OnLive Aims to Make Game Consoles Obsolete

[+Random Terrain]

OnLive Aims to Make Game Consoles Obsolete:

 

http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,2817,2343717,00.asp

 

 

Is this more of the same crap we've been hearing for years or do you think this would be a good way to keep up with the latest games without needing to buy expensive consoles or spending thousands of dollars every two weeks to make sure your PC can play the latest games?

[DaytonaUSA]

OnLive Aims to Make Game Consoles Obsolete:

 

http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,2817,2343717,00.asp

 

 

Is this more of the same crap we've been hearing for years or do you think this would be a good way to keep up with the latest games without needing to buy expensive consoles or spending thousands of dollars every two weeks to make sure your PC can play the latest games?

 

Usually, this sort of thing (like the Phantom) just generates a chuckle from me. However, this actually sounds quite promising. I've already seen what cloud processing can do, and I'm sure once it's perfected we can start seeing a lot more. We're already getting Quake in a browser for God's sake, this could be entirely possible.

 

I'd actually like a very low powered console that did this all online. My only concern would be how long the service would be for, thus how long would I have my games.

 

Lastly, while I do think this guy is right (ie: I do think cloud processing consoles are the future), I am concerned as a collector. I guess this means getting all the Sega Saturn titles I can find again haha.

[MCHufnagel]

The article never really made clear if the games would be sold or leased. If this is a service that works like Gametap, then I might bite. But if i have to pay a yearly or monthly fee to have the service and then pay for games I wouldn't use this at all. What happens to your games if you drop out of the service? Will you get some sort of refund?

[DaytonaUSA]

This shows a LOT more. I love the look of the box and the controller!

 

http://www.joystiq.com/2009/03/24/gdc09-re...vice-and-micro/

 

Wow.. I'm actually excited! Well, providing I'm 1000 miles from a cloud server, I think I'm getting this when it comes out this year. I don't think I've been this excited about a system since the Saturn .

 

Thanks RT for posting the original link so I could see this!

Edited March 24, 2009 by DaytonaUSA

[Pixelboy]

Interesting, but with a high probability of failure.

 

If they really want to have a chance at success, they should focus on making their internet streaming system work with PCs and Macs first, work out the kinks (both technical and financial), and then go to the next level with their TV-ready micro-console. If they try to market everything together at once, they're only going to confuse consumers, and this alone will dramatically discourage third-party support.

 

Also keep in mind that Microsoft, Sony and Nintendo won't take this lying down. They already have a strong (and faithful) user base for their game download services (Virtual Console, XBLA, etc.) and they will do everything they can to keep third-party developers from going elsewhere.

[DaytonaUSA]

Interesting, but with a high probability of failure.

 

If they really want to have a chance at success, they should focus on making their internet streaming system work with PCs and Macs first, work out the kinks (both technical and financial), and then go to the next level with their TV-ready micro-console. If they try to market everything together at once, they're only going to confuse consumers, and this alone will dramatically discourage third-party support.

 

Also keep in mind that Microsoft, Sony and Nintendo won't take this lying down. They already have a strong (and faithful) user base for their game download services (Virtual Console, XBLA, etc.) and they will do everything they can to keep third-party developers from going elsewhere.

 

Not really. I think it's pretty easy to understand. And I think if you're savvy enough to figure out how to get their game service working in your browser, you can understand which option you'd want. I mean, people said multiple SKUs would confuse people.. and it hasn't.

 

Personally, I want the micro center version. I don't want to play this on my computer as much as I'd want to play on my tv. That and if it's ID driven, you'll be able to do both .

 

Lastly, regarding the "Microsoft, Sony and Nintendo won't take this lying down", that's what people said when Microsoft entered the market. They thought it was laughable for them to even try. I'm just saying, whoever does something great, well, first, gets the worm. If the Wii can sell millions of Wii Fits to non-gamers, parents and grand parents, and the iPhone game software sales can make PSP and DS game sales look like freshman efforts, why can't this company do the same? The promise of never upgrading to a new system pretty much had me from the start . I'm sure that alone will appeal to many people, fanboys or not.

