By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close

Forums - PC - OnLive is here and it works!

disolitude on 07 July 2010
dahuman said:
NJ5 said:
disolitude said:

lol.

This thread is quite a good summary of user post stereotypes on VGchartz.

vlad321 - PC users = Elite super humans

Soleron - Unpaid AMD/ATI PR employee

jefforange89 - "look at my tripple monitors!"

disolitude - "does it do 3D gaming?"

NJ5 - Only one reading everything and asking the right questions.

 

Where is Shio, and how come he hasn't posted here yet?

Thanks for the compliment, but I think your and Soleron's - and many others' - points are also quite valid (and btw I think Soleron has/had an Intel Core Duo, so he's not completely AMD fanatic ;)).


what am I then? my PC is decently awesome ya know?


lol, I couldn't get enough consistency in your posts in this thread and from earlier ones to find one general point you are trying to get across when you post.

I was just kidding with that post btw. A lot of people have valid points and arguments in this thread...



Around the Network
dahuman on 07 July 2010
jefforange89 said:
disolitude said:

jefforange89 - "look at my tripple monitors!"

If I had the desk space and a second video card (and a good enough PSU to support a second 5870 as well), I'd make it four in a heartbeat. :)


should have waited for that eyefin6 =P



dahuman on 07 July 2010
richardhutnik said:
Soleron said:
Mr Puggsly said:
NJ5 said:

One more thing... I just opened Onlive's system requirements page, and saw this:

"If you are using a low-performance computer, like a netbook, you may also experience high latency."

I do remember that one of the original selling points was "omg crysis on a netbook". I suppose that the decompression algorithms are actually quite CPU-intensive.

Did anyone here try it on a netbook?


They use it on a netbook torwards the end of the video.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QtwaH4g3Kk4

Can you just acknowledge that Ontario exists (and renders OnLive obsolete)? I'll shut up and go away then.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ed3InAJhh2k

And if I say, "Can you acknowledge that consoles provide enough horsepower now for people that it renders PC gaming as not relevant?"  Would you acknowledge that?  You argument that somehow Ontario is the end all and be all for gaming, is pushing it.  For you to stand on that is to say there isn't a need for any updating of graphics at all on a PC.  And then I could say, "well then why bother with that over consoles?"  I don't get the same level of headaches with consoles as I do with PC gaming, and it works.

I think the cool thing about those APUs is that it's very portable with a netbook and can be used on the road, and you can easily get online with tethering on the road if you need some online fix. It will open a new road for cheaper high end portable gaming on a decent size screen which is not something the consoles are able to do. With something like Steam, gaming has never been easier on PC, through digital distribution, you don't have to even goto the store and their games are at such a good price that it's ridiculous when compared to consoles(Just Cause 2 with all DLC for 30 bucks.)  It has always been the flexibility of what you can do with a PC that outshines a fixed spec. Open Steam, browse games, easy purchase, instantly starts to download, easy to browse game list, and all you gotta do is double click and it opens, and no need for disc change or swap, just quit and double click on another icon and you are set to go. When you think about that, Kojima saying consoles are dying almost sounds logical with the rise or portable handhelds and cheap and powerful netbooks with an easy purchase model if you look years ahead of us.



dahuman on 07 July 2010
disolitude said:
dahuman said:
NJ5 said:
disolitude said:

lol.

This thread is quite a good summary of user post stereotypes on VGchartz.

vlad321 - PC users = Elite super humans

Soleron - Unpaid AMD/ATI PR employee

jefforange89 - "look at my tripple monitors!"

disolitude - "does it do 3D gaming?"

NJ5 - Only one reading everything and asking the right questions.

 

Where is Shio, and how come he hasn't posted here yet?

Thanks for the compliment, but I think your and Soleron's - and many others' - points are also quite valid (and btw I think Soleron has/had an Intel Core Duo, so he's not completely AMD fanatic ;)).


what am I then? my PC is decently awesome ya know?


lol, I couldn't get enough consistency in your posts in this thread and from earlier ones to find one general point you are trying to get across when you post.

I was just kidding with that post btw. A lot of people have valid points and arguments in this thread...


prolly just too neutral about everything then =_=



dahuman on 07 July 2010
vlad321 said:
nightsurge said:
 

Not anything that recent that I could find with a quick google search.  Probably because laptops are far outselling desktops these days.

Any data whatsoever to backup your claims?  I'd especially like to see RROD data on Jasper or newer 360s and data on Desktop PC's having a 0% failure rate within 3 years.


I was talking about 360s in general, which include the early models. Just like I won't specify "self-assembled PCs." However I do know that our PC from '98 with 128 RAM and P2 300MhZ still works, and the only console I have from back then that isn't broken is a Nintendo one.


