I was wondering when Malstrom would talk about this. This seemed like the kind of thing that would get his interests.

OnLive was a dumb investment by dumb investors

	Third, and most important, the hardware barrier isn’t set in stone. Like all things, prices drop and hardware shrinks. The HD Twins will keep getting cheaper. Already, the Xbox 360 is cheaper than the Wii. PC hardware keeps getting cheaper. Netbooks don’t have the power to run the best looking games, of course, but in a few years netbooks will have more capability. And is it worth hooking up that OnLive apparatus to a tiny Netbook or even TV? It would be much simpler to just buy the hardware itself since it is only a couple hundred dollars. Due to subscription rates and how gaming habits (unlike movie or TV habits) are erratic, it’ll likely be cheaper to just buy the hardware. Fourth, there won’t be future generations of ‘graphics’. Someone might respond to the previous point and say, “Golly, it doesn’t matter if prices for current hardware drops. There will be the Next Generation! And this will solve that Next Generation!” But there won’t be any ‘next generation’ as we traditionally know. There won’t be a, say, Super HD Generation  because graphics have reached ‘good enough’ where improvements won’t be seen by customers and because it would break the bank on producing games. The shift has gone toward user interface. The next generation will be upgrades and changes in user interface, not graphics. OnLive is a solution to a problem that is fast approaching a deadend. This isn’t occuring just on consoles but PCs as well.

Theirs another article about maelstrom on this. However relating to the bolded parts.

Yes I do agree that the hardware barrier is breaking down. What many console focused gamers don't know is that when it comes to PC a large majority of games don't focus on needing bigger hardware. Big games(regardless of comercial success) don't always "push" current hardware to it's limits. That's because hardware is really irrelevant to a good game. Spore, WoW being only 2 examples of low power, but big in design. That's only part of the answer these games were designed for single core processing. If we look at what's happening it's not unreasonable to think that come a few more years AMD and Intel will be designing for customer use large core sets 16+. As that happens will polygon push power really matter? Will we be concerned with how all the objects on screen move. No becuase hardware at point is irrelvant.

So where is the need of onLive in such a world where my cell phone will have 4 core processing?

Instead I see a move that hardware will branch into features that programmers can use that customers will notice. In areas other than just graphics.

Link doesn't work.

One thing... Is he saying there won't be a new gen, because making the games would be too expensive?

Wouldn't making a Ps3 game with top notch Ps2 graphics be a lot cheaper than making a Ps2 game with top notch graphics?

So, a system that can create a fair bit better graphics (not a lot, say, Crysis quality?) will be able to make a Ps3 game at a lower production cost than a Ps3 would, right?

If I am correct, his statement is kinda wrong.

@Oyvoyvoyv

The link works for me.

Making a PS3 game with top notch PS2 graphics kind of defeats the purpose of making a PS3 game.

@Alterego-X

The whole point of Onlive is to get ride of the problem of upgrading. If upgrading isn't a problem why use Onlive and not GameTap or something?

Didn't they (not malstrom) call the Wii a dumb investment too ?

I've decided that i'll look at new ideas in a more optimistic light , the games market being as dynamic as it is I Wouldn't be suprised if onlive dominated the market nextgen

My personaly opinion is that it's way too early for onlive to suceed , speed is inadequet from alot of ISP's , bandwith allowances are still relativley low (ISP's will not foot the bill for other industries) .Computers are specificaly marketed as social , gaming devices wheras consoles are ( you have to buyperipherals to game on your PC ,a good mouse ,gamepad etc ) , any device trying to gain marketshare has to convince the average joe that it is a straight out of the box gaming experience , Onlive will struggle to do that.

but there is definetley potential in the future , maybe a partnership with a hardware marker is in order ?

Malstrom? I bet if OnLive was nintendo's idea, he would be talking about how great this idea was.

Malstrom = huge nintendo fanboy

wii fans,..read the barner.-.

http://www.vgchartz.com/forum/thread.php?id=66680

I bet money if Nintendo was coming up with this idea, or was on board with this, he'd fine a billion reasons to praise this.

It's best to just not ever listen to this guy.