OnLive: Sony's Yoshida Still Skeptical; Remote Play Is A Similar Service

In an interview with Videogameszone Shuhei Yoshida, Senior Vice President for Product Development at SCEA, said, that he is still skeptical about OnLive. "There are a lot of technical cradles". For example you need a constant 5 MBit/s internet connection. Yoshida added, that Sony already launched a similar service, called Remote Play. More after the jump.

[LiquifiedArt]

but based on the technology in OnLive, I think they have proprietary stuff that makes the experience much better.

I won't personally use it, cause God willing, I'd have a PC, but its good as the dollar collapse's to give poorer and poorer Americans the ability to play top end games on any device.

[Blaze929]

maybe I'm doing it wrong, but when I do remote play with my ps3 and psp all I can do just about everything EXCEPT play my games...which OnLive does. So how are they similar services?

[-Alpha]

It's good to be skeptical. As long as Sony or anyone else doesn't slander or become unprofessional about OnLive I'm fine.

Let's face it, if anybody knows about skepticism, it's Sony and Microsoft. Both ridiculed for entering the gaming market, yet both made huge impacts on the industry.

Everybody is skeptical about OnLive because it's so much different, but everybody should also be optimistic too. In other words, I personally am cautiously optimistic. OnLive is serious, they know what they want to do and they are making big promises to achieve it. The beta testing seems solid, and though the final product once released can go anywhere, it's still good to see new competition that's promising to change the future.

If OnLive is going to save gamers big bucks (no upgrading, etc) then it can go along way. I think the ball is in OnLive's court-- and I think that the pricing and subscription fee of OnLive is the make-or-break factor.

[ApexHell]

how is it gonna help out poor americans when 1.6MB internet costs ~35$ a month. and u need at least a 5MB connection to game online with it.

and you have to pay subscription fees to onlive, possibly buy a micro console, or get it free if u subscibe for like a year or so. then purchase games that u never recieve digitally stored of physicly stored that are just connected to ur account that could get hacked easily.

[-Alpha]

What you listed is the exact skepticism people have with OnLive.

That's why ultimately, we will have to wait and see.

One issue I have is the idea that I never actually "own" the games I buy. If they are tied to my account and if I have to pay to play, then OnLive is going to be a big trust issue.

We will see what happens, but right now, OnLive seems like a good idea, but there a lot of stumbling blocks to get over.

[Serg]

I am very excited about OnLive, the service is new, yes, there has never been a service so close to release ever before. I know it works, but I still have a healthy dose of skepticism. How I know? Simple, look at the list of publishers who signed up for the service. A publisher would never ever invest in a fairytale product.

Watched the 50 minute demo Steve Perlman did in a university, and, I'm convinced, the guy really knows what he is talking about. He listed a lot of problems they faced and named the solutions for them.

I just hope they start setting up these data centers in Europe soon.

PS: I probably wouldn't switch to the service even if it completely works as advertised, but I'm a tech-geek, therefore the excitement about it.

[SilentNegotiator]

They couldn't sustain 30fps, and it was a CONTROLLED situation, in their latest demo. Imagine when thousands of people try to play it all at once.

And I'll bet that the games will play without AA (Heck, maybe not even NATIVE hd), so that they can save power.

[blackpanther25]

well if you have a psp and pixel junk eden then you will know why they are similar. I play that game on my psp all the time when i am away from home

[Blaze929]

Is that the only game that supports it?

[NotSoSilentBob]

No Pixel junk Monsters has remote play
Lair does and thats how I beat the game before they patched the Analog usage in.

[randomwiz]

IMO, onlive might turn out to be the greatest thing in the world, but it will be way to expensive to maintain. The company can't really make competitive pricing right now. Im guessing they'll charge somewhere around $20 a month.

Servers are extremely expensive to maintain, and if onlive has to meet demand with the people and hundreds of games, they're going to have one of the biggest server farms in history.

[FarEastOrient]

Just imagine trying to play Modern Warfare on launch day and imagine all the lag that is happening now on systems with disc in comparison with something like OnLive over the internet. Talk about something that is unplayable...

