Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

Onlive & the end of consoles?

Options
24567

Comments

  • Options
    #32
    Cuddlesworth
    Registered Users Posts: 13,995 ✭✭✭✭Cuddlesworth


    Ciaran500 wrote: »
    So they can stream a 720p video image using about 3-4kb/s. Bull the creators even say it will take a 1.5mb line to run in SD and 4-5mb for 720p.

    On a internal network I can stream a 1280*1024 image over Citrix xen desktop using 3-4kb/s overhead. I can't see why they can't enable similar compression.

    If the above is true you won't see many people doing it here or in a lot of country's(America included). The infrastructure isn't there, the backbone would be destroyed with that amount of traffic. Think when the BBC/CH4 released their subscription service.


  • Options
    #33
    thebman
    Closed Accounts Posts: 10,012 ✭✭✭✭thebman


    Cuddlesworth wrote: »
    On a internal network I can stream a 1280*1024 image over Citrix xen desktop using 3-4kb/s overhead. I can't see why they can't enable similar compression.

    If the above is true you won't see many people doing it here or in a lot of country's(America included). The infrastructure isn't there, the backbone would be destroyed with that amount of traffic. Think when the BBC/CH4 released their subscription service.

    The image quality isn't HD on the Citrix connection. Nowhere near it I bet. Then you have audio.


  • Options
    #34
    Cuddlesworth
    Registered Users Posts: 13,995 ✭✭✭✭Cuddlesworth


    thebman wrote: »
    The image quality isn't HD on the Citrix connection. Nowhere near it I bet. Then you have audio.

    I was quite surprised when I saw it work, I really was.

    Here are some tech videos.

    Moving picture, audio etc. All streamed to what is essentially a dumb terminal. And little to no network overhead due to video compression algorithms.


  • Options
    #35
    thebman
    Closed Accounts Posts: 10,012 ✭✭✭✭thebman


    Cuddlesworth wrote: »
    I was quite surprised when I saw it work, I really was.

    Here are some tech videos.

    Moving picture, audio etc. All streamed to what is essentially a dumb terminal. And little to no network overhead due to video compression algorithms.

    There is no way that can work at a few KBps IMO No video compression is that good for HD video and audio content.

    I've studied compression algorithms and as far as I know, no compression on that level exists without loss in image and audio quality.


  • Options
    #36
    BlitzKrieg
    Registered Users Posts: 14,685 ✭✭✭✭BlitzKrieg


    while the back and forth on the discussion if the service wont buckle under the pressure the element that I am looking at and thinking this could save the PC industry if it works is:
    The games can be played on any bog-standard laptop or PC without the need for a high-end graphics chip using OnLive’s plug-in software

    Really could return the pc market to the front that any old machine from dell could run Crysis (which seems to be the elected test monkey by discussions)

    But I question would companies like Nivida and Radeon take this, wwould they be happy if their market turned into supplyin a select few companies that housed the servers rather then the tech demanding PC market at the moment (even if it is shrinking)

    The discussion of pressure etc really depends on who picks it up and how the market is formed. We could see *providers* popping up much like ISP's were at the internet boom or maybe the console manufacterers will see this as the VCR of the gaming world and we might finally get a unified platform.



    Then I think of Phantom and shrug


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #37
    Cuddlesworth
    Registered Users Posts: 13,995 ✭✭✭✭Cuddlesworth


    thebman wrote: »
    There is no way that can work at a few KBps IMO No video compression is that good for HD video and audio content.

    I've studied compression algorithms and as far as I know, no compression on that level exists without loss in image and audio quality.

    Why don't you email Citrix and ask them how they do it then? I'm sure a few trade secrets and millions spent in R&D mean nothing to them anyway.


  • Options
    #38
    Ciaran500
    Registered Users Posts: 8,225 ✭✭✭Ciaran500


    Cuddlesworth wrote: »
    I was quite surprised when I saw it work, I really was.

    Here are some tech videos.

