OnLive Thread + int speed

[Rook]

I actually started a discussion and that guy locked it cool!


The only thing I see this doing is giving Americans bandwidth limits per month due to the high amount it would use! no thanks!

Continue?

[Joshflighter]

Lmao.. what? :o

Ill relock it.. Disaster might aswell post it here. :p

[Disaster]

http://www.speedtest.net/result/438779072.png


lol

[Rook]

http://www.speedtest.net/result/438781917.png (http://www.speedtest.net)

D/L is ok, U/L is eh. Don't be fooled my latency shoots up to 233-333 daily!

New Wave Comm. is amazing.

e: I download faster from a server in the middle of the ocean, Bermuda, than Tennessee? LOL
http://www.speedtest.net/result/438783961.png (http://www.speedtest.net)

[StankBacon]

http://www.speedtest.net/result/438784015.png

[Disaster]

http://www.speedtest.net/result/438784505.png

Oh wow. Switched servers.

[Saggy]

http://www.speedtest.net/result/438785562.png

Don't get too jealous of me now... [/failedsarcasm]

Fucking hate Sympatico...

[Joshflighter]

http://www.speedtest.net/result/438785562.png

Don't get too jealous of me now... [/failedsarcasm]

Fucking hate Sympatico...


God, they fail so bad its not funny. :(

[AAA]

http://www.speedtest.net/result/438807626.png (http://www.speedtest.net)
that's the suggested server and here's one from exactly where I live.
http://www.speedtest.net/result/438809372.png (http://www.speedtest.net)

Is this a good speed? I run a max of 350kb/s when downloading. I've never understood the whole service of 3 megabytes service when you get like 100x less for downloading. it's a WTF subject and I wish they made more sense...

[klange]

http://www.speedtest.net/result/438765246.png http://www.speedtest.net/result/438767141.png

[StankBacon]

for those of you with comcrap and those insanely high down speeds, that's the boost phopo was talking about, you'll never get that speed for sustained downloads...

which makes speed tests on comcast mean nothing.

[ThePlague]

Fuck disaster, do you really need that fast of internet? Damn.

Here's my friends (i'll get mine when I go back to my house):
http://www.speedtest.net/result/438809459.png (http://www.speedtest.net)

[BobtheGreatII]

http://www.speedtest.net/result/438821654.png (http://www.speedtest.net)

[Corndogman]

http://www.speedtest.net/result/438826174.png

[Cortexian]

http://www.speedtest.net/result/438878770.png

Speedtest.net is inaccurate because it measures download burst speeds. My internet connection is actually:

7.5Mb/s Download
512Kb/s Upload

On the topic of internet connection speeds, does anyone know the technical term for "paying a monthly fee to plug your own server into the internet backbone"? Basically I would like to take my server to some place and pay them monthly to keep it connected to the North American internet backbone.

E: Got it, it's called "Colocation" or "Co-Location". I'm thinking of doing this for my TeamSpeak/FTP/Game server, but it has to be rackmount compatible from what I can tell...

[NuggetWarmer]

http://www.speedtest.net/result/438972985.png (http://www.speedtest.net)

[jcap]

http://www.speedtest.net/result/439073707.png (http://www.speedtest.net)

[Phopojijo]

E: Got it, it's called "Colocation" or "Co-Location". I'm thinking of doing this for my TeamSpeak/FTP/Game server, but it has to be rackmount compatible from what I can tell...If you're worried about having a direct access to an ISP's internet backbone, the price for a rackmount is nothing o.O

[dydo]

http://www.speedtest.net/result/439174471.png (http://www.speedtest.net)
730 KB/s max for me in downloads.

[Saggy]

Ok, redid my test and got this:

http://www.speedtest.net/result/439217193.png

Compared to my old one here:
http://www.speedtest.net/result/438785562.png

Also, note the locations between the two tests as well. WTF...

[Terry]

http://www.speedtest.net/result/439221636.png (http://www.speedtest.net)

Sad thing is, its difficult to get much better here ;_;

[Terin]

http://www.speedtest.net/result/439236899.png

Fun stuff.

