| Mail |
You might also like: WoW Insider, Massively, and more

Reader Comments (64)

Posted: Jun 3rd 2009 2:03PM jefwif said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
tuned to perfection.

for the e3 unit.

dur.
Reply

Posted: Jun 3rd 2009 2:06PM Haggard said

  • 3 hearts
  • Report
'First person action game' - considering it's not a shooter since that was already mentioned, and considering we've already seen it's on there, I'm willing to bet that was Mirror's Edge.
Reply

Posted: Jun 3rd 2009 2:13PM StormEagle said

  • 3 hearts
  • Report
Add that to the mention of "avoiding obstacles and nailing jumps" and you've pretty much snuffed that secret our of it's hiding space.
Reply

Posted: Jun 3rd 2009 2:15PM Burritoclock said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
But judging by the article that would mean that Kevin Kelly has never played mirrors egde, which I find hard to believe, but other than that good deduction.
Reply

Posted: Jun 3rd 2009 2:26PM StormEagle said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
No, you're confusing the shooter (which was sluggish) to the first person action game (Mirror's Edge).

..."several of the games were extremely reliant on timing, and we were able to nail jumps and avoid obstacles fairly easily after a couple of tries." While this statement is made directly after talking about the shooter, he doesn't attribute these actions to being made while playing the shooter. That's where I bet they were made playing the action game, Mirror's Edge.
Reply

Posted: Jun 3rd 2009 2:30PM Haggard said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
As for the shooter.. a PC online FPS which Kevin Kelly hasn't played before. Could have been any number of things - UT3 perhaps? TF2?
Reply

Posted: Jun 3rd 2009 2:31PM Haggard said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
Actually, I bet Valve wouldn't put their games on this considering they already have online distribution nailed.
Reply

Posted: Jun 3rd 2009 6:32PM einhanderkiller said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
Mirror's Edge... 2!
Reply

Posted: Jun 3rd 2009 2:10PM BananaBoat said

  • 3 hearts
  • Report
OnLive is the kind of service that will work well for the initial batch of users. As more users come on board, and the costs required to keep building infrastructure pile on, the service will slow to a crawl and inevitably fail.

OnLive needs an ISP or Google to come flying in on a white horse to put up the infrastructure costs if they are going to succeed.

I'm not sure if I hope I'm wrong or not. Better hardware drives graphical innovations, and without the need for new hardware, things would quickly stagnate. Without the mass market to sell graphics cards to, why would ATI or Nvidia ever push the envelope when it comes to GPU's? Without new hardware, how could companies like Crytek push the envelope when it comes to graphics?

OnLive certainly has an interesting idea, but I'll believe it when I see it working when thousands of users are on simultaneously.
Reply

Posted: Jun 3rd 2009 2:17PM Trance Addix said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
Some very smart people are working on this project -- you're not giving them enough credit. I have no doubt that they will make a profit of this. And that is their exact motivation - not to revolutionize gaming.
Reply

Posted: Jun 3rd 2009 3:09PM KaBob799 said

  • 2.5 hearts
  • Report
I agree, I can't see any situation where a company could be rendering graphics and running games for thousands upon thousands of people without charging way too much. It's not just downloading the game like most services, but actually running the whole game and sending the information. Thats a ton of processing.
Reply

Posted: Jun 3rd 2009 3:16PM Special Agent Steve said

  • Half a heart
  • Report
I think I'll stick with my 50$ a month Internet Service, and my 1000$ computer instead of a 2000$ Mac and the hassle of the service. I honestly don't think this is going to work, and I don't know if I want it to.
Reply

Posted: Jun 3rd 2009 4:21PM Duke said

  • 2.5 hearts
  • Report
ThatPCgameryouhate - you obviously know nothing about this product from that post. Sad.