People who know wtf they are doing can build PCs that'd last a very long time, and I mean it doesn't die, and will get outphased for you to take them apart in the end. Name brands on the other hand, horrible unless it's workstation or server grade shit, end user computers, forget it, you'd be lucky to get 2 years out of it before repairs.



Around the Network
Soleron on 07 July 2010
richardhutnik said:
...

My focus is more on the technology, more than the company itself.  I see that what will happen with OnLive is that, as the technology proves itself, they will get bought up by someone, and the technology used in multiple places.  I could see a cable company jumping in, if not a console maker. I see the approach catching on.  Won't say it is going to be THE future, but I see that it will make headway.

I personally can't see OnLive hanging as it is long term, because if it starts to catch on, they will get competition.  Microsoft, Sony and Nintendo have to be watching and then see that it is doable.

Ok, on the business side, I see cable companies offering it with their cable service to people, so they can get a cut of gaming revenue. 

And yes we have stagnated.  The Wii shows we have enough horsepower now for the average consumer.  I just need to look longer-term though, and what is involved.  And that there are other paths of development that would need to be considered here, such as increases in bandwidth being a reality, and computing shifting in that direction.


OK. I agree that OnLive will likely not be the only streaming company if the tech proves viable.

I think that most people's computers will be able to run games natively before the bandwidth, pricing and game availibility for those services combine to be an attractive option.



TX109 on 07 July 2010

here is a question:

will OnLive serve as its own console in terms of online (i.e. you can only play games with other people who have onlive), or will i be able to play,say, borderlands with people that bought the actuall PC game to use on their PC?



                                                                                                  
dahuman on 07 July 2010
Soleron said:
richardhutnik said:
...

My focus is more on the technology, more than the company itself.  I see that what will happen with OnLive is that, as the technology proves itself, they will get bought up by someone, and the technology used in multiple places.  I could see a cable company jumping in, if not a console maker. I see the approach catching on.  Won't say it is going to be THE future, but I see that it will make headway.

I personally can't see OnLive hanging as it is long term, because if it starts to catch on, they will get competition.  Microsoft, Sony and Nintendo have to be watching and then see that it is doable.

Ok, on the business side, I see cable companies offering it with their cable service to people, so they can get a cut of gaming revenue. 

And yes we have stagnated.  The Wii shows we have enough horsepower now for the average consumer.  I just need to look longer-term though, and what is involved.  And that there are other paths of development that would need to be considered here, such as increases in bandwidth being a reality, and computing shifting in that direction.


OK. I agree that OnLive will likely not be the only streaming company if the tech proves viable.

I think that most people's computers will be able to run games natively before the bandwidth, pricing and game availibility for those services combine to be an attractive option.

I do a lot of video stuff, and I can tell you that the bandwidth required vs realtime rendering will most likely never match, at least not anytime soon, to get the same quality, you'd have to sell your soul to the devil atm, I'm too used to high res stuff so that'd prolly not work for people like me.



richardhutnik on 07 July 2010
TX109 said:

here is a question:

will OnLive serve as its own console in terms of online (i.e. you can only play games with other people who have onlive), or will i be able to play,say, borderlands with people that bought the actuall PC game to use on their PC?

OnLive is apparently contained to its own community.  What is neat is you can jump in and spectate a bunch of people playing online, and watch the action.   So, in some sense, it is its own console.



richardhutnik on 07 July 2010
Soleron said:
richardhutnik said:
...

My focus is more on the technology, more than the company itself.  I see that what will happen with OnLive is that, as the technology proves itself, they will get bought up by someone, and the technology used in multiple places.  I could see a cable company jumping in, if not a console maker. I see the approach catching on.  Won't say it is going to be THE future, but I see that it will make headway.

I personally can't see OnLive hanging as it is long term, because if it starts to catch on, they will get competition.  Microsoft, Sony and Nintendo have to be watching and then see that it is doable.

Ok, on the business side, I see cable companies offering it with their cable service to people, so they can get a cut of gaming revenue. 

And yes we have stagnated.  The Wii shows we have enough horsepower now for the average consumer.  I just need to look longer-term though, and what is involved.  And that there are other paths of development that would need to be considered here, such as increases in bandwidth being a reality, and computing shifting in that direction.


OK. I agree that OnLive will likely not be the only streaming company if the tech proves viable.

I think that most people's computers will be able to run games natively before the bandwidth, pricing and game availibility for those services combine to be an attractive option.

OnLive is seductive in how it works.  You don't need to install or worry about things.  You can jump around and do demos.  You get in and play faster.  It is just more convenient than other ways.  Hey, I would say if the price is cheap enough to play, and you are so set on doing things natively, get OnLive to give games a test spin and then buy it and install it locally.  You get a full year to do that now.  I may do that with some more recent released to that are on the 360.