[Amit]

Using Rogers High-Speed Internet Extreme

Toronto, Ontario

Trials 1, 2, and 3.
http://www.speedtest.net/result/439267003.png (http://www.speedtest.net) http://www.speedtest.net/result/439273831.png (http://www.speedtest.net) http://www.speedtest.net/result/439278974.png (http://www.speedtest.net)

Kippen, Ontario

Trials 1, 2, and 3
http://www.speedtest.net/result/439280634.png (http://www.speedtest.net) http://www.speedtest.net/result/439281736.png (http://www.speedtest.net) http://www.speedtest.net/result/439283034.png (http://www.speedtest.net)

[Varmint260]

What is Comcast's monthly bandwidth limit, out of curiosity?

http://www.speedtest.net/result/439438084.png (http://www.speedtest.net)

http://www.speedtest.net/result/439439160.png (http://www.speedtest.net)

I wonder why Prince Rupert way up the coast has lower ping than Vancouver? I guess it's 'cause Vancouver's way busier, maybe.

[Darqeness]

http://www.speedtest.net/result/439450836.png (http://www.speedtest.net)

Hmm...yeah...

[Rentafence]

woo
http://www.speedtest.net/result/439456374.png (http://www.speedtest.net)
http://www.modacity.net/forums/%5BURL=http://www.speedtest.net%5D%5BIMG%5Dhttp://www.speedtest.net/result/439456374.png%5B/IMG%5D%5B/URL%5D

[Heathen]

http://www.speedtest.net/result/439461025.png (http://www.speedtest.net)

I'll retry it with Utorrent and Pidgin off

Is that good though?

[Cortexian]

If you're worried about having a direct access to an ISP's internet backbone, the price for a rackmount is nothing o.O
It's actually not that bad for the speeds I'd like to rent. I'm not looking for anything faster than 10Mb/s up and down and it looks like that'll cost me about $50-$75/month. My Halo CE server doesn't need anything crazy like the line Shaw provided Fragapalooza last year:
http://www.speedtest.net/result/306564634.png

Ignore the "Telus Communications" note, it was actually Shaw, just didn't register for some reason. The connection they provided was a 60Mb/s Download and Upload connection, dedicated to us.

Also, why is it that almost all of the Co-Location places I look at boast things such as:

Hardened perimeter (guard stations, reinforced walls, anti-hostage entrances)
7 x 24 on-site security officers
Archived video surveillance
Biometric access controls
Security access reports

My stuff is important, don't get me wrong, but holy shit.

[Heathen]

http://www.speedtest.net/result/438784505.png

Oh wow. Switched servers.
Holy shit.

[Cortexian]

Holy shit.
Not really, it's burst speed.

[Limited]

http://www.speedtest.net/result/439492410.png (http://www.speedtest.net)

[Disaster]

I usually get arround 16-17 mb/s speed

E: Thats why I was shocked it was so high. I didn't know it was burst speed :p

[ExAm]

http://www.speedtest.net/result/439534680.png
Why can everyone afford ultrafast internet but me :C

[Abdurahman]

http://www.speedtest.net/result/439534680.png
Why can everyone afford ultrafast internet but me :C

That's nothing. :( This is mine. My dad refuses to get faster internet.
http://www.speedtest.net/result/439559439.png (http://www.speedtest.net)
Damn 768/384. It works for gaming and hosting an 8 person TF2 server! But downloads are hella slow.

[legionaire45]

http://www.speedtest.net/result/439617988.png (http://www.speedtest.net)
My school has a 66MB/s down connection and something really high for the upload; I'll try and grab a link on Monday :P.

[Mr Buckshot]

http://www.speedtest.net/result/439630979.png (http://www.speedtest.net)

Better than I thought.

Since I can't voice my OnLive opinion in fear1337's thread (gg man), I'll say it here:

I doubted that it'll work from the very start. Especially since it's U.S.-exclusive, and this whole continent doesn't exactly have the best internet connections, hell America can't even handle cell phone reception (shittiest I've ever experienced). But even in blazing-fast-internet countries like Japan and South Korea, I don't think it'll be that smooth.

However, this might be a reality a few decades later, basically making today's games stream as smoothly as those web Java MMO games. But in the next 5 years? I doubt it.

[beele]

http://www.speedtest.net/result/439675737.pnghttp://www.speedtest.net/result/439677558.png

Download is good, although upload could be a bit better.

[343guiltymc]

http://www.speedtest.net/result/439766715.png
Should I switch to Rogers, my internet keeps freezing when loading pages and playing games for no reason.

