surf dtoid with 
Rising (10+)
People you follow
Wish I woulda snagged one of the free consoles they were handing out at PAX last year. Would have looked great next to my rotary dial phone and abacus.
Hopefully it keeps going strong. I wouldn't wish for anybody to lose their job. It does feel like this service was brought out prematurely, before it's time though... I'm sure in about five years time this would be an amazing platform that would have a much bigger potential market.
The concept is sound but the prices are steep from what I saw (last I checked... Which is admittedly a year ago) . IF it was like Netflix for games i'd be all over that shit, but "buying" individual games on the service? No thanks.
@WFMS
I agree that it sucks for the employees who are losing their jobs. However this certainly wasn't brought out before its time, it never should have gotten past scribblings on a bar napkin.
There are only two ways that this would have worked and that is
a) with a subscription on top of paying for games
because they are footing the bill for all the hardware and covering the overhead to operate said hardware.
b) If every ISP on the planet wasn't chomping at the bit trying to figure out how to cap/tier and charge overages for broadband, without causing a mass exodus to their competitors.
It was an interesting concept but its a pipe dream with no real benefit to either the service provider or the consumer.
I agree that it sucks for the employees who are losing their jobs. However this certainly wasn't brought out before its time, it never should have gotten past scribblings on a bar napkin.
There are only two ways that this would have worked and that is
a) with a subscription on top of paying for games
because they are footing the bill for all the hardware and covering the overhead to operate said hardware.
b) If every ISP on the planet wasn't chomping at the bit trying to figure out how to cap/tier and charge overages for broadband, without causing a mass exodus to their competitors.
It was an interesting concept but its a pipe dream with no real benefit to either the service provider or the consumer.
@SephirothX
Polly a telco, I could sorta see them working if they got glomped onto a cable package that didn't count against cap-n-tier.
Polly a telco, I could sorta see them working if they got glomped onto a cable package that didn't count against cap-n-tier.
If this is true, then it is slightly disappointing news. The only thing that has been happening recently are a couple of 'we miss you' e-mails (I haven't been playing games on OnLive for a while) and codes for free games starting from last weekend.
I hope OnLive continues well beyond events here, because it does work well with a decent internet connection.
I hope OnLive continues well beyond events here, because it does work well with a decent internet connection.
The cloud works for damn near everything else, it'll work for games too. The digital landscape is moving in that direction, and there is absolutely nothing that's going to stop it.
Of course, so far there is absolutely no proof that anything is wrong here at all, so the doomsayers should be handing out grains of salt.
Of course, so far there is absolutely no proof that anything is wrong here at all, so the doomsayers should be handing out grains of salt.
Okay, there is proof something is wrong here. Still, doesn't sound any more wrong than any of the large struggling publishers.
Much like Vivendi was reportedly trying to offload ActiBliz, and EA has been looking for a wealthy group to buy them out, OnLive will likely do the same.
Microsoft? Apple? I'd be happy if it were Google outright, seems to be a perfect fit considering all the smart TV tech they're involved with.
Much like Vivendi was reportedly trying to offload ActiBliz, and EA has been looking for a wealthy group to buy them out, OnLive will likely do the same.
Microsoft? Apple? I'd be happy if it were Google outright, seems to be a perfect fit considering all the smart TV tech they're involved with.
The cloud works for damn near everything else, it'll work for games too. The digital landscape is moving in that direction, and there is absolutely nothing that's going to stop it.
"The cloud" is a marketing buzzword.
Whether storing data remotely works for everything is one thing, whether it works well and is something people actually want is another.
"The cloud" is a marketing buzzword.
Whether storing data remotely works for everything is one thing, whether it works well and is something people actually want is another.
@xaliqen
It's an amazing buzzword, for sure, but it still carries weight at its core. The cloud, as it were, isn't perfect at the moment, but there's too many big entities making too many strides to write it off as some kind of mistake. Time will tell how big it'll get in the realm of gaming, but it's way too early to call the fight for one side or the other.
It's an amazing buzzword, for sure, but it still carries weight at its core. The cloud, as it were, isn't perfect at the moment, but there's too many big entities making too many strides to write it off as some kind of mistake. Time will tell how big it'll get in the realm of gaming, but it's way too early to call the fight for one side or the other.
Onlive is a horrible way to play games, so I can't say I would miss it, but it sucks for the people losing their jobs.
Good. Anything that slows the "digital only future" and makes it look unattractive to investors is good as far as I'm concerned.
