OnLive

[Dwood]

This program has gone live: http://www.onlive.com/

The end of true gaming is near.

[Phopojijo]

Here's something that boggles me a bit.

When discussed about OnLive only requiring supporting games for 3 years... fans say "Oh who plays games for more than 3 years anyway?" -- then they are like "Wow I want to play Crysis ((2007)) on Onlive".

Halo 3's reaching the 3-year mark too.

[Dwood]

Just look at Halo 2 for "Who plays games longer than 3 years"- OoT, Poketmonsters, and WAY more for that matter.

[LlamaMaster]

So, any word on if it's a laggy piece of tripe? You know, like the internet cried about for months?

[Phopojijo]

Well the biggest point is that to those people -- videogaming is consumable entertainment. You know, like going to a movie theatre and deciding at the theatre what to watch. The game itself is irrelevant as long as it occupies their time in an enjoyable manner and maybe satisfies a craving for a particular genre.

There's nothing wrong with that... and basically everyone consumes entertainment -- look at the Hollywood blockbusters that you never see on DVD a year after its home release. The long tail, however, is when you get artistic and cultural relevance.

How many books/paintings/sculptures/songs/movies that are studied in schools are from the last 3 years? Hell even modern art course subjects are more than 30 years old.

While there's definitely a LOT of room for blockbuster releases -- videogames as art takes a major hit if it's not permanent -- which is why I support linux gaming -- (basically) the only platform that can be user-modified to extend compatibility to old content if it has cultural relevance (or some other reason for someone to help fix it). Otherwise you're stuck using Emulators or "(N)ot an (E)mulator"s with varying levels of illegality to extend support for it.

Seriously -- we're past the point where preserving art is a federal offense. Think about that.

[Heathen]

It wont end gaming. People want to own their games and they definitely like modding, which isn't possible with onlive.

[Kornman00]

If my understanding of DCMA's Section 1201 (http://cyber.law.harvard.edu/openlaw/DVD/1201.html#f) is right, when a service is no longer provided or manufactured (ie, like XBL for Xbox 1), reverse engineering to allow interoperability won't land you in a soup of infringing-jumbo. As long as you follow some guidelines (http://www.eff.org/issues/coders/reverse-engineering-faq) while doing it of course. The emulator service in general won't land you in trouble but the actual ISO or ROM data to a game will.

[Limited]

Oh fantastic, cant fucking wait!! O wait, its fucking United States only.


What are the Minimum Recommended Requirements?
OnLive games are played through the Internet from an OnLive game data center. Currently all OnLive games are HD resolution. The Minimum Recommended Requirements are:


PC: Windows® 7 or Vista (32 or 64-bit) or XP (32-bit)
Mac: Mac OS X 10.6 or later
Processor: Dual-core CPU
Screen Resolution: 1280x720
Internet Connection: 5 Mbps located inside the contiguous United States (wired connection required)

I'm pretty sure, they mentioned ages ago that you could have a like 8 year old PC and it would run it fine, I thought dual-core processors, and screen resolution of 1280 x 720 wasnt common around 8 years ago..

[Futzy]

It still needs to render the video so it will need a bit of power at higher resolutions

[Pyong Kawaguchi]

I have this, and it isn't that bad at all, I'm honestly surprised that it works too. (got it free, lol)

[Futzy]

I have this, and it isn't that bad at all, I'm honestly surprised that it works too. (got it free, lol)
I signed up for the free year thing and am waiting for the email. I thought you still had to pay for games though?

[Pyong Kawaguchi]

you do, but there is 30min demo's of each game.

[Phopojijo]

I've said since the very beginning, OnLive can and likely will work. What I want to avoid is people who say "Wow -- it works!", get all caught up in that, and ignore the real problem.

The iPhone proved time and time again that people will give up their rights for something shiny... and screw themselves and the industry up later.

Not that consoles or to a lesser extent Windows gaming really afforded much more rights... but stepping in the wrong direction is still the wrong direction regardless of where you started from.

[king_nothing_]

I got selected to be in the Founding Members Program a few days ago. I just wanted to see how well it worked, and I don't really have any intention of ever paying for the service.

