive's streaming technologies allow it to do some crazy stuff. Aside from being able to watch clips of games to see what they're like, you'll be able to spectate any game being played on the system. OnLive also lets you show off your coolest moments via the Brag Clip system. The service automatically records your gameplay at all times, and anytime you do something that looks cool, you can press a few buttons and save the last 15 seconds of footage. At that point you can share your saved clip with other friends who are part of the OnLive service."

I know 15 seconds isn't a long time, but if your "moment" needs longer than that it'll just bore people. This applies to EVERY GAME at ANY MOMENT that you play.

So, how exactly does it not allow you to record in game videos??

it would be cool if microsoft could do it...but it would take up a lot of space on the HDD... unless the developers create the same system that Bungie did, and just allow it to record game data instead of video... I just wish that more developers implemented a saved films feature in their games as well...

Apart from the fact that Onlive will fail miserably...

Here are my reasons:

1) Quantity... they say things like " We have high powered systems made for maxing Crysis and low powered systems for less powerful games..."... Well if on day one... 100,000 people buy Onlive and 50,000 of them who have never played Crysis do to financial reasons want to max it... the Onlive Systens maybe amazingly powerful... but not enough to max 50,000 versions of Crysis simultaneously... and that number is being Generous... Xbox 360 sold out all 1,000,000 launch consoles in 1 week... Onlive is only supposed to cost like $50 at launch for the little TV adapter and a monthly fee... It would probably sell out in 1 day... So 1,000,000 people all accessing the service at once... all of them wanting to max the game they are playing... a large majority of them on Crysis... Their servers may be state of the art... but just 3 server hubs (west coast, central, east coast like he said)... can't house enough servers to max 1,000,000 different games at once... even with technology that is 10 times better than what consumers can buy now (which it isn't...)... what are they going to do... after you buy the console and pay your subscription..."We're sorry, but only 10,000 people can access our system at once, try again later..."...?

2) Quality... adding on to the previous point... 1,000,000 all accessing those servers at once... so 1,000,000 connections sending billions of mbits of information to those server hubs every second, and then those server hubs responding by uploading billions of mbits every second in response... I am sorry... but there is no ISP in the world that offers speeds in the billions of mbits... the way the system is described to work, is that the game is running server side (in their server hub)... you download the client, and select a game... the game then runs and the images of the game (at 60fps in his words) at 720p (1280x720)... what he called "720p60"... that is saying that every second... you will recieve 60 seperate images in 720p... that is just 1 user... so say everyone is doing this... 60,000,000 frames being sent out every second in 720p... I am sorry... but there is no way they could upload that much... that fast... the fastest download connection speed doesn't even scratch that, let alone the fastest upload speed (which is no where near the fastest DL speed)... they would need their own ISP connection HUB... and a large one...

Naaah! if a lot of people liked or used that feature then more games would have copied that feature & added it to their game. If every game had this then each annoying kid on live will fill youtube up with trash videos & finding a really good helpful video would be hard. I live the video recording & editing to the pro's of each game who help make newbies understand strategies in a game.

Apart from the fact that Onlive will fail miserably...

Here are my reasons:

1) Quantity... they say things like " We have high powered systems made for maxing Crysis and low powered systems for less powerful games..."... Well if on day one... 100,000 people buy Onlive and 50,000 of them who have never played Crysis do to financial reasons want to max it... the Onlive Systens maybe amazingly powerful... but not enough to max 50,000 versions of Crysis simultaneously... and that number is being Generous... Xbox 360 sold out all 1,000,000 launch consoles in 1 week... Onlive is only supposed to cost like $50 at launch for the little TV adapter and a monthly fee... It would probably sell out in 1 day... So 1,000,000 people all accessing the service at once... all of them wanting to max the game they are playing... a large majority of them on Crysis... Their servers may be state of the art... but just 3 server hubs (west coast, central, east coast like he said)... can't house enough servers to max 1,000,000 different games at once... even with technology that is 10 times better than what consumers can buy now (which it isn't...)... what are they going to do... after you buy the console and pay your subscription..."We're sorry, but only 10,000 people can access our system at once, try again later..."...?