I just bought a playpass and I am halfway through the witcher 1. please for the love of god don't shut down. I don't want anyone to lose their jobs either. Onlve has actually grown to be a quite impressive platform.
Really fighting urge to go into a cloud rant......
I will say one good thing about "the cloud" when someone uses the term its usually a good indicator of when I need to start dumbing things the fuck down.
I will say one good thing about "the cloud" when someone uses the term its usually a good indicator of when I need to start dumbing things the fuck down.
@Scuffles
By all means, rant away, and make it as dumb as you feel you need to. But while you do, offer up exactly why it is that gaming could not work through the cloud the way nearly every other form of online entertainment does. Not obstacles that need to be tackled (those are a given), but fundamentally why it won't work, or at least why OnLive specifically was a pipe dream.
By all means, rant away, and make it as dumb as you feel you need to. But while you do, offer up exactly why it is that gaming could not work through the cloud the way nearly every other form of online entertainment does. Not obstacles that need to be tackled (those are a given), but fundamentally why it won't work, or at least why OnLive specifically was a pipe dream.
@Alan Argentina:
You can't separate OnLive's failure from the technical hurdles. They were a significant contributor to why no one wanted to play games like that.
You can't separate OnLive's failure from the technical hurdles. They were a significant contributor to why no one wanted to play games like that.
@Alan Argentina -- The problem you're going to run into is 'the cloud' is not a technical term, and it doesn't convey any interpretable information in terms of a specific technology or method.
If you want to talk about distributed computing, streaming technology and storage, that's fine, but you'll probably find talking about clouds doesn't help in that discussion.
The cloud is kind of like a place-holder. It's a word that's easy to use in order to reference a vague idea, but it means little once you actually start talking about it. As a company, you wouldn't implement a cloud, you'd implement specific platforms to help achieve whatever the goal is (automated incremental backups; collaborative development environments; etc...).
If you want to talk about distributed computing, streaming technology and storage, that's fine, but you'll probably find talking about clouds doesn't help in that discussion.
The cloud is kind of like a place-holder. It's a word that's easy to use in order to reference a vague idea, but it means little once you actually start talking about it. As a company, you wouldn't implement a cloud, you'd implement specific platforms to help achieve whatever the goal is (automated incremental backups; collaborative development environments; etc...).
That's unfortunate. I never got it, but it was a really neat idea that, as has been said is limited by many service providers putting caps on internet data usage.
So it goes.
So it goes.
Damn. I had Onlive and liked it for cheap games at times but found the service completely unusable with a wireless connection. I like the streaming concept on the condition the games are cheaper than Steam. Onlive couldn't sustain itself as it was. It was ahead of it's time.
At least I got the console for free unopened. It'll be a collector's item someday.
At least I got the console for free unopened. It'll be a collector's item someday.
@xaliqen
The "cloud" is just an easier term to use. I know there are much more accurate ways of putting it, but it would seem the term "cloud" is fairly recognizable, no (it's my understanding that the term itself was always meant in this way, but I could be wrong)?
If the beef is over the nomenclature, and not the services themselves, then that's one thing. I, maybe wrongly, assumed that using the easy broad terms wouldn't be an issue. Semantics aside, I'm just asking what the beef with the services themselves are. Personally, I see this story itself as more an issue of execution, and not so much a condemnation of the tech behind it, but it's pretty clear that there are those who feel otherwise.
The "cloud" is just an easier term to use. I know there are much more accurate ways of putting it, but it would seem the term "cloud" is fairly recognizable, no (it's my understanding that the term itself was always meant in this way, but I could be wrong)?
If the beef is over the nomenclature, and not the services themselves, then that's one thing. I, maybe wrongly, assumed that using the easy broad terms wouldn't be an issue. Semantics aside, I'm just asking what the beef with the services themselves are. Personally, I see this story itself as more an issue of execution, and not so much a condemnation of the tech behind it, but it's pretty clear that there are those who feel otherwise.
@Alan Argentina -- As a service, it's an interesting idea, but the bandwidth barrier makes it more dependent on ISPs and network service providers than just about any other streaming platform around.
For some things, processing hardware located in your house is going to be superior to a distributed platform for the foreseeable future, partially because of latency introduced by off-site computing and partially because of the reality of bandwidth limitations by most service providers. I'd say gaming is one of those things.
For massively multiplayer games and applications, you're already seeing a good deal of information processed remotely, but the most economically efficient method is still for an individual's computer to bear a large portion of the processing load.
