Gaming Without The Boxes!!

What do you guys thing of the new revolution in gaming that claims to obsolesce gaming computers and consoles. This new technology will stream games to any Intel bast Mac or PC and maintain all of the latest up-to-date technology needed to allow you to play the most updated games. It will even have the ability to play on a TV. The only thing that's necessary is a high speed connection. What do you think, no gaming rigs necessary.

 

doubt it will happend, pc hardware producers would probably loose a lot of money if that came true since u would maybe not need to pay a lot for good specs and update ur pc all the time.

 

There is a big thread on this, and it's called OnLive.

I also think it's fail. There are absolutely no benefits to this.

Streaming True HD Game video is impossible on majority of people's ISP, unless they live in Netherlands, Finland or Japan with their 100 Down/100 Up.
- Uncompressed true HD Game video for one hour of play would reach almost 10GB for just 720p video, based on what I've seen from using Fraps etc.
- Only way would be to stream compressed video, loss of detail. There is absolutely no way to maintain original quality and detail when you compress anything, whether it's audio or video.

The cost for your monthly ISP bill would be enormous, have a 10MB line already costs $60/Month.

The latency in gaming would be worse than if you just used your console or PC connected directly to server. Going from you, to OnLive, OnLive to server, Server back to OnLive, and back to you.
- People whine when they say their latency is higher than 80... And there is no way, no how this system can get your latency down to 30-50 that competitive players demand.

Then add on the monthly cost to OnLive. OnLive's overhead costs are going to enormous to do this.

Overall, you won't be saving money. Consoles cost about $500 when brand new and they last 6 years or more. Sony Network is free and Microsoft's Live is less than what OnLive will demand.
- Even for PC users, you buy a great system. You only need to upgrade the GPU once every 2-3 years and computer should last 4 years.

You don't own the games. OnLive does. You can't play when you want to. Only when OnLive says you can. What if OnLive has server problems, which they will. That will suck. Imagine your games are deleted, you will have to deal with their customer service, and no matter how good CS is, sitting there dealing with CS always always always sucks.

There just isn't any benefit to this system at all. ABSOLUTELY NONE.

All this does is scream: Yay for DRM! Yay for DRM! Yay for DRM! Yay for DRM! Yay for DRM! Yay for DRM! Yay for DRM! Yay for DRM! Yay for DRM! Yay for DRM! Yay for DRM! Yay for DRM! Yay for DRM! Yay for DRM! Yay for DRM! Yay for DRM! Yay for DRM! Yay for DRM! Yay for DRM! Yay for DRM! Yay for DRM! Yay for DRM! Yay for DRM! Yay for DRM! Yay for DRM! Yay for DRM! Yay for DRM! Yay for DRM!

Just look at who are the major investors for OnLive...

Before the game was even proven to work, even proven to be stable or anything...
It was announced that Electronic Arts, Take-Two, Ubisoft, Epic Games, Atari, Codemasters, THQ, Warner Bros., 2D Boy and Eidos Interactive have signed up to have their PC games available on the service.

Wow, look at all those companies just jumped right on board on an untested, and unknown service.
- All the companies that are known for moving away from PC to Console because they believe piracy = loss of sales.

 

I strongly disagree with this centralization pipe dream that all these game developers seem to have. What's wrong with actually owning a piece of a computational powerhouse? I guess people are ok with a few companies controlling what their hardware can and can't do, cause that's where it would go. Opinion is the same for cloud computing. Call me a conservative but our current networking technologies certainly could be streamlined or improved, but are essentially fine.

 

It will be a niche fad that will peak in 3 years, and then slowly die down over 4-5 years. It will never outnumber PC gamers with good hardware and the money to buy and own games.

This is my prediction and my hope.

 

Personally, when I buy a game, I LIKE having the box.

I like having 20+ or so on my shelf, all looking down at me, in a nice, neat order.

For me, that is heaven.

 

Long live boxes... my OCD loves 'em.

 

OP old news as Ziddy has already stated and 'search' is your friend.

http://forum.notebookreview.com/showthread.php?t=466476&highlight=onlive

 

Why is it that whenever gaming is brought up around here, everyone assumes that all gamers are hardcore CS1.6 players with a 5000 DPI mouse and demand a constant 200 FPS?

You guys forget that the large majority of gamers are casual or "normal", and will gladly accept convenience over extreme quality. Remember, the best selling console is the Nintendo Wii, and the best selling handheld is the Gameboy. For most people, this isn't about ideology. They don't know what "cloud computing" is or what ramifications this has on "DRM". And you know what? They don't give a darn. They're going to judge this on value, convenience, and execution, just like any other product or service.