[Alwin Roth]

http://www.speedtest.net/result/439873136.png


OH HAI!



http://www.speedtest.net/result/439874380.png

[ThePlague]

Scotsdale AZ Server:
http://www.speedtest.net/result/439885885.png (http://www.speedtest.net)
Phoenix AZ Server:
http://www.speedtest.net/result/439886530.png (http://www.speedtest.net)
Tuscon AZ Serer:
http://www.speedtest.net/result/439887109.png (http://www.speedtest.net)

Atleast it's better than my friends...

[Amit]

http://www.speedtest.net/result/439766715.png
Should I switch to Rogers, my internet keeps freezing when loading pages and playing games for no reason.

The only answer: YES. Sympatico is a piece of shit. Can't understand why people use it for teh price you have to pay.

[Roostervier]

Is this a good speed? I run a max of 350kb/s when downloading. I've never understood the whole service of 3 megabytes service
That's because its a service of 3 megabits, not bytes. 3 Mbps service gives 300 kb/s download speeds.

http://www.speedtest.net/result/440130106.png
Mine.

[Syuusuke]

around 365 to be exact =d
oxymoron =D
(I get up to 350 with my 2.8 mbps)

[Varmint260]

Mine did download 350 kilobytes per second when it was first upgraded. Now I'm lucky if it gets above 300. Don't honestly know why, besides that Telus is crap. It's amazing how difficult it is to talk to those people on the phone. But, it's all that's available here, unless I want dialup.

[Cortexian]

http://tv.seas.columbia.edu/videos/545/60/79?file=1&autostart=true

Great demo of OnLive actually working here and a lot of the features they're going to incorporate... Might be something I'd be interested in getting for an HDTV, though I'd still prefer to have an enthusiast grade PC for primary gaming.

[Phopojijo]

I've said it from the start... this is a positively terrible idea.

Byebye back catalog games (even worse than consoles)
Byebye indie developers who can't get server space
Byebye 3rd party mods who likewise can't get server space

Paying for a gatekeeper is just about ALWAYS a TERRIBLE idea.

[Cortexian]

Byebye back catalog games (even worse than consoles)
What do you mean by back catalog games?


Byebye indie developers who can't get server space
Byebye 3rd party mods who likewise can't get server space
Indie developers only really make an impact on PC games because of the readily available distribution network already in place, the Internet.

3rd party mods are null and void on consoles already, so I really don't see how this would be a bad implementation for the console crowd.

You pay for your subscription, get a device that connects to your television and internet connection, and pay for your games without having to worry about hardware upgrades to support the new games you want to buy. Sounds extremely similar to existing console setups except with the added benefits of anti-piracy (can't pirate something that you don't have access to) and anti-cheat protection (can't hack/cheat on something you don't have access to).

[Heathen]

I gotta say, I was really hoping they were gonna bring this to the iPhone.

[Cortexian]

I gotta say, I was really hoping they were gonna bring this to the iPhone.
They did, it's in the above video I posted a link to... Or are you just expressing your excitement because you saw the iPhone demo IN the video?!

Unfortunately he did say that it was basically restricted to WiFi connections because 3G just can't handle the bandwidth yet.

[CrAsHOvErRide]

Yeah....no.

http://www.speedtest.net/result/664984674.png

[Phopojijo]

What do you mean by back catalog games?
What do you think the chances are that Halo PC would still be playable if it were on their servers? How long ago do you think they would have pulled the plug because "Operating Costs exceed the demand"... or... "We want you to buy a new game so we get commission"?


Indie developers only really make an impact on PC games because of the readily available distribution network already in place, the Internet.

3rd party mods are null and void on consoles already, so I really don't see how this would be a bad implementation for the console crowd.We shouldn't replace consoles with a format that is more proprietary than even the consoles! Switch platforms to get more freedom and control over the content you consume... not less.


You pay for your subscription, get a device that connects to your television and internet connection, and pay for your games without having to worry about hardware upgrades to support the new games you want to buy. Sounds extremely similar to existing console setups except with the added benefits of anti-piracy (can't pirate something that you don't have access to) and anti-cheat protection (can't hack/cheat on something you don't have access to).You can get a perfectly simple and easy experience by getting your home theatre PC assembled by your local small business computer stores (average assembly cost is 0-35$)... or one of the dozens of factory computer suppliers if the market actually demands they put decent parts in it.

