Originally posted by nariusseldon

Originally posted by GreenChaos

The harshest form of DRM ever created and some of you think it's a good thing? To no longer own games is a good thing?

You won't think this way when they start shutting down old classics that you can't play anymore because you don't own the disk. You won't think this way when your internet company starts charing you per bandwidth use.

Or how about when to government gets involved and decides you can only play 4 hours a day.

This is great for game companies, very very bad for gamers.

 

Funny coming from people from a MMO site. It would be similar to MMOs, except there is no presistent world. Why is it a bad thing? You don't "own" any MMOs but you still play them.

Convenient is a good thing. Paying LESS for hardware is a good thing. Not have to worry about settings and upgrads is a good thing.

 

Paying less for hardware is not a good thing in my book.  I have a highend PC for many reasons gaming is just one of them.  And I really don't mind settings and upgrades.  I format my drives every 6 months and reinstall everything.   Some people still like computers.

---

Originally posted by sonicbrew

The problem is that no DRM system has been succesfull in abolishing piracy, not one.

---

---

Originally posted by GreenChaos
Paying less for hardware is not a good thing in my book. I have a highend PC for many reasons gaming is just one of them. And I really don't mind settings and upgrades. I format my drives every 6 months and reinstall everything. Some people still like computers.

---

People who like their computers are a small minority. The great majority of people want computers to operate like televisions - such that they just work. OnLive would permit that. (Assuming the network connection stays up :) )

I'll offer a reminder that OnLive is technically capable of providing access to ANY application. Their model could completely replace the home PC with a touch-screen display and their little box. Temporarily, include a keyboard and mouse.

The faster broadband becomes relative to the video streams needed to feed our displays, the more practical this becomes.

Also, think about things like adoption of physics hardware or ray tracing hardware. Instead of having to convince millions of customers to buy new hardware so they can get the game companies to take advantage of it, the hardware manufacturers only need to convince OnLive and a couple prominent game companies to make the upgrade. It's a much more manageable chicken and egg problem.

Edit: additional quote and comments

Originally posted by cukimunga

Originally posted by Swiftblade13

if this works as advertised... and if they can get resolutions as high as a real gaming pc with future improvements in internet connection speeds........    this could pretty much kill off the PC gaming hardware market..  It would be interesting to see the long term repercussions.

 

As it is this is fantastic for people who cant afford or dont want to invest in a gaming PC...   It would be awesome to be able to play high end titles with friends that have an emachine.

 

 

 

I don't think it will kill off the PC hardware market. I have a sweet computer already and can play any game out there already so why would I need to use Onlive?

But there will be people that don't have nice computers that will use Onlive. 

 

Also will they have MMORPG's on their service if not  you still need to buy hardware to keep up with those games, and other games that might not be on their service.

Exactly - too many people are treating this as a replacement for the current PC hardware market system, when the freaking dev himself said it'd be an addition, not a replacement.

The only thing that'd suffer is your pride. "I spent hundreds getting a high-end PC that makes Crysis my bitch, but now some poor nubz can play it with max settings on a freaking Gateway? Just because they has a good Intarnetz connection? WTF!"

How would they have enough PCs to cover this?

I don't see this threatening consoles.

-  You have to pay for a subscription to it.  A lot of the console gaming crowd are casuals.  They don't typically buy subscriptions.  They want to buy their console and a few games and not have to worry about paying a monthly fee.

-  PCs require a large $ investment for gaming because a lot of game companies raise the system requirements every year.  Console gaming is generally cheaper overall.  Yes I understand that you can play these titles on an entry level PC/Mac, but it's still generally more expensive than a console.

-  How well it's actually going to work is still sketchy.  Lag can still be a big issue.

-  Developers are going to have to want to make games for the PC over consoles.  Since consoles are a single machine which all have pretty much the same hardware in it (aside from peripherals) it's far easier to make games that don't crash and have other various glitches associated with memory/graphics/performance.  That means that these developers might have to pay more to have a technical support staff if they choose to develop more PC games over console games.

-  As mentioned elsewhere modded content is a problem.  Patches for certain technical fixes might also be a problem with this delivery method. 

-  This service isn't really too much different from downloading games via any distrubition method (Steam/Impulse/XBox Live/PSN).

-  You'll probably have to pay for the "micro console" too if you want to play a game via that method.  Who knows how much that's going to cost.

-  They need to have publisher support to port the games over to OnLive.  Lots of developers (especially certain console developers) probably aren't going to bother with concurrently porting those games over.  Some developers might not bother porting those games over at all.  This means that you'll have to play a lot of games weeks after their release on consoles and even PCs.

Still the service has plenty going for it.  I just don't see it threatening console gaming. 

+  You can run the game on your PC or television despite what it might have been originally programmed for.

+  Some major developers already signed up for this, so they should have a fairly decent list of games on release.

+  You don't have to wait for a download to finish to play your game.

+  You can rent games, instead of buying them.  This is especially important for PC games which you simply couldn't do before.

