OnLive may already be failure before a single sweaty palm has caressed a controller.
How can something fail when its not even out yet? This article fails.
for the same reason that in the same day you'll see one article saying ps3 or 360 is failing and then see another that says it's the year of the ps3 or 360. i already saw an article earlier about how onlive could mean the end of consoles as we know it. N4G is just a junk site for bloggers to dump their trash in an attempt to get hits. There's very little actual news on here.
Exactly, we will know if it fails once its out. Even if it has some points we still dk when this will be out. Same thing was said about blu ray, 360, PS3 & Wii. None fail... till now that is lol
if you read the article it makes several key points im very skeptic that this will take off the ip caps mainly i can see this eating a huge Chunk and second it seems like a majority of the people who have broadband like me have a min 3 mb cable connection and that will more likely result in minmal requirments i did sign up the beta to see how it will go but again my Hopes for this thing isnt close to high for it to be taking off.
Quoting myself from a different thread: - Printing a disc containing dozens of hours of HD single player, co-op and online multiplayer gameplay costs less than $1. - Delivering streaming HD gaming costs no less than $1 per hour so providing the same amount of gameplay as the disk, for argument's sake we'll peg at 30 hours, would cost $30 dollars. Unless consumers suddenly decide they want to start paying a hell of a lot more for their games and internet connections and developers decide they want to make games for the love of it rather than profits, an OnLive type service simply isn't going to happen. If you can somehow demonstrate that the economics of streaming game service make sense, please do so. N4G doesn't charge per post.
remember the Phantom or Gizmondo handheld? lol FAIL!!
The article makes a valid argument and the title makes a question (hence the question mark), not a statement of fact that it will fail. These are very valid points in the article for the claims that the company is trying to state the service will provide. I personally wouldn't use the service myself as I like being able to play my games I own anytime I want without having to worry about going over my ISP caps or possible latency issues. I am not a "techie" by any sense of the word; however, I do know enough about technology to know that there are some major hurdles that have to be jumped before this technology goes mainstream. If I am wrong.... more power to ya to get your subscription.
damn are people really that scare of onlive .
...it makes no sense.
_I'm_ Ron Burgundy?
i think not, if they can do what they promise, this thing is going to be out of control, buy a game and play it on your tv or crappy pc, or even over on your mac that couldn't even run games before. And you pay a subscription that is supposedly supposed to be the same $ as xbx live or around, but not only does that buy you the connection and friends list and all the stuff that you get on xbox live, but you get a super pc that gets upgraded constantly. i really hope they can pull it off, cause I am onboard, signed up for the beta, hopefully I will get to see what its all about.
it has features that I haven't seen on any console yet either, like rent almost any game before you buy it, and play it instantly (not to mention when you buy a game, you don't have to download it either, or technically it downloads, but i think i read that its over the super pc local network to your own hdd space, so its like a 5 second wait for the multiple gig file to transfer over, lol) oh and you get to playback and record clips of the last 15-30 seconds of gameplay (and screen shots), whenever, in every game! that is going to be something that I look forward too. just imagine having the halo 3 system, except you have it 24/7 in any game. spectating, well you can set it up so your friends or anyone can spectate you, and supposedly, if there is a really good gamer playing a game, there could be a million people watching that one person exactly how they see it.
see my previous post for details. Even giving them the benefit of the doubt that they are charging Live's monthly fee of $8/month rather than the annual fee of $50/yr, this is an investor scam at best. $8 per month would only cover about 8 hours of HD game streaming. Most gamers will clock 20 hours a week, or 90 hours a month. That's $90/month of hosting cost that has to be recuperated somehow. Please explain how this business model (streaming game service) makes the slightest bit of sense when the conventional method (disc) of getting all that gameplay to the customer costs only about $1 per disc.
I don't see it happening in Australia, NZ or Canada where internet is still very expensive and the caps limit and the download speed. If they can come up with some deals from the ISPs and provide broadband service then there might be a chance.
Come to America bro. Internet Service Providers are just jokes here. There is nothing serious or moral about them.
and when something sounds that good........there is usually a snag that causes big problems.
Will (insert game here) save OnLive?
That game will flop for sure.
Is this like Dial-Up where you can't be online and talk at the same time? Basically no one else could be downloading or using the internet connection while your playing on this service if it requires that speed at all times.... I just don't see how it will work.... Everyone doesn't have 10mbps + with high upload speeds.....
I agree.imagine someone that has Voip service and uses a video on demand service. Lets say you are in your room playing on your onlive system but then someone else in the house wants to watch a movie on demand, and then someone gets a phone call.....it would all fall to pieces. AS it is now if you re gaming online and using voip and downloading something small the voip will break up due to low bandwidth. It FEW cities where verizon has the FIOS network this might all work, but on a standard cable or dsl connection its a joke.
Theres no way they will be able to do this. Look at all the ISP trying to put caps in place already. They do this to keep users from using services like appletv and such cause they want you to use their video on demand service ie comcast and time warner. This is going to require way too much bandwidth to work. However if it does work then the ISP are going to be charging people so much for going over their limits that people will hate it. its going to fail and will not work untill the big ISP out there decide to upgrade thier old outdated networks. I used to work for comcast and beleive me it is really a miracle they are able to give people the service they already do.
N4G is a community of gamers posting and discussing the latest game news. It’s part of NewsBoiler, a network of social news sites covering today’s pop culture.