Distributed computing is, like most things, usually beneficial in moderation but often risky or inefficient in excess.
For some things, processing hardware located in your house is going to be superior to a distributed platform for the foreseeable future, partially because of latency introduced by off-site computing and partially because of the reality of bandwidth limitations by most service providers. I'd say gaming is one of those things.
For massively multiplayer games and applications, you're already seeing a good deal of information processed remotely, but the most economically efficient method is still for an individual's computer to bear a large portion of the processing load.
Distributed computing is, like most things, usually beneficial in moderation but often risky or inefficient in excess.
@xaliqen
I see the the bandwidth issue being prohibitive at the moment for some, but honestly, I just don't think it's as big a problem as it's made out to be. I slurp up a lot of bandwidth, and I've never reached my cap. I know a guy who seeds everything he's ever downloaded, and he's never seen his cap. There are people who cast online video games in HD, and the only ones I've ever seen talk about hitting their cap were the ones who do so for hundreds of hours a month (and the price they talk about paying doesn't seem all that bad, really).
I realize this is a small cross section, but for many people, it just isn't an issue. I'd be interested in learning more about the exact amount of data has to run through the series of tubes over at OnLive compared to other things, so that's definitely something that would be real cool to have inserted here.
And this seems like it would be more of "it's not perfect right now because..." argument than a condemnation. The tech has nowhere to go but up, and if something like OnLive doesn't work now, I don't think that applies to the future. There are several large entities putting their weight behind it, I don't see how that kind of support would manifest for something that can't work based on the tech.
As someone who has used OnLive and Gaikai a fair amount, I can say I have never had any significant issue. I've never heard of someone talking about hitting caps, and I've never had any prolonged latency issues, but I could definitely be an isolated case.
Again, I think the reason why these things haven't caught on has more to do with execution. OnLive and Gaikai really don't offer much to most gamers who already own something to game on. This is why I think Gaikai's acquisition by Sony could be huge, it could potentially broaden the hell out of what's offered (mmmmm, forward compatibility for the first time in console history?).
I don't think there's any issue that can trump the issue of execution, and if they're not offering a compelling product to their target audience on a broad scale, I think it's hard to draw any concrete conclusions on the effect the tech has had on the consumer base. I think OnLive's eyes were bigger than their mouths, but I don't think that you can hold this against the tech.
I see the the bandwidth issue being prohibitive at the moment for some, but honestly, I just don't think it's as big a problem as it's made out to be. I slurp up a lot of bandwidth, and I've never reached my cap. I know a guy who seeds everything he's ever downloaded, and he's never seen his cap. There are people who cast online video games in HD, and the only ones I've ever seen talk about hitting their cap were the ones who do so for hundreds of hours a month (and the price they talk about paying doesn't seem all that bad, really).
I realize this is a small cross section, but for many people, it just isn't an issue. I'd be interested in learning more about the exact amount of data has to run through the series of tubes over at OnLive compared to other things, so that's definitely something that would be real cool to have inserted here.
And this seems like it would be more of "it's not perfect right now because..." argument than a condemnation. The tech has nowhere to go but up, and if something like OnLive doesn't work now, I don't think that applies to the future. There are several large entities putting their weight behind it, I don't see how that kind of support would manifest for something that can't work based on the tech.
As someone who has used OnLive and Gaikai a fair amount, I can say I have never had any significant issue. I've never heard of someone talking about hitting caps, and I've never had any prolonged latency issues, but I could definitely be an isolated case.
Again, I think the reason why these things haven't caught on has more to do with execution. OnLive and Gaikai really don't offer much to most gamers who already own something to game on. This is why I think Gaikai's acquisition by Sony could be huge, it could potentially broaden the hell out of what's offered (mmmmm, forward compatibility for the first time in console history?).
I don't think there's any issue that can trump the issue of execution, and if they're not offering a compelling product to their target audience on a broad scale, I think it's hard to draw any concrete conclusions on the effect the tech has had on the consumer base. I think OnLive's eyes were bigger than their mouths, but I don't think that you can hold this against the tech.
Any content titles customers bought wont be available with bankruptcy. Their money down the drain. Thus why digital is a bad idea and physical media ensures the customer always has access to what they own.
@Alan Argentina -- I think more people experienced the bandwidth issue in reduced picture quality during scenes with a large amount of motion. After all, bandwidth isn't only about caps or aggregate use, but also max thoroughput.
In terms of thoroughput, how are you going to beat a machine that's processing that information right there at your desk?
