Sony questions OnLive, doubts it can deliver |
Ó
What will be the final cost to the consumer when you start adding up what [OnLive is] selling? [...] What will be sacrificed when you [put OnLive] into a real world environment where multiple devices are plugged into one broadband connection?
Concerns that a lot of other gamers have expressed. Thousands of gamers depending on the same set of servers to render their high-end games is bound to have consequences. Doubters would say that lags are inevitable, despite what OnLive promises.
Seybold doesn't end there of course. He has to plug the PS3, or else he just wasted the publicity he's getting by taking potshots at OnLive:
PlayStation's been bringing HD gaming and entertainment into consumers' homes for many years now. With both digitally distributed and disc-based content, we have a competitive offering for consumers, whether they are tethered to the Internet or not.
Only on PlayStation 3 can you get HD gaming, watch BD and downloaded movies, have ample hard drive space for music, movies and photos, built-in Wi-Fi, and free access to PlayStation Network – right out of the box.
Related:
Via EDGE
25 Jumps Custom firmware 5.50GEN-D now out
Contact Us:
The QJ.net Network |
 |
| Site | Feed |
| QJ.NET | RSS |
| Nintendo DS | RSS |
| PlayStation 3 | RSS |
| PSP Updates | RSS |
| Wii | RSS |
| Xbox 360 | RSS |
| MMORPG | RSS |
| Personal Computer Games | RSS |
| iPhone - iPod Touch | RSS |
| QJ.NET Forums | RSS |
Add QJ.NET
User Favorites - December
User Favorites - December
Categories
Archives
December 2009
November 2009
October 2009
September 2009
August 2009
July 2009
June 2009
May 2009
April 2009
March 2009
February 2009
January 2009
December 2008
November 2008
October 2008
September 2008
August 2008
July 2008
June 2008
May 2008
April 2008
March 2008
February 2008
January 2008
December 2007
November 2007
October 2007
September 2007
August 2007
July 2007
June 2007
May 2007
April 2007
March 2007
February 2007
January 2007
December 2006
November 2006
October 2006
September 2006
August 2006
July 2006
June 2006
May 2006
April 2006
March 2006
February 2006
January 2006
Comments [refresh]
(Proof that Microsoft, Sony, and Nintendo will all take a chance to plug their hardware no matter how irrelevant the topic they are commenting on is.)
--
I will say though that I don't believe that this will take off. believe it or not A LOT of people don't have internet or if they do they only have dial-up. (I do think this is a cool idea, but I just don't think it will be able to compete against actually owning a console.)
didn't sega try to do something like this years ago?
I don't think Sega did but the Phantom was exactly what onlive is...maybe that's what your thinking of.
For the bandwith and because if a game doesn't sell well or need something they can do everything, also interrupting everything... And it stops every mod,....
And I think it'll need thousand of servers, think about the power delivering HD graphics to everyone....
is that its impossible for HD Graphics(HD Video since that's what OnLive streams, doesn't stream games just streams a video of the game) can be achieved through our bandwidth. Not only will ISPs complain but they will need tons of servers. Some way to tunnel connections to the point of no delay. And a big subscription fee. Also needs to somehow send the inputs fast enough, compute it and then send it back with no delay(kinda repeated) Also I heard the box costs 300 dollars and I think thats kinda expensive for a box that streams video to your TV.
If you ask me,
I'd rather stick to my physical media format with movies and games.
I love holding the casings when i open that lovely wrapping and getting that 'gamer's bona'.
And why should I pay for games that I'm most likely to play, for which I already own physically, and risk of the chance to lag while playing?
Here in the UK internet connection speed are way behind from the rest of Europe and USA.
if this was impossible or just too hard onlive wouldve had never been announced. I actually think it will work
I can see this type of system working in the "FUTURE", just as many has mentioned not everyone has an internet connection, let alone a broadband connection, I had a buddy mention BD getting phased out because you can "stream" HD videos with netflix on the 360 which is ridiculous because like a mentioned before not everyone has a broadband connection, this will work for some but not everyone, I personally would rather have physical media than DLC, so no I don't think consoles are going to die because of this.
"Here in the UK internet connection speed are way behind from the rest of Europe and USA. "
are we? how fast is theirs then? I dont know anyone with less than 10 mb in the uk and apparently most people still use dial up in america.
Whenever 1000 MB/ps connections become mainstream.
Seriously though, there are tons of gamers with no internet access, dial-up, or weak broadband connections. Then a lot of them use routers, so that won't be good. You also have to rebuy any games you want to play besides demos, along with the monthly registration for onlive.
I don't think it's really worth it, unless you're desperate to play Crysis or something.
This is just like gametag but with a much wider vision.
It's going to fail, I don't see gametag commercial as much as
I used to...I've never come across anybody who owns or
even think of owning gametag. XD
I guess my opinion is very different from anyone elses. I think we should wait for Onlive apearance on E3, but I'm positive this guy know what his dealing and will deliver.
The guy behind Onlive isn't just any guy with an idea, this guys has many achievements behind him in the electronic entertainment sector.
Link: http://www.rearden.com/people/
This guy since 30 years ago has been revolutionizing modern technology with huge advances and thats a fact many of us ignore.
