OnLive Makes Crysis on a Netbook Possible

Status
Not open for further replies.

Claimintru

Distinguished
Aug 4, 2008
68
0
18,630
0
Horrible idea. What are you going to do, pay them to render your own games in low resolution for you? What if a new game comes out and 15 Million people are requesting renders of it simultaneously? I would love to see a server farm/internet backbone to handle all that traffic.
 

hellwig

Distinguished
May 29, 2008
1,743
0
19,860
26
The only problem with OnLive is 480P and 720P are NOT good resolutions for playing on your average computer monitor. Sure, if you have a 480P or 720P Television, those resolutions are fine, and OnLive might offer a nice alternative to the XBox and PS3, but OnLive here is missing out on two key factors:

One, Wii users obviously aren't about the graphics, they're about the playability. Unless OnLive can license the Wii's game library (and controllers), its not going to be a big competitor there.

Two, lots of PC gamers like getting the latest and greatest hardware to play the best looking games on their PC. As stated before, 720P will NOT satisfy those customers. Sure, enthusiast PC gamers aren't the majority, but they seem to be enough to drive whole markets with enthusiast PCs, GPUs, CPUs, etc...
 

curnel_D

Distinguished
Jun 5, 2007
741
0
18,990
1
With america's broadband netowrk in the state that it's in, I dont see this working out for alot of people. For instance in my area, 1 meg download is the highest I can get, and I pay 70 a month for it. And another friend who pays for a 10meg cable connection cant game when he gets home, because the connection tanks when people hit the torrents and web surfing in his area.
 

Grims

Distinguished
Sep 17, 2008
174
0
18,680
0
Well, look at QuakeLive, it is very playable and looks very good. I would think it would use similar technology.
 

SneakySnake

Distinguished
Jan 28, 2009
451
0
18,780
0
its got potential but I'd rather my game be based off of my hardware rather then Ineternet service provider. You can't overclock your internet speed
 

Zenthar

Distinguished
Dec 31, 2007
3,248
0
20,960
61
Even if they are able to pull it, I would prefer a "private cloud" where we own the hardware and software so when you buy something, you actually own it and nobody can pull the plug on you (*cough* DRM *cough*). If a bunch of people decide to make a "cloud community", good for them, but it shouldn't be mandatory.
 

Dreasconse

Distinguished
Nov 19, 2008
26
0
18,530
0
Problem is resolution, or if your 'net goes down.
I refuse to run any game in a rez lower than 1600 by 1200, and that only for games that don't support widescreen. (unless it's a really old game, like the original fallout)
 

Tindytim

Distinguished
Sep 16, 2008
1,179
0
19,280
0
The only time I'd want cloud computing touching my gaming is when it would be a supplement to my pre-existing hardware. I'm not giving up my hardware so someone else can charge me a rate for computing power I could get for much cheaper.
 

tenor77

Distinguished
Jan 22, 2009
711
0
18,980
0
One server to rule them all!

[citation][nom]Tindytim[/nom]The only time I'd want cloud computing touching my gaming is when it would be a supplement to my pre-existing hardware. I'm not giving up my hardware so someone else can charge me a rate for computing power I could get for much cheaper.[/citation]

Agreed.
Cloud computing for my media-sure
Anything else = no thanks
 
[citation][nom]hellwig[/nom]The only problem with OnLive is 480P and 720P are NOT good resolutions for playing on your average computer monitor. Sure, if you have a 480P or 720P Television, those resolutions are fine, and OnLive might offer a nice alternative to the XBox and PS3, but OnLive here is missing out on two key factors: One, Wii users obviously aren't about the graphics, they're about the playability. Unless OnLive can license the Wii's game library (and controllers), its not going to be a big competitor there.Two, lots of PC gamers like getting the latest and greatest hardware to play the best looking games on their PC. As stated before, 720P will NOT satisfy those customers. Sure, enthusiast PC gamers aren't the majority, but they seem to be enough to drive whole markets with enthusiast PCs, GPUs, CPUs, etc...[/citation]
So true. Well said! I see something like this happening for an RTS/RPG game but never a FPS game, esp. one with a reputation for high end hardware like Crysis.
 
[citation][nom]Grims[/nom]Well, look at QuakeLive, it is very playable and looks very good. I would think it would use similar technology.[/citation]
Doubt it. Crysis is a uses different engine that is aimed at high end GPUs. The Quake engine has been out for years, and the hardware back then was pretty low compared to today.
 

jerreece

Splendid
Oh gawd. Didn't you guys do this article in the past? Talking about cloud gaming, and how you could play Crysis on your cell phone?!?