[fullmetal297]

I like the idea of Onlive: all your content and stored online and played through any PC. Its an innovative idea but just isn't convenient at the moment. Not everyone has internet, let alone a +5 mbit connection. Imagine how frustrating not being to play a game in friend's house because he has DSL or not being able to play games without any lag because your brother's downloading porn via torrent. Until +10 mbit internet becomes mainstream, I just don't see this market taking off anytime soon.

[CREESH]

Semms Sony is trying hard to dismiss it.

[El_Colombiano]

Because they have nothing to worry about. They have all their exclusives just that, exclusive to Playstation. No worries. Mass Effect 2 is going to be on OnLive. That's a problem for Microsoft, most Xbox games are on PC and this is PC for everybody. They need to be careful now.

[OC_MurphysLaw]

Unless they already have a plan to do something similar(I am sure they all are looking at it).

Regardless of the exclusives the consoles have... each of the big 3 has to realize this is how the future of gaming is going to look. No console, just cloud service you subscribe to and play through.

[UltimateIdiot911]

I don't think Sony, MS and Nintendo need to worry. One of the point of OnLive seems to be addressing is how you need a good PC to play games and your pc might not be able to handle x requirements. With console gaming, you buy the game for your system, it's done. I see Digital Download being more successful than cloud gaming.

[El_Colombiano]

I disagree man. Downloads would not become more popular then cloud gaming if it worked to an extent. The general public would have no idea about response time and frankly, they wouldn't care. Think of it simply put; can I wait to download something and have it taking up space, or can I simply press play and pause whenever I feel the urge?

I rather physical media anyway. Disks are indefinitely superior to downloads.

[OC_MurphysLaw]

Its a minimal Hardware cost for the consumer and I am sure much more economical to the company. That said, its a good 5 years away from really being viable. Broadband needs to be more wide spread and speeds increased universally. About the only way this really takes off now is if a company like Comcast buys them up and offers this up as part of a cable/internet package.

[Pennywise]

Games are only going to get prettier and more complicated causing their size to drastically increase. Onlive streaming is not going to be ideal for playing the cutting edge games.

Onlive will be good for retro games. I just dont see how they created a system that will stream a game and let you play online without lag or buffering. I can't even watch a movie online without buffering...

[sikbeta]

On-live will be amazing for Shovelware games and probably games equivalents to 1 or 2 DVD of data, big games will never be able to play on the Platform even if the Bandwidth get 5 times bigger than now

The Tech is cool, but it needs more time + more Bandwidth

[Bigpappy]

The internet is not stable enough to support a remote only service. I was skeptical from the go. Paying monthly for a service that is more limited than what we have now doesn't seem like such great idea to me.

[CryWolf]

Onlive is not the future yet for gaming maybe in the next 5 to 10 years away right now but with these big internet companies not giving us enough bandwidth to the consumer like Comcast, Verizon High Speed Internet, Time Warner Cable, how are we even going to use onlive technology without paiding extra for enough bandwidth thats real problem onlive's having.

[nogolis]

I'm laughing at you all who say that On live is the way of the future. I really am cause it shows how clueless the average consumer is in this field.

Please elaborate on what kind of future it will be. You mean one with 3rd party multi platform games that refuse to push any boundaries? Do you honestly think you will see any proprietary games for this system from Nintendo or a Sony? Do you think you'll be playing the latest Mario Bros or Uncharted using this system? Games that push the industry forward and keep it on its toes are what matter. MAdden 2010, Bio Shock, WWE, Fight Night, Burnout, Devil May Cry and Resident Evil 5 do not matter to the wheel of life in the video game world. They are a means to an end and a buck for the publisher who undertook it. They make no advancement in their respected genres.

Only Sony and Nintendo, and even Microsoft with Natal, push the industry forward. Ask yourself when the last time you saw EA or THQ break out something new that the industry took notes of and learned from. You didn't. And for that, Onlive will be an ambitious project that couldn't land the big sharks in their tank.

[dkgshiz]

Thats what people don't understand. Onlive doesn't have any exclusive games. Just old boring multiplat games. I guess if you want to play crysis on the highest settings get onlive then. Otherwise have fun playing multiplat games. While console owners get to play a much wider variety of games.

[koehler83]

It's true, OnLive is a gloried emulator with a subscription fee. It may bring gaming's recent past to the masses but it will never satisfy the core audience's need for gaming's present and gaming's future.