2) Quality... adding on to the previous point... 1,000,000 all accessing those servers at once... so 1,000,000 connections sending billions of mbits of information to those server hubs every second, and then those server hubs responding by uploading billions of mbits every second in response... I am sorry... but there is no ISP in the world that offers speeds in the billions of mbits... the way the system is described to work, is that the game is running server side (in their server hub)... you download the client, and select a game... the game then runs and the images of the game (at 60fps in his words) at 720p (1280x720)... what he called "720p60"... that is saying that every second... you will recieve 60 seperate images in 720p... that is just 1 user... so say everyone is doing this... 60,000,000 frames being sent out every second in 720p... I am sorry... but there is no way they could upload that much... that fast... the fastest download connection speed doesn't even scratch that, let alone the fastest upload speed (which is no where near the fastest DL speed)... they would need their own ISP connection HUB... and a large one...

Squeets

and the guy said theres no need to worry about hardware which means no one will be ugrading there pc anymore which will probaly mean all the companies that sell these pc parts will go bust because no one will need to upgradeyungog

That won't happen... people that buy computer parts are enthusiast... Onlive only runs at the settings onlive wants with a max resolution of 1280x720... so even if it does work... enthusiast are still going to buy pc parts... and since Onlive is going to fail... Nvidia and ATI have nothing to worry about...

Apart from the fact that Onlive will fail miserably...

Here are my reasons:

1) Quantity... they say things like " We have high powered systems made for maxing Crysis and low powered systems for less powerful games..."... Well if on day one... 100,000 people buy Onlive and 50,000 of them who have never played Crysis do to financial reasons want to max it... the Onlive Systens maybe amazingly powerful... but not enough to max 50,000 versions of Crysis simultaneously... and that number is being Generous... Xbox 360 sold out all 1,000,000 launch consoles in 1 week... Onlive is only supposed to cost like $50 at launch for the little TV adapter and a monthly fee... It would probably sell out in 1 day... So 1,000,000 people all accessing the service at once... all of them wanting to max the game they are playing... a large majority of them on Crysis... Their servers may be state of the art... but just 3 server hubs (west coast, central, east coast like he said)... can't house enough servers to max 1,000,000 different games at once... even with technology that is 10 times better than what consumers can buy now (which it isn't...)... what are they going to do... after you buy the console and pay your subscription..."We're sorry, but only 10,000 people can access our system at once, try again later..."...?

2) Quality... adding on to the previous point... 1,000,000 all accessing those servers at once... so 1,000,000 connections sending billions of mbits of information to those server hubs every second, and then those server hubs responding by uploading billions of mbits every second in response... I am sorry... but there is no ISP in the world that offers speeds in the billions of mbits... the way the system is described to work, is that the game is running server side (in their server hub)... you download the client, and select a game... the game then runs and the images of the game (at 60fps in his words) at 720p (1280x720)... what he called "720p60"... that is saying that every second... you will recieve 60 seperate images in 720p... that is just 1 user... so say everyone is doing this... 60,000,000 frames being sent out every second in 720p... I am sorry... but there is no way they could upload that much... that fast... the fastest download connection speed doesn't even scratch that, let alone the fastest upload speed (which is no where near the fastest DL speed)... they would need their own ISP connection HUB... and a large one...

Squeets

You do make some excellent points. But if you've already thought of this then doesn't it stand to reason that the people behind OnLive also have and found a way around these problems in the 7 years it's been in development? These are afterall thesame people who helped develop QuickTime, WebTV, Mova, Netscape, Mozilla and much more. I'm not saying that you're wrong, I'm just saying that they may have some new tricks up their sleeve.

[QUOTE="Squeets"]

Apart from the fact that Onlive will fail miserably...

Here are my reasons:

1) Quantity... they say things like " We have high powered systems made for maxing Crysis and low powered systems for less powerful games..."... Well if on day one... 100,000 people buy Onlive and 50,000 of them who have never played Crysis do to financial reasons want to max it... the Onlive Systens maybe amazingly powerful... but not enough to max 50,000 versions of Crysis simultaneously... and that number is being Generous... Xbox 360 sold out all 1,000,000 launch consoles in 1 week... Onlive is only supposed to cost like $50 at launch for the little TV adapter and a monthly fee... It would probably sell out in 1 day... So 1,000,000 people all accessing the service at once... all of them wanting to max the game they are playing... a large majority of them on Crysis... Their servers may be state of the art... but just 3 server hubs (west coast, central, east coast like he said)... can't house enough servers to max 1,000,000 different games at once... even with technology that is 10 times better than what consumers can buy now (which it isn't...)... what are they going to do... after you buy the console and pay your subscription..."We're sorry, but only 10,000 people can access our system at once, try again later..."...?