What was shown on GDC on theory is possible with today's technology. I think the technology will deliver, though I'm a bit skeptic about a few things. Onlive is a new name, and getting into competitions with new products is hard. The xbox failed to achieve good revenues, the Phantom failed from the start. The Ngage, Gizmodo, Tapwave Zodiac failed misrably. The PSP (having the famous playstation brand) hasn't done well (new comp. on handheld market). The only advantage I see against this is that developers are gonna completely support Onlive. Less economic risks to take, easier way to sell products.
Another issue I see is the amount of people with fast enough bandwidth. For standard definition gaming its required a minimun of 1.5mbps for lag free gameplay (we'll not judge the 5mbps for HD gaming because less than 2% of gamers play games on HD resolution). Now, all cable internet is faster than that, and most DSL connections too, but what about dial up users? Maybe not in Japan, South Korea, Taiwan, nor Western Europe, but in the US (and the rest of America), Eastern Europe, and China many people still use Dial-Up instead of DSL, Cable, or higher. This is a big challenge they will face.
Last but not least, a worry of mine. This could create a gaming monopoly if it kicks off. No need of upgrading hardware because they upgrade their servers, supplying a service that no other company is thinking of supplying at the time. This reminds me of the NES era were Nintendo would make huge profits by overcharging their products and controlling the prices.
In E3 we'll see how this unfolds...
Nintendo, sony, microsoft vs onlive lol
All of those people connected to the same server, if there's even a few dozen milliseconds of delay games like shooters and racers won't be playable, and since you're connected to the server at all times, not just to play multiplayer, if there's any lag even single player won't function.
Even if it does work at its core, What about when there's an influx of people on the servers during a busy hour? I would imagine the people with slower connections would run into lag, making all their games useless at these busy times. Unless the service really has no lag, ever
I just don't see this working
To anhero, dial-up would not be an issue for any party involved, since if the service works there are more than enough cable and fiber optic internet users out there for OnLive to generate a profit. The people with dial up will either have to upgrade or not use OnLive. Simple
Gametap anyone?
gametap you DL the actual game to your computer and install, what onlive is doing is streaming the actual game from a server while you play
the games system requirements are in effect with gametap due to it being on your actual computer, and on onlive you can play any game as long as you have a broadband connection.
I'm sure the guys staking their entire company on this forgot to think about bandwidth you are all obviously smarter than everyone involved in creating Onlive.
There is no way OnLive can know there will be no lag with hundreds of thousands, if not a million+ connected and playing at the same time, until they actually try it.
They can build the system as good as possible and take a guess that there "should" be no lag, but until tested publicly they can't know. Closed betas involving a few hundred employees will only give them so much info
I'm sure OnLive is fairly confident, but we'll see when the open beta happens during the summer (which you can sign up for at their site). But I can think of other things that were 8+ years in the making that ended up falling apart
none of us are saying its going to fail, what we're saying is that its not going to kill consoles which is what all the news around onlive has been buzzing about, its a great idea to be able to play any game online on any computer, but not everyone has a broadband connection, and some people like myself would rather have physical media rather than streaming it online and risk lag.
It was called the sega channel, but it required a genesis and I think it used co-ax. That was quite a bit simpler than this though
I'd love to see OnLive work, since it'd be a pretty significant and revolutionary service. Even tho I wouldn't use it, since you can only play games in up to 720p, and I have a PC capable of playing any game at 1680x1050 or higher.
Same for consoles, my 360 and PS3 can do beautiful 1080p on my HDTV, but again OnLive can only stream in 720p max. The news articles going around about OnLive "killing" both PC and home console gaming are ludicrous
What OnLive will do is essentially open up PC gaming to everyone with a broadband connection, regardless of how low-end their PC is, if it works. And the people without broadband internet can just buy it instead of an overpriced gaming PC( last I checked a broadband connection was significantly cheaper than a PC that can max Crysis). You could play the newest games on your laptop meant for schoolwork with OnLive.
Another possible scenario is that sony could just chill out and see how its going to work. And if it works out, they could setup a deal with onlive to actually use the service on ps3.
I trust this guy. I mean, his a pioneer in web communications technology, from the link I posed you can see this guys has achieved things that were thought impossible (from the xbnd thing to play SNES and Genesis multiplayer online, to the first functional Internet TV servce, in 1994, to first Digital Recording System, and worked on developing Quicktime and the techonlogy for the 360's online capabilities).
We've seen pretty revolutionary things in the videogame industry (I think the original Playstation seemed something out of this world and there was more skepticism when announced). I have faith this will work very well, only thing I'm skeptic about is if it will sell. They plan a winter 2009 release which I think is too soon since they just announced it. Neither do I think they have anything planned for E3 09? This is the only place where they can actually create a lot of attention, in my opinion.
Count on it for sure
Also it's not too soon since they said they've been working on the algorithms for this for over 8 years. Forget where I read that, but I know I did. They just announced it because they're finally confident about it
I signed up for beta, we'll see how it goes
1. what internet speed is required?
2. how much will it cost?
If it's a monthly or pay as you go fee, I am not interested at all, because I prefer to own physical consoles and games to play whenever I want in the future, one-time fee. I prefer to have a guarantee that my games and saved data will exist in 5 years or so. If they are charging a monthly or pay as you go rate, they are making huge money, and also I doubt they will keep all the games online all the time - there will be server updates and they will likely delete lesser played games to make way for more popular titles. Vote with your money people, don't waste it here.
I don't know about you peeps but the ISP supplier in my world has a surcharge for going over the number or bytes they say you can transfer per month. They also have price tiers for the speed that the "cable-modem" can run at. Now add content to that. My PS3 looks real good from where I'm sitting.