1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.

News Onlive rental pricing revealed

Discussion in 'Article Discussion' started by CardJoe, 21 Jun 2010.

  1. crazyceo

    crazyceo New Member

    Joined:
    24 Apr 2009
    Posts:
    563
    Likes Received:
    8
    Not worth it based on those costs and quality of games. Who was it who said this would be the death of PC gaming?

    It's main restricition will be BT Broadband unless of course this can all run on 512kbps connection.
     
  2. olimorgan

    olimorgan New Member

    Joined:
    16 May 2010
    Posts:
    115
    Likes Received:
    0
    If its bundled with BT will that stop them capping your usage and download speeds. Course not!
     
  3. Sonofalich

    Sonofalich New Member

    Joined:
    9 Jun 2010
    Posts:
    30
    Likes Received:
    0
    I really can't see how they can market this.

    Pc Hardware is becoming cheaper and cheaper all the time.

    I just built my brother a computer that is able to handle all the latest games fine, albeit not in absolute maximum graphics. But for less than £400 he has access to all these games.

    £400 is the price of a ps3 at launch and look how many people bought that.

    Hardware is coming down in price all the time and I cannot see them possibly having a market.
     
  4. s3v3n

    s3v3n MMO Cold Turkey -fail

    Joined:
    23 Jun 2008
    Posts:
    68
    Likes Received:
    0
    They should have more tiers of subscription.
    $10 for "Standard" with those above price schemes.
    $30 for "Silver" for unlimited on games that's been released for 6 month or more (half price for the rest)
    $50 for "Gold" for unlimited on all games
     
  5. sotu1

    sotu1 Ex-Modder

    Joined:
    24 Aug 2007
    Posts:
    2,877
    Likes Received:
    26
    I think they're going for an overpriced early adopter scheme, which they'll drop within 6 months/1 year. When people see a drop in price they'll reconsider. Much like what Apple do with their products.
     
  6. Elledan

    Elledan New Member

    Joined:
    4 Feb 2009
    Posts:
    948
    Likes Received:
    34
    I'm honestly not sure who their target market is. I would could myself among the more casual gamers and even my first thought was to just buy the friggin' game and be done with it, not withstanding any crippling DRM.

    Basically with OnLive you'll be paying as much or more to play a game than if you were to go out and buy the game plus console, or that fancy new videocard, especially if one adds up the total costs for both options during a few years. Sounds to me like OnLive's target market is the mouth-breathing, slack-jawed section.
     
  7. _Metal_Guitar_

    _Metal_Guitar_ New Member

    Joined:
    16 Jun 2009
    Posts:
    129
    Likes Received:
    1
    OnLive is crippling DRM. DRM that costs you at that.
     
  8. eddtox

    eddtox Homo Interneticus

    Joined:
    7 Jan 2006
    Posts:
    1,296
    Likes Received:
    15
    Bahahahaha... bollocks to that :D
     
  9. Fabou

    Fabou New Member

    Joined:
    22 Apr 2010
    Posts:
    455
    Likes Received:
    2
    Can't say that the review are positive.
    Plus considering that when your PC is a little old it's trading image quality for lag I woouldn't say it attract's gammer. A FPS with lag is unplayable.
     
  10. runadumb

    runadumb New Member

    Joined:
    20 Jan 2010
    Posts:
    424
    Likes Received:
    5
    okay okay, from a business perspective this is probably a price point they have to meet to pay for the whole shabang. As a (potential) customer I say "NO FREAKING WAY YOU MANICS!!!"
    That pricing makes the whole thing seem ludicrous.
     
  11. metarinka

    metarinka New Member

    Joined:
    9 Feb 2003
    Posts:
    1,844
    Likes Received:
    3
    the price point is pretty ridiculous but it actually makes sense for some of those games in the beat once and never play again category. some games like max payne only take a couple hours to beat and then I never really picked em up again. if I could "Rent" it for 5 days at $10 I would feel much better than paying $50 and having it sit on my shelf forever. But that $10 on top of a $15 a month fee makes it unattractive.

    The only other benefit would be someone who travels a lot as you could game on the road (assuming you have the connection) and not have to lug around a pc or console.

    overall I'm a little dissapointed but I have a feeling this business model could work in a few years when the prices comes down.
     
  12. Cupboard

    Cupboard I'm not a modder.

    Joined:
    30 Jan 2007
    Posts:
    2,148
    Likes Received:
    30
    LOL

    OK, so ignoring the ridiculous pricing for a minute...

    If I am playing an OnLive copy of a cross platform multiplayer game, who will I be playing against? Will I be connected to the XBox, PS3 or PC servers? You may be able to use OnLive through your console or a spcialised OnLive console, does that change things?
     
  13. technogiant

    technogiant New Member

    Joined:
    2 May 2009
    Posts:
    323
    Likes Received:
    17
    Although I would like this to work both from a business and tech perspective I'm struggling to see the advantage here. Why would I use this service and pay £10 per month for the pleasure and then a further what £5 or there about for a short game lease with all the encumbent problems of lag and quality the service may have?
    I'd sooner simply buy a console with a 5 - 10 year life span and rent games at a lesser cost and play them at full lag free console quality and then purchase them in full for a life time if I liked them and wished to continue playing on line.