It'll certainly be cheaper than consoles... Xbox Live subscriptions cost as much as a new videocard over the duration required to switch videocards. You already have a fairly up-to-date PC... console price, extra price in games, and accessories are just pure savings to you. And how many consoles DO you own anyway?

[Limited]

I do see Phopoj's point, you might pay like $60 a year for this service + game costs. After the year, what are you left with? Just $60 + game cost hole in your wallet.

If you did save that up, and spend it on actual PC parts, you have the card that can be used 'indefinitely' for 'free'.

I got to admit I was a skeptic before, but the more I see the more I like it. The only issue I have right now is whether internet speeds can handle this right now. Okay speeds are increasingly all the time, but there is a limit to how fast they can actually reach.

Personally, I also like to have the actual physical product with me, which means if I buy it, and my pc works fine I can use it any where any time I want to, which might not be possible with this service.

[Phopojijo]

60$/yr is... generous... to say the least. That's the price of Xbox Live... I can tell you that the price of OnLive will be substantially more than Xbox Live.

I'd say you're better in the ballpark of 20$/mo (240$/yr)

Maybe I even lowballed it a bit <shrugs>

*****

Also this guy has a history of selling things to companies. He gave Quicktime to Apple, sold WebTV to Microsoft... who do you want owning OnLive?

[Limited]

Whaaaaaaa? Screw that, on top of that you need to actually purchase the games too.

I do like the ability to support different business models, which can incorporate steam like qualities (sales, bundles) plus rental/demo.

[Phopojijo]

Whaaaaaaa? Screw that, on top of that you need to actually purchase the games too.

I do like the ability to support different business models, which can incorporate steam like qualities (sales, bundles) plus rental/demo.The PC can support any business model. The point is, you're not forced into it. I can download steam... I can go to the store and buy a retail disk... I can go to gog.com. Impulse, Direct2Drive, EA Downloader... though lets face it, EA Downloader is a piece of crap.

Rentals? Steam Free Weekends can be adapted... or USB/Optical Disk "tray-and-play" (most likely USB because they're harder to pirate).

And it'll be very hard to push people to leave something proprietary and move to something non-proprietary... so we need to promote PC gaming while it still has enough marketshare to remain viable.

It just takes a couple of companies to push Home Theatre PCs to the masses... that are strong enough to play videogames. Just look at how Asus started the netbook market.

[jcap]

I just hope they sell you the game and you get the device for free with the game. However, if they are selling you the game (a license), they MUST provide you with the serial for it in case they end up shutting down or you don't enjoy the service (or can't enjoy it anymore due to your geographical location).

They can still cover the cost of the device that way. If OnLive gets 35% of the profit when selling the game, maybe about 5% of that would go towards the device for first-time subscribers. The "5%" number isn't meant to cover the cost of the device after one sale, but rather the repeated sales of games which would add up to a lot in the end, since you only need one device per customer (+$50 for every additional device the customer wants). The actual service should also be free (or maybe $25/yr) because the lifetime cost could be covered under the initial sale of the game. For some games, they can come ahead (like with one-time playthrough singleplayer games) and other times they might fall behind (like with popular multiplayer games), but in the end they should still come out ahead from people who buy games but don't play them as much as anticipated.

[Phopojijo]

I just hope they sell you the game and you get the device for free with the game. However, if they are selling you the game (a license), they MUST provide you with the serial for it in case they end up shutting down or you don't enjoy the service (or can't enjoy it anymore due to your geographical location).

They can still cover the cost of the device that way. If OnLive gets 35% of the profit when selling the game, maybe about 5% of that would go towards the device for first-time subscribers. The "5%" number isn't meant to cover the cost of the device after one sale, but rather the repeated sales of games which would add up to a lot in the end, since you only need one device per customer (+$50 for every additional device the customer wants). The actual service should also be free (or maybe $25/yr) because the lifetime cost could be covered under the initial sale of the game. For some games, they can come ahead (like with one-time playthrough singleplayer games) and other times they might fall behind (like with popular multiplayer games), but in the end they should still come out ahead from people who buy games but don't play them as much as anticipated.1) It'll be pretty damn hard to get a serial key to play the games yourself when you don't have a good enough PC... and especially if the game isn't even MADE for the PC.

2) They already said it'd be Subscription... and their GDC demo had Buy/Rent buttons... so it's pretty obvious they're aiming for Subscription + Buy/Rent.