    Moving picture, audio etc. All streamed to what is essentially a dumb terminal. And little to no network overhead due to video compression algorithms.

    There is no chance in hell its possible to stream a HD moving image at dialup speeds, you'd be talking about completely throwing out all our current streaming tech if this was true. Were you playing a 1280*1024 video while only using 3-4kb/s or were you just looking at a programme running.


  • Options
    #39
    thebman
    Closed Accounts Posts: 10,012 ✭✭✭✭thebman


    Cuddlesworth wrote: »
    Why don't you email Citrix and ask them how they do it then? I'm sure a few trade secrets and millions spent in R&D mean nothing to them anyway.

    Lol, I don't think it matters how much you spend in R&D. You can't throw money at something at end up with something that breaks the laws of physics.

    Quite simply I don't think it can ever be done at that level without losing image and audio quality. In gaming, that won't be tolerated IMO.


  • Options
    #40
    AlmightyCushion
    Moderators, Education Moderators, Technology & Internet Moderators Posts: 35,079 Mod ✭✭✭✭AlmightyCushion


    BlitzKrieg wrote: »
    But I question would companies like Nivida and Radeon take this, wwould they be happy if their market turned into supplyin a select few companies that housed the servers rather then the tech demanding PC market at the moment (even if it is shrinking)
    At the moment it can only do 720p. You can get a 22" monitor and a card that would run most games at 1680x1050 on high settings quite cheap now a days. As long as this continues (spending a few hundred euro on a decent graphics card will provide better results than onlive) then I can only really see it taking over in the low end pc market so it won't make too much of an impact in the medium to high end. There would still be a lot of people who'd spend the extra money to get better quality graphics.


  • Options
    #41
    K.O.Kiki
    Registered Users Posts: 18,707 ✭✭✭✭K.O.Kiki


    But they're talking of a set-top box that's cheaper than a Wii...


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #42
    AlmightyCushion
    Moderators, Education Moderators, Technology & Internet Moderators Posts: 35,079 Mod ✭✭✭✭AlmightyCushion


    Cuddlesworth wrote: »
    Why don't you email Citrix and ask them how they do it then? I'm sure a few trade secrets and millions spent in R&D mean nothing to them anyway.
    As much as I'd love this to be true, I don't think it is (I'd love to be proven wrong though). If this was the case google would throw money at them just to get it for youtube which last time I checked is still losing money due to the cost of the bandwidth it needs.


  • Options
    #43
    Ciaran500
    Registered Users Posts: 8,225 ✭✭✭Ciaran500


    Cuddlesworth wrote: »
    Why don't you email Citrix and ask them how they do it then? I'm sure a few trade secrets and millions spent in R&D mean nothing to them anyway.
    http://www.brianmadden.com/blogs/brianmadden/archive/2003/10/22/a-look-inside-citrix-s-new-technology.aspx
    "Citrix's new “rave” technology completely changes this model. In this model, multimedia content is streamed to the client device via the ICA protocol in its originally encoded state ."

    So Citrix doesn't have any spectacular new way of doing it, it just sends the file like it is as (wmv/avi/mkv etc). You couldn't possibly get the results you claim from this method.


  • Options
    #44
    Brian
    Registered Users Posts: 5,699 ✭✭✭Brian


    Time.com wrote:
    But you know who's definitely going to love OnLive? Apple. All that time they spent not turning Macs into a credible gaming platform now looks like pure foresight. OnLive just did it for them.

    Haha. An ex-Apple employee scuppers the vidya gaem market? Now that is interesting.

    Of course, it is yet to happen. As pointed out earlier, the Irish internet infrastructure is by-and-large not reliable enough to depend on for 100% availability of service.


  • Options
    #45
    Ri_Nollaig
    Registered Users Posts: 2,297 ✭✭✭Ri_Nollaig


    On paper its a brillant idea.
    But in reality i dont see this ever taking off or atleast not a hope by winter 2009, maybe winter 2019...
    Sounds like another phantom...
    Also, what about wanting to play an old game or modding???
    Publishers probably love this idea as it could be the answer to all of their problems, end of piracy, end of the second hand market etc etc.


