Quantcast
How many of you feel OnLive will be the decider

Forums - Gaming Discussion - How many of you feel OnLive will be the decider

If you consider the success of steam, Onlive is merely going to be a hard-drive that plays games, it will be cheaper than the consoles. I think Onlive will play a big role on the console race once it launches. It'll prove the loyalty of fans



my signature went on strike, it's demanding 3% raise

Around the Network

It won't be cheaper than physical hardware because the subscriptions will add up, the bandwidth and latency issues will make it an inferior experience to PCs and consoles, the DRM and usage rights issues will mean you don't keep what you pay for, and decent PC/console hardware is extremely cheap these days.

You need a basic computer to use OnLive; a good gaming PC wouldn't cost $200 more than that. I don't think OnLive can match that.

"The loyalty of fans" has never been a decider in console 'wars'. It's always good software and the availibility thereof. If the software is good enough people will pay any amount for the hardware. OnLive is a technological tool that doesn't make games better or more numerous, and  early next year Llano and Sandy Bridge will make a gaming computer no more expensive than the cheapest one you need to use OnLive now.



no it won't.

no console games on onlive.

physical media is still strong.



I didn't even realize that OnLive was still alive.

I have not gotten any follow-up emails from them since I volunteered to beta test.

I honestly do not think that it is a viable platform -- something about basically renting games just does not make sense. This is not the 1980s when you could sell those kinds of services (see Playcable for the Intellivision).

Mike from Morgantown



      


I am Mario.


I like to jump around, and would lead a fairly serene and aimless existence if it weren't for my friends always getting into trouble. I love to help out, even when it puts me at risk. I seem to make friends with people who just can't stay out of trouble.

Wii Friend Code: 1624 6601 1126 1492

NNID: Mike_INTV

You know, for the first attempt at this kind of technology, this sounds VERY impressive. This should cause console makers to strongly reconsider the console model for the next generation. This is a way to use top tech and not have to pass the cost on to the consumer.

Consoles could have two SKU's: online and offline. The online one could be much cheaper and cater to those with super fast connections and the other for those that don't. Prices would be much cheaper for those the online version (maybe SIGNIFICANTLY cheaper) and consoles could become profitable much faster if not immediately.

Don't right this off, folks. This is MAJOR.
 



Around the Network

I have been hearing quite favorable things of OnLive actually. In fact everything seems great except for the graphics, but really if you want graphics you get a powerhouse PC and not a console, so it is very possible for this to affect the consoles.



Tag(thx fkusumot) - "Yet again I completely fail to see your point..."

HD vs Wii, PC vs HD: http://www.vgchartz.com/forum/thread.php?id=93374

Why Regenerating Health is a crap game mechanic: http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=3986420

gamrReview's broken review scores: http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=4170835

 

everybody who played it at E3 said 'it works' so thast good for it



OnLive could have been a classical disruptive product aimed at home consoles and actually everything else that plays graphics-heavy games. The problem is that it may not work for mass consumer at this level of technology, so as disruptive product it can't be aimed at low-end consumer, in fact it looks like more of an enthusiast's toy due to bandwidth requirements and subscription (maybe they should work out some other ways of monetization, smth more accessible than subscription, smth like F2P). If we assume it would work practically everywhere (not only in ideal conditions of E3 demo) even with low-resolution and low fps, it may be a good choice over home consoles and powerful PC rig, while both X360/PS3 are screwed at this case (Wii due to different approach to games might have a chance to survive). Luckily for them it seems it's a science fiction at this point at least in eyes of mass market consumer.



I am in the beta for Onlive (got my code and everything the other day).  Have not had a chance to play around with it, but I plan to sometime soon.

Ill throw up any info I have once I do tho :)



Darth Tigris said:

You know, for the first attempt at this kind of technology, this sounds VERY impressive. This should cause console makers to strongly reconsider the console model for the next generation. This is a way to use top tech and not have to pass the cost on to the consumer.

[...]

Don't right this off, folks. This is MAJOR.
 


What is the price difference between a pure OnLive box and a console of equivalent graphics? How long will it take for the price difference to be taken away by subscruiption costs? And surely there is a value to owning the game disk rather than something which is taken away when you stop playing?

If the subscription for five years (one hardware generation) is less than the price difference, OnLive is viable. If not, then how could it be? You might as well buy the console on a credit card and pay it off over five years for the same effect.