+  Spectating

+  Great looking UI so far

Originally posted by sonicbrew 

The problem is that no DRM system has been succesfull in abolishing piracy, not one. The only thing DRM has accomplished is causing massive issues for honest and legit buyers of games. You think I am talking out of my ass then scan tremendous amounts of boards and forums for DRM based games. Hell, go to Amazon.com and look at the feedback alone for the new Total War.

I won;t even get started on Steam either....

Actually MMOGs don't really have piracy issues.  It does not make sense to pirate a MMOG client since the software is useless without an account.  The people running the servers have full control over who they let onto the servers.  The DRM is built right into the game rather than being a secondary entity.  Everytime one logs into a WoW, EVE or EQ account that's a DRM handshake.

OnLive takes this even further since the client is purely generic and the people runnign the servesr have full control over what games you can access.

Originally posted by Magnum2103

I don't see this threatening consoles.

- You have to pay for a subscription to it. A lot of the console gaming crowd are casuals. They don't typically buy subscriptions. They want to buy their console and a few games and not have to worry about paying a monthly fee.

Casual people pay for cellphones, internet, cable (and pay-per-view on top of that). What makes this so special?

- PCs require a large $ investment for gaming because a lot of game companies raise the system requirements every year. Console gaming is generally cheaper overall. Yes I understand that you can play these titles on an entry level PC/Mac, but it's still generally more expensive than a console.

Once the minimum acceptable requirements are established Id be willing to bet you people will come out with a bare minimum entry level computer that can be ready for onLive at the barest of minimum costs.

- How well it's actually going to work is still sketchy. Lag can still be a big issue.

Its being backed by a lot of big names. These people wouldnt be putting their reputations on the line if onLive was only "kinda sure" it would work.

- Developers are going to have to want to make games for the PC over consoles. Since consoles are a single machine which all have pretty much the same hardware in it (aside from peripherals) it's far easier to make games that don't crash and have other various glitches associated with memory/graphics/performance. That means that these developers might have to pay more to have a technical support staff if they choose to develop more PC games over console games.

With onLive, its all ONE console... TV, PC, Mac... Its a fraction of the support cost and the technical support is trivial. Anything complicated is handled in house. This is leaps and bounds ahead of consoles, not a step back,

- As mentioned elsewhere modded content is a problem. Patches for certain technical fixes might also be a problem with this delivery method.

Patches would be instant, as you would be patching the 5 computers rather then actually distributing it... I think you may be misuderstanding how this whole distribution method works.

- This service isn't really too much different from downloading games via any distrubition method (Steam/Impulse/XBox Live/PSN).

Its very different and nothing aside from the 2meg browser plug-in is actually stored on your computer.

- You'll probably have to pay for the "micro console" too if you want to play a game via that method. Who knows how much that's going to cost.

Current estimates I believe were sitting at 50-100 dollars.

- They need to have publisher support to port the games over to OnLive. Lots of developers (especially certain console developers) probably aren't going to bother with concurrently porting those games over. Some developers might not bother porting those games over at all. This means that you'll have to play a lot of games weeks after their release on consoles and even PCs.

Well onLive can be run on a computer, or TV, which means that 1 release works for both controllers and computers. I think part of the deal with onLive is they want concurrent releases with the other consoles, so I think this is a non-issue.

Casual people pay for cellphones, internet, cable (and pay-per-view on top of that). What makes this so special?

In the case of a cellphone the payment plan is a requirement to use the phone service.  It's not as if I can get unlimited phone service (even if it were just to call one particular person) for a one time fee.  Internet service is also required to pay to use the internet.  Cable subscription is required to view the additional channels also.  The thing with OnLive games is it seems like there will be no exclusivity and essentially I'm paying a subscription fee for something I could play on my PC or console anyway.  To top it off if I want to use the OnLive service for a MMO it's a possibility that not only will I have to buy the MMO game, I would have to pay the OnLive and MMO subscription fee (as well as my internet and electric bill).

Once the minimum acceptable requirements are established Id be willing to bet you people will come out with a bare minimum entry level computer that can be ready for onLive at the barest of minimum costs.

Which is still going to be more expensive than a Wii or Xbox 360.

Its being backed by a lot of big names. These people wouldnt be putting their reputations on the line if onLive was only "kinda sure" it would work.

I did list that them already having a good amount of developers supporting it as a plus.  Still there have been plenty of things with developers backing them that just didn't take off.  PhysX cards come to mind, in fact one of the developers (Epic) supported the PhysX cards by being one of the first to develop a game using them, but they never grew popular.

With onLive, its all ONE console... TV, PC, Mac... Its a fraction of the support cost and the technical support is trivial. Anything complicated is handled in house. This is leaps and bounds ahead of consoles, not a step back,

Still you are running it on different PCs (as well as televisions.  If there are display problems then at the very least OnLive will be responsible for fixing that.  I guess the developers wouldn't have to worry about that, so I take that back.

Patches would be instant, as you would be patching the 5 computers rather then actually distributing it... I think you may be misuderstanding how this whole distribution method works.

And how would you go about adding mods like in most MMOs if the game's directory is on another computer?

