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

Reader Comments (70)

Posted: Jun 30th 2009 8:05PM Bowlby said

  • 2.5 hearts
  • Report
I'm sure that Apple would love to get their hands on the technology. It would be their perfect entry into the games market (in some form, more or less).
Reply

Posted: Jun 30th 2009 11:30PM samfish said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
I don't think Apple would get into it. Running such a big server farm like that would be expensive and kind of goes against Apple's over all philosophy. Kinda like the same reason they won't launch their own 3G network.

I do expect Apple to get into games for the next generation, though.
Reply

Posted: Jul 1st 2009 1:28PM Dr Stabbingworth said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
Maybe Google? They have their hands in everything and they seem to have that networking thing down.
Reply

Posted: Jun 30th 2009 8:08PM fwacce said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
Assuming this actually does work as advertised, I hope no one buys them. Venture Capital would be great, but not new owners. All great ideas are crushed when tey are bought by a large corporation. Just look at Blizzard recently.
Reply

Posted: Jun 30th 2009 8:26PM TheDarkWayne said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
I was gonna say WoW hasnt really changed at all, but then I remembered 3 different starcrats
Reply

Posted: Jun 30th 2009 11:41PM WiiFTW said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
And the whole lack of LAN in Starcraft 2. And then trying to justify its omission by saying, "Oh we just want to force features that we think are good, not what you actually want. Eh, so what you might get more lag, that's no prob with all the super-cool features you're gonna get, right? ZOMG PIRACY, ANYONE PLAYING ON LAN DOESN'T HAVE THE GAME."

Big corporations can suck my balls.

Reply

Posted: Jun 30th 2009 8:12PM Wiizer said

  • 3 hearts
  • Report
I will someday throw Pachter through a wall as I would like to do in Crysis...
Reply

Posted: Jun 30th 2009 8:13PM Injulen said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
I really can't wait, I think this is gunna be great
Reply

Posted: Jun 30th 2009 8:14PM nukee said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
And Pachter is the one to know these things. Am I right or what?
Reply

Posted: Jun 30th 2009 9:32PM Haggard said

  • 3 hearts
  • Report
Pachter couldn't tell a fully-optimized gaming PC if you shoved one up his ass.
Reply

Posted: Jun 30th 2009 11:31PM samfish said

  • 2.5 hearts
  • Report
"Pachter couldn't tell a fully-optimized gaming PC if you shoved one up his ass."

I don't think most people could, unless their ass has, like, electrical inputs and stuff.
Reply

Posted: Jun 30th 2009 8:14PM Ryuk said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
OMG Can you guys just make a separate tab for Patcher? Seriously, I'm getting sick of this guy, I know I don't have to read it, but his opinion shouldn't really matter, I'd take the editor's opinions on this site over patcher.
Reply

Posted: Jun 30th 2009 8:20PM Double J said

  • 3 hearts
  • Report
Unbeknownst to Pachter, but knownst to us, he actually was just playing it on an optimized PC. It's sort of like the Pepsi challenge.
Reply

Posted: Jun 30th 2009 8:22PM LaughingTarget said

  • 3 hearts
  • Report
"So, sir, did you like A, the ice, cold, fresh Pepsi, or B, the Coke we left out in the sun and peed in?"
Reply

Posted: Jun 30th 2009 8:37PM Inquisitor Glokta said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
I still prefer the latter... Pepsi sux!
Reply

Posted: Jun 30th 2009 8:46PM (Unverified) said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
Pepsi > Coke





bitch.
Reply

Posted: Jun 30th 2009 10:18PM PN04 said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
You might get a PC that beats a PS3 for less than it's price but how long will it last you before you have to upgrade it due to increasing over heads for new PC games. Console owners dont buy Consoles for PC games. We dont need PC ports to enjoy gaming and we dont need to buy a new graphics card every 3 years for good graphics. Maybe you can buy a PC for 300 bucks that will play Alan Wake but will it still play all the new games in three years on full settings when developers up the requirements again arbitrarily just so you can see shadows on a character's Noes hairs?
Reply

Posted: Jun 30th 2009 10:31PM DBuckEye said

  • 2.5 hearts
  • Report
@PN04
We had a potentially great Cola argument coming our way, and you had to drag PS360 v PC into it. For shame.
Why don't you go inflict pain on yourself by drinking some Dr. Pepper?
Reply

Posted: Jun 30th 2009 10:57PM Double J said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
I'm gonna have to agree with the Lt. on this one.
Reply

Posted: Jun 30th 2009 11:44PM Hedgeson said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
Ici c'est Pepsi.