 

Remember fanboy loyalties are actually pretty fragile. One console can make even the most dedicated run away screaming. Look at the PS3 and Wii for example. PS3 is the successor to the world's best selling console.. and for the most part, you hear crickets over on that end now. The Wii's pretty much swapped who it's appealing to, leaving big nintendo fans like me, moving onto greener pastures (not that I don't buy wii games still, just not as much these days..).

 

I'm just saying, it's a masterful idea, and if done right, this could really take off. I'm VERY excited, and with companies like EA and Ubisoft behind them already, it's not like they're begging for attention here.

Edited March 24, 2009 by DaytonaUSA

[Chickybaby]

From the article -

You're probably asking, "Well, what games are in there?" OnLive doesn't want to be another GameTap, so it won't be offering a backlog of titles. It promises to have the same games (PC) that are on store shelves at that moment also available to play in OnLive. We were shown GRID and Crysis Wars, and got glimpses of Mirror's Edge, Burnout Paradise and World of Goo. Its struck deals with nine publishers: EA, Take-Two, Ubisoft, Eidos, Codemasters, Epic, Atari, WB and 2D Boy, and, according to Perlman, it only requires minor modifications on Rearden's end to get titles to run on the service.

 

As far as pricing goes, Rearden wasn't releasing numbers. It did mention that the microconsole will cost less than the lowest-priced dedicated console and the OnLive subscription-based service's price will likely be comparable to Xbox Live. That's just to access the service, however. Once inside you can either buy or rent games, and that price point will be left up to the developer. You can instantly demo any game on OnLive, but it's doubtful you'll be able to swap titles with a buddy once you're both done playing them. It's touting "no second sales" and no piracy, which probably means no "Hey, I'll see trade you BioShock for Prince of Persia!" amongst friends. Bummer.

 

One downside of the latency issue is that you can't live more than 1,000 miles from a data center. Rearden's hoping its initial five-server launch will give it a large enough footprint, but we'll have to check in with someone remote to see how their mileage varies. Another downside is that it might suck up your entire bandwidth when gaming: OnLive requires 1.5 Mbps for standard def gaming, and 5 Mbps for high def. Again, it's entirely unclear how well this will work once the pieces are all fitted together. Does this keep us from wanting to try it out? Not at all. We'd welcome a portable game system that doesn't care if your computer doesn't even have a GPU.

 

So, if I get this straight it will be current games, you'll have to pay for the console if you want to play on TV, pay for the service, and pay per game at whatever the developer would like to set the price to. So a developer could set the price as the same as a physical copy if they wanted to and I would be almost willing to bet that there will be upgrades you have to pay for within games too. Plus it will most likely eat all your bandwidth. If it fails you're stuck for whatever you spent along with a paperweight. While they take up more room at least with the current gen consoles you get something to show for your money and if the online subscription fails you're still left with games you can play as opposed to investing a lot of cash into something virtual. Sounds like if you don't care about owning physical property or don't have the space to and have a good amount of money to waste/spend then this would be for you.

[DaytonaUSA]

From the article -

You're probably asking, "Well, what games are in there?" OnLive doesn't want to be another GameTap, so it won't be offering a backlog of titles. It promises to have the same games (PC) that are on store shelves at that moment also available to play in OnLive. We were shown GRID and Crysis Wars, and got glimpses of Mirror's Edge, Burnout Paradise and World of Goo. Its struck deals with nine publishers: EA, Take-Two, Ubisoft, Eidos, Codemasters, Epic, Atari, WB and 2D Boy, and, according to Perlman, it only requires minor modifications on Rearden's end to get titles to run on the service.

 

As far as pricing goes, Rearden wasn't releasing numbers. It did mention that the microconsole will cost less than the lowest-priced dedicated console and the OnLive subscription-based service's price will likely be comparable to Xbox Live. That's just to access the service, however. Once inside you can either buy or rent games, and that price point will be left up to the developer. You can instantly demo any game on OnLive, but it's doubtful you'll be able to swap titles with a buddy once you're both done playing them. It's touting "no second sales" and no piracy, which probably means no "Hey, I'll see trade you BioShock for Prince of Persia!" amongst friends. Bummer.

