Thoughts on OnLive
blog.wolfire.com
blog.wolfire.com
My expectations were shattered when I clicked on a game preview video, expecting a 10 second wait while it loaded and buffered. Nope! It started playing immediately. Heck, even the infinitesimal load screens they have are videos.
I clicked on all the "Brag Clip" videos and they played immediately. You can even watch people playing live. Since there's no wait penalty for moving through the interface, you find yourself clicking a lot more.
One thing I forgot to mention in the post is that there is apparently an OnLive API that some games are using that replaces the cursor in the game with a local cursor. Not all games can use it (for example, World of Goo's cursor is blocked by walls and such which is critical to gameplay), but Unreal Tournament, and OnLive itself, use it in the UI.
Edit: of course this wouldn't solve the case where you are actually doing something in Photoshop that might require real-time feedback like the airbrush tool!
If you're having trouble with a mouse cursor, then no video game that requires interaction will be playable. QuakeWorld, IIRC, was the first real game to solve the latency problem. And they did it with prediction that lets the UI maintain responsiveness while hiding latency. That game was playable up to maybe a 200ms ping time and with a dial-up modem. That's impressive. But it was also a lot of client-side magic, which is what VNC is doing with the mouse.
In addition to that, no Wii game will be playable with this thing, no FPS, no World of Warcraft, etc. etc. I think this is why serious game companies aren't even commenting on it. It doesn't even register to them. I can really only see OnLive taking business away from the Appstore or Android handheld markets. Extreme casual gamers that don't know the difference between an Xbox controller, a Wii nunchuk, and a 1980s joystick will be the market here.
Overall, I still think that OnLive is a product born too ahead of time; we just simply don't have that hight quality Internet to support it.
The way OnLive is cheaper is that it smoothes the usage curve by allowing people in different places, different time-zones to play on the same server. Once the utilization rate up, it is a scalable business.
In your "dorm room" scenario, I fail to see any advantages in server utilization perspective.
Well, look a little harder, bub. I'm talking about installing one to share amongst an entire highrise. :) A mini-datacenter if you will. Each city could have one out in the burbs.
I don't know the mechanics of how it was arranged. They charged only an "access fee" and not per game, so perhaps it was a shared emulator / arcade style machine?
I'm surprised hotels haven't moved much past N64, which even the ones that have it are using emulation (I am suspect of this claim myself, but confident enough to post it). ---Actually I think I've seen at least NGC available from hotels. (Both thru the CATV & ordering system.)
Edit (Yay, I thought my comment had baked set already!): LodgeNet used their hotel PPV delivery systems for game rentals on demand, and they were run on console hardware, with the video piped over the CATV channel dedicated to that room. I have no evidence to support this, it was a PITA to search.
I got hung up on http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nintendo_M82 , Which I knew wasn't the FAMICONBOX I was thinking of. http://web.archive.org/web/20071011234713/assembler.roarvgm....
My point is lost to me.
Edit2 (It's late): Anyways, I shouldn't have jumped so aggressively about your claim of no HDD & delivery, Since I also would like to see console aggregation.
What is with this crazy negativity around OnLive? I thought you guys liked new things -- don't be a hater!
The OnLive uses a crazy proprietary algorithm to get a ton of juice out of your line. The guy working on it is one of the most brilliant engineers I know.
Because it sounds utterly impossible given the laws of physics. Which just means I'll be even more impressed if it actually works.
If I am playing a FPS game, and someone shoots a bullet, that takes 30ms to get from his computer to the game server. Then its another 30ms to get from the game server to the onlive server. Then its ??? 5ms ??? to get processed and converted to video. Then its 30ms to get sent from onlive to your desktop.
So thats 95ms as a best case scenario. More than likely, it would be closer to 200-250ms most of the time.
And that is under absolute ideal conditions. I remember I frequently got a ping of 50-80 when I played TF2- It was quite rare to get near 30.
Also, just thought I would mention that the frame rate has nothing to do with the latency. You can have 200 FPS and still be playing 10 seconds delayed. Detail definition != Good latency.
I've seen cheaters on an xbox live game that costs the monthly live fee + a $70 game + a $300 system.
These kids mostly just want to troll.
"Unfortunately, because of licensing restrictions, we can only offer Mass Effect 2 for play under Windows. So, if you do not have access to a PC, your only option to play it on a Mac is under Windows using Boot Camp or a similar system. We apologize for the inconvenience. OnLive has no other games in the pipeline that are Windows-only, and we do not expect to have any others."
D'oh!
[edit: As a Canadian surfer, I run into US services and sites every week that don't allow non-US users. Netflix, Comedy Central, etc. I could imagine the licensing issues could be similarly irritating with OnLive as well]
As they point out, this is the only game that's not available cross platform. It's understandable that this would happen during the beta period, while they are still trying to prove the model to game developers.
I might even venture to say that at some point in the future as the platform matures, OnLive will be the preferred distribution platform simply due to the fact that there is no way to resell a game by the end user. Resale is a major problem for publishers who are desperately trying to eek out every last cent from their investments.
Edit: The more I think about this, the more it seems this is precisely (or at least should be) where they're going with this.
I get 700kb-1Mb/s here in Berlin on a cheapo contract - I will definitely try it out if (and that's a big one) it becomes available here.