Printable View
Apparently there is this new technology that is developed called OnLivw that lets you stream a game from OnLives dedicated servers, so you can play any game regardless of the power of your PC.
http://news.cnet.com/8301-10797_3-10202688-235.html
Sounds like a brilliant fucking idea if it works as well as they say it does.
I don't get it, my computer can suck complete ass and somehow miraculously be able to run these games?
I think it's a good idea, but methinks someone is going to charge for these kind of services and by the time it's said and done, you shoulda just bought a better computer.
Think On Demand of digital cable for computers. Or more like remote desktop or something. The box you buy allows your computer to connect to their servers which have the games on it. Then the game essentially streams to your monitor.Quote:
Originally Posted by Cool Runnings
I don't think this will catch on. The social aspect of consoles is what makes them so appealing (going to friends houses playing split screen etc). Maybe this will hurt the high end computers, but there better be like no lag or this thing will flop.
While the idea sounds good on paper and in beta testing, how will this survive in the wild? Personally, I'm the type of gamer / techie who likes to own all of their games and movies. Although this does sound interesting, I can't wait to start playing it and then get a bit of buffering while in a firefight... that'll go over well.
I feel like this will fail fairly quickly. I don't think people's internet connections are fast enough or have enough bandwidth to be able to stream a whole fuckin' video game, and still have it playable. Unless of course you're forced to play at an ultra low resolution or terrible quality video.
Well that's the thing. It's not streaming the game, but a video of the game in what will apparently be a low latency stream. Hence the buffering comment mentioned above. It does mention being able to stream 720p video too.Quote:
Originally Posted by srsinternets
I just thought of another reason this will blow. I don't know if anyone's college monitors bandwith usage, but mine does (penn state). I have a 4gb weekly limit. Streaming games would most likely suck my bandwith dry.
Yeah thats what I meant. Not resolution, but just low quality video in general.Quote:
Originally Posted by linkinkampf19
I believe it says you need a 5mbit connection to stream 720, otherwise you can just use standard def. It's a cool idea, but they do seem to be slightly over-optimistic about input delay. Even with the fastest connections there's still probably going to be some visible delay.Quote:
Originally Posted by linkinkampf19
Yeah thats what I was wondering about is even sometimes while watching videos on a good connection you get a delay or buffering, and something like that would be annoying, like you were playing with a shitty computer.
As for the social aspect. Its probably still possible to play multiplayer, they have a connector for the TV with a controller, so I assume you could have multiple controllers as well.
Within 10 years this is going to be standard.
I mean corporate it is already going toward this model
Jitter alone will prevent this from working as intended.
That's not technically accurate. It IS streaming the game; the output and control mechanisms are being sent to you over the net. That's streaming. You're obviously not being sent the entire install data, but that's neither here nor there.Quote:
Originally Posted by linkinkampf19
Quote:
Originally Posted by Atmosfear
This.
Ok so I watched an interview and here are some things I learned
resolution will depend on your internet speed. 1.5 mb for standard, 5mb for HD
You can have people spectate you or vice-versa
You can save a video of your last 10-15 seconds to share, kind of like in Halo 3.
Nine publishers will participate with this service.
There will be an initial access fee then price for the game, which you can pay for a limited time like renting or buy forever.
Beta this summer
Scheduled to Launch Winter 2009
Apparently they've been working on this for seven years to perfect it.
Well then it could be pretty decent if you have a 5mb connection and you go for standard anyway. Then you're pretty much guaranteed no lag or anything.Quote:
Originally Posted by Infernus
It's a fantastic idea if they can manage to pull it off but I think I'll wait and 'believe it when I see it'.
How so? Lag is more likely to be caused by high latency, not a lack of bandwidth. Bandwidth only describes how much data can fit down the pipe at once; latency must be added in to figure aggregate 'speed' (throughput). Sending less information down the pipe doesn't automagically mean that there will be no or less lag; regardless of the bandwidth available to you, your video and control data still need to be received within a fairly small time frame to appear as if they were real time. Having even a 100Mb connection is irrelevant if you're getting ~200ms+ latency to their servers.Quote:
Originally Posted by simonj
This was so stolen from me. Okay, well anyway, this is awesome. This is the way all things are going. Anyone remember the Phantom?
Wasn't the Phantom more of a device to in which you download games too? If so it still needed high end hardware in order to work.Quote:
Originally Posted by TheOriginalGrumpySpy
Right, the Phantom isn't actually at all similar. The Phantom was pretty much a console (more like a gaming PC) that played PC games, and had Direct2Drive-esque software preinstalled.