I've played demos of Borderlands and Unreal Tournament III so far. There is an easily noticeable delay between my input and the video. For some reason it was a lot worse in Borderlands than it was in UT3. My opinion on the system so far is that it would probably be alright for some games. I would recommend against playing a multiplayer FPS with it, though.

BTW, I think one of their datacenters is in Chicago, and I usually ping around 20ms to Chicago servers.

[Amit]

This looks cool for portable gaming, if they design some sort of controller for the portable devices, but for PC and Console gaming, I'd still want the disc. It would be pretty rad to be sitting in a chair and playing borderlands co-op on an iPad using Wi-fi and a specialized controller.

[jcap]

So let me tell you a story about my experience so far:

I've despised this shit service since its inception. I decided to sign up for the founding members free offer anyway, just to give it a try, and to get a free game at their expense. Everyone at this company should fucking hang for what they've created. But anyway, I signed up and downloaded the client.

I executed the client, and it asks me to log in. I type in my username/password (no option to remember me on my local computer...) and it runs through a self test. Now, just last week I actually upgraded from my 20/5 FiOS Internet package to the 25/25 package. For those who aren't aware, with FiOS, what they advertise is what you actually get. It's not like Comcast, Cox, Roadrunner, etc. who advertise their speed boost speeds, which aren't sustained for more than the first 10 MB (approx.) of a file. At step 2, I am greeted with the wonderful message:

http://jcap.h2vista.net/files/pics/onlive-unabletoproceed.jpg
Translation: hurf durf :downs:

:smith:

From this point, it is impossible to proceed. Your only option is to quit. There are no details or any explanation. The only "help" they provide is a link to their lousy FAQ:


Why am I getting PERFORMANCE WARNING or UNABLE TO PROCEED messages when starting the OnLive Game Service?

Connection Speed:
All OnLive games are currently HD resolution and we recommend a 5 Mbps connection speed or higher. OnLive technology is designed to tolerate periodic reductions in bandwidth as may occur if your Internet connection is simultaneously used for low-bandwidth applications such as non-video Web surfing. But, OnLive will not work simultaneously with high-bandwidth applications that are consuming so much of your Internet bandwidth that OnLive is unable to sustain HD-resolution video.

Consider whether other applications in your home are using your Internet connection at the same time as the OnLive Game Service. If so, you should avoid simultaneously using high bandwidth applications such as video playback, large file downloading, or file sharing that will consume significant Internet bandwidth (indeed, in many cases, such applications will try to use all of your Internet bandwidth), or else they may affect your OnLive gameplay experience. Degraded performance may also be due to your Internet Service Provider (ISP) suffering from congestion problems, or there may be an issue with your home networking equipment. If you have unexplained low performance when no other people are using your Internet connection, you might try power cycling your cable, DSL or fiber modem and your other network equipment, such as firewalls.

Also, bear in mind that, although the advertised connection speed for your Internet connection may be high enough to meet OnLive's Minimum Recommended Requirements, the actual speed after sustained use of the connection (which is what OnLive relies upon) may be less. For example, in many cases, advertised Internet connection speeds are higher than actual speeds, or the advertised speeds are only sustained for short bursts, before settling down to a much lower speed over time. Most speed test websites will only measure burst speed, but sustained rate is the speed that OnLive will be able to utilize.So, I run a speed test.

http://www.speedtest.net/result/871224650.png
Caption: Obviously not fast enough.

There's nothing I can do. Imagine if I actually bought a game and now I can't play it because my connection "may not be sufficient." I tried contacting support, but I am still waiting for an answer back. I doubt I will get any human response, just a copy/paste of the FAQ that I quoted here.

There is no way to even suspend or cancel your account from within your account settings. You are unable to even remove your credit card or disable automatic renewal. The only way to suspend your account is to email their support.

Your account can remain suspended for a maximum of 12 months. After those 12 months, your account is permanently deleted and you lose EVERYTHING. All your saved games and game purchases are lost forever with no way of recovering them.

Final thoughts: 0/10. This shit fucking sucks.

[Amit]

This is some skynet shit. somebody needs to drop bombs on their data centers and headquarters. Hurry, before it's too late!

[iizahsum]

I hate having to be plugged into the fucking router to use this thing.

[jcap]

I figured out the problem. Shitty programming on OnLive's part.

