370°

Could OnLive be the death of hardware?

GDC 09: Just as Zeebo promises new 'fourth' console, rival service threatens to bring high-end gaming to the masses

With Zeebo proposing that the future of gaming will bring about the end of disc-based media, an arguably even more exciting prospect dubbed OnLive threatens to end the gaming hardware race altogether.

The new on-demand service claims to do for gaming what the 'cloud' concept has done to computing – centralise all code and assets on a remote server, with games playable by users accessing the content across a high-speed internet connection.

Nineball21125533d ago

I'd definitely be interested in trying out a service like this...

Pay for use... I'd be for that.

No more buying games and finding out that it's not what you expected, no more dealing with cables and set up issues of the hardware, no more schlepping down to the store to see if they have the game in stock.

Yeah, these are minor annoyances... but to be able to turn on my TV and log in and play whatever game I wanted, whenever I wanted? Yeah, I'd be interested in that. :-)

marinelife95533d ago

It could be the death of consoles especially if the publishers push it. If all the new exclusive third party games are on onlive first then the gamers will follow.

For a publisher the positives are huge.

No piracy for PC or Xbox 360 games.

No used game sales

Direct profits from game rentals

No problems with hardware specs

No lag on multiplayer games

They just better make sure they get the pricing right for consumers.

twoface5533d ago

Correct me if I'm wrong or out of context. Didn't MS have something like that (sharing applications from a server) for a while already?
That did not seem to go mainstream.

The Lazy One5533d ago

Let's say there are 100,000 people playing some really popular next gen game. Is On Live going to have 100,000 consoles running off site or something? And we already have trouble streaming hi-def content without any input.

I think it's coming eventually, I'm just curious how their going to do it now. I also think it'll be more along the lines of a personal server that you'd have at your home, then you stream from that server (where you'd have all your content stored. Media, games, apps, etc).

I just don't see game clients running off a server being very efficient :-/.

More than happy to be proven wrong though.

Tempist5533d ago

This idea is never going to fly as well as they're hoping.

1) Many many ISPs have bandwidth capping, which means that this poses a serious threat / drain on that limit. So in addition to paying for the internet and the service, and you potentially pay for over using your bandwidth for the month.

2) Just because the games are coming in at a good resolution, doesn't mean they're going to be awesome. To get the lag down and everything running great, there's probably going to be a sacrafice in some of the graphics options (such as high details and physics)

3) Aside from the breif mention of Crysis, no other game has been mentioned to support this service.

This just happens to be one of those 'looks good on paper' ideas. Just like how Next Flix didn't kill rental stores, this isn't going to kill consoles. People who've invested more than $400 in a console isn't going to give it up for this sham of a system.

FarEastOrient5533d ago

Isn't this kind of early, like the Chicken versus the Egg kind of thing?

We haven't even got Netflix to run without lag and Comcastunism with their bandwidth cap at 250GB, Verizon FIOS at 5GB... We still have roadblocks to go through.

Ju5533d ago

So, let me get that straight. We morn because we can't run 1080p games at const 60fps with the complexity of a movie scene, yet (actually, I think that's where everybody wants to be at some point) - with every player having their own console. But now, we shift that super powerful console to one central location, so we can then play the same on a server rather then on a client. This will never fly.

It will always be cheaper to build and sell a client machine then building and maintaining a humongous data center which in addition needs even fatter pipes to deliver the content. Nice dream though, but so 1969.

The Lazy One5533d ago

actually the only "pipes" needed are to transmit input and visuals. All the calculations are done on the server. I think the biggest problem comes from bankruptcy of the corporation, since you literally don't own any data. Games would have to be cheaper and for rent (or subscription), because if the company went under you have nothing tangible to show for it.

At least with DD you have the data somewhere in your possession. It might not be on a fixed medium, but at least it's in your possession.

MNicholas5532d ago (Edited 5532d ago )

are ISPs. 3rd party companies will fail if they try just as Netflix is doomed to falling to Comcast and Verizon VOD.

The idea itself is quite old. Just google server side rendering video games and you'll get the gist. However the problem has been the lack of a common, easily scalable hardware architecture and a seriously insufficient infrastructure. It was, and still is, far too expensive to make the slightest bit of sense.

BTW, a company called OTOY was demoing this kind of thing years ago. There are lots of companies working on browser-based gaming with server side rendering. Therefore, absolutely nothing new about ONLIVE whatsoever except that they got a few headlines at GDC.

+ Show (5) more repliesLast reply 5532d ago
Zeus Lee5533d ago

Not if Nintendo and Sony are still around it won't.