I was just curious if it ever ended up coming out. Because unlike the next gaming "revolution" this looks like it might actually be it.
Thats because no one but themselves thought the Phantom was a good idea. This on the other hand looks to have some very high potentialQuote:
Originally Posted by TheOriginalGrumpySpy
I am pretty skeptical of this. I read a hands-on with this a little while ago and and the guy said that there were framerate issues and that the games didn't look anywhere near as good as they did on consoles or high-end PCs. He also noted that there was a bit of lag between input on the controller and action in the game, and he was using a server that only people in that room were using that was about 50 miles away.
I mean, it is still pre-beta, but I'm skeptical nonetheless. I will never get this, even if it works well.
I disagree with you a bit on the nature of video games in 10 years Atmosfear. While I do believe that everything will be distributed digitally, I also believe that we will still be hosting our data locally. The true and complete future of video games is giant hard drives, universal library digital distribution, and the death of physical media.
I hope 720p isn't going to be the highest they provide.
This.Quote:
Originally Posted by Mr. E
Kinda makes me sad though because I'm a person who likes to have physical media. I enjoy going to the game store browsing at games, looking at the cases and such. Plus, borrowing games, trading them, etc will be non existent.
This is the most annoying part for me. I do a lot of game trading.Quote:
Originally Posted by SneeBeezums
I imagine if they did go this option though they'll still keep a physical media. I mean they'd completely neglect the people with dial up or no internet at all.
You mean corporate runs on dumb terminals all connected to a terminal services farm? Corporate is becoming more consolidated but they're really only returning to the old days of mainframes. Corporate dunderheads went crazy with decentralization when the PC became cheap, and now they're finally beginning to realize the PC isn't that cheap, with things like energy costs increasing.Quote:
Originally Posted by Atmosfear
Honestly I can't even run Maple on my university's LAN on RDC without being annoyed. The same concept with a game would either be horrible quality or unbearable.
Agreed. And I am happy about it.Quote:
Originally Posted by Killuminati
The only thing that you will be required to provide will be the connection and connections are only getting faster. This shit will kick ass for multiplayer and totally level the playing field.
There's no way this won't have noticeable lag compared to playing it through your actual computer. On my current computer I'll easily beat anyone using this technology on a first person shooter. Guaranteed.
What are you basing that on?Quote:
Originally Posted by UnreasonablyReasonable
edit: oh and sponge maple is the fucking worst, i had to take 3 classes of it last year and I hated every one of them.
Common sense and a basic understanding of networking?Quote:
Originally Posted by Killuminati
I doubt it will perform very well, even if it does - I would rather buy a game and own it, then have to pay a subscription.
Uh I don't have any problem with maple, it's maple over RDC that annoys me (actually all apps over RDC, ssh and every other remote computing technology I've used with the possible exception of tn3270) that annoys me. Maple itself has saved my ass a ton of times.Quote:
Originally Posted by Killuminati
Something else that should be mentioned, they are claiming this will be the end of high-end PC's, do you really think the giants like nvidia and ATi are going to let this happen? IF this is viable, it will take a huge chunk out of their income, along with serveral other global companies.
Games developers might like the idea of this, but the hardware giants will crush it before it becomes a threat to them.
Not to mention CPU makers like Intel and AMD. If you can just stream the games online you won't really need badass multicore processors.Quote:
Originally Posted by Mach 5
There was an article about the hardware necessary to handle the processing of each individual game, and it boiled down to basically having a beefy computer in their service center than in you home.
http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/gd...article?page=1
I don't know how much I believe either way on this situation, but I certainly believe they would have to have pretty beefy systems running back at base to handle the load and rendering of games like Crysis. I have a feeling this'll turn out to be nothing more than a glorified Gametap or something.
No matter how good the OnLive experience is, it will never live up to running things locally. It seems pretty damn likely that OnLive is going to have problems with things like input delay and even the highest quality they offer won't live up to that of something running on a home machine. There will always be demand for PC components.Quote:
Originally Posted by Mach 5
Thats not strictly true, most games barely support 2 cores anyway, let alone 4.Quote:
Originally Posted by SneeBeezums
Quad cores are very popular for media editting, and similar activities, so even if the need for high-end PC gaming machines wont be as high, there will still be a demand for multicore cpu's.