I have an Astaro Security Gateway appliance. It has one hell of a firewall, very smart too. One of its features is DDoS protection, and part of that is UDP flood protection. Turns out that OnLive was triggering the Intrusion Protection System, which drops all packets and blocks the source.

I took a look at my logs and found:


2010:07:06-22:28:11 jcap ulogd[4316]: id="2105" severity="info" sys="SecureNet" sub="ips" name="UDP flood detected" action="UDP flood" fwrule="60013" initf="eth1" srcmac="0:90:1a:a1:f3:e7" dstmac="0:4:23:b9:72:6e" srcip="74.85.146.215" dstip="173.72.19.29" proto="17" length="1472" tos="0x00" prec="0x00" ttl="53" srcport="16388" dstport="60010"
2010:07:06-22:28:11 jcap ulogd[4316]: id="2105" severity="info" sys="SecureNet" sub="ips" name="UDP flood detected" action="UDP flood" fwrule="60013" initf="eth1" srcmac="0:90:1a:a1:f3:e7" dstmac="0:4:23:b9:72:6e" srcip="74.85.146.215" dstip="173.72.19.29" proto="17" length="1472" tos="0x00" prec="0x00" ttl="53" srcport="16388" dstport="60010"
2010:07:06-22:28:11 jcap ulogd[4316]: id="2105" severity="info" sys="SecureNet" sub="ips" name="UDP flood detected" action="UDP flood" fwrule="60013" initf="eth1" srcmac="0:90:1a:a1:f3:e7" dstmac="0:4:23:b9:72:6e" srcip="74.85.146.215" dstip="173.72.19.29" proto="17" length="1472" tos="0x00" prec="0x00" ttl="53" srcport="16388" dstport="60010"
2010:07:06-22:28:11 jcap ulogd[4316]: id="2105" severity="info" sys="SecureNet" sub="ips" name="UDP flood detected" action="UDP flood" fwrule="60013" initf="eth1" srcmac="0:90:1a:a1:f3:e7" dstmac="0:4:23:b9:72:6e" srcip="74.85.146.215" dstip="173.72.19.29" proto="17" length="1472" tos="0x00" prec="0x00" ttl="53" srcport="16388" dstport="60010"
2010:07:06-22:28:12 jcap ulogd[4316]: id="2105" severity="info" sys="SecureNet" sub="ips" name="UDP flood detected" action="UDP flood" fwrule="60013" initf="eth1" srcmac="0:90:1a:a1:f3:e7" dstmac="0:4:23:b9:72:6e" srcip="74.85.146.215" dstip="173.72.19.29" proto="17" length="1472" tos="0x00" prec="0x00" ttl="53" srcport="16388" dstport="60010"
2010:07:06-22:28:12 jcap ulogd[4316]: id="2105" severity="info" sys="SecureNet" sub="ips" name="UDP flood detected" action="UDP flood" fwrule="60013" initf="eth1" srcmac="0:90:1a:a1:f3:e7" dstmac="0:4:23:b9:72:6e" srcip="74.85.146.215" dstip="173.72.19.29" proto="17" length="1472" tos="0x00" prec="0x00" ttl="53" srcport="16388" dstport="60010"
2010:07:06-22:28:12 jcap ulogd[4316]: id="2105" severity="info" sys="SecureNet" sub="ips" name="UDP flood detected" action="UDP flood" fwrule="60013" initf="eth1" srcmac="0:90:1a:a1:f3:e7" dstmac="0:4:23:b9:72:6e" srcip="74.85.146.215" dstip="173.72.19.29" proto="17" length="1472" tos="0x00" prec="0x00" ttl="53" srcport="16388" dstport="60010"
2010:07:06-22:28:12 jcap ulogd[4316]: id="2105" severity="info" sys="SecureNet" sub="ips" name="UDP flood detected" action="UDP flood" fwrule="60013" initf="eth1" srcmac="0:90:1a:a1:f3:e7" dstmac="0:4:23:b9:72:6e" srcip="74.85.146.215" dstip="173.72.19.29" proto="17" length="1472" tos="0x00" prec="0x00" ttl="53" srcport="16388" dstport="60010"
2010:07:06-22:28:12 jcap ulogd[4316]: id="2105" severity="info" sys="SecureNet" sub="ips" name="UDP flood detected" action="UDP flood" fwrule="60013" initf="eth1" srcmac="0:90:1a:a1:f3:e7" dstmac="0:4:23:b9:72:6e" srcip="74.85.146.215" dstip="173.72.19.29" proto="17" length="1472" tos="0x00" prec="0x00" ttl="53" srcport="16388" dstport="60010"
2010:07:06-22:28:13 jcap ulogd[4316]: id="2105" severity="info" sys="SecureNet" sub="ips" name="UDP flood detected" action="UDP flood" fwrule="60013" initf="eth1" srcmac="0:90:1a:a1:f3:e7" dstmac="0:4:23:b9:72:6e" srcip="74.85.146.215" dstip="173.72.19.29" proto="17" length="1472" tos="0x00" prec="0x00" ttl="53" srcport="16388" dstport="60010"I don't know why I have this problem with OnLive only. Video from OnLive is only 720p. I stream 1080p video with no problems, at an even higher bitrate than what OnLive sends. I just had to increase the threshold.