3) Again, when Perlman invariably sells this company to some bigger company like he's always done in the past... what will Microsoft/Comcast/AT&T/Apple do with the service? I mean I guess there's a chance that Google would buy it too... but... <shrugs>

[jcap]

1) It'll be pretty damn hard to get a serial key to play the games yourself when you don't have a good enough PC... and especially if the game isn't even MADE for the PC.

2) They already said it'd be Subscription... and their GDC demo had Buy/Rent buttons... so it's pretty obvious they're aiming for Subscription + Buy/Rent.

3) Again, when Perlman invariably sells this company to some bigger company like he's always done in the past... what will Microsoft/Comcast/AT&T/Apple do with the service? I mean I guess there's a chance that Google would buy it too... but... <shrugs>
It doesn't matter if you don't have a good enough PC to play the game. It's about owning what you buy. They can't legitimately say you are buying the game if you're "permanently leasing" it for the lifetime of the service.

They should also create a Zune Pass system where you pay maybe $30/mo for unlimited game rentals that last as long as you are paying for your membership.

[Phopojijo]

It doesn't matter if you don't have a good enough PC to play the game. It's about owning what you buy. They can't legitimately say you are buying the game if you're "permanently leasing" it for the lifetime of the service.

They should also create a Zune Pass system where you pay maybe $30/mo for unlimited game rentals that last as long as you are paying for your membership.Or rather the lifetime of the game on that service. Like I said... chances that HaloPC would still be there? Justtttt about none. For a while now.

It just unnerves me a little bit... people are all focused on the service and convinced that it doesn't work... I'm just about certain that it will which will be like "WOW!" for people... and that hype of seeing it work (to some degree... minus compression artifacts) will be just enough for them to not see how fucking controlling this service is... especially when it's sold away to someone big.

[=sw=warlord]

I just hope they sell you the game and you get the device for free with the game. However, if they are selling you the game (a license), they MUST provide you with the serial for it in case they end up shutting down or you don't enjoy the service (or can't enjoy it anymore due to your geographical location).
I severely doubt they would just "give" you the device for free there is bound to be a set up charge.
They can still cover the cost of the device that way. If OnLive gets 35% of the profit when selling the game, And how exactly do you think the retail price will afford the increase in costs with the current prices?
PC gamming is already at one of the highest peak cost for consumers it's ever been, australia with their $80 price tags are not going to be too happy on having to cough up $115 PER GAME, i personaly am more inclined to say their probably going to go the same router SKy TV works.
You pay a certain amount for the basic package but then pay extra for "extensions", additional features that arn't bundled with the basic package for instance
The basic package could allow you to play campaign but not multiplayer such as how xbox live currently works, you could get a certain limit for how many game hours you can play and then top up when you want more.
maybe about 5% of that would go towards the device for first-time subscribers. The "5%" number isn't meant to cover the cost of the device after one sale, but rather the repeated sales of games which would add up to a lot in the end, since you only need one device per customer (+$50 for every additional device the customer wants)Again depends on production costs, for all we know it could cost $75 if not more and then we need to include gross profits plus any possible shareholders. The actual service should also be free (or maybe $25/yr) Your kidding me? Please tell me your kidding me.:raise: because the lifetime cost could be covered under the initial sale of the game. For some games, they can come ahead (like with one-time playthrough singleplayer games) and other times they might fall behind (like with popular multiplayer games), but in the end they should still come out ahead from people who buy games but don't play them as much as anticipated.
Untill we get more definitive info on this, i think theres a few things that we can't really discuss.
For instance as nice as it would be to pay for the initial cost of the device you use your still going to have to pay for hardware upgrades their end as well as maintenance and demand draw from multiple users trying to draw from the same servers, this won't be like website servers as with alot of games you need a entire pc dedicated just to that game in order to play it at a decent quality and framerate.

[Bastinka]

-snip-
Mines in my signature, though I'll post the latest results though I was on a 4-person conversation in Skype at the time so bandwidth might have been penalized.

http://www.speedtest.net/result/665261515.png

P.S. I love my upload speed <3.

EDIT:

Not really, it's burst speed.
He nearly tricked me there, seeing as it's not a sustained speed.

