Apologies if there's another thread for this, i saw one after searching but it was over a year old. Thought it'd be better to start a new one. Anyhow, i was wondering if anyone else has tried it? Especially since they're doing a deal whereby your first game purchase is only £1. http://www.onlive.co.uk/games/featuredgames This includes new stuff like Space Marine and Deus Ex: Human Revolution. They also do free trials for certain games (30min access to the first game), i personally trialled Space Marine and was thoroughly impressed (so much so that i used the £1 deal for it). At first i was rather skeptical, especially with the issue of lag and latency however i was pleasantly surprised when it was just as responsive as playing it locally. Now there are obvious cons, the main one being graphics. It doesn't really compare to consoles yet, but i think that will only improve with better connections. The other is the requirement for an internet connection, but i've never really been bothered by that. Last would be the issue of whether or not the service will succeed. I personally think it's got the potential although it's early days and things haven't gone wrong yet. If i didn't have a Gaming PC i'd definitely consider this over buying a new console and i'd easily recommend people to at least try it out.
I can see this being great for people who want to play games on the move - provided they can get a decent connection! As for me, I think I'll stick to playing on my PC for the time being.
My 2 major issues with it are: 1 - broadband infratructure is not good enouh for it which results in lag and rubbish graphics 2 - its a service which you pay for so not only do you pay X per month but every game you BUY is tied to said service. stop paying for the service and you lose all your games !!!!!!!
Indeed, it's obviously not gaming to shift dedicated gamers. I'm currently at Uni with only my Laptop, which doesn't play anything new, wouldn't even run League of Legends properly and Champions Online looked terrible and stuttered massively when in combat. As such, it wouldn't have played anything like Space Marine or Deus Ex, however i found the former to be completely playable over the service. 1) Like i said, i personally haven't had issues yet with regards to the connection, maybe a few stutters but no noticeable input lag. As for graphics, i did highlight it as an issue... i won't say it looks terrible, but it's noticeably worse than consoles due to a lower resolution. However it's much better than i'd get on this laptop and for that i can't fault it. It should also improve once the "broadband infrastructure" gets better. 2) At the moment there's "Free" membership although they haven't stated how long that'd be for and they reserve the right to change it etc. etc. Pay Monthly is currently for access to the "Play Pack" which lets you play a selection of games (i think they said around 100) for the month. I'd personally say to be able to play Space Marine (or others) for £1 for any amount of time is a bargain and should at least be tried.
I am sure that MS, Sony and Nintendo will be watching with interest. I am absolutely convinced that the next generation consoles will deliver their games this way (no physical media and no downloads).
It seems that Onlive will now be giving away a free "microconsole" and Joypad with every pre-order of Saints Row 3 (£35).
Sure, because MS and Sony gamers are not at all interested on powerful graphics and all-about-visuals. The only way you can deliver the best of that is with home hardware!... and OFC THE BESTEST OF THE BEST WITH A PC IN YOUR ROOM!!!!
I don't see why it'd just be for kids. I think anyone who travels a lot to locations with decent internet access would be a potential market for this. They could take their Ultraportable/Netbook w.e. and be able to play all the latest games (with regards to the catalogue) without worrying about performance issues. Obviously the emphasis is now on the internet quality (something you can't control) as opposed to your own laptop. However i think the potential is there i do hope that it'll take off and evolve into something greater. Lovely PC Elitist response... i guess i should have expected it at some point. Now back to the actual topic: Has anyone actually tried the Service? You know, to form an opinion based on experience, rather than initial prejudice?
oh **** off, taking into account the ridiculous pricing scheme, performance based entierly on your bandwidth and the fact that despite paying through the arse for it you have nothing to show for it i have come to the conclusion that you are successfully sucking someones balls. and dont come that "steam is same crap" as steam launched with one of the most anticipated games of the decade thus securing its base almost immediatly. this has nothing going for it in anyway shape or form. **** i could buy and xbox and some games for less then a years subscription to online and several of thier games licences.
For a lot of people the anti-OnLive sentiment is nothing to do with hands-on experience or a lack thereof. The service could cause my televion to vomit gold coins onto the livingroom floor for all I care, but OnLive sets a nasty precedent of taking control further out of the hands of the consumer than the current practices of companies like EA and Activision already do. The potential for price-gouging, abuse and loss of consumer choice if OnLive is successful is more than enough justification for people who take their gaming seriously (and enjoy such things as modding, game-tweaking and being able to play whenever they want on their own hardware) to resent any success it gets. It's matter of feeling threatened, as if hardcore gamers didn't already have enough reasons to feel as such in recent years. If OnLive were only going to be 'another option' for gamers alongside PCs, consoles, phones, etc. then I wouldn't care much; but a revenue model where the customer pays both for the service and the game AND gives up some of their control over how they play it has the potential to supplant customer-owned hardware and offline play if the publishers see it as successful. It's the kind of thing that turns Bobby Kotick's pupils into dollarsigns. The technology is exciting and there are situations in which it enables people to game where they otherwise couldn't, but I don't see anything wrong with people disliking it as a direction for an industry that already shits on its customers so often. Also, vdbswong; Do you never feel that you're just on the wrong forum? You seem to spend half your time shooting down other people's opinions by facetiously calling them elitists and railing against any kind of Pro-PC/Pro-Consumer/Anti-Corporate sentiment. Bit-tech is a site for hardware enthusiasts with a traditionally niche, PC-centric userbase whose main interest is genuinely under threat from the potential success of services like OnLive, just as it has been from the success of consoles in recent years. Yeah, you should have expected it; and you should deal with it better too. Discussions about OnLive are all well and good, and to be encouraged just the same as any other topic related to gaming or hardware here; but you can't dismiss someone's opinion about the service off-hand as merely the view of an elitist just because you don't agree with them. Gunsmith's initial post doesn't exactly elaborate on why he'd rather see the service fail, but it's certainly not off-topic. Or rather: You can, but it makes you look like a dick, and that wouldn't be the first time; to be honest.