 

One downside of the latency issue is that you can't live more than 1,000 miles from a data center. Rearden's hoping its initial five-server launch will give it a large enough footprint, but we'll have to check in with someone remote to see how their mileage varies. Another downside is that it might suck up your entire bandwidth when gaming: OnLive requires 1.5 Mbps for standard def gaming, and 5 Mbps for high def. Again, it's entirely unclear how well this will work once the pieces are all fitted together. Does this keep us from wanting to try it out? Not at all. We'd welcome a portable game system that doesn't care if your computer doesn't even have a GPU.

 

So, if I get this straight it will be current games, you'll have to pay for the console if you want to play on TV, pay for the service, and pay per game at whatever the developer would like to set the price to. So a developer could set the price as the same as a physical copy if they wanted to and I would be almost willing to bet that there will be upgrades you have to pay for within games too. Plus it will most likely eat all your bandwidth. If it fails you're stuck for whatever you spent along with a paperweight. While they take up more room at least with the current gen consoles you get something to show for your money and if the online subscription fails you're still left with games you can play as opposed to investing a lot of cash into something virtual. Sounds like if you don't care about owning physical property or don't have the space to and have a good amount of money to waste/spend then this would be for you.

 

But if it IS successful, it will be like Live where the games are always there, no matter what changes are ever done to the service/hardware.

 

The most important thing to remember here, and why I'm so excited, is exactly what you're iffy about. Publishers making their own pricing structure. Remember what happened with the iPhone? Sega came out and made Monkey Ball for 9.99 and everyone thought "oh, ok.. all games are 9.99 .. sure that sounds like a good price". Then some smart devs said "well, I'll make mine 5.99".. then it went to 1.99... then just 99 cents. Without packaging and manufacturing costs, there's no cost to them other than the development of the game itself. I'm not saying games will be 99 cents.. far from. But I can certainly guarantee you that they won't be what you'd pay for the PS3/PC/360 version. Just think about it.

 

If it is popular.. and why not, like I said it's entirely possible a newcomer can be profitable, then the service could be like iTunes. No matter if you get a new computer, the purchases you make are always there for you.

 

Your fears could be just as worry driven about games on the iPhone. If AT&T and Apple die out one day, or AT&T and other carriers drop the service... then it's impossible to boot up yoru iPhone, making all your purchases worthless. Yet, it's selling millions upon millions of copies of software.

 

People think of the now, not the later. If they see things they want now, they'll buy it now. The more peopel buy, the higher chance it's going to be around for a long time, making your purchases stay with you longer. And hey, if you're a collector like most of us here, you should be excited! All the physical games out will probably be worth even more in 10 years when physical media is no where to be found . And you can tell your grandchildren how things used to be on physical media in order to be viewed, and then can laugh at you...sigh .

Edited March 24, 2009 by DaytonaUSA

[Kripto]

I'm most concerned about their low-latency claims. It's a nice idea, but I fear current Internet connections are not 100% up to this.

 

Btw- I would also like to throw in the Yen symbol-¥, simply because my phone can do it and I'll might never have a legitimate reason to use it.

[Reaperman]

centralized computing is not the wave of the future, but rather of the distant past. I already have grown to dislike the slight lag 'built in' to modern console controllers, but now I have to send my input 1,000 miles away? Heck, my work always has me remote desktopping to machines roughly 500 miles away physically and you know what? it's *not* great. I have enough damn trouble with latency with current online gaming--I certainly don't need my single player games lagging too.

 

but assuming this "console" is better, it still requires 1.5 megabits of downstream, and decent upstream just to provide lastgen-style 480p graphics (a whopping 5 megabit for HD). how many broadband ISPs promise 1.5 megabits of solid downstream in a 'hours without problems' way? none that I've seen. As I've come to understand the world, city folk with 5meg cable connections are sharing and can't expect the full blast all the time, country folk are stuck with satellite which can suffer from latency issues, and getting dsl over 3meg costs 'real money', so where is the customer base? and what if those customers need to do more with their pipe than play games?