2) Quality... adding on to the previous point... 1,000,000 all accessing those servers at once... so 1,000,000 connections sending billions of mbits of information to those server hubs every second, and then those server hubs responding by uploading billions of mbits every second in response... I am sorry... but there is no ISP in the world that offers speeds in the billions of mbits... the way the system is described to work, is that the game is running server side (in their server hub)... you download the client, and select a game... the game then runs and the images of the game (at 60fps in his words) at 720p (1280x720)... what he called "720p60"... that is saying that every second... you will recieve 60 seperate images in 720p... that is just 1 user... so say everyone is doing this... 60,000,000 frames being sent out every second in 720p... I am sorry... but there is no way they could upload that much... that fast... the fastest download connection speed doesn't even scratch that, let alone the fastest upload speed (which is no where near the fastest DL speed)... they would need their own ISP connection HUB... and a large one...

rattleheadxyz

You do make some excellent points. But if you've already thought of this then doesn't it stand to reason that the people behind OnLive also have and found a way around these problems in the 7 years it's been in development? These are afterall thesame people who helped develop QuickTime, WebTV, Mova, Netscape, Mozilla and much more. I'm not saying that you're wrong, I'm just saying that they may have some new tricks up their sleeve.

very good point. i don't see a company wasting so much time on something so ambitious just to run into the most obvious problems by launch time

[QUOTE="Squeets"]

Apart from the fact that Onlive will fail miserably...

Here are my reasons:

1) Quantity... they say things like " We have high powered systems made for maxing Crysis and low powered systems for less powerful games..."... Well if on day one... 100,000 people buy Onlive and 50,000 of them who have never played Crysis do to financial reasons want to max it... the Onlive Systens maybe amazingly powerful... but not enough to max 50,000 versions of Crysis simultaneously... and that number is being Generous... Xbox 360 sold out all 1,000,000 launch consoles in 1 week... Onlive is only supposed to cost like $50 at launch for the little TV adapter and a monthly fee... It would probably sell out in 1 day... So 1,000,000 people all accessing the service at once... all of them wanting to max the game they are playing... a large majority of them on Crysis... Their servers may be state of the art... but just 3 server hubs (west coast, central, east coast like he said)... can't house enough servers to max 1,000,000 different games at once... even with technology that is 10 times better than what consumers can buy now (which it isn't...)... what are they going to do... after you buy the console and pay your subscription..."We're sorry, but only 10,000 people can access our system at once, try again later..."...?

2) Quality... adding on to the previous point... 1,000,000 all accessing those servers at once... so 1,000,000 connections sending billions of mbits of information to those server hubs every second, and then those server hubs responding by uploading billions of mbits every second in response... I am sorry... but there is no ISP in the world that offers speeds in the billions of mbits... the way the system is described to work, is that the game is running server side (in their server hub)... you download the client, and select a game... the game then runs and the images of the game (at 60fps in his words) at 720p (1280x720)... what he called "720p60"... that is saying that every second... you will recieve 60 seperate images in 720p... that is just 1 user... so say everyone is doing this... 60,000,000 frames being sent out every second in 720p... I am sorry... but there is no way they could upload that much... that fast... the fastest download connection speed doesn't even scratch that, let alone the fastest upload speed (which is no where near the fastest DL speed)... they would need their own ISP connection HUB... and a large one...

rattleheadxyz

You do make some excellent points. But if you've already thought of this then doesn't it stand to reason that the people behind OnLive also have and found a way around these problems in the 7 years it's been in development? These are afterall thesame people who helped develop QuickTime, WebTV, Mova, Netscape, Mozilla and much more. I'm not saying that you're wrong, I'm just saying that they may have some new tricks up their sleeve.

The only way they could surpass these problems would be to develope their own ISP hub... or like I said before take over an ISP hub (the hubs where people get their internet from)... because that is the only thing powerful enough to upload and download that much information at one time...