This IS a major bug on their part, though. The error message is extremely misleading. It should simply say that you have massive packet loss, which could be due to a list of reasons. Simply saying "oh durr your connection isn't fast enough!1" won't help solve any problems. It should only say that if you don't pass a speed test.

I finally got to play around, though. For the past few hours, I have been playing several game demos on OnLive. I really do enjoy how you can play a game demo without ever needing to download it, and it is pretty cool watching other players play games. But that's about where my compliments end.

First, I think you never actually "buy" a game. When you click that button, you are actually purchasing a "PlayPass." My understanding of this is that a PlayPass is essentially a fancy word for a rental. There's several tiers of rentals, however. You can rent a game for 3 days, 5 days, or "unlimited." Buying the "unlimited" PlayPass means you are renting the game until your account expires or their service goes down. That's how they can legally steal money from you.

I got the chance to play several games on OnLive that I have previously installed on my PC. For me, it is a super massive letdown to play these games on OnLive. The quality is probably worse than a YouTube video. HUDs are blurry and you can always notice compression artifacts. Some games also have periods of stuttering, even with the low settings the games are preset to. I can run all of these games at max settings on my 2 year old rig, but they can't. You do have the option to customize controls, but no other settings.

For mobility, I could sacrifice quality, especially if I can play a game like Crysis on a netbook. But the biggest problem, and my number one gripe, is the latency. I live in New Jersey, and the closest server is in Washington DC. I checked my firewall logs to make sure I was in fact playing off of the DC servers before commenting, as I once found myself connecting to their servers in Dallas. DC is probably 140 miles away from here, probably less considering the networks of the Internet. To their servers in DC, I have a 20 ms ping.

It feels like there's about 60-100 ms of lag, which I assume the bulk of comes from the video compression. It is extremely noticeable, especially with twitch shooters. It feels like using an extremely shitty wireless mouse, so if any of you have that experience, you can probably relate to it. It also feels like there is massive mouse smoothing, which is just an illusion from the lag. If you have ever played Splinter Cell: Conviction (such a terrible port with no option to disable smoothing), you should know what I am talking about. Precise aiming takes time, since I constantly find myself overshooting (no pun intended) their heads.

2/10. Still sucks.

[Dwood]

Oh jcap you rabble rouser you.

[jcap]

OnLive review part 3!

Alright, so over the past few days I've been playing with this. I've played several games for what has added up to several hours now, and I've gotten a pretty good feel now. I will not discuss video quality, since that is in a prior post.

First and foremost, your experience varies greatly from game to game. I don't quite understand why, either. The first game I played was FEAR 2. The mouse aim was terribly sluggish and it was impossible to find the correct balance for the mouse sensitivity. At times, the game would slow down, and it would pause for about 1 second every time it autosaved.

Assassin's Creed II is a game I have yet to play on the PC. I can't compare running the game locally vs remotely, but I recall hearing about problems with mouse acceleration and mouse smoothing. When using the mouse and keyboard, the game controls like crap. It's very jerky, and you never look where you intend to. While I do believe this terrible port is part of the problem, OnLive is still to blame. Even after I switched to a 360 controller and replayed the same part, it still felt like I was getting massive framerate drops (probably was getting 20 FPS max at some points). Otherwise, the game plays exactly like it does on the console with an Xbox 360 controller. And while there is still some latency, it is a lot less noticeable with a controller.