[DaytonaUSA]

centralized computing is not the wave of the future, but rather of the distant past. I already have grown to dislike the slight lag 'built in' to modern console controllers, but now I have to send my input 1,000 miles away? Heck, my work always has me remote desktopping to machines roughly 500 miles away physically and you know what? it's *not* great. I have enough damn trouble with latency with current online gaming--I certainly don't need my single player games lagging too.

 

but assuming this "console" is better, it still requires 1.5 megabits of downstream, and decent upstream just to provide lastgen-style 480p graphics (a whopping 5 megabit for HD). how many broadband ISPs promise 1.5 megabits of solid downstream in a 'hours without problems' way? none that I've seen. As I've come to understand the world, city folk with 5meg cable connections are sharing and can't expect the full blast all the time, country folk are stuck with satellite which can suffer from latency issues, and getting dsl over 3meg costs 'real money', so where is the customer base? and what if those customers need to do more with their pipe than play games?

 

 

Cloud computing is actually a fairly new concept that's only just starting to take form. Sure mobile desktop type programs have been around for a while, but that's a much different type of process. That's one computer talking to another. Cloud computing consists of many servers talking to one device taking the data from all the servers, working together, to broadcast one signal to your machine.

 

Now, I have no idea how well this data submission will work. I'm not the most techy guy when it comes to data speeds and such. However, if they *do* make it work, their business plan is pretty great.

 

I always kinda find it funny when people always argue that "oh, well then people in Montana can't play because they have dial up". I think XBOX Live has proved though that the amount of people with broadband connects are quite high, and that there is a market for it.. despite how many people don't have it yet. Play tests with this so far have been very positive throughout the press right now, so I have high hopes. If not these guys, someone will take cloud processing to the gaming world. Our computers will probably work in a very similar respect years from now. I find it all very exciting to be honest .

 

 

As a final funny, non-serious note regarding the "what if those customers need to do more with their pipe than play games", then they should just get an iPhone and turn off their WIFI settings and run on AT&T's servers haha.

Edited March 24, 2009 by DaytonaUSA

[DaytonaUSA]

This quote from Engadget should help some of you guys here to understand a bit:

 

"GameDaily dubbed the play "fantastic" after seeing Crysis streamed "smooth" off a server to a plain ol' MacBook laptop. See, OnLive claims to have perfected the interactive video compression technique so that latency is low enough to support on-line multi-player setups. Broadband connections of 1.5Mbps (71% of US homes have 2Mbps or greater) dials the image quality down to Wii levels while 4-5Mbps pipes are required for HD resolution.

 

...

 

And if you think publishers will never buy in to the model, think again: Electronic Arts, Ubisoft, Take-Two Interactive, Warner Bros. Interactive Entertainment, THQ, Epic Games, Eidos, Atari Interactive and Codemasters are already on-board. Expect OnLive to launch this Winter with monthly subscriptions available in "a variety of different pricing packages and tiers, competitively priced to retail."

Edited March 24, 2009 by DaytonaUSA

[godslabrat]

First line of the article: "Imagine never upgrading your hardware again. "

 

FAIL

 

While I recognize that there are differences between this and the Phantom, that is exactly the kind of thinking that killed the latter project. People LIKE upgrading their hardware, at least to the extent that they like talking about upcoming consoles and getting into pissing contests about which system can do what. As illogical as it might be, it drives the industry. Furthermore, the hardware manufacturers won't take this lying down. It's in their best interests to make buying hardware with your software an attractive proposition.

 

Also, bandwidth is and always will be an issue. Even with a broadband connection, you don't get much speed if you're pushing a lot through the pipe. And why do we keep getting forced into abandoning perfectly good technologies just so we can do them through the net?

 

"Hey, don't buy BluRay, use VOD!"

"Hey, don't get a landline phone, use VOIP!"

"Hey, don't watch cable TV, use IPTV!"

and now... "Hey, don't buy an Xbox, use OnLive!"