As far as the viability of this, I think we all are too quick to sell them short and assume things are going to fall apart. Hopefully they will be able to offer a final product that mirrors their claims. This preview makes it sound very promising.
Reply

Posted: Jun 3rd 2009 6:34PM c247def6 said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
It's really quite easy to do this kind of thing, imo. At my job we were code serving the CAD software that we running right off of our servers. Now we only had 10 -15 users running this at a time, but before the code serving the machines that ran it were xp x64 systems that required 16GB RAM etc etc. However, only the code was served and all actual processing was done on the local PCs. Speaking of CAD here is wikipedia's list of primary investors:

"OnLive's investors include Warner Bros., Autodesk and Maverick Capital"

Warner Brothers: media giant, Autodesk: Easily the largest CAD and 3D design software company there is (here in Michigan, any company that designs anything uses and Autodesk software) and Maverick Capital is a $10B investment firm. Among the executives are: Steve Perlman (quiktime and webtc), Paul Weinstein who worked on MySQL, Tom Paquin (founder of Mozilla.org) Charlie Jablonski (head of engineering and tech NBC for 16 years) If anybody could produce this it's these guys. They have all the backgrounds required to support something like this. And this WILL push gaming forward because these are the things that have pushed every aspect of all other technologies further

On another note, @KaBob799, what do you think MMO's have been doing for years upon years? Sure, the processing is done locally, but just how much do you think it takes for Blizzard to support their 10 million (is that the current number? I stopped keeping track) WoW players?
Reply

Posted: Jun 4th 2009 8:59AM (Unverified) said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
I have got to think that they have taken the thousands of users utilizing the service into account. The description you have outlined here is that of everyone on a phone line looking to have access to AOL. We have come a LONG way from those modem days. http://www.onlivetips.com
Reply

Posted: Jun 3rd 2009 2:13PM Professor Lario said

  • 2.5 hearts
  • Report
Thanks for bringing this info - I wondered if this device would pop up during E3.
Reply

Posted: Jun 3rd 2009 2:14PM Chris DPSN AggieCEO XBLThe Aggi said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
Still suspicious of this myself...but only time will tell if it EVER really works....
Reply

Posted: Jul 1st 2009 2:37PM Bolts said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
Thanks for the feedback Chris D.
Reply

Posted: Jul 1st 2009 4:34PM Chris DPSN AggieCEO XBLThe Aggi said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
???
Reply

Posted: Jun 3rd 2009 2:16PM Burritoclock said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
I still don't believe it... and for some reason I hope it doesn't work. Does that make me a bad person?
Reply

Posted: Jun 3rd 2009 2:18PM Railgun said

  • 2.5 hearts
  • Report
I think you're a pretty cool guy.
Reply

Posted: Jun 3rd 2009 2:27PM xFenixKnightx said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
No, it just makes you a bad gamer.

Reply

Posted: Jun 3rd 2009 2:28PM Burritoclock said

  • 3 hearts
  • Report
Hopefully it's just that I like to have the carcasses of my defeated games lined up on the wall like deer heads.

But yes it could be the water chemical.
Reply

Posted: Jun 3rd 2009 3:05PM (Unverified) said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
it dose not make you a bad gamer at all the only gamers that will like this are renters
i also keep my old games and love to go back now and then
at slow times to play a gem
Reply

Posted: Jun 3rd 2009 3:24PM Levi Partridge said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
I wrap my carcasses in shoe boxes and shove them in my closet. I hope my neighbors don't notice the smell.
Reply

Posted: Jun 3rd 2009 2:19PM spin cycle said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
What happens when your roommates/family decide to watch a little Hulu at the same time?
Reply

Posted: Jun 3rd 2009 2:55PM (Unverified) said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
I feel bad for OnLive as ultimately I think it will fail. In another 5 - 10 years time when broadband technology is even faster and more stable another system will be built with the same intentions as Onlive. The new system will succeed as the broadband infrastructure will already be in place.
Reply

Posted: Jun 3rd 2009 4:23PM Duke said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
Chad you make a lot of assumptions. How can you eel bad or them when they have no failed yet? How can you assume the future of our broadband structures and how companies will use them? You are really being a pessimist. Give them a bit of credit for being able to watch the market that they are working within and what to watch out for.
Reply

Posted: Jun 3rd 2009 9:10PM (Unverified) said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
I don't know, does Hulu use that much bandwidth as is?