Why on earth are you doing this again? The first article was stupid, and this one is just about as worthless. (Sorry, I know that sounds harsh).

I hope this cloud gaming never happens. Cloud other stuff fine. But gaming will be done in my own office, on my own system, with or without internet. And I will play at 1080p thank you very much. Not 480p (or worse) on my 22" HD monitor.

Let alone my freaking Palm Treo.... 320x320 FTW!!!
 

jerreece

Splendid
...this technology could soon wipe out the need to perform yearly, costly CPU and GPU upgrades just to play the latest games.
Oh just buy an XBOX 360 and hope it doesn't RRoD.

Of course you could demo this technology easily at a booth. With the server attached to your gaming PC by a 6ft Cat6 cable. But in the real world, give me a break. As was already stated by others above, the infrastructure in the United States is way, way behind for something like this to be effective.

Besides, I don't wish to play my FPS games with a full second or more lag between my clicking a button and it showing up on my screen.
 

Zenthar

Distinguished
Dec 31, 2007
3,248
0
20,960
61
I like the idea of "cloud gaming", but as long as I control it. To me the "over the internet" would just be icing on the cake. We could then build rigs that can make as much noise as they want, stuff them is a cold basement room and just have a nifty thin-client kind of device next to the TV/LCD monitor. You could have a relatively inexpensive laptop for school/work, but still play games on it when at home.
 

eklipz330

Distinguished
Jul 7, 2008
3,004
4
20,795
1
look, ima be an optimist and say this is possible. if they manage to open server farms close to home, and have subscription plans for a number of people, this seems VERY possible.. as long as the YEARLY bill doesn't go over $200, im promised a high speed spot for any game of my choice all year round with little to no downtime [my comp can have downtime too ya know], near 0 ping, than ill be on that so fast... happily too. i have a decent computer but if i can try so many games, id be on it in seconds...

i wonder how it would work for mmo's, or at all?
 
G

Guest

Guest
I'm thinking this is some smoke and mirrors... Demonstrating at GDC with a controlled network or even on a low ping ISP backbone connection is one thing, but how will this scale and how will the ISP's react to continuous 4-5Mb/Sec thruput.

I also seriously doubt they've solved the latency problem? If best case I'm 20ms from my client device to their host system, I'm really 40ms as upstream USB/input controller needed will be 20ms up and the images will be back down 20ms. Something is NOT adding up with these guys. If they have pulled this off and the latency is solely your ISP latency then kudo's, great for turn based games and internet video. I don't see this for any games that need real time input or near real time input.

Also they claim 1ms to encode and decode (outside of the ISP)... I call bollocks on this, the best studio level HW encoders and decoders add more latency than this. Remember the desktop side on a notebook or mac is SW DECODE... So how does this work then??
 

Dmerc

Distinguished
Feb 3, 2009
36
0
18,530
0
So is also the end of DRM? How is the service going to work , pay $10 a month and get to play any game on offer or pay per game?
 

pocketdrummer

Distinguished
Dec 1, 2007
1,060
3
19,285
0
It's great and terrible altogether.

Great because cheap systems can play games, but terrible due to the inevitable pricing structure. Yeah, you save in hardware, but you'll more than surpass that in monthly fees.

Speaking of monthly fees, am I the only person noticing that EVERYTHING is now a monthly charge? You can't just buy anything anymore, you have to lease it... ugh.
 

Blessedman

Distinguished
May 29, 2001
577
0
18,980
0
There is one thing that I do like about this, there is no target hardware for a game company to shoot for. So they can ramp up to pixar level graphics for their games. Who cares how much it taxes the cloud, that would no longer be their concern.

Latency however is something that needs to be explained better. Is that 1ms per frame? so 24frames = 24ms+client/server side response... the slightest hesitation could send the game into a slide show.

The cost of the servers + game license + bandwidth will be extreme, I can't imagine this service would be cheap either.
 

neiroatopelcc

Distinguished
Oct 3, 2006
3,079
0
20,810
9
I really like the idea. It means no matter who you are, you can play games if that's what you want. But there are some obstacles still. You're limited to games they've made work. And let's face it - there are a lot of people playing a lot of games they haven't paid for. So overall cost might actually increase by use of this system. Many in the late teens and early twenties spend almost all their investment in hardware, and nothing in software. So unless the service can be provided cheap enough, I'm not sure those people would pay. But it could help bring down piracy if it does work ofc :)
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

ASK THE COMMUNITY

TRENDING THREADS