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

Forums - Sales - OnLive - THE END of fanboys wars?

Black RL on 01 April 2009

@the2bears, yep, time will tell.




Around the Network
Deneidez on 01 April 2009
Black RL said:
@mrstickball

I don't think it's going to be a problem, some of the games you play right now have HORST lag than that.

Well, the highest I have seen is about 4 frames with 30fps(~133ms lag) caption and thats on PC, with CRT monitor and mouse that has wire. ( http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YtjzcmliDkw )

The thing is that you always lose one frame atleast. My own engine can do it withing next frame. :)



New crap available on mi pages!

NJ5 on 01 April 2009

"The round trip latency from pushing a button on a controller and it going up to the server and back down, and you seeing something change on screen should be less than 80 milliseconds.

"We usually see something between 35 and 40 milliseconds."


So they are seeing less lag than games running on a local console? (remember the whole KZ2 debate?)

I call bullshit. Many LCDs alone would have almost that much lag by themselves.

http://www.gamasutra.com/view/feature/3725/measuring_responsiveness_in_video_.php?print=1

Games that run at 60 fps:

  • PS3 System menus: 3/60ths
  • Guitar Hero III (Xbox 360): 3/60th
  • Ridge Racer 7: 4/60ths
  • Virtua Tennis 3: 4/60ths
  • Ninja Gaiden Sigma: 4/60ths
  • PixelJunk Racers: 4/60ths

Games that run at 30 fps:

  • Genji: Days of the Blade: 6/60ths
  • Tony Hawk's Proving Ground: 8/60ths
  • BlackSite: Area 51: 8/60ths
  • Halo 3 (Xbox 360) : 8-10/60ths
  • Skate: 10/60ths
  • GTAIV: 10/60ths
  • Harry Potter and the Order of the Phoenix: 10-14/60ths
  • Heavenly Sword: 7-18/60ths

 



My Mario Kart Wii friend code: 2707-1866-0957

mrstickball on 01 April 2009

Why does the OP say there will be no response lag, when the Kowenicki's quote says otherwise.



Back from the dead, I'm afraid.

NJ5 on 01 April 2009
mrstickball said:
Why does the OP say there will be no response lag, when the Kowenicki's quote says otherwise.

That's not even the real issue here, because only the most naive would believe something like that. The real question is why they state their service has better response time than a regular console.

 



My Mario Kart Wii friend code: 2707-1866-0957

Around the Network
NJ5 on 01 April 2009
kowenicki said:
@NJ5

Yeah having done a bit of reading... It does seem a bit odd.

Its def quicker than a home and wired set-up... how!?

To put it simply, the guy is lying. According to the gamasutra article, the latency he mentions isn't even enough to cover the LCD/Plasma screen update.

 



My Mario Kart Wii friend code: 2707-1866-0957

the2bears on 01 April 2009
NJ5 said:
kowenicki said:
@NJ5

Yeah having done a bit of reading... It does seem a bit odd.

Its def quicker than a home and wired set-up... how!?

To put it simply, the guy is lying. According to the gamasutra article, the latency he mentions isn't even enough to cover the LCD/Plasma screen update.

 

Who knows what test "results" they're portraying.  The real world situation is going to be multiple hops across the internet and the lag to do a round trip packet is going to be pretty hard to overcome or code around.  Hardly new in concept, just another reworking of client/server.

 



the2bears - the indie shmup blog
NJ5 on 01 April 2009
kowenicki said:
so how come they have all these developers signed up? surely they had to demo the tech?

I wondered about that earlier in the thread, and Khuutra had this plausible reply. Developers probably have little to lose and potentially something to gain by signing up, so why not?

 



My Mario Kart Wii friend code: 2707-1866-0957

mrstickball on 01 April 2009

It is a low-risk solution, and requires almost no work from the publishers.

If your running the game on another computer, allowing access, then displaying the results....What kind of technology is actually involved in that, from the developer's side?

Answer: Very little or none. All you'd need is a way to capture the video from the game, to send it to the user after their input to the game.

So, all the developers/publishers would need to do was allow OnLive to legally access, and distribute their game to their server.

It's kind of the same thing behind a movie company allowing Netflix or Hulu to display their movie(s) and media: It really takes nothing on their side, other than approval for the media.



Back from the dead, I'm afraid.

Ratz on 01 April 2009

It could work for games with low hardware requirements. However, to play FPS shooters with high quality graphics, it's a no go. Imagine: a server with 64 players. The datacenter will have to handle all the graphics processing of the 64 players. You can't do that in a single computer. If you use virtual machines, GPUs won't work.