Also since most Cable providers are rolling out DOCSIS 3.0 now, I imagine you'd only have problems at the lowest speed tier.
Reply

Posted: Jun 3rd 2009 2:20PM Obienator said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
This might work....5 years from now.
I still suffer disconnects and lag with my internet, and since this service requires 100% reliability, I don't see it happening for a while.
Reply

Posted: Jun 3rd 2009 2:54PM (Unverified) said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
Okay, since you're talking about internet speeds and even though the Xbox 360 isn't involved in this article, how can Microsoft say such a thing that you can instantly live stream full 1080P HD movies? I'm assuming they have the technology ready for it but it's just the consumers that need higher internet speeds, and we all know that ISPs these days don't/can't have the download speeds it needs to stream 1080P and dear lord that's not even the high definition audio yet. Transfer speeds of 1080P movies can start at 10 mb/s of video (pretty much a black screen with no movement) and the transfer rate drastically gets bigger at high load scenes and again, that's without high definition audio

I'm not being a fanboy here, but I'm not sure if Microsoft's bullshitting us. The technology is always always welcome and I just hope this is the real deal
Reply

Posted: Jun 3rd 2009 3:08PM (Unverified) said

  • 1 heart
  • Report
MS mite be fakeing the 1080 just like they do with some games
Reply

Posted: Jun 3rd 2009 4:19PM BananaBoat said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
1080p just refers to the resolution (1920x1080) and how the video is scanned/displayed (progressively, meaning the full frame is displayed every second). 1080p is 1080p even if it looks like garbage. I can't comment on the quality of Microsoft's 1080p streaming content, but I'd imagine it will look pretty good. It won't look as good as blu-ray content, but it should be decent enough for it not to just be a marketing gimmick.

Reply

Posted: Jun 3rd 2009 2:21PM SoulPatch said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
This is another reason that the game companies are coming out with more advanced motion controllers. OnLive sounds great, but can we talk with Mylo? Can we play dodgeball with our bodies? Can we play with swords, or play Zelda? Nope, so the press conferences kind of derailed this a little for me. Even if it does work, I don't really want it to be honest. This will only be third party games. Halo would never be on this, nor would Mario or Zelda. So, for me, there is no use to this machine.
Reply

Posted: Jun 3rd 2009 2:31PM (Unverified) said

  • Half a heart
  • Report
EDIT: Horribly offensive and obscene.
Reply

Posted: Jun 3rd 2009 2:45PM SoulPatch said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
Thank you for that enlightening and constructive criticism. I am glad that such a man of your stature exists on this site. I can't wait what other pearls of wisdom I get to read. I hope and pray I don't have to wait long. Thank you sir, for all you do.
Reply

Posted: Jun 3rd 2009 4:24PM Duke said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
I bet his newsletter is great!
Reply

Posted: Jun 3rd 2009 2:29PM Sandman3621 said

  • 2.5 hearts
  • Report
The next gen Sega Channel!
Reply

Posted: Jun 3rd 2009 2:30PM Shagittarius said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
If OnLive is serious about competing they are going to need a penis-thumb.
Reply

Posted: Jun 4th 2009 2:02AM (Unverified) said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
What the hell? Ohhhh, you're referring to that PlayStation billboard in Europe that had the guy with a thumb for a penis right?
http://www.blogcdn.com/www.joystiq.com/media/2008/05/ps3playboy490full.jpg
Reply

Posted: Jun 3rd 2009 2:35PM (Unverified) said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
even if this works... it's contantly downloading at your max internet connection.
so if are game a lot, it won't play nice with the comcast/charter/time warner/etc. 250gb caps that are starting to appear.

you could easily download 2 gigs at 5mbit in one hour with this thing, so you need to play only 125 hours then in a month. That might seem like a lot, but thats 4 hours a day. Playing games. And that doesnt leave any room for normal internet usage.