HDgamer5533d ago

I think this thing will be like the phantom console, you'll never see it.

mcgrawgamer5533d ago

in private beta now; with a open beta coming this summer with a winter 09 release. This is nothing like the phantom.

Andras845533d ago

I like to have a hard copy of my games on my shelf. That gives me a sence of ownership. This idea sucks.

MiloGarret5533d ago

That's because you, like many others, are obsessed with material ownership, this is very common (but not exclusively) in extreme-capitalist societies like the US where having stuff is associated not only with status but a sense of self-accomplishment as well.

For those of us really only looking for the end product of video-games, that is: the game experience per se, this is a fantastic idea. It rids me of ugly boxes which need to be hidden so as to not ruin the livingroom/bedroom, it rids me of discs and even more ugly (tho smaller) boxes. Best of all, it rids me of disgusting fanboys (not referring to you Andras84). This should be the future of gaming, I don't know if it will be, but it should, All hail OnLive.

Hmm, I wonder what resolution I'll get with 100mbit? Maybe even FullHD.

Andras845533d ago

But also think about all those people that will lose their jobs because of that. Second I don't think that the boxes are ugly at all. I'm not even hideing them. But tell me something. What if OnLive decides to take off certain games form their servers because they are old but you love them and play them a lot. Now since gaming is only on OnLive you are srewed. You can't play that game anymore. Now me on the other hand just pull that game off my shelf everytime I feel like it and just play it whenever I feel like it because it's mine and not controlled by a company.

You know there are 1000 things that can go wrong with that service. I just don't like it at all. Same with DD. I don't think that these are the right ideas for the future of gaming. What I can imagine maybe is games getting some other kind of media...like small chips of some sort...like USB or something. But defenatly not OnLive or DD.

But that's just my opinion.

Also some companies like GameStop make a huge profit from used games...do you actually think that they will let things like OnLive ruin their fun??? I don't think so.

gamesmaster5533d ago

"That's because you, like many others, are obsessed with material ownership, this is very common (but not exclusively) in extreme-capitalist societies like the US where having stuff is associated not only with status but a sense of self-accomplishment as well."

i read books, lots of books, which i pick up from book fairs and second hand stalls around manchester, does the fact that i own close to 1000 books make me obsessed with material ownership? no. If someone enjoys collecting something why does it have to directly be linked to materialism, i don't feel it gives me a sense of accomplishment, i simply thrive on the knowledge and experience i gain from reading them.

by your logic computer games are all about self-accomplishment, status, with or without physical media.

I do realize however that there are people who regard their possessions as indications of status and accomplishment. i'm not disagreeing simply poiting out that its not always like that.

Ju5533d ago

"are obsessed with material ownership, this is very common (but not exclusively) in extreme-capitalist societies"

What a load of bull (while I live in the US, I am European). Owning means independence. So, because of "convenience" we would rather give up control to one (!) central organization which then defines what we play, and one location making profit. Yes, sure right thing to do.

MiloGarret5533d ago (Edited 5533d ago )

Andras: that is a very good point and you are absolutely right, didn't think about that aspect to be honest, that is a definite downside.

The other guy: "i read books, lots of books, which i pick up from book fairs and second hand stalls around manchester, does the fact that i own close to 1000 books make me obsessed with material ownership? no. If someone enjoys collecting something why does it have to directly be linked to materialism, i don't feel it gives me a sense of accomplishment, i simply thrive on the knowledge and experience i gain from reading them."

Two answers, first: If you keep them to re-read them then no, because you'd only be keeping them to enjoy their content once more. If you just keep them for the sake of it, then yeah, you are somewhat attached to material things, I wouldn't say obsessed, but attached. They probably do give you a sense of accomplishment, you may not think of it that way consciously but its there.
On your second point, that's pretty much defining materialism, collecting things is pretty much a textbook example of materialism, but whatever...

Second point: huh? That didn't make sense, how is a video-game experience linked to materialism? It's an experience. This is besides the point, but video-games are quite a lot about self-accomplishment, status not so much, but I guess that depends on your personal life.

The OTHER guy: If you feel independence is ownership, I feel sorry for you, I really do, I think you should re-evaluate your basic conceptualizations about life.

I didn't say I wasn't guilty of the same attachment to material things as well, I am, most of us are, but it isn't a yes/no question. There are qualitative differences, some of us care less than others, Americans tend (notice the word TEND) to care more than most other nationalities in general terms, this is not something that you can argue, it is fact, if you feel like disputing it I suggest getting an education.

BTW Andras: my comment was in no way or shape an insult, I urge you not to take it as such. It's like saying X person is obsessed with money, duh, we all are, it's an inherent part of our global society.