 

The internet is at its fastest when we keep the unneccesary traffic off of it. At this rate, we'll be back to paying by the megabyte any time now.

[DaytonaUSA]

First line of the article: "Imagine never upgrading your hardware again. "

 

FAIL

 

While I recognize that there are differences between this and the Phantom, that is exactly the kind of thinking that killed the latter project. People LIKE upgrading their hardware, at least to the extent that they like talking about upcoming consoles and getting into pissing contests about which system can do what. As illogical as it might be, it drives the industry. Furthermore, the hardware manufacturers won't take this lying down. It's in their best interests to make buying hardware with your software an attractive proposition.

 

Also, bandwidth is and always will be an issue. Even with a broadband connection, you don't get much speed if you're pushing a lot through the pipe. And why do we keep getting forced into abandoning perfectly good technologies just so we can do them through the net?

 

"Hey, don't buy BluRay, use VOD!"

"Hey, don't get a landline phone, use VOIP!"

"Hey, don't watch cable TV, use IPTV!"

and now... "Hey, don't buy an Xbox, use OnLive!"

 

The internet is at its fastest when we keep the unneccesary traffic off of it. At this rate, we'll be back to paying by the megabyte any time now.

 

I don't believe people LIKE having a console that they love die off then be told to spend 600 bucks on a new one. If someone told me I could play PS3 games on my PS2 for 50 bucks a year, I'd say "OK!".

 

Lastly, this sort of thing IS catching on. Your examples are silly. I know plenty of people who use Vontage and not a regular line. I know plenty of people who are streaming digital movies (like HD movies from itunes) to their media centers connected to their TVs (like iTVs for instance). Companies for movies and music have switched to digital formats for the most part.. proof of this being that iTunes is the highest selling music outlet including brick and mortar joints.

 

Gaming is the only popular medium that hasn't really gone over to the digital medium yet. It's all going to digital formats, so if you don't like it get used to it soon!

[Reaperman]

it's not the digital 'rental' part I mind so much. though I don't always like the idea, I've come to accept digital downloads of games, and even prefer them in very specific situations. (I play gran turismo 5 prologue so much I bought a digital copy so I didn't have to keep my hard copy in the machine)

 

It's really just a latency and speed thing for me. This really is a *LOT* bigger stream, than voip or even currently streamed movies (2meg max on netflix). With the cost of a big connection (I'd want to upgrade) and the cost of their service, I think I might as well stick with buying a console every couple years, and a game every month or so. then I can stick with cheap DSL, and still play games online. I believe the quality of games on console will continue to be far superior to offsite computing for at least half a decade or so. once I start seeing reasonably priced gigabit lines I'll consider it, assuming screen resolutions and bandwidth requirements haven't skyrocketed too.

 

I see locally processed downloadable games as being the current trend. If this is to have any chance at all, they need to partner with somebody like netflix, and bundle it as an entertainment package.

Edited March 24, 2009 by Reaperman

[godslabrat]

First line of the article: "Imagine never upgrading your hardware again. "

"Hey, don't buy BluRay, use VOD!"

"Hey, don't get a landline phone, use VOIP!"

"Hey, don't watch cable TV, use IPTV!"

and now... "Hey, don't buy an Xbox, use OnLive!"

 

I don't believe people LIKE having a console that they love die off then be told to spend 600 bucks on a new one. If someone told me I could play PS3 games on my PS2 for 50 bucks a year, I'd say "OK!".

 

Maybe not, but I'm really not sure that justifies changing the entire distribution model.

 

Lastly, this sort of thing IS catching on. Your examples are silly. I know plenty of people who use Vontage and not a regular line. I know plenty of people who are streaming digital movies (like HD movies from itunes) to their media centers connected to their TVs (like iTVs for instance). Companies for movies and music have switched to digital formats for the most part.. proof of this being that iTunes is the highest selling music outlet including brick and mortar joints.

 

Gaming is the only popular medium that hasn't really gone over to the digital medium yet. It's all going to digital formats, so if you don't like it get used to it soon!

