onlive article

by Ethr • 8 Apr 2010, 20:31 • Journals
http://www.pcper.com/article.php?aid=859&type=expert&pid=1

thoughts comments?

personally i think its a shit idea so im glad to see it fail for fps games. also this article highlights the extent to which console gamers dont expect so much from their gaming experience and i guess are easier to rip off as a result.
Comments
11
▼
beggin 8 Apr 2010, 21:38
It will probably work in 10 years when everyone has access to fast and stable fibre optic internet.
▼
Ethr 8 Apr 2010, 21:40
yeh perhaps and when home consoles/pc's reach their power limit but even with fibre optic they'll still be huge lag. imagien playing et and having to wait 50ms for ur mouse movements
Parent
▼
Danje 8 Apr 2010, 21:43
I think they've taken that into account. Would be a big failure if it wasn't. Would be nice to play ET with stable 125fps, no hackers (less atleast)
Parent
▼
Ethr 8 Apr 2010, 21:47
games are cap to 60fps and stereo sound i think....
Parent
▼
Danje 8 Apr 2010, 21:49
Quake capped @ 60fps is fail tbh. It's the only engine imo (apart from COD4) which you can see the FPS difference. I can easily play COD4 with 60fps, not ET NO WAYZ.
Parent
▼
Danje 8 Apr 2010, 21:39
I think it's a good way to lower piracy. This will make a lot of money for the game creators. Also it opens a whole new world for small game developers/companies to contribute and get their name known. Will also cut down on global polution with machines running for discs and electricity usage etc...

Would think you need a lot of bandwidth and an awesome connection. Considering I'm on 10MBps and the download speed is actually 1mb and the upload 60kb, it seems stupid for me.

I'm just waiting to see how much it will cost, most likely £200 for a year or something, which isn't bad... but it means the only people who will be benefiting is people with no job and constantly play games.

If I got it wrong and you buy single games not £200 and access them all then it's leaving people open to scams. People could easily phish accounts and steal so much money from them.
▼
Ethr 8 Apr 2010, 21:45
interesting points

as u say it does open up a sort of specialist market of games suited to this system

actually bandwidth isnt really the main issue its more server power and lag

considering that their servers will run on some mega powerfull backbone and consumers will run on broadband its not so bad. the issue is around lag which in the main is gonna be physically impossible to alter

subscription is $15 a month i think.... a steep price for the casual gamer and the hardcore gamer will have the hardware to play the games locally. though if u want to play alot of different games for a short time this might be good.
Parent
▼
Danje 8 Apr 2010, 21:48
Which is what I was thinking, I can't go to COD4 and then go back to ET. Games feel completely different (engine wise). I guess it also limits the possiblity to alter game settings and tweak the game to your liking. I can't see myself playing with mouseaccel forced on.

I think this would be awesome to have a subscription to all the games and to be able to play whatever game you want without no lag, buffering or installing.

I get bored with ET, RTCW and a random PC game I've got installed. Would love to know when a games released I don't have to wait for delivery and I can just double click on it.

I guess they would need mega power for this yeah :P, can't even imagine the price.
Parent
▼
Ethr 8 Apr 2010, 21:53
i find cod4 quite nice but only when ive tweaked it and boosted the fps and thihngs a bit

though cod4 runs on the quake3 engine like et so i guess thats why i like it :p

it would be nice to have all that access but unfortunetly people want money for their games :p slight issue
Parent
▼
Danje 8 Apr 2010, 21:57
xD true, I would want money too but they do get it wrong. I will only pay for a game if I enjoy it. Why would I play a game that sucks with amazing graphics and the best team in the world working on it? If people don't like it, they won't buy it. MW2 is a great example. I know people who love MW2 and say it's the best game ever, nothing will and can compare to it. MW2 compared to ET is shite, ET pisses on it due to the amount of tactics and team work it takes. MW2 is a public game and there is no chance of a competitive scene.

Yeah most of the CMDS are still the same in COD4 :P, I did a video on it, some glitches still remain the same also. Memory addresses are also the same :D. Would be awesome if someone replaced ET textures with up-to-date ones though. Perhaps higher quality brushes and such.

Can you give me the vent IP please? I'm on Win7, XP is being a bitch.
Parent
▼
Ethr 8 Apr 2010, 22:00
remember games developers arent interested in making a game that is playable

graphically amazing games sell to the buying masses who then go for the next shiney game to come out. its like fashion.

if u want a good competitive long lasting game that is updated often then u'll have to pay a subscription and in some ways i can see that happening in like 7 years time when publishers catch on...
Parent
Back to top