there is a good chance this could end console gameing but not portables, so nintendo n sony r good. Microsoft does the pc thing so there safe too but they better strengthen there first party or make a hand held.

If thats true they can make it work with HSDPA 3g (7,8-14,4 Mbit/s) So they could make a portable device and you could play even Crysis on it.

So they would be screwed too if that thing is really that good.

If this thing is going too be a success nobody will need a Computer anymore. Everyone will have cheap access devices one portable on one at home. And in every bigger city there will be a supercomputer. And you will pay a monthly fee one with premium and none premium services. The only thing is to make the Internet faster. But if that will happen its easier for the goverment to control all the data and spy to us. Everything will be linked cameras/phones/cars/houses. Maybe this development is not the best for our privacy.

Latency is even more of a problem in HSDPA than in wired broadband connections (100+ pings and a lot of jitter) ... Maybe it could work with LTE, but that's a few years away from becoming mainstream.

That isn't really a problem. They can have many servers running at the same time, and the virtual machine problem you mentioned is probably solvable.

honestly, i doubt this will work. people with normal connection will never be able to play it this way.

"Delivering real-time streaming game play is seen by some as an insurmountable problem, even before factoring in the necessity of sending back telemetry from a game controller across the net to the data centre."

This extract is taken from the bbc website.

I am in this camp.

Internet connections will keep increasing more and more. 9 years ago I had a 128kbs connection, but now I have 100 times that + unlimited traffic, This will hold true to the rest as time is in favour of Onlive and every other digital service.

Your thought was the same as Microsoft's a few years ago, when Valve went to them with an idea to make a DD Service for games, and Microsoft declined and told them it was 10 years too early to make such service. Then Valve created Steam, which is now printing money, while Microsoft had to swallow their own words and is trying (and failing) to catch Valve with inferior DD services like Xbox Live and GFWL (lol),

VgChartz just added an interview:

http://news.vgchartz.com/news.php?id=3329

What do you think?

You're also talking about bandwidth, and not latency.  Latency is actually the problem here, and the reason it's not going to work.

Well, here's what I think: I think this isn't gonna work. Simply because the economy is in a very hard time and when onlive comes, Sony and Nintendo (and Microsoft, but less) won't sell any hardware or software anymore. So they don't get money and more and more people are going to be fired.
Also will there be no more competition between companies, so the producers of Onlive can ask a very high price for their system.
Furthermore, Onlive asks to much of your internetcapacity, so you don't only pay for your Onlive-system, but also for your internetconnection.

In any case, I don't think this is gonna work. Not that I don't want it to work, but if you look at the economy now and look at the advantages and disadvantages (like the internet or the price), I think there need to be taken a few more steps to make this a success.

@Nick(name): Welcome to VGC.

I don't know if people care that much if someone is going to get unemployed... At least history shows they don't.

But yes, otherwise i agree. Network latency and high bandwidth requirements are fighting against the service.