OnLive Patents Cloud-Based Streaming PC Gaming

Toggle sidebar Toggle sidebar
Status
Not open for further replies.
Huh, too bad this guy had to wait an extra 5 years because so many other companies are filing B.S. patents over thinks like "One Click Purchasing", "Using the Internet to Download Files", "Using a Phone to Take Pictures", "Using [strike]3[/strike],[strike]4[/strike],[strike]5[/strike],[strike]6[/strike] 7 Fingers for multi-touch tracking", etc etc...

I'm hoping this guy got a patent on the technology he uses to handle running PC games on server architectures, mass rendering, and streaming of that content in real time, and not simply the concept of "Allowing people to play games online", which would be B.S. itself. As for suing other companies offering the same service, that's a bad idea. Not only are they not worth anything, you want to grow the market, not shrink it. Merge with those companies rather than eliminate. You need their customer base.

It's like Serius/XM. There weren't enough subscribers for 2 satellite radio companies, so merge into one. There aren't enough customers for streaming video games, so merge into one.
 
This is stupid, their service isn't even available in other countries like New Zealand or Australia, so that patent could prevent other companies from starting in other countries..
 
If the concept of streaming games in real time already made me think if it was worth it, now I'm pretty sure it's not. They've been granted a legal monopoly that's gonna last pretty much forever. Guaranteed to having pricier subscriptions and less quality of service than it would have if a competitor showed up at some point.
 
Tried it, Lagged considerably, even on a 30mb connection with 6 up. heh, Far from worth even demoing. I'll stick with hardcopies and Steam >_
 
It will be interesting to see how this works out. OnLive doesn't require a high-end PC, which many gamers in the US have, while it does require a good Internet connection, which many people in the US don't have - and can't easily get.

I think the traditional game supply chain can sleep easy for the time being.
 
[citation][nom]joytech22[/nom]This is stupid, their service isn't even available in other countries like New Zealand or Australia, so that patent could prevent other companies from starting in other countries..[/citation]
This patent is only valid in the USA.
 
Why in the hell would they allow a single company to patent cloud based PC gaming..Jeeze. Some people are so money hungry its not even funny. And besides that, how can anyone in the US utilize cloud based PC gaming with the average ISP downstream speed for consumers being 1Mbps and upload 500Kbps? Thats completely useless. And even as someone said above, it lagged terribly with a 30Mbps download and 5Mbps upload, which is way higher than the average connection for consumers across the US. Maybe force ISP's to bump us up to all fiber connections, or at least 1Gbps speeds, then people will actually be able to utilize this service. Even then, all the hiccups involved in online activity that occur, people will constantly complain how their gaming experience is being completely shot. It'd be like everyone in the US experiencing blue screen of deaths 20 times a day while playing their games. that'd be terrible.
 
[citation][nom]megahustler[/nom]It will be interesting to see how this works out. OnLive doesn't require a high-end PC, which many gamers in the US have, while it does require a good Internet connection, which many people in the US don't have - and can't easily get.I think the traditional game supply chain can sleep easy for the time being.[/citation]
Good point, and if the average internet speed gets any faster how much do you think the game sellers have to pay to cough cough stifle the competition. (Look at Comcast and BitTorrent)
 
@All: If cloud computing is going to lag, then it won't work. According to our insider, current high-end connections will lag, so stop b!tching about how they're going to take all the business. I'll still be using my computer if it lags less.
 
The idea of OnLive has plenty of skeptics. I am in the fence, since the conditions against its success may disappear over the next decade ( bandwidth, latency).

But now OnLive has to also be carefull on how it handles that patent. If the gaming ecosystem they are about to create is too proprietary, very few developers will risk making software for it because they may fear OnLive will eat their lunch in the future (think Microsft with office applications in the 90's). On the other hand, if they make an open standard, and license the patent to the competition (like Intel to AMD), they may be able to grow a new computer sector.

With only passing knowledge of the patent, I think the patent has a ground to stand on. I've though about the approach myself (from the Grid Computing perspective) about 3 years ago, but certainly did not have the confidence to pursue it. Pursuing something instead of just think about it, in the end, should and is worth money.
 