Well onLive can be run on a computer, or TV, which means that 1 release works for both controllers and computers. I think part of the deal with onLive is they want concurrent releases with the other consoles, so I think this is a non-issue.

Might not be a non-issue for developers who don't want to spend the extra time on concurrently developing for the OnLive service.

Really, I think it might be a good service.  I'm keeping an eye on it myself and I hope it takes off.  I just predict it won't be a problem for consoles.  I don't even think it's going to even dent any of the console's sales.  If it does well it has the potiental to replace all consoles and the need for constantly upgrading your PC's hardware which is fantastic.  It's just in the past great innovative hardware like this almost never catches on.  I'm hoping it will.

(From what I've seen of the UI it looks phenomenal too, wish the other distribution services adopted a UI like that)
 

all i can say is LOL WHAT A JOKE

This will never happen for one reason. The day their servers crash and go down for 16 hours that noone can play any games (imagine serious gamers buying games from this exclusively) from it is the day they lose all their business forever.

bad

this is bad

this is very bad!

its happening...

we have to do something...

to stop the cattle from being herd...

how the major media will position itself

is the next signal

yes, we are being watched

its on!

Originally posted by Interesting

bad

this is bad

...

yes, we are being watched

its on!

Cocaine much?

And as per my previous post I think pay-per-view is a better example where you pay for cable, then pay for more on top. With a cellphone I pay monthly, but still pay extra on top of that for long distance and text messages.
When I go ski'ing I have to buy a pass, and rent the equipment, the equipment is useless without a ski pass.

Yes, some people will have issues, but I think the allure of top notch graphics will bring a lot of people in.

Looks interesting but i think I'll stick to boxed games and upgrading.

This is something that would be really cool and innovative if it works as it should... i doubt that this will work as well as the ppl making this have sed. 0 lag rofl are u kidding me? I hope it works thought and i also hope that they dont release it its not 100% done and has alot issues

There will simply come a time when no one will know what its like to not access thousands of games for a single fee via a service like Onlive. Those gamers, still unborn, would consider buying hardware and owning game media as the antiquated artifice of a bygone era like 8 tracks and rotary phones. When that happens, who will control ideas in the public domain then? you can develop games all you want, if your message defies the status quo, they simply won't allow you to be heard as a developer. Without this, if you wanna develop something and market it, it gets heard, it may or may not suceed, but you are free to enter the marketplace with a fair chance to be heard(see Darkfall). When this becomes the standard for the millions of people who have historically been locked out of the modern higher end gaming market, a group easily targeted by indy developers, independent game development will be relegated almost exclusively to hobbyists unless Onlive danes to allow them access and a voice. They're hopes are totally in Onlive's hands.

 Resistance is futile.

 Meh, just don't buy it. Just like drugs. Pushers will soon move on to other pastures for fresh meat.

BIG QUESTION...wouldn't this kill PC's and hardware and not consoles? Seems like a mini console with a keyboard/mouse/controller to me. I'm not so sure how OnLIVE will turn out to be really. Now if I could play MMO's on that thing I'd buy, but it's no need.

I had a wise philosphy prof who once said "Any idiot can create a conspiracy, and any fool can be pessimistic. It takes a clever man to see the good and stronger man to hold onto it".

Its so easy to claim everything will be the end of the world. Hell half of you though bush would going to blow up the world 8 years ago.. then 4 years ago... now Obama...

Its so easy to assume the worst and be scared. It takes balls to see potential and believe. So far the "end of the world" is batting 0.000 yet people still fall back on it. 1984 was a book, not a magical, mystical adventure into the future, and any fool can tell you Its easy to scare people by throwing that around, yet to argue against it takes effort, time and resources. The nagging doubt is something people exploit, and if your scared onLive will be the end of the free world your just a wimp.

Grow a satchel and embrace progress. If it goes the wrong way, stop it. Its easy to say that humanity is going to go with the grain, yet the Nazi's didnt take over... The world has yet to plunge into chaos and for god sakes look at the cold war.

---

Originally posted by Munki
I had a wise philosphy prof who once said "Any idiot can create a conspiracy, and any fool can be pessimistic. It takes a clever man to see the good and stronger man to hold onto it".

---

Agreed. Next comes the small issue of whether or not this is for the common good.

---

Originally posted by Munki
If it goes the wrong way, stop it.

---

Nice try, but no. The only time that something gets stopped is when the detrimental effects as well as the solution are both obvious and immediate. Collectively, societies are pathetically bad at spotting and correcting problems. There is great value in spotting problems while they are still forming so that they can be "nipped in the bud" or "headed off at the pass".

---

Originally posted by Munki
embrace progress

---

Many people have used that slogan for quite a few really bad ideas. "Progress" is a term frequently used when "change" is the only thing happening. Just because we're talking about something that has never been done before doesn't mean that it is progress.

I think it's great that you've got a positive outlook on life, but don't let that fool you into believing that the New is also the Good. I would think that the current economic mess (triggered by embracing the New) would give us some insights into that.