In terms of thoroughput, how are you going to beat a machine that's processing that information right there at your desk?
@xaliqen
You're not, which is part of the reason why I think they went after the completely wrong audience. People like you or I will probably never have any real use for something like OnLive, it's entirely likely that we both have any number of kickass machines more than capable of doing all kinds of heavy lifting.
I think that things like this have more a role in ancillary positions. Something to the effect of having gaming on a non gaming device as standard the way that non gaming applications have come to gaming devices. I'm curious as to how the new smart TVs will play into this, especially if they become ubiquitous with home entertainment the way high definition did.
Considering ancillary gaming is becoming more and more popular (and holy fuck is it), I think there should be a natural progression into that arena.
You're not, which is part of the reason why I think they went after the completely wrong audience. People like you or I will probably never have any real use for something like OnLive, it's entirely likely that we both have any number of kickass machines more than capable of doing all kinds of heavy lifting.
I think that things like this have more a role in ancillary positions. Something to the effect of having gaming on a non gaming device as standard the way that non gaming applications have come to gaming devices. I'm curious as to how the new smart TVs will play into this, especially if they become ubiquitous with home entertainment the way high definition did.
Considering ancillary gaming is becoming more and more popular (and holy fuck is it), I think there should be a natural progression into that arena.
I used Onlive in Austin. I have a PC with a power supply that won't let me use my now venerable GPU so I'm stuck with onboard graphics until I can find enough spar change for a new computer.
It worked surprisingly well most of the time. Game selection was very limited. I got over half of my games on there for free or at a huge discount. The promos were crazy. I spent less than $150 with them and have a pretty big library of games.
It does suck when some kid starts watching you play and starts pestering you to talk to him or play with, and he's obviously not even twelve, aware of how annoying he is, and just won't go away or shut up. Other than that it's pretty cool for what it is. I hope the service stays up. I never played Divinity Dragon Knight Saga and I 'bought' it for $5.
Which is probably why they got bought or ended up in backruptcy.
It worked surprisingly well most of the time. Game selection was very limited. I got over half of my games on there for free or at a huge discount. The promos were crazy. I spent less than $150 with them and have a pretty big library of games.
It does suck when some kid starts watching you play and starts pestering you to talk to him or play with, and he's obviously not even twelve, aware of how annoying he is, and just won't go away or shut up. Other than that it's pretty cool for what it is. I hope the service stays up. I never played Divinity Dragon Knight Saga and I 'bought' it for $5.
Which is probably why they got bought or ended up in backruptcy.
@Mulk
"I have a PC with a power supply that won't let me use my now venerable GPU so I'm stuck with onboard graphics until I can find enough spar change for a new computer."
Why not just get a better power supply? The kind that will handle a decent GPU might be a little pricey, but not nearly as much as a new PC.
"I have a PC with a power supply that won't let me use my now venerable GPU so I'm stuck with onboard graphics until I can find enough spar change for a new computer."
Why not just get a better power supply? The kind that will handle a decent GPU might be a little pricey, but not nearly as much as a new PC.
I actually owned TWO OnLive microconsoles (bought one, got the other free in a promo). Sold them both on eBay last month for about $50 each. My thoughts and prayers are with those two unlucky sons of bitches.
I'm impressed it went this far. This would explain why they were so quick to jump on Ouya. Maybe when broadband and streaming are more widely available at better speeds? Maybe when the concept isn't so alien to average users? Maybe when they learn how to better advertise or at least raise more awareness?
Seriously, I'm the only person I know that knows this even exists.
Seriously, I'm the only person I know that knows this even exists.
To all those arguing that the infrastructure could support cloud-based gaming and that bandwidth is simply not an issue, kindly get your head out of your arse and consider yourself in the minority. Cheers.
The main issue with Onlive for me was the game selection. When it was first announced, I was excited for the possibility of playing games on my MacBook. I had a 360 and PS3, but hadn't had a gaming PC in several years. When the service came out, I was pleased with the responsiveness and streaming quality, but disappointed that all the games that were available were also available for consoles. That meant no Total War, Crysis, Blizzard titles, etc. Had they been able to get these kind of games in their catalog Onlive would have held my attention.
Personally I like having a game I can hold and say that its mine without some company (netcom, dev, publisher) telling me when and how I play my games. The digital age is a great thing but as more and more companies use it to sell software as a service that we never own, the more I can't help but say "fuck you I paid for it its mine".
follow
