on paper its great but if it really is a success then Sony MS and Nintendo would take over this market within months they could offer the same service plus they already have a name and franchises so Onlive could be a beginning but I swear that if it really works the big three would share the market they have games like Gran Turismo Mario Zelda Halo onlive has absolutely no chance against them nobody stops them from joining the cloud computing market.

I still have problems to believe that it could work the Internet is not so reliable I dont think we have everywhere a proper infrastructure to realize this.

Cloud computing is the future but not yet. You sit at your couch and press A button the information goes to the server the server process it and then the information goes back. And a blink lasts 300-400ms but this is to slow. You could be shot and you wouldnt even know it. A third of a second is 10-20 frames. In this time a lot of things can happen. One player games ok but Multiplayer FPS matches ??

Aslong as no real users with standard connection confirmed that it works I will be sceptical and even then it could fail because most people wouldnt pay this much 200 a year for gaming the attach ratio is just 6 games per console ofcourse here the people have more but that means that somewhere else the people have less games. I dont think it will be 100% reliable even if it works and this is a fact most people just wont accept.

Its 10 years to early for that.

I dont think a project of this magnitude can be lifted by such a small company nowadays. It requires billions of investment and huge add campagnes. And the selection of games they offer is just to small this will aim mainly to PC gamers but they pirate their games anyway. Ofcourse a couple of million will try it and pay for it but not the masses just the early adopters and to convince the masses it needs more then just this. And onlive on phones will not happen yet. the latencys are a lot higher then with cable. I dont even think that it would work properly with WIFI and with 3g or HSDPA ? No way.



Its a brillant idea but the success will be harvested by other companys or maybe Onlive will build up a decent network and someone will buy them probably MS. Sony will replicate the technology and Nintendo too.

I said almost a half second- 400ms certainly qualifies as such I think gamers focused would take no more than 200ms.

Your whole argument is flawed too based on the fact that people blink only a few times a minute. OnLive is hardly able to set their buffer based on our blinking pattern. Any lag is bad lag, we can't control our eyes, but we can control out gaming appliance.  So adding a blink to gameplay could make a big difference.

I will comment here again regarding OnLive, the same way I would regarding Natal... it is too early to say whether or not this will end up taking off. We don't know at all. We don't even have a price point for anything, and the software support for it is getting long in the tooth. Showing Frontlines and Mirror's Edge doesn't exactly instill confidence they are going to have the newest games people want to play for it. They say they have it, but we haven't even gotten it going into open beta with the public yet.

I think you may be rushing things. I certainly would not expect a beta at this point.

Imho they already said half a year ago that they will have a beta soon if I remember correctly i read a thread about this here a long time ago.

And I remember them saying they will be on the market in 2009 thats obviously delayed but they said it.

Good point. I'm certainly curious to try it out. Hopefully it isn't vaporware.

How many times a person blinks in a minute has nothing to do with my point. 80ms, which is what the gentleman in the video said was the lag, is roughly a 4th of the speed it takes to blink your eye. So, if you think blinking is fast, the lag is 4 times faster. I know that when I blink, it's almost like I didn't blink at all, and 80 ms is even faster than that

Additionally, the speed of sight is between 50-200ms...not to be confused with the speed of motion capture. That is, to be consciously aware of something you have seen, you need to see it for at least 50-200ms. The human eye can detect things up to 14ms short, but is never consciously aware of it. Below 50ms is sub liminal speed.

And that's the speed they're getting on the beta servers, up to 1000 miles away. If you live close to the servers, say 500 miles away, you will experience something more like 50ms and less. On top of that, the guy said they will upgrade servers constantly which will contribute to faster and faster speeds.

Alright, let's say it does take off and, as some have suggest, makes consoles obsolete. How would everyone here feel about that? 

Yeesh, I sound like a shrink.

No that is not the future. I hope this never goes mainstream.

You should watch the videos.

I really did not like the idea of onlive at first until I saw those videos. About 45 minutes to get through them all, but sit tight, it's worth it.