I don't even have this thing right now and with 3 roommates we already get damn close to breaking the 250gb cap. So this probably wouldn't work in most households unless ISPs start getting more reasonable.
Reply

Posted: Jun 3rd 2009 3:03PM (Unverified) said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
You bring up an excellent point. I think it was Comcast in Texas who recently tried putting in place very low data caps on their standard internet plans as part of a trial run. The customers complained and the data cap removed but Comcast (or whichever company it was) said they will revisit the idea once they have educated the consumer more on the issue.

I have no doubt that those of us fortunate enough to enjoy to enjoy unlimited download bandwidth are not going to have that luxury forever. As cable companies begin to struggle with the competition of online television shows they are going to be bleeding consumers wherever they can and download caps are going to be prime target.

Yet another strike against a product that hasn't even reached consumers yet.

*For anyone interested in the Comcast story it was on TwiT podcast #193
Reply

Posted: Jun 3rd 2009 2:35PM djenkins83 said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
Video clip of game play would be nice, pictures and words on hardware do nothing. Even if the service worked great they could have easily put in a server there at E3 which made it run faster than it normally would. Still would like a video clip.
Reply

Posted: Jun 3rd 2009 4:48PM Vidikron said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
Given that they couldn't name the games (for whatever reason) it is a pretty safe bet they can't show video clips.
Reply

Posted: Jun 3rd 2009 2:38PM (Unverified) said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
Too bad they didn't show any really latency-dependent games. It's easy to hide lag in racing games, single player adventure games, flight simulators and even in multiplayer FPSes, but in fighting games lag cannot be disguised. That's why even clever schemes like GGPO's rollback mechanism can't cope with pings much above 50 ms or so, even in slower, simpler fighting games. And that's dealing with point-to-point one-on-one gaming. Adding a third point in the server and the additional latency introduced by the OnLive system would make this genre entirely unplayable. I'd imagine rhythm games like Rock Band and Guitar Hero would be similarly affected (although since they're single-player games, players could adjust to hearing/seeing delayed results of button presses).
Reply

Posted: Jun 3rd 2009 2:44PM (Unverified) said

  • 2.5 hearts
  • Report
They "claim" i ran over a regular internet connection...

Hmm..
Reply

Posted: Jun 3rd 2009 3:04PM MystileArmor said

  • 3 hearts
  • Report
You should get your brakes examined...
Reply

Posted: Jun 3rd 2009 3:03PM MystileArmor said

  • 3 hearts
  • Report
Kevin, you guys should put up a poll about wether or not people would buy/subscripe to OnLive if it worked as well as they suggest it will, that would be interesting.

Personally, even if it worked as great as they say it will, I wouldn't want it. i want my physical discs, that I've payed for. I want the manuals to my games. I want to be able to play my old games 10 years down the road.

I'd like to see what the general opinion on this is amongst Joystiq users, and I'm fairly confident I'm not alone.
Reply

Posted: Jun 3rd 2009 4:28PM Duke said

  • 2.5 hearts
  • Report
I think a lot of us would agree with you in the end. A great part of gaming is getting the devices, the new games in hand, the peripherals, and such.
Reply

Posted: Jun 3rd 2009 6:20PM ripvanwinkle said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
100% agree

i still buy CDs
Reply
Sorry, you must be logged in to leave a comment.

Featured Stories

Portabliss: Time Ducks (iOS)

Posted on Feb 7th 2012 9:00PM

Portabliss: Sticky Bees (iOS)

Posted on Feb 6th 2012 9:00PM

Engadget

TUAW

Massively

WoW