Speaking of the Xbox 360 controller, much like many GFW "certified" games today, OnLive supports switching between mouse/keyboard and controller on the fly. You don't need to restart the game client, though you MAY need to change the settings inside the games. You can even connect a controller while a game is in progress and switch over to it, without needing to restart anything.

After playing Assassin's Creed, I was ready to throw in the towel on this service. But then I was massively bored and thought, "Why not give Unreal a run?" So I did. Unreal Tournament is the only twitch shooter in their library, and you can guess that they tried their hardest to make it as responsive as possible. I have to give these guys credit for this one, because this game really plays like it's locally installed. There is almost no latency, aside from the 40ms (or so) it takes for my input to get there and back. This is how I expected every other game to perform, so I am thinking the delay in the other titles is caused by the encoding process. Playback of the game was smooth, with only very few glitches here and there.

There is one very "tiny" problem, though:

There's no servers.

...

No, literally, I mean there's no servers.

http://jcap.h2vista.net/files/pics/OnLive%202010-07-10%2000-56-37-46.jpg

http://jcap.h2vista.net/files/pics/OnLive%202010-07-10%2000-54-31-27.jpg

I was lucky to have found just one hosted game earlier today from an individual who wanted to play. There were 16 players in it, half full. The game has only one multiplayer option, and that sends you straight to LAN. There is no true Internet play, no dedicated servers, no mods, no bans, no fun. I'm appalled by the ridiculous and asinine restriction. How can they even hope to sell this service with such gimped games?

Obviously, OnLive either needs to desperately rethink their business model, or they will sink FAST. Who is honestly going to pay for a monthly service just so they can play the campaign of their singleplayer game? Who the hell is going to buy a multiplayer game that DOESN'T LET YOU PLAY MULTIPLAYER?! OnLive really did have potential, but they have grade A morons behind the wheel and none of them know how to steer.

My verdict still stands. OnLive seriously sucks ass.

[neuro]

rofl.

[jcap]

Being one of the "founding members," OnLive has provided everyone who signed up with a free PlayPass. I've been trying hard to decide what game I want to use it on (because all games have at least one major problem), but I finally decided on one.

A few days, I posted:

First, I think you never actually "buy" a game. When you click that button, you are actually purchasing a "PlayPass." My understanding of this is that a PlayPass is essentially a fancy word for a rental. There's several tiers of rentals, however. You can rent a game for 3 days, 5 days, or "unlimited." Buying the "unlimited" PlayPass means you are renting the game until your account expires or their service goes down. That's how they can legally steal money from you.
As if that doesn't sound bad enough, I actually got it partially wrong. There is no such thing as an "unlimited" PlayPass. The highest tier is a "full" Playpass. What does that mean?

Well, a full access PlayPass gives you full access to the game of your choice. It costs the same as the retail game, in addition to your monthly membership cost. Like I said before, a PlayPass just a fancy word for a long term rental. If you stop paying your monthly fees or OnLive disappears, every PlayPass you paid for is lost.

But wait, it gets worse! Again, I can't emphasize it enough, you DO NOT OWN A LICENSE TO THE GAME, as you would if you bought the game retail! OnLive owns the license, and it is nothing more than a long term agreement with the publishers. They sign a contract with companies like EA, Activision, and Ubisoft to sell rentals. These agreements are valid for period of about 3 years. If there are any violations to this agreement in that time period, the contract is void and the game can be pulled from their service. If the contract is not renewed after 3 years, then you lost all access to your PlayPass purchase.

http://jcap.h2vista.net/files/pics/OnLive%202010-07-10%2013-55-08-70.jpg

Furthermore, the PlayPass is specific to Windows/Mac. The "microconsole" and iPhone app they are developing would require additional agreements because of the medium it is being played on (there's actually legal issues between playing on a PC, a portable device, and a TV). So, a game might only be playable on your TV, but not on your computer.

[Kyle]

So... I shouldn't invest in what seems to be a horrible gaming version of Netflix but rather, purchase said games on Steam where there are wonderful discounts and I actually get to own the game and can't have it taken away from me for not paying for a license/pass to play/use the game/service? Is that what you're trying to tell me?