    This service needs to be priced in a maner that compensates for its shortcomings, no monthly fee and a more realistic short game lease fee.
    If they get the pricing right their are millions and millions of low power pc and lap top owners out there that would make use of this service. But it has to be priced at a lower level to attract the more casual gamer.
    If it weren't for the monthly fee I would in all probability use it to try games before making a full retail purchase.
    As regards the quality of the service, well that can only improve with increased internet speeds so I hope it takes off.
     
  14. Pete J

    Pete J RIP Teelzebub

    Joined:
    28 Sep 2009
    Posts:
    5,381
    Likes Received:
    366
    This. Is. Complete. Shite.

    As bemoaned by everyone, the prices are ridiculous. I thought Onlive was going to be a cheaper option than a Console or PC; it works out more expensive and with worse results. Limited quality settings and resolution, just plain...ridiculous. Not to mention the absolutely stupid 'Unlimited' three year limit - I still play games from before the turn of the millennium!

    I don't wish failure on this company but they really aren't helping themselves. If any of my peers consider this 'service', I'll be sure to point out the actual costs compared to buying a cheap gaming PC.
     
  15. Krayzie_B.o.n.e.

    Krayzie_B.o.n.e. New Member

    Joined:
    2 Aug 2009
    Posts:
    427
    Likes Received:
    6
    Lets see I can use Onlive and have Lag, Fuzzy video, or mediocre graphics pay $15 a month plus still have to buy games and pray the servers are running when I want to game and never own anything when the servers go offline in 3 years..

    or buy a console and buy new, used, or rent games($25 a month unlimited Gamefly) with no lag and clear graphics and have a hard copy if I bought new or used but I can game anytime I want for sure and that includes multi player.

    or buy a PC Graphics card (most people have a PC anyway) and buy cheaper PC games with no lag and superior graphics have several copies and even game when I'm not on my PC, hell even try most games for free before I buy therefore I never waste my money plus play multi player from any computer (Steam).
    even Mod a game get noticed and hired by a developer and become rich.

    Either way Onlive is EPIC fail as it will go down in prices but only gain .5% of the video game market share as in three years the servers will be sold to host MMO's or Google will buy them. I see hotels offering this service or maybe a tie in with McDonalds as a way to get kids to come to their FATTY restaurants

    Don't ever buy a game without a hard copy.
     
  16. outlawaol

    outlawaol Geeked since 1982

    Joined:
    18 Jul 2007
    Posts:
    1,935
    Likes Received:
    65
    Uhh, I wont be buying this in anyway, shape or form.
     
  17. hbeevers

    hbeevers Yes, it can play crysis!

    Joined:
    24 May 2010
    Posts:
    30
    Likes Received:
    0
    a new pc capable of playing most games can be bought for about £550. Games for this can be bought for about £20 each to keep and use 'forever', there'll be no lag, reasonable graphics and room to upgrade further to keep up with new requirements. over 2 years you'd actually save money buying a new pc.
     
  18. Fused

    Fused Member

    Joined:
    19 Jun 2007
    Posts:
    224
    Likes Received:
    8
    I'm sure I remember reading a discussion on here not so long ago about peoples fears if steam ever failed and what would happen to there games (as in no longer having the service there to download them again or authenticate the user to allow play)

    From what I gather from this so far is you have to pay a monthly sub plus the full game (similar to full retail) price to only have access until 2013? :confused: Plus the possibility of loosing access to your games if you unsubscribe to the service for too long?

    My biggest fear is that if this does take off, there will be less and less demand for desktop hardware so prices will go up for things like gpus (fewer and fewer customers) and there will be less development on them to the point where you couldn't build your own pc to take on the latest games as alternative to this kind of service.
    *Edit: Ok rethought this, and perhaps something competing against high end gpu makers might drive prices down for a while. Though I do think that if this really take off there will come a point when there is no longer any profit in making desktop gpus etc.

    It has many advantages but for the same reason I would rather have a whole stack of £3 DVDs rather than just renting them (or streaming them) even though I may only watch them once is I want to be able to have total control over what I do with them, when I do things with them and not worry about access issues. The world isn't quite ready to go totally digital. No ones come up with a system that is profitable but is the same as own a physical copy.

    Also aren't I missing something here, surely your computer has got to process the datastream from onlive to display and track your interactions with the game? Surely that is no small task even if takes out the actual processing of the graphics from the game engine. There must be certain standard of computer needed? Would my machine is of 5-6 years ago be able to play a 2010 title via OnLive to the same quality as brandnew computer using OnLive (mainly talking about lagg here)

    One disadvantage that has just struck me is that user or community hotfixes/hacks/mods that correct bugs in a game would become impossible and we would all be faced to wait for developers to get around to patching the game which can be quite long peroids for some.
     
    Last edited: 21 Jun 2010
  19. Krayzie_B.o.n.e.

    Krayzie_B.o.n.e. New Member

    Joined:
    2 Aug 2009
    Posts:
    427
    Likes Received:
    6
    $29.99 a month and play all the dam games you want. This would be better.
     
  20. _Metal_Guitar_

    _Metal_Guitar_ New Member

    Joined:
    16 Jun 2009
    Posts:
    129
    Likes Received:
    1
    No, another company trying to compete in the high-end GPU market would be better. $29.99 a month and all the games you want, might just make this something worth considering.
     
Tags: Add Tags

Share This Page