[Bigpappy]

You say Bio Shock, Fight Night, Burnout, and Devil May Cry did nothing to move their genres forward. Well I always have room for enlightenment. So could you please tell me which boxing game did more to push the genre that FN? I believe Bio Shock was the innovative action/adventure before uncharted 2 came along; Burnout is the father of high speed crashes. Who does it better? Devils may cry gave birth to Beyonetta. The move sets are different but the concept is the same. I am not a fan of all these games, but I certainly respect what they have done to their respective genre. Because they are not exclusive to PS3 and Wii, does not mean that they don't advance gaming. Fanboy hate is leading to brain damage. You keep insulting multiplat's only so have them outsell exclusive on your godly system. You then make excuses by saying sale do not matter. Sales is the only true indicator of what owner prefer. They vote with their dollars. How else would you know what games want, review score and awards? You guys are the worst. I agree with your main point though (onlive does not seem like it will work for most of us). But it has nothing to do with exclusives.

[dkgshiz]

Onlive has multiplat games.... How is this service better? Trust me onlive will never be mainstream.

[Why Dis 0]

AAA exclusives ?

[MetalGearRising]

Well if Onlive takes off that would leave sony ps3 in 4th place that would be funny.

dkgshiz

No point in winning awards if the sales are crap it's a disgrace and nothing to be happy about.

[Bloodshoteyz]

Your Face Is Funny O_o

[dkgshiz]

Well I guess you never heard of MGS4,LBP,Uncharted 2-nearly winning every GOTY award this year. Demons souls, etc. Dumb sh!ts.

[MegaPowa]

lifeless trash

[Thoreau]

and stick to the ps and xbox...

[divideby0]

those complaining about lag now..just wait....
dsl connections wont get this done FIOS is so scarce.
We have a solid cable connection 5M/10M, but this is NOT the norm..which will be needed for this service...
I do not know anyone who is beta testing this service as of yet...does anyone, besides the official release stuff

[NotSoSilentBob]

I still stand behind my saying about Onlive. It is a start-up company that was started to just entice the big 3 to buy it out for the Technology.

[Natsu89]

Could it be onlive missed the release? :D
No news about ppl playing it!

[TANUKI]

Technological competition is always good. Lets see Onlive duke it out with Remote Play!

It'll be good for all of us, as Sony and Onlive with be forced to improve, improve and improve the [said] services!

[Dragonopolis]

Imagine playing Crysis (or any highend game on low end hardware). Most modern low end hardware over the last 5 years can display the the necessary pixels equivalent to 720p. (A lot of notebooks and netbooks have 1200x800 LCD screens.

Pixels (what we see on the tv) are only a fraction of what makes a game seem real. I have yet to see a PC game that can imitate the real life of my digital ABC channel which Broadcast in 720p. Yet Crysis on my PC at 1080p is no where near as realistic as what I watch. Why? processing power required to imitate real life has yet to be invented and if it did would be years before it could be mass produced and sold General public in console form. Onlive solves the mass producing problem although it still might be years before we see real imitation it will be realized sooner using Onlive's method than the current Console or PC method. Theoretically, Onlive should be able to continue to improve the graphic quality of their games without changing the bandwidth requirements or require you to purchase a new piece of hardware.

Again Pixels isn't everything? Think of Onlive as a service that allows you to plug in your monitor and controller over a greater distance to one big massive super console that everybody is chipping in to buy.

Now we still don't know the finer details of the pricing but there has been hint of service fee much like Xbox 360 live.

The X factor is the Game prices. We all know that Onlive service cuts out the middle man and doesn't require developers to mass produce their titles so we better see some significant price reduction for equivalent games we see using standard methods of distribution or Onlive will flop.

Consoles will still compete a few more years though but will have to resort to pushing advance interactive controllers and peripherals (I.E. Natal, Nintendo's Controllers, Sony's Wand/Playstation Eye, etc...) Stuff that would be cool but would be hard to implement over Onlive's service because the advance peripherals would eat up to much bandwidth.

I'm in, at least for the short term.

I'm not in if I don't see any price reduction in the games being sold over the service. Sorry to dissappoint gamers but this is the future of gaming so get use to it.

Sony, and I Guarantee Microsoft, are going to find ways to utilize this feature next time around. Cheaper to produce better hardware and protects their Developers from Piracy.