Then the issue of simply running hundreds of thousands if not millions of different version of games at the same time... the person who did most of the press conferences said things like "All of our servers have a powerfull GPU"... "Some of them, like those for Crysis have 2 GPU's"... well by powerful... I am under the impression that he means top of the line that is currently available... because I doubt that a place like Nvidia or ATI would go and develope some all powerful GPU that can max 100 versions of Crysis all at once... because 1) it would cost Nvidia/ATI hundreds of millions... 2) Their only customer would be Onlive, because a consumer doesn't have tens of thousands of dollars to sink into a GPU... so even if they had the absolute best they could buy right now (HD4870X2 or GTX295)... both of those can max 1 copy of Crysis on a consumers PC... so how do they expect to max a million copies of crysis...?

I am sorry for my skepticism... but the only way to make it past the issues I have pointed out... would be to invest in and succeed in developing hundereds of millions of dollars if not billions in new technology... and I doubt investors would spend that much money on developing new technology, simply to play video games...

now im pretty computer savvy but i'm not an expert so bare with me on this if im a noob. What if every gamespot user wanted to watch an HD video at the same time? wouldn't that be possible? and isn't that just what onlive is? it's basically like going to a minigame sight or something and playing new releases, only the games look great. Im not sure about this that's just sort of how i thought about it after watching that video. there are other issues with onlive that i'm worrying about, the least of which being the games running smoothly and looking great.

now im pretty computer savvy but i'm not an expert so bare with me on this if im a noob. What if every gamespot user wanted to watch an HD video at the same time? wouldn't that be possible? and isn't that just what onlive is? it's basically like going to a minigame sight or something and playing new releases, only the games look great. Im not sure about this that's just sort of how i thought about it after watching that video. there are other issues with onlive that i'm worrying about, the least of which being the games running smoothly and looking great.

tannerislegend

Basically... it is just you playing the game with your mouse and keyboard or the gamepad... from their server... and similar to an Xbox360 connected to your TV via HDMI from 3 feet away... you are connected via Ethernet/Fiber and streaming from 1,000 miles away...

So the entire time there are several processes going on and the only thing that keeps the system running is internet packets... there is their server running the game, your PC/the little console sending your key input to their server, their server responding to those inputs and displaying them on your screen, you responding to the screen and inputing more keys, their server responding... etc...

So if their is ever packet loss (which happens fairly often with the internet) the system breaks down... if your internet goes out, the system breaks down, if their internet goes down, the system breaks down... if your internet slows down... the system breaks down... if there internet slows down, the system breaks down...

The only way this system will work... is if they are taking in your key inputs and then updating your screen instantly basically... it all needs to happen in microseconds...

So over the coarse of 1 second... they need to recieve your inputs, process the game information, and then send 60 frames of gameplay at max detail and a resolution of 1280x720... within a few microseconds... around 1,000 miles away... and not just for you... but for everyone using the service...

That is where my skepticism comes from... In my opinion... it just isn't possible...

[QUOTE="my_mortal_coil"]

[QUOTE="ColdP1zza"]

No its not, OnLive is promising to stream pc games on to your tv not allow you to record in game videos.

chaoscougar1

Did you even READ the link??

And I quote:

"OnLive's streaming technologies allow it to do some crazy stuff. Aside from being able to watch clips of games to see what they're like, you'll be able to spectate any game being played on the system. OnLive also lets you show off your coolest moments via the Brag Clip system. The service automatically records your gameplay at all times, and anytime you do something that looks cool, you can press a few buttons and save the last 15 seconds of footage. At that point you can share your saved clip with other friends who are part of the OnLive service."

I know 15 seconds isn't a long time, but if your "moment" needs longer than that it'll just bore people. This applies to EVERY GAME at ANY MOMENT that you play.

So, how exactly does it not allow you to record in game videos??

Don't know how they are going to pull it off but if it works then it is going to be ace but i only have two questions:

How much would it cost?

and

Will it be available to all us brits because unfortunatly we don't have access to netflix, so i'm hoping we will get this.

Don't know how they are going to pull it off but if it works then it is going to be ace but i only have two questions:

How much would it cost?

and

Will it be available to all us brits because unfortunatly we don't have access to netflix, so i'm hoping we will get this.

thenathmeister

No... it is only available for North America... they haven't even announced plans for Europe/Asia yet...