Used it to try the Brotherhood demo on my laptop back before it was properly released in the UK. Unfortunately it didn't run quite smooth enough for me to consider using seriously, and when I'm in a position to use a better connection I have my desktop, so not really for me. Also, I wouldn't pay full price for a game on such a new service since there's no real guarantee for how long they'll last. Any game for a quid is a great deal though; may try Deus Ex for that price. Seems it's a little before it's time to me. I'm sure gaming will move towards this sort of thing in the future but I don't think most connections are good enough yet. Hopefully they're not watertight in terms of patents and we may see some competition (and thus lower prices) in the future. Edit: People seem confused, you don't pay for a sub AND for each game, it's either or. Or has it changed recently?
My thoughts when I used it. Quoted from an old thread on bit-tech article. ********. There is no monthly sub. Only monthly charged item is the playback bundle that costs 10 bucks for 70+ games.
Well, I wouldn't go as far to say that I am a happy high end PC gamer and also a happy console gamer. There is nothing I would like to see more than consoles embracing the latest technology, however I think that all the signs from MS (at least) are that they are going to aim at the broder audience. In that respect I expect their next console to be more akin to the on-live service rather than the latest PC technology.
I could see this working better with tablets and maybe TVs will come in time to be able to run this without anything else (bar kb+mouse / joypad)
Wasn't aware of this change until I saw your post and googled the matter. It originally was planned to have a monthly subscription fee on top of game costs, so the removal of that fee is definitely a good thing; but considering the number of people who still think there's a monthly fee involved it goes to show they need to work on their publicity. The rest of my criticisms remain.
I could have said exactly the same thing when i saw your first post. Instead i at least tried to keep it somewhat civil. I've already mentioned that Bandwidth is one of the limiting factors of the system. And i've already stated that i'm more interested in the potential that the service brings. Ridiculous pricing scheme? Could you at least clarify that? I've personally not seen anything ridiculous about it. They offer various different ways to play: Monthly Fee - This gives you access to a load of games for just £7 a month. "Full Access" - Like it says, full access to a single game. The pricing is similar if not identical to other Digital Distribution services so i don't see the issue here. Renting - A couple of £ for a couple day's gameplay. Seems reasonable enough if you don't want to buy the full game and just want to play it. Oh please, you're even creating arguments for things i haven't even said? The only time i think i've used the Steam debate is during the Origin mass QQ'ing and then by your standards the launch of BF3 and SW:TOR through Origin would be enough to satiate the masses (apparently not though). In terms of nothing going for it, I'd say the same thing about Direct2Drive and Impulse, yet people still use those. My math figures that £7 a month for a year is £81. That's access to games such as Borderlands, Arkham Asylum and Just Cause 2... What exactly would you be able to get your your 360? I'd count a console... and? I don't have an issue with people being "Anti-OnLive", for example you've given a very nice comprehensive and constructive reasons as to why you (and others) may not like it. I'm completely fine with that and it's not as if i don't agree with you on certain aspects as like i said, i'm not particularly interested in joining the service because i already own a PC and prefer to actually "own" the game as opposed to owning the right to stream it (hence why i went for Space Marine and not Deus Ex: Human Revolution - i want to play the former, but i'd like to own the latter). The main issue that i did take was that Gunsmith's comment was both completely ridiculous and at the same time offered no insight into why he thought that way. I'm not dismissing Gunsmith's opinion simply because it disagrees with me... it's because he offered absolutely no reason for me to consider his argument had any basis. I'll agree that implying Gunsmith was "off-topic" wasn't completely accurate, however i intended this thread to be more discussion by people those who had actually used the service and their opinions of it rather than for just anyone chiming in their own thoughts without any experience. EDIT: I'll also state that this thread was intended for people to highlight any potential shortcomings that i may have overlooked in my initial positive reaction to the Service. Like i said, your post Zurechial was good with regards to this, even though you haven't tried it (i assume). On the other hand, Gunsmith's wasn't and thus, i deemed it pointless. I've thought about that for quite a while really, especially with the lovely PWP debate of so many months ago. I'll be honest and state that i personally find the views on Hexus to be much less extreme and more enjoyable to read. However with all that said, i prefer (with exceptions of course) the smaller community of bit-tech which does generally foster good discussion and debate (like in the League of Legends thread, or the general BF3 thread. Also, to use the "excuse" of being hardware enthusiasts is fairly hollow in my opinion. This is supposed to be the same community that refers to "console kiddies" as a way of stating that they're somehow more mature than others, yet at the same time seem unable to view things objectively. Yes i should probably deal with it better, but we all have our flaws and this happens to be one of mine. I'd like to think that most of the time i'll at least try to put forward evidence of why someone's wrong. However if i "look like a dick" to you then so be it, i think we've both already established we have completely opposite views on multiple things.
The best broadband I can get (and millions of other brits) is 200/300kb/s. How the hell is that going to be able to deliver better graphics than my gaming machine?