[jcap]

Untill we get more definitive info on this, i think theres a few things that we can't really discuss.
For instance as nice as it would be to pay for the initial cost of the device you use your still going to have to pay for hardware upgrades their end as well as maintenance and demand draw from multiple users trying to draw from the same servers, this won't be like website servers as with alot of games you need a entire pc dedicated just to that game in order to play it at a decent quality and framerate.
If they have a subscription system, they even said in the video that the hardware is so inexpensive that they could be in the position to just give it away. They claim the plastic enclosure costs more than the hardware inside. Now, if you have a PC client, all you need to do is download the software which you don't need to provide physical copies of. Even if the device is $75 to make, you can easily make that up again from the people who don't need one because they can just use software. Maybe saying "free" is a bit too far, but I think $20 for a $75 device is good with a 6 month subscription.

Why are you saying the price of the game would increase? Think about the charts provided by the video. The retail value of the game doesn't increase - just the breakdowns that make up the total cost are reassigned. Instead of $60 being broken down across 10 different items, leaving the publishers with only $20 or so in the end, the new distribution has only two people - OnLive and publishers. With fewer people you need to share with, each share is increased in size. This is why I say the device and cost of the service could be covered by purchases of games. I was not "kidding you" when I said even a $25/yr subscription was too much because it really is, especially if I don't need the device and choose software instead. I do think $25/yr is definitely reasonable, though. Any more is just greedy when you take everything above into consideration.

I also highly doubt they will sell you campaign but not multiplayer. They claim they want to sell full retail unmodified games. They want to sell you a subscription and a game. Any more and it becomes overly complicated and commercial.

[Con]

Hold on, wouldn't there be annoying delays between actions you make on your controller and the video feed you get back?

[Limited]

Hold on, wouldn't there be annoying delays between actions you make on your controller and the video feed you get back?
My god, watch the video.

[Dwood]

They wouldn't be doing this if the internet wasn't ready... (I have a major bet they'll be signing a contract with Verizon for FiOS services but that's a whole other thing)

I don't think I'll ever sign on with this service... I want to be able to a) Play without the program (only games I own that require steam are Valve-only games) and b) NEVER pay a subscription to play games. ever. [nope, I have no xbawx live]

[Phopojijo]

Unless they sell, which is practically Steve Perlman's hallmark at this point.

Edit: Con! Like I said, don't let the technical side distract you from the business model itself. Works or not... kill it o.o

[jcap]

Or rather the lifetime of the game on that service. Like I said... chances that HaloPC would still be there? Justtttt about none. For a while now.
I just noticed this. I completely forgot about that point. You're absolutely right.

I don't think old games should be a concern, though. The real issue is with contracts. We know this is a huge issue from past experiences with music and books. Some classic examples were with Warner Music Group and Youtube, NBC and iTunes, and Amazon's book store. In all of these cases, the companies had contracts with each other for distribution of media. But at one point the publishers weren't happy and did not renew their contracts. This caused all the purchases the consumers made to just disappear because they weren't legally allowed to provide the media anymore.

With OnLive, depending on how the contracts are written, it could be possible to actually retain your purchase with OnLive, but who knows if they're even considering that until the time comes around where Activision is butthurt and pulls all their games from the service? Really, the only way to ensure this works is to just make OnLive a retailer who provides you with a CD key and copy of the game which you can then choose to run with their service. I don't think it's being approached that way given the deals with all the publishers they have who are intrigued by their service.

Also, I think they should have some feature where you can migrate a license for a game you own to their service (if they support that game, of course). They could charge maybe a $10-15 fee to cover the cost of the servers you're using. I think that should only be done if the subscription cost is low, though. If you have a high yearly cost ($60/yr or more), it should be free for like 3 games.

[Phopojijo]

If this actually survives... which I hope not... I expect the Telcos would invest/take over the business... and it'd be like 20-40$/mo on your phone/internet/cable bill + either publisher channels or pay-per-game.

Which is why I expect Onlive could work... the Telcos can easily packet prioritize -- sure it's illegal but, they're already doing it with IPTV... they on-the-record admitted they were prioritizing IPTV in the CRTC hearing against Bell/Rogers/Telus. "Oh but that's not the internet, that's a premium service on just our network... it just uses the same bandwidth"

Never mind that it's anti-competitive to every other form of gaming... skype... and just about everything on the internet...

[Dwood]

Unless they sell, which is practically Steve Perlman's hallmark at this point.


It all depends on who he sells the service to... I mean, if they sold it, to say, Valve... or Stardock, this could be absolutely amazing. (even if Google bought it) But I think that Activision or some other tight-up publishers will begin to use this service, or make something like this...