There are a lot of patent trolls out there, but this definitely is a valid patent. OnLive absolutely did something different, and turned the online gaming model on its head. I personally haven't used the service, but that is only because I don't game that much anymore. And no, it does not create a monopoly. There are plenty of other ways to play games both offline and online. But this is a model that allows you to do it with minimal hardware investment, and that is deserving of patent protection. Without the patent, Onlive could be muscled out by MS or Sony, or any number of other tech giants. And, unlike copyrights, patents do actually run out.
 
10 years too early

their recent new payment plan tells me they are suffering... but if they penetrate the tablet market, its freakin over, they're gonna rule the competition
 
Even if OnLive doesn't make it, someone will buy up their IP rights in the 3 to 5 years that it might take for this technology to be viable, and then we have a whole new Rambus company suing everyone for minor infractions. I think the gaming community just lost a big fight on this one.
 
[citation][nom]hellwig[/nom]Huh, too bad this guy had to wait an extra 5 years because so many other companies are filing B.S. patents over thinks like "One Click Purchasing", "Using the Internet to Download Files", "Using a Phone to Take Pictures", "Using 3,4,5,6 7 Fingers for multi-touch tracking", etc etc...I'm hoping this guy got a patent on the technology he uses to handle running PC games on server architectures, mass rendering, and streaming of that content in real time, and not simply the concept of "Allowing people to play games online", which would be B.S. itself. As for suing other companies offering the same service, that's a bad idea. Not only are they not worth anything, you want to grow the market, not shrink it. Merge with those companies rather than eliminate. You need their customer base.It's like Serius/XM. There weren't enough subscribers for 2 satellite radio companies, so merge into one. There aren't enough customers for streaming video games, so merge into one.[/citation]

this guy deserves a patent, but here let me chime in on this one
"Using 3,4,5,6 7 Fingers for multi-touch tracking"
if there is a company that developed a way to use more than 2 fingers, and they want a patent on that tech, than they also deserve it, because if they make the tech, and it works should they allow others to have what they made for free? no, they should licences it out, and only make it free if they really want to. there is a reason multi touch only has 2 fingers, and it was hard to even get those 2 to play nice.
 
The sound of my system fans and HDDs whirling away puts me to sleep at night. It's a noise I've listened to daily for years now. What will I do without it? :)
 
i hate the sound of computers. i sleep with a big fan to drown out all the other noise around me, because if i heard even a small noise from my computer than isnt normal, i would be come to nervous to sleep. iv had enough crap fail on me to know what noises are bad, and the birds around where i live, and the house in general make noises like the click of death, and other various bad noises.
 
the cloud gaming will never work, never.

do you really think that companies like microsoft or nintendo will just let onlive take the big "hardware" bussiness from them just like that?

why would nintendo do games for this shit when they can earn millions and millions of dollars by selling nintendo DS or nintendo wii consoles like they are doing now? and all the hardware sells in games like pokemon or other big name games?

and the worst part, you obligatory NEED internet connection, with consoles or a pc you just need your hardware and the required sotware and you have to play, even if you dont go online, with this kind of senseless service like onlive if you dont have iternet connection you just dont play shit.

and considering the average bandwitches around the world, it is even worst.

so i dont give onlive much time till it disappears or go to bankrup.
 
i'm suprised the patent office gave such a patent out to such a broad idea seriously things have goten rediculous with patents these days. i think i'm going to patient the idea of a--holes taking out borad patents , then i can sue these guys and rambus
 
[citation][nom]gsacks[/nom]There are a lot of patent trolls out there, but this definitely is a valid patent. OnLive absolutely did something different, and turned the online gaming model on its head. I personally haven't used the service, but that is only because I don't game that much anymore. And no, it does not create a monopoly. There are plenty of other ways to play games both offline and online. But this is a model that allows you to do it with minimal hardware investment, and that is deserving of patent protection. Without the patent, Onlive could be muscled out by MS or Sony, or any number of other tech giants. And, unlike copyrights, patents do actually run out.[/citation]


actually copy rights run out too pretty much LOL , copyrights after 50 years go to public domain. not sure on patent life time though. of note copy rights in music are particularly abused , because many labels "buy" a copy right after it's 50 years are up essintially extending the copy right a great example is old jazz music you see constantly getting released on cd , often that label bought teh copy right after those oldies copy right expired.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

TRENDING THREADS

Latest posts

Share this page

COMPANY
RESOURCES
FOLLOW
Top Bottom