OK!

gamesmaster5532d ago

"Two answers, first: If you keep them to re-read them then no, because you'd only be keeping them to enjoy their content once more. If you just keep them for the sake of it, then yeah, you are somewhat attached to material things"

so what do i do? burn my books after reading them, you need to think deeper than that. my books arnt my material possessions, the literaure belongs to the authors, the writers. the books serve as a means of getting those ideals those stories into my own perspective. if i choose to retain the books does that mean materialism, of course not. books are not possessions, they're the captivated thoughts and ideas of minds, many minds. the fact that i have the books is simply a method of engaging anothers intellect and one day i hope to pass that knowledge to my children (i'm 21 so thats far off).

you're thinking about this is too cut and dry, black and white.

Sarcasm5532d ago

Milo Garret is the type of person who intentionally tries to be "outside of the box" so he looks cooler.

:)

+ Show (4) more repliesLast reply 5532d ago
Captain Tuttle5533d ago (Edited 5533d ago )

Very impressive...I'd be all over something like this.

Show all comments (59)
90°

Two Decades Later, the Original Splinter Cell is Still a Masterpiece

They don't make games like this anymore.

Read Full Story >>
gamingbolt.com
vgvill1d 9h ago

Too dated in my book. The AI is way too unpredictable to be acceptable today. It's definitely a game of its time.

Jingsing1d 6h ago (Edited 1d 6h ago )

Agreed with those sentiments. The quality of the CPU controlled characters make or break a stealth game and they are pretty poor in all the Splinter Cell games by today's standard. This is what led me to playing Spies vs Mercs all the time in later games just to get a better stealth experience from a real person. Arguably Sony are making better stealth games albeit not Tom Clancy stuff.

TheProfessional1d 2h ago (Edited 1d 2h ago )

You should stick with fortnite or one of the countless bloodborne style games then. What a joke.

rlow11d 3h ago

I had a good time with the game. It is a product of its time. But when it came out it was a must have game for a lot of people. I wish Ubisoft would make another game in the series or at least a reboot.

vgvill1d ago

They are making a remake, I think. I loved the original game when it was released, but I tried to play it again in recent years and just couldn't get on with it. The same with the older Hitman games.

PrecursorOrb1d ago

Yeah chaos theory still holds up though I gotta say. If you’re a fan of the series I highly suggest you go back to that one. Ubi has said they are remaking sc for “modern audiences”. I don’t have a lot of faith for the future of that company

Chocoburger17h ago(Edited 17h ago)

Due to the lack of modern stealth games, and me constantly playing the MGS series, I've been looking for alternative stealth games to play, and went back and re-played the SC series recently. I wouldn't call SC1 or SC:PT masterpieces, there are AI issues, they're very much trial-and-error games, and that can lead to a lot of frustration. I also found the stories in this series to be boring, uninteresting, and just sloppily told. Cinematics are also of poor quality for both in-game scenes and CG cut-scenes, the soundtrack didn't leave any impression on me either.

Chaos Theory is better, but there was still a lot of room for improvement, and Double Agent (old gen ver.) was a sloppy mess that ended up a regression from CT. But still, at least they tried back then, these days Ubi-junk doesn't even try to make good games!

70°

A Matter Of Trust: What The Game Industry Should Do To Win Gamers Back

Skewed and Reviewed have written an Opinion Piece covering issues in the gaming industry, how current issues were issues years ago, and what can be done to help restore consumer trust.

anast6d ago

Nothing. It's up to the gamers to stop consuming content from companies that they don't agree with.

Garethvk6d ago

How do you know if you agree with it or not unless you play it? Which without conventions forces gamers to rely on trailers. Perhaps Demos should be made more frequently. But companies need to do better as well.

anast6d ago

Wait until release. Watch Gameplay. Exercise patience.

Garethvk6d ago

But is that not what they have now? Tons of gameplay or are you talking about watching actual gamers play it versus the trailers and streams? The big issue is that some companies pay streamers and influencers and they create content but for me; that is hardly a fair, unbiased, and factual look at a game.

1nsomniac6d ago

Get rid of the suits in the industry and job done!!

Garethvk6d ago

They usually are attached to the money sadly. It would be nice to have gamers in charge but you have so much money invested that business people are needed. Hence the issue; you need people who know business but are also gamers who know have an eye to the community. It sounds simple in theory that if you give gamers quality games that they want to play; money will be made. But that is not always so.

60°

From The Last of Us to Baldur's Gate 3: The success of the Game Music Festival

Marie Dealessandri speaks to Borislav Slavov and Gustavo Santaolalla about “the new golden age of games music”.

Read Full Story >>
gamesindustry.biz