Think about it... Play a game with specialized software, without having to physically distribute the games....... This could be the death of gaming as we know it, instead of having powerful consoles and games you have a little unit you plug into the tv, internet, and power.... The player wouldn't have any games of their own, since they'd all be located on servers across the country.



Edit: Con! Like I said, don't let the technical side distract you from the business model itself. Works or not... kill it o.o

I agree. Completely. I see nothing positive coming from this.

[Chozenzzz]

http://www.speedtest.net/result/666326533.png (http://www.speedtest.net)
My network card is limiting me somewhat.

If i was hardlined, i would be 25 mb download, and 25mb upload.

The last test i did like 5 months ago, i had a diffrent network card from linksys and i did 15mbs download and 15mbs upload. My upload has droped i guess, fuck verizon? o;

[Phopojijo]

It all depends on who he sells the service to... I mean, if they sold it, to say, Valve... or Stardock, this could be absolutely amazing. (even if Google bought it) But I think that Activision or some other tight-up publishers will begin to use this service, or make something like this...I'd expect the Telcos... just another premium service that you'd buy.

"Hello Mr. Wood, you are signed up for our ultra bundle. Would you like to add OnLive gaming for 20$/month? You will get 3 free games upon sign-up with a 2 year contract."

TV and phone have been moving further and further away from a closed model to open online (skype, MSN phone, Google's many phone services that are slowly getting combined)... and slowly and surely high-budget videogaming has been moving closer and closer to a closed model... from PC to consoles to onlive. It's ludicrous to me.

Kill... fireeee.

[Dwood]

I'd expect the Telcos... just another premium service that you'd buy.

"Hello Mr. Wood, you are signed up for our ultra bundle. Would you like to add OnLive gaming for 20$/month? You will get 3 free games upon sign-up with a 2 year contract."


That's my problem. In 10 years or so I would expect telcos to be completely useless as phone services over the internet begin to surface more and more... The only thing keeping most people from using the Internet for phone services are bandwidth caps (Hello Comcast) and internet speeds (Hello Fiber Optics) The only way this can be effective (imho) is if publishers will flock to it... using it as their primary publishing platforms Which the tight-up ones probably will.

I find it funny, because eventually this will turn into a war of ethics more than adding competition to the plate, and I would even venture to add that (in the event that it's hugely successful and popular) it worsens the already sore state of pc gaming.



TV and phone have been moving further and further away from a closed model to open online (skype, MSN phone, Google's many phone services that are slowly getting combined)... and slowly and surely high-budget videogaming has been moving closer and closer to a closed model... from PC to consoles to onlive. It's ludicrous to me.

Kill... fireeee.

The difference is that the TV, internet phone, etc, doesn't have to worry about who publishes what, licensing, etc as much as video games and high-budget gaming companies do. As I said, this whole thing depends solely on publishers.

[Phopojijo]

And the customers who get vocal saying "We want control"... which means... we all need to be vocal.

The three major downsides -- back catalog, indie developers, and 3rd party content... are things that the publishers would prefer died... (stupidly... as it'll eventually screw them too... especially when you consider how many developers were modders or indie developers) but yeah.

[Heathen]

60$/yr is... generous... to say the least. That's the price of Xbox Live... I can tell you that the price of OnLive will be substantially more than Xbox Live.

I'd say you're better in the ballpark of 20$/mo (240$/yr)

Maybe I even lowballed it a bit <shrugs>

*****

Also this guy has a history of selling things to companies. He gave Quicktime to Apple, sold WebTV to Microsoft... who do you want owning OnLive?

Phopo, just don't use the service. Its not like you have to.

I'm just more excited about the technology.

[Phopojijo]

Phopo, just don't use the service. Its not like you have to.

I'm just more excited about the technology.It's not an individual thing. You need multiple people to promote alternatives.

Otherwise there will be none... which is when they screw you... because it's them or nothing.

[Dwood]

I'm just more excited about the technology.

What's to be excited about it if modders + people who want physical copies get screwed?

E: Tbh I only play games with large support for modifications... That's why I'm still playing HCE

[jcap]

If Verizon or Comcast picked this up, they'd be able to bundle this with their set-top boxes for FiOS TV or digital cable. Then they can easily tack on that extra monthly fee just like another channel.