About the article:
80 milliseconds is SOMETIMES too much for me when I play Team Fortress 2.

OnLive users should only play against OnLive users, if the game is multiplayer. It should then remove the lag between users, and you'd only get the input/video lag, which at 80ms is commensurate with fast MP servers.
Reply

Posted: Jun 30th 2009 8:21PM BananaBoat said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
5 bucks per subscription would bankrupt them. That no firms are paying me to make this type of prediction blows my mind.

Reply

Posted: Jun 30th 2009 8:21PM LaughingTarget said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
*sigh* The Crysis thing again. You can run Crysis with little trouble on a self-built machine for $800. That's the $500 you'd spend for a PC anyway plus the cost of a home console.
Reply

Posted: Jun 30th 2009 8:28PM HumanNature said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
I have my doubts about OnLive, after all even on DSL streaming an HD video forces me to buffer quite a bit and it's 3Mbps. So in other words, OnLive is looking for an audience with probably around 20Mbps. And above all else, I like to play my single players offline thank you very much.

With $350, you can get yourself a PS3 and play games in HD with most of them already optimize for the console. Just look on slickdeals if you can't find a PS3 below $400. I got mine for $250, so I fail to see why people complain about the price. They just don't look hard enough.
Reply

Posted: Jun 30th 2009 8:28PM Typicalgamer said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
i would rahter pay 100 bucks for onlive and 20 bucks a month subcription than pay all that money.
Reply

Posted: Jun 30th 2009 8:36PM Robot Overlord said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
you could play it on high settings with a computer you built for 500, not 800
Reply

Posted: Jun 30th 2009 8:45PM LaughingTarget said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
Right, sorry, my numbers are 3 months old.

Point being, you need that PC one way or the other and getting it to embarrass a PS3's graphical abilities takes about half of what PS3 actually costs.
Reply

Posted: Jun 30th 2009 8:49PM RKN said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
LaughingTarget, the hardware of a PC certainly is nice, I feel that we need a bit more software loving here though and more optimized console ports to the PC please, Street Fighter 4 is very optimized for the PC whereas some games are not.
Reply

Posted: Jun 30th 2009 9:49PM Mmmmz said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
I'd rather have games built for the PC first and then ported to consoles. People wonder why PC gaming is faltering should look there first. PC gamers have been getting shafted with ports when it used to be the shafter.

Those were happier times for all.
Reply

Posted: Jun 30th 2009 10:45PM Haggard said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
Exactly. Some games are ported fantastically like FC2, while others such as GTA4 and Assassin's Creed are insane. I wouldn't be suprised if AC2 had lower requirements than the original.
Reply

Posted: Jun 30th 2009 8:24PM (Unverified) said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
I never knew whatthe big deal was with Crysis, but that pic looks FUCKING INSANE!
Anyway, do we really need 2 Pachter stories in one day?
Reply

Posted: Jun 30th 2009 8:25PM (Unverified) said

  • 2.5 hearts
  • Report
Any idea on the bandwith requirements for this? I"m guessing my 1.5 meg DSL ain't gonna cut it.
Reply

Posted: Jun 30th 2009 8:29PM HumanNature said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
It won't, my 3Mbps Dsl can't even cut streaming HD video on 480p properly sometimes.
Reply

Posted: Jun 30th 2009 10:19PM JONNNathannn said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
Yes it will. That's one of the first things they addressed.
Reply

Posted: Jun 30th 2009 10:25PM Cheesus Crust said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
I have the same one(3Mbps) and ALOT of the time HD stuff loads slow as hell. But we just ordered FIOS(25Mbps) and it is going to be installed on the 15th. Cant wait!
But screw this shit, my PC can play all games at max or near to max(Crysis...). I built it for $800 on black friday.
Specs: Q6600@3.2GHz
ATi 4850 1GB
Asus P5Q Pro
Corsair 450VX PSU
Antec 900
4GB OCZ Reaper ram
640GB HDD(Western Digital)
Reply