First off, Ziddy, I'm just going to assume you've never heard of lossless compression.

But besides that, the internet is getting to a point where it can handle 720p streamed video. For a business to be a successful market leader, you usually have to see an opportunity and jump at it. That's the definition of INNOVATION. That's what OnLive is trying to do - they're taking this opportunity at the very beginning and trying to run with it.

Now, whether they'll succeed or fail is for the future to decide. But you guys really need to be able to look beyond your nose, and beyond just what you, personally, want.

 

Ya, I agree with this. I don't know if it will be a success or not (there where not a whole lot of people on the Beta. I only recall playing with 4 or 5 people), so only time will tell.

But I still personally like having a box to look at.

 

OnLive is only innovative for developers by providing an inherent DRM.

It's not innovative for gamers at all. It's just plain bad no matter how you look at it.

As for lossless video compression, I personally have never ever seen it used nor do I have any idea where it's used.
- Even lossless audio, no matter if you use FLAC, Apple Lossless, WMA Lossless or Real Audio and so on, the files are still MASSIVE
- For gaming they would probably use lossless DTS which is even more massive.
- The minimum of acceptable for audio would be 384 KBPS AC3 and even then the file for one hour of gaming would be quite large. Just no way around this, unless you stream with lots of degradation on both audio and video. For 2 channel maybe get away with 256 KBPS ogg or lame v0 mp3.
- Even using lossy h264 compression for 720p at one hour with good detail will take up 3-4GB of space. I personally do not know anyone who has bandwidth capable of downloading that much data streaming.

And I'm surprised you think casual gamers don't demand high quality. I'm not a hardcore CS 1.6 player, but I sure as hell do not want any more latency lag than what I already have and do not want any further degradation on the visual qualities either.

I don't see the innovation in streaming content. All I see is DRM DRM DRM DRM. If people didn't like AC2's DRM, well this is even worse. Your entire gaming experience is held hostage by some lame company that is heavily invested by corporates seeking the ultimate DRM.

This is clearly not about improving gamers experience to me, not at all, this is completely catered to corporates who are not focused on improving gaming experience but so called profits from the people who pirate games, even though they would most likely just not buy the game to begin with.

 

So instead of assuming that all gamers demand 200fps, we should assume that all gamers have 1GBPS uninterruptible internet speed with no download limit? And that they're willing to pay a subscription fee for gaming?

Well, I guess WoW proved the last one true...

Still, when a *good* gaming rig costs only a couple hundred more than a normal computer (and since you have to have a computer anyway to run it), there's just no reason to do it.

 

What other company is offering this type of service? Yeah, that's what I thought.

You have a valid point in that this type of service will require a hardy internet connection, but 720p video can be streamed on a 5 Mbps connection, which is quite common.

 

Well right now, Onlive IIRC isn't enabled for 720p yet. Also the latency of the compressed audio and video depends on not just the connection, but the distance. Onlive is only currently set to cover the majority of the US, but not the extremes of where population is lower. If Onlive is a hit, I can see problems with how well the servers can handle all of the connections. For those of you who don't know, Onlive developed a special compression and decompression chip purely tailored to the Onlive system. The server contains the chip and the set top box they developed contains it as well. Along with that they developed a new compression algorithm for their service, and that's how it all works. Computers running the service do the decompression in hardware.

I do personally think Onlive has alot going for it, and it might just succeed. However it won't completely replace consoles and PCs. It can't really as personal computers can guarantee higher framerate, software ownership, as well as still usable without internet connection. Some people just don't care about ownership, they want to just play, and thats okay, Onlive will give them the oppurtunity to do so, but they will still need a fast and wide connection for HD, that is within latency range, though smooth 480p Onlive gameplay shouldn't be hard for the vast majority of broadband users.

I personally see Onlive co-existing with real boxes at best, and along with cloud computing co-existing with the normal kind. There is confidence in physical media and machines, much like people had confidence in a gold backed monetary standard. Giving up personal machines for cloud computing terminals is a risky venture already.

As for hardware manufacturers, they will always exist too. Onlive's servers and equipment have to come from somewhere, and considering Onlive will upgrade their equipment through time as well, I'm sure no one is really worried.

 

You bring up a good point that I forgot to address.

OnLive isn't here to REPLACE anything. Consoles and PC games for purchase will not be going anywhere. OnLive aims to fill a niche that is currently not serviced. It's existence doesn't mean that another has to fail.

 

But what niche is that?