 

I'm not questioning whether it's catching on, I'm questioning the wisdom of pushing streaming as the ultimate distribution method when we have other technologies available... technologies that have distinct advantages over streaming. How are the examples silly? The examples I gave are precisely the mesage being given to consumers. I don't have a problem with VOD or IPTV as an option, but the "streaming is going to make everything else obsolete" rhetoric is getting old. There are a lot of risks and disadvantages inherent in relying on an external system to deliver your content... I didn't even touch on the concept of ownership in my previous posts, but that too is one of my biggest concerns. What assurance can OnLive give me that the game I buy today will still be usable if I close my account, if the go out of business, or of the game's publisher gets bought out?

 

The market is littered with the corpses of "revolutionary content delivery systems". For every iTunes, there's a Digital Video Express, Sega Channel, FlexPlay, or Phantom. How many times do we have to run this experiment?

[DaytonaUSA]

it's not the digital download part I mind so much. though I don't always like the idea, I've come to accept digital downloads of games, and even prefer them in very specific situations. (I play gran turismo 5 prologue so much I bought a digital copy so I didn't have to keep my hard copy in the machine)

 

It's really just a latency and speed thing for me. This really is a *LOT* more stream, than voip or even currently streamed movies (2meg max on netflix). With the cost of a big connection (I'd want to upgrade) and the cost of their service, I think I might as well stick with buying a console every couple years, and a game every month or so. then I can stick with cheap DSL, and still play games online. I believe the quality of games on console will continue to be far superior to offsite computing for at least half a decade or so. once I start seeing reasonably priced gigabit lines I'll consider it, assuming screen resolutions and bandwidth requirements haven't skyrocketed too.

 

I see locally processed downloadable games as being the current trend.

 

They said if you looked at it closely, you could tell there were slight signs that there was video compression, but you have to also understand that it's able to run games of ANY graphical capability. So games like Crysis are playable without a $7k machine, and it looks wonderful. $5k systems that run Crysis in 1080i get 20fps, where as this machine that can be free with subscribtion (last I heard, it's what they're considering) is getting 30-35 fps in 780, and that's just a beta version. By the time it releases late this year, it could be better.

 

And that's where the advantage lies. You are no longer bound by the capabilities of your console machine. You are able to get any type of graphical performance on any machine without the need of upgrading. And over time, internet speeds will only increase. That means that the video compression signs will only go away, and the resolution will only increase.

 

People may not like going to digital.. and that's why audio CDs still exist. But the main group will go through digital distribution because it's easily accessable and it just makes sense. I'd love to play a "next gen" game today, because I'm no longer confined to the power of my machine. That would be like my Wii all of a sudden being able to play HD games just because it now, just.. can. YAY!

 

Right now the device is for people to be able to play high end graphic games without the need of upgrading a PC, but if they come up with some exclusives.. especially ones that look better than any 360 or PS3 game (like Crysis) that you can only play on the OnLive machine, then they could get some serious attach rates.

[Kripto]

My prediction is that it will work over the right connection but the latency will make it play like mush. Their claim of one millisecond is absolute BS. Impossible.

[+Random Terrain]

People LIKE upgrading their hardware, at least to the extent that they like talking about upcoming consoles and getting into pissing contests about which system can do what. As illogical as it might be, it drives the industry.

No, not people, just rich bastards that don't have to choose between food and entertainment. Seems like a lot of people would hate upgrading their hardware. "Do I upgrade and live on crackers and cockroaches for 3 months? Hmmm . . . tough decision. Deep fried cockroaches are yummy, but will my family want to eat them every day for 3 months? Maybe my kids can find some grasshoppers in the field across the street, then we won't get burned out on cockroaches. OK, I'll do it! I'm going to upgrade!"

[godslabrat]

People may not like going to digital.. and that's why audio CDs still exist.

 

DaytonaUSA, this is not aimed at you specifically, I'm just using your quote to point something out. Is anyone else annoyed by this new bit of marketing babble? Last I checked Audio CDs WERE digital! Also, so are DVDs, BluRay Discs and game cartridges.

[DaytonaUSA]

People may not like going to digital.. and that's why audio CDs still exist.