  • Options
    #46
    Cuddlesworth
    Registered Users Posts: 13,995 ✭✭✭✭Cuddlesworth


    thebman wrote: »
    Lol, I don't think it matters how much you spend in R&D. You can't throw money at something at end up with something that breaks the laws of physics.

    Quite simply I don't think it can ever be done at that level without losing image and audio quality. In gaming, that won't be tolerated IMO.

    Looks like I'm going to have to get my desktop back working and set up a Citrix farm so. Don't suppose anybody wants to save me the hassle?
    AlmightyCushion wrote: »
    As much as I'd love this to be true, I don't think it is (I'd love to be proven wrong though). If this was the case google would throw money at them just to get it for youtube which last time I checked is still losing money due to the cost of the bandwidth it needs.

    Are they not limited to flash?
    Ciaran500 wrote: »
    http://www.brianmadden.com/blogs/brianmadden/archive/2003/10/22/a-look-inside-citrix-s-new-technology.aspx
    "Citrix's new “rave” technology completely changes this model. In this model, multimedia content is streamed to the client device via the ICA protocol in its originally encoded state ."

    So Citrix doesn't have any spectacular new way of doing it, it just sends the file like it is as (wmv/avi/mkv etc). You couldn't possibly get the results you claim from this method.

    Quoting a six year old article. Nice. hey have plenty of different methods of media streaming now. Render on and off the host machine, caching etc.


  • Options
    #47
    AlmightyCushion
    Moderators, Education Moderators, Technology & Internet Moderators Posts: 35,079 Mod ✭✭✭✭AlmightyCushion


    Cuddlesworth wrote: »
    Are they not limited to flash?

    If it meant severely slashing the amount of bandwidth required I'm sure they'd find a way to accommodate it.


  • Options
    #48
    Stev_o
    Registered Users Posts: 9,249 ✭✭✭Stev_o


    Considering the economic climate at the moment i very much doubt those publishers would back it if AMD, Intel, ATI and Nvidia and co decided to cut their sponsorships, and lord knows that those publishers/developers aren't in the sh1t already.


  • Options
    #49
    PogMoThoin
    Closed Accounts Posts: 13,874 ✭✭✭✭PogMoThoin


    Stev_o wrote: »
    Considering the economic climate at the moment i very much doubt those publishers would back it if AMD, Intel, ATI and Nvidia and co decided to cut their sponsorships, and lord knows that those publishers/developers aren't in the sh1t already.

    One of the big players will buy it and make it disappear before it ever gains momentum if they feel threatened


  • Options
    #50
    MooseJam
    Closed Accounts Posts: 5,111 ✭✭✭MooseJam


    so if they got a million subscribers all wanting to play crisis at the same time do they have to have a million top spec pc's running it at their end, can't see that working.


  • Options
    #51
    Overheal
    Registered Users Posts: 83,309 ✭✭✭✭Overheal


    MooseJam wrote: »
    so if they got a million subscribers all wanting to play crisis at the same time do they have to have a million top spec pc's running it at their end, can't see that working.
    That plus the bandwidth requirements would be staggering. Corporate-Internet is still spinning its head about bittorrent protocol - whats going to happen when the online gaming bandwidth per person shoots up from a few kbps to 500kbps? Just streaming Hulu, I average 300kbps.

    Might be commonplace in 10 years, but not now.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #52
    valleyoftheunos
    Closed Accounts Posts: 2,332 ✭✭✭valleyoftheunos


    The infrastructure simply isn't in place for this. only the US and Japan are anywhere near equipped for the connections necessary. There will be so many people who wont be able to use this tech for about 10 years that we will certainly see another gen or two of consoles.