I mean, the fact that you don't have to have a top of the line computer to play new releases is nice, but the rest just seems absolutely ridiculous.

XD

[iizahsum]

I have always felt safer having hard copies of games than digital downloads. If I lose my steam password or my account gets hacked for some reason I lose everything. If I have a disc the worst that could happen is I lose the disc or it breaks (which dosn't happen to people who take care of their stuff).

[Phopojijo]

So... I shouldn't invest in what seems to be a horrible gaming version of Netflix but rather, purchase said games on Steam where there are wonderful discounts and I actually get to own the game and can't have it taken away from me for not paying for a license/pass to play/use the game/service? Is that what you're trying to tell me?

I mean, the fact that you don't have to have a top of the line computer to play new releases is nice, but the rest just seems absolutely ridiculous.

XDWell, your game can be pulled from you on Steam as well... it's not perfect -- but yeah, better than OnLive by a long shot.

[Dwood]

In this case, I personally believe that it's the developers of this games that will shut down the OnLive Service, NOT a lack of players willing to pay monthly for Games as a Service like this.

[Phopojijo]

Activision is still refusing to sign up with OnLive, as is basically all of the Japanese companies (like SquareEnix... if you ignore Eidos' deal with OnLive)

[Kyle]

Well, your game can be pulled from you on Steam as well... it's not perfect -- but yeah, better than OnLive by a long shot.

Yeah, but I don't know the circumstances that would get a game removed from your library by Valve though. Also, I've heard first hand accounts of the sales not working for some people so they end up being charged full price and only a few of those cases are resolved. It isn't perfect, but nothing really is. :)

Then there is always the chance that Valve somehow shuts down/gets destroyed. Moderators stated on the forums that Steam would just go into offline mode (http://forums.steampowered.com/forums/showthread.php?p=10035981#post10035981) and that a patch would be released (http://forums.steampowered.com/forums/showthread.php?t=870603&page=6), possibly dealing with online content in multiplayer games and permanently keeping steam in offline mode.

And I'm not surprised some companies aren't signing up. The sheer fact that this seems to only support third party titles released on multiple consoles(at least that's the impression I get from the list of (upcoming)games and from the companies who signed up with the service) guarantees that this won't last long; unless they develop some exclusive titles for the service, which is doubtful.

[Phopojijo]

Actually part of their business model is NOT having first party developers. They publicly stated that as a selling point.

Exclusives would need to be 3rd party exclusives.

I wouldn't be too quick to count-out OnLive yet though... their (silent) business model from day 1 was to snuggle with the telecom companies. They're making large deals with AT&T as well as having various European telcos slowly buy up stock in it.

It wouldn't surprise me if Perlman sold OnLive to Microsoft, Google, or Fox/Newscorp (To pair with IGN and Gamespy Arcade). I mean he's never actually kept a company... ever.

[Dwood]

I honestly hope Google buys the service out. The one company I would *shudder* trust to handle a service like this properly is elGoog.

[Phopojijo]

Unfortunately elGoog's the least likely... it's dependent on a strong relationship with the Telcos... all of which hate Google (long story involving dark fibre apparently).

In an ideal world Valve would eat them and integrate with Steam (well, if OnLive and all similar businesses don't roll over and die... that'd be slightly more ideal).

[jcap]

Google wouldn't buy a failing service with no future.

Aside from their flawed business model, there's just fundamental roadblocks which not even the BEST technology in the world can solve...unless they can magically figure out how to travel faster than the speed of light...

[Phopojijo]

Google wouldn't buy a failing service with no future.

Aside from their flawed business model, there's just fundamental roadblocks which not even the BEST technology in the world can solve...unless they can magically figure out how to travel faster than the speed of light...Or put thousands of small colos in just about every town. It's not too hard to string together colos for multiplayer... it's the input/video loop that causes all the problems. People are used to latencies of even 200ms for multiplayer lag.

That's the reason it's so imperative for them to suck (up to) Telecom companies... you need to get within that first hundred miles... even if load balancing pushes you out to a different colo than usual... it'll not be more than ~200-300 miles... that's still VERY short distance.

Of course the problem with that is holy crap monopoly.