Hacker News Reader

It's good-enough for less intensive / movement-oriented games. Not that that covers much of what people actually want to play, mind.

Also some people are just not that sensitive-to or bothered-by bad quality media that the pickier amongst us would consider non-starters. e.g. there are plenty of people walking around noisy streets enjoying their music via earbuds that don't deserve to be free gift with a Happy Meal.

View on HN

Yes, but they're hearing music as an afterthought in this case.

Of course there are games in this category: those on a mobile phone/Portable systems.

But their sales point is: "leasing games and equipment", however, if I'm doing this I expect good/high quality (like going into a LAN Gaming center)

I agree low quality is acceptable in a multitude of cases, but it doesn't fit with their product.

Back in the early days of recorded gameplay there was a massive influx of gaming VODs to Vimeo, because they were basically the only mainstream video hosting site that had good enough quality. Iirc Vimeo even had to ban gameplay videos.

Many games were not viable on OnLive, some because of latency and some because of fuzzy image quality. It was a good service for the super-casual gamer. But those all play games on their phones now.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com