  • Options
    #53
    Helix
    Closed Accounts Posts: 17,661 ✭✭✭✭Helix


    valleyoftheunos wrote: »
    The infrastructure simply isn't in place for this. only the US and Japan are anywhere near equipped for the connections necessary. There will be so many people who wont be able to use this tech for about 10 years that we will certainly see another gen or two of consoles.

    to be fair, everyones saying that but nobody knows anything about the back end these guys have

    this has been a 7 year project, so why would they release it now if its not ready? whats another couple of years?


  • Options
    #54
    McGetty
    Registered Users Posts: 57 ✭✭McGetty


    Whether or not this thing is feasible, cost is going to be a major issue. I mean, they basically need the processing power to run 10,000 games of Crysis at once, and those machines will need to be upgraded eventually. How much of a monthly fee is going to be necessary to cover that? Plus, what happens during peak times when the system comes under strain? They'll need to have a hard cap on user numbers to keep it usable, and I don't wanna have to queue to play my games. Nor do I want to lose the ability to play them if my connection goes down for a while, or if these people go out of business.


  • Options
    #55
    Helix
    Closed Accounts Posts: 17,661 ✭✭✭✭Helix


    again tho, do you not think that costings were assessed in the seven years they were working on it? id be fairly sure they have something thats not going to bankrupt them planned

    too many people writing this off as if its a pipe dream that someone came up with last week

    lets wait and see what they have for us first before we declare it completely unworkable

    if they held off for seven years until now, i doubt theyre going to throw out a half finished product that doesnt work, do you?


  • Options
    #56
    AlmightyCushion
    Moderators, Education Moderators, Technology & Internet Moderators Posts: 35,079 Mod ✭✭✭✭AlmightyCushion


    McGetty wrote: »
    Nor do I want to lose the ability to play them if my connection goes down for a while, or if these people go out of business.

    If they go out of business they might give people the option to download the games. If your connection goes then you wouldn't be able to play the games. They said it will cost about the same price as xbox live. On top of that you have to pay for the games.


  • Options
    #57
    Brian
    Registered Users Posts: 5,699 ✭✭✭Brian


    AlmightyCushion wrote: »
    If they go out of business they might give people the option to download the games. If your connection goes then you wouldn't be able to play the games. They said it will cost about the same price as xbox live. On top of that you have to pay for the games.
    Well we've got an hour to wait until something happens: Onlive.com


  • Options
    #58
    thebman
    Closed Accounts Posts: 10,012 ✭✭✭✭thebman


    Helix wrote: »
    again tho, do you not think that costings were assessed in the seven years they were working on it? id be fairly sure they have something thats not going to bankrupt them planned

    too many people writing this off as if its a pipe dream that someone came up with last week

    lets wait and see what they have for us first before we declare it completely unworkable

    if they held off for seven years until now, i doubt theyre going to throw out a half finished product that doesnt work, do you?

    It wouldn't be the first time a company had a pie in the sky dream in gaming especially.

    How many failed consoles were launched on the pipe dream aspirations to get large market share?

    ISP's in most countries (including America) would sh** themselves if even half their user base tried to use this service. The networks can't handle it and I still don't believe there is a mythical 99% lossless compression algorithm.

    With these kind of ideas, it is better to be skeptical until proven wrong IMO.


  • Options
    #59
    AlmightyCushion
    Moderators, Education Moderators, Technology & Internet Moderators Posts: 35,079 Mod ✭✭✭✭AlmightyCushion


    thebman wrote: »
    It wouldn't be the first time a company had a pie in the sky dream in gaming especially.

    Don't forget about steorn. :D


  • Options
    #60
    BlitzKrieg
    Registered Users Posts: 14,685 ✭✭✭✭BlitzKrieg


    or phantom

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Z6KIHqLQri0


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #61
    Brian
    Registered Users Posts: 5,699 ✭✭✭Brian


    Well this is not encouraging. If their server can't even handle a site-launch, how do they expect to stream games?


Advertisement