It's marketed to PC gamers, so the more PC gamers who spend money on OnLive, the fewer PC gamers will have money left to buy hardware and games directly.

And what if a company decides to release a game exclusively for OnLive?

 

I don't think it's a zero-sum game here, it's my impression that most people won't devote all of their disposable leisure income into a scheme that's untried, untested and not guaranteed for long term survival. Similarly I don't think any company would think of exclusivity on a platform that has almost no guarantee of cash flow or sustained revenues.

I don't like Onlive personally, but if the idea catches on and they aren't a bunch of charlatans, then maybe it's worth a second look.

 

Ubisoft tried this already and look where it got them

 

Can't always see things from best selling part, do also take note that wii is the first current gen console to be bypassed and easily modded, while gameboy is because... it's the only major brand handheld console before other handhelds join in.

 

You guy keep talking about bypassed, and modded, and DRM...None of this matters to the average customer!

And what niche? How about the instant gratification, "I want to play now!" niche? Or the no-install, no-patch, no-hassle niche? Come on now, open your eyes just a little.

 

Problem is, you are saying that wii is being the best selling console because of simple gameplay catering to the casual players, however, how can you tell if the best selling is actually due to the fact that it's the only easily moddable console or is it really because of it catering to casual players.

 

Ok, so now you're telling us the majority of grandmas and guys that love mario/zelda games are all modders? Yeah surrreeee...

It is clear the Wii is catered towards casual players, you don't see any advertisement on their 'moddability' advantage.

And back on topic: So far it seems like an untested idea this OnLive business. It remains to be seen how much of GB/session will be needed and the ping issue, as mentioned here and on the other OnLive thread.

 

The Wii is the best selling console because of quite a few factors:

1. Price Point
2. Innovation
3. Advertising
.
.
.
2389562. Moddablilty

 

Great. I really need to see OnLive for myself. One thing that people keep failing to bring up is controller latency. It's bad enough to have a delay seeing the enemy with an online multiplayer game, it's another for your controls to have to process through the whole system as well.

Right now when you move your mouse, it's processed between your mouse and southbridge and to your CPU then GPU and displayed on screen. Now it will go through your PC, through your network card, router, ISP, processed by the Onlive system, back down the interwebs, through your ISP, through your router, through your PC, and then finally shown on screen.

If you've ever played games like Dead Space with the vsync controller lag, it's horrible and impossible to play. I don't doubt it will be any less horrible even with the fastest connections. You're talking AT BEST 100ms lag, more like 150-200ms. It'll be like you're dragging your arm through water.

And regarding the compression, even if people do like the Wii, the graphics are still crisp, as we expect form a digital platform. With compression, it has to lose detail, nature of the best. And to all of a sudden look like we're playing an MPEG movie isn't going to be acceptable. Unless it compresses it like a zip file, then decompresses it on your end with the box, then that has to take a significant lag hit as well.

 

Given the US's horrendously horrible internet connections, this might be a blessing in disguise much as DivX turned out to be.

The public will reject the concept but the companies will find the possible implications of selling much faster internet to be profitable and it may just happen that the US upgrades past 3rd-world internet speeds!

Whether Onlive and its spiritual successors succeed or not, it may bring faster internet to the US and other countries.

Silver lining ftw.

 

It's not more about speed of the internet but the latency, speed of the internet simply means that it's possible to even view the game in the first place, latency means whether the game is playable. To really have a wide audience, it will need to have operating servers in every part of the world, at least a latency of less than 50ms would be needed for playability (I'm not even going to talk about hardcore gamers here), even 100ms delay isn't going to cut it, because the delay here is input delay, not game response delay, which is much worse.

 

The US has slow connections because there doesn't seem to be any bandwidth/total downloaded data caps. Our limit on our plan with Bell is 25GB/month upgraded to 65GB/month since we watch all TV on the internet as of now.

 

I'd better be in the US with a "not-so-fast" connection without download/upload caps than here with a 28GB/month total download/upload.

 

i actually consider OnLive a very good thing, if it succeeds then i can see the industry making better console ports and more PC exclusives, since there is no piracy on that platform

 

Fixed for you.

Imagine a time when you sit down to play your favorite game and you simply cannot play as the onlive servers are being flooded 24/7 from every direction on very real stolen accounts from a growing number of stolen accounts from very real subscribers.
They will do this until you are all limited to X minutes of play per day.
(Your quota *17minutes* is up until tomorrow)
Then you log in the next day to find out your quota is topped out before you even log in as your account is compromised...

If Onlive doesn't suck, it will be compromised. Count on it.