 

DaytonaUSA, this is not aimed at you specifically, I'm just using your quote to point something out. Is anyone else annoyed by this new bit of marketing babble? Last I checked Audio CDs WERE digital! Also, so are DVDs, BluRay Discs and game cartridges.

 

Ughh.. DIGITAL DISTIBUTION vs PHYSICAL MEDIA.

 

I was saying some people still want physical media vs digital distribution. I'm saying physical won't go away right now, but yes.. one day.. physical media will be kinda like showing your kid a record player. It'll generate an "oh my God, you lived with this?"

[DaytonaUSA]

My prediction is that it will work over the right connection but the latency will make it play like mush. Their claim of one millisecond is absolute BS. Impossible.

 

You don't even know how it works, and you say it's impossible. Here's a shocker, they are running this game on a set of servers hundreds of miles away. And every reputable news source is saying it "surprised them" in how well it looked and worked.

 

 

You're NOT trasmitting the exact video of the game to your tv. THAT WOULD BE IMPOSSIBLE. You're sending compressed video that then uncompresses when it reaches you. What I'm trying to say is, it's kinda like getting a 60 mb file in winzip so it's only 2 mb, but you open it and it's 60 mb again. Except it's doing that really really fast, over and over a lot of times. I hope that makes sense.

 

Again, why are people so negative on the idea of this?

 

If this didn't work to the point where it was playable, the company wouldn't show it now because it would have killed the public's vibe of the product and all that work would be for not. They waited 7 years to show this off before it was ready, and it won't be out till late this year. If it's working this well now, you have no idea how much better it will be then. Their reputation is on the line.. they don't want to mess this up.

 

And to be honest, if the hardware is free with a year's subscription why not try it?.. I'll try it! God knows I've waisted 50-60 bucks before on bad games. Look at this as a game purchase, try out some demos or use it to rent games if you don't want to buy through their service.

 

If you only use it as a game rental service it's still a spectacular idea. If you use it to play games with graphics you can't get out of a ps3 or 360, it's just a cherry on top .

Edited March 24, 2009 by DaytonaUSA

[+Random Terrain]

And to be honest, if the hardware is free with a year's subscription why not try it?.. I'll try it! God knows I've waisted 50-60 bucks before on bad games. Look at this as a game purchase, try out some demos or use it to rent games if you don't want to buy through their service.

 

If you only use it as a game rental service it's still a spectacular idea. If you use it to play games with graphics you can't get out of a ps3 or 360, it's just a cherry on top .

If it really works without making you scream because the game keeps screwing up and it doesn't keep getting postponed, I'll be getting it. I'd rather get that than an expensive PS3 or an unreliable Xbox 360.

[moycon]

I'll check it out when consumer reviews start showing up.

I have my doubts this will work as well as it's presented but I'm more then willing to give it a chance and see what they offer.

[DaytonaUSA]

And to be honest, if the hardware is free with a year's subscription why not try it?.. I'll try it! God knows I've waisted 50-60 bucks before on bad games. Look at this as a game purchase, try out some demos or use it to rent games if you don't want to buy through their service.

 

If you only use it as a game rental service it's still a spectacular idea. If you use it to play games with graphics you can't get out of a ps3 or 360, it's just a cherry on top .

If it really works without making you scream because the game keeps screwing up and it doesn't keep getting postponed, I'll be getting it. I'd rather get that than an expensive PS3 or an unreliable Xbox 360.

 

Yep, if it works.. not much to lose here.

 

Another interesting note here is that they have 100+ patents for this technology on their system, so I'd be curious if the "big 3" will be figuring out how to get around this, or taking the typical Sony/Nintendo stance and saying how much they "don't care" or "aren't in the same market".

 

Also, they have three major investors, including Warner Brothers Interactive (which explains why they recently said they were getting into game development again). This explains where all the money came from to back this project.

 

I hope it all works out. I love it when newcomers come in (providing they don't kill off any of the existing companies) because it usually means it's offering something new . And new experiences are what make gaming exiting in the first place.

Edited March 24, 2009 by DaytonaUSA