Posted: Jun 30th 2009 8:27PM OremLK said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
Play Crysis now at 72p on OnLive! That's right, a full seventy-two lines of pixels!
Reply

Posted: Jun 30th 2009 8:27PM Typicalgamer said

  • 1 heart
  • Report
so instead of wasting thousands of dollars on a big pc, you can just pay like 20 bucks a month to play cryisis. fair enough.
Reply

Posted: Jun 30th 2009 8:51PM Tac Error said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
I paid just $700 for a new PC back then and it runs Crysis at high all good.
Reply

Posted: Jun 30th 2009 8:46PM RKN said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
Except its not thousands of dollars, but is it worth debating with a console fanboy?
: )
Reply

Posted: Jun 30th 2009 9:14PM Typicalgamer said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
do i have to be so speciefic???
Reply

Posted: Jun 30th 2009 9:15PM RKN said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
You don't have to spend anywhere near several thousand dollars, its just jarring that your so far off but its not surprising since you don't have a gaming PC and thus are ignorant.
Reply

Posted: Jun 30th 2009 10:20PM JONNNathannn said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
Breakerchase, this is so much bigger than "Just spend 600ish on a gaming pc it's not that much!"

With OnLive, if it works, you can play Crysis during your lunch break at the office or in the cafeteria on your $300 laptop on campus.

It opens so many doors.
Reply

Posted: Jun 30th 2009 8:29PM (Unverified) said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
I'm hoping this can somehow work as advertised, cause I really don't want to spend many hundreds of dollars to get a new PC that can play anything that came out in the last 4 years (unlike my once great laptop) :(
Reply

Posted: Jun 30th 2009 8:47PM RKN said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
What I am wondering is if I could stream and play 360/PS3 games with my PC and vice versa. That is one thing to get excited about.
Reply

Posted: Jun 30th 2009 10:48PM Haggard said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
You mean play the game on one but view it through the other?

I don't think they're offering that. So far they only seem to play the game on PC hardware on their end, and stream the video to either a program on your PC, or the microconsole that you can plug into your TV.
Reply

Posted: Jul 1st 2009 12:18AM RKN said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
No no, I mean that through my PC, I can stream 360/PS3 games to play games that will never come to PC like LittleBigPlanet.

Vice Versa where PS3 and 360 owners can stream PC-exclusives like The Witcher, Crysis, ARMA II, Sims 3, etc.
Reply

Posted: Jul 1st 2009 8:44AM Haggard said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
Well, console manufacturers wouldn't allow a competing service like OnLive anywhere near their consoles. It'd be like Sony patching Xbox Live into the PS3.

Similarly you wouldn't see their first party console exclusives up on the OnLive store either, since the point of those is to sell copies and push hardware of that specific platform.
Reply

Posted: Jun 30th 2009 9:02PM maaax said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
i don't see US ISPs having the bandwidth for this. i guess it's only for FIOS customers and people in Japan and Europe and wherever else has fast internet.
Reply

Posted: Jun 30th 2009 9:16PM RKN said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
Yeah, American ISPs really need to step up their game, and no fucking bandwidth caps!
Reply

Posted: Jun 30th 2009 10:50PM Haggard said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
A lot of the problem with broadband in the US is geographical. It's just not feasible to provide the same speeds we have in Europe when there are tens of thousands of towns, hundreds of miles apart. Here in Britain you're never more than a few minutes away from civilisation.
Reply

Posted: Jun 30th 2009 11:57PM Ottozero said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
Sucks... they should improve the communication Infrastructure because its going to be the primary Commerce in the future.
Reply
Sorry, you must be logged in to leave a comment.

Featured Stories

Rhythm Heaven Fever review: Crazy into you

Posted on Feb 9th 2012 12:00PM

Remedy not done with Alan Wake

Posted on Feb 9th 2012 10:30AM

Engadget

TUAW

Massively

WoW