Onlive & the end of consoles?

super_furry

Phantom 2.

K.O.Kiki

I do think we should all see if it just a scam, or not.

But if it is a scam, this would be the best in videogaming history yet.
Imagine, all those journos being convinced they're "playing" the game! :pac:

But until I test it, I'll stay on the positive side of 'skeptical'.

Ciaran500

thebman wrote: »

One thing I noticed which nobody seems to have picked up is that the video never needs to buffer. Go stream any video online. It will need to buffer. IPTV works differently and this can't work like IPTV or bandwidth requirements will have just gone through the roof and then a bit higher. It should have buffered! Even the clip afterwards where he watches the video of him playing doesn't buffer. You can do this in Halo 3, it needs to buffer. There is a reason for this.

You don't understand what a buffer is if you think this needs to buffer. Having a buffer would completely render the system useless.

thebman wrote: »

I'm convinced this demo was running locally in the building. Those little boxes they have are probably just the recording equipment to record the feed of him playing if they are anything at all. It could be an empty box for all we know.

They said the servers are hosted 50miles away. So its very possible and much more likely that they just have a very high speed direct connection to that.

thebman

Ciaran500 wrote: »

You don't understand what a buffer is if you think this needs to buffer. Having a buffer would completely render the system useless.

I'll admit I wasn't thinking right when I said they had to buffer the game since it has to be real time (actually have a hangover) but they do have to buffer the grabs and then there are the video clips playing in the menu systems of the games. Nothing has to buffer or takes even a second to load from this services which is completely impossible. Those clips would have to come from the server, the device couldn't hold all that video and content on it as the list would change and be updated so it would be held server side, same as XBL or PSN.

Services such as XBL have masses of bandwidth but they don't waste it on their menu systems. No system would do that.

sink

thebman wrote: »

I'll admit I wasn't thinking right when I said they had to buffer the game since it has to be real time (actually have a hangover) but they do have to buffer the grabs and then there are the video clips playing in the menu systems of the games. Nothing has to buffer or takes even a second to load from this services which is completely impossible. Those clips would have to come from the server, the device couldn't hold all that video and content on it as the list would change and be updated so it would be held server side, same as XBL or PSN.

Services such as XBL have masses of bandwidth but they don't waste it on their menu systems. No system would do that.

The menu system would use the same bandwidth as doing anything on the service as none of it is rendered locally, it is rendered at the data centre and piped through as a single unbroken streaming video. So they don't need to stream each video clip in the menu separately, the are rendered into a single clip before being sent.

thebman

sink wrote: »

The menu system would use the same bandwidth as doing anything on the service as none of it is rendered locally, it is rendered at the data centre and piped through as a single unbroken streaming video. So they don't need to stream each video clip in the menu separately, the are rendered into a single clip before being sent.

How do you know that? That seems a bit wasteful.

Why the hell would you do it that way for the menu system? It could just be stored on the device and updated via firmware updates, same as a console so that you don't constantly stream content that doesn't need to be streamed.

So if I leave it on a menu or pause the game while I go to dinner, I'm using 5Mbps of bandwidth the whole time. That would just be inefficient.

BopNiblets

I think the whole point of the device is it that doesn't have to have anything but streaming components in it.

Why keep a menu system on a device that has to be updated individually 1000s of times when you can update the menu system once on the server?

Since the server saves the gamestate when you turn off the device, why would you leave it on when you go for dinner?

thebman

BopNiblets wrote: »

I think the whole point of the device is it that doesn't have to have anything but streaming components in it.

Why keep a menu system on a device that has to be updated individually 1000s of times when you can update the menu system once on the server?

Since the server saves the gamestate when you turn off the device, why would you leave it on when you go for dinner?

Because it will p*ss off ISP's less and users won't hit their caps when they forget to turn it off or won't waste massive bandwidth causing contention to other users on the same ISP (with not all that many users on a service this demanding).

People leave stuff on when they go to dinner because you don't want to have to go through a 2 minute start up process again, same reason you pause existing games instead of saving it and turning it off (even in games with instant access to save people don't do this all the time).

It doesn't have to be updated thousands of times a day (aware you didn't say that but your 1,000 times makes the update process look bad). It would have to be updated maybe once a week or so and can be pushed out. You'd have to update it on the server anyway as new games aren't going to add themselves so when a device is pushed it out, it checks the date of last update. If there is a new one, download the new update.

It reduces load on servers and reduces bandwidth. Why the fook wouldn't you do it? It has to have memory anyway for the information it will temporarily be storing. All you have to do is increase it by a very small amount. Memory is cheap even for end users at this stage let alone if making a device for mass production.

Anyway you don't even have to store the listings on it. Just the actual background images and the like which would change very rarely. No point in streaming them constantly. If you have a constant stream, they will be constantly sent down the line for no really good reason. Just sending the same information again for the craic.

Your talking about transmitting something 60 times a second to every user on your service when they use menus rather than storing it on the device itself at a once off cost of adding it to the device.

I don't see the benefit to excluding non-streaming parts. It isn't cheaper as you have to stream it constantly to the user which costs bandwidth and uses server resources.

Just my opinion on it that it is a foolish thing to do.

MooseJam

thebman wrote: »

B

It doesn't have to be updated thousands of times a day (aware you didn't say that but your 1,000 times makes the update process look bad).

Well I think the idea of the menu system they are using is that it shows games that are currently being played live on the system, so you can hop in and watch if you want to, so it wouldn't be possible to have an offline version of that,

you are right it does seem like a huge waste of bandwidth though

thebman

I think it is, lots of other services provide spectating features without wasting bandwidth like that.

Realistically your not goin to want to view a random game, your going to watch your friends play which is a very limited subset of games. You can select that person first and then start streaming their content.

Basically the way spectating currently works. Their menu system solves a problem I don't think existed, XBL has a great system for this. I don't know if its patent protected in some aspects but I'm sure a similar system could have been used that would reduce bandwidth usage for the end user, the ISP and OnLive themselves.

Super Sidious

Even if it is a sales pitch for one of the big companies to buy it over... hopefully the financial backing of one of the heavy weights will be able to help develop the type of technology needed for it...

It is in theory brilliant news... the possiblity of playing any game without having to move from your couch... nor the worry of having to upgrade to the latest gaming pc etc... the idea is mouth watering to say the least!

thebman

Personally I think it would have more effect on Mac/Linux sales than anything else.

Patricide

flynner13 wrote: »

Even if it is a sales pitch for one of the big companies to buy it over... hopefully the financial backing of one of the heavy weights will be able to help develop the type of technology needed for it...

It is in theory brilliant news... the possiblity of playing any game without having to move from your couch... nor the worry of having to upgrade to the latest gaming pc etc... the idea is mouth watering to say the least!

Nail on the head here, although il still remain scepticle untill i get my hands on a working copy!!

Fanny Cradock

If this did turn out to be true then it could possibly be the end of other gaming platforms. I would hate to have to play my beloved a fps with a joypad and with the meagre numbers of players a console can muster. All I want is a mouse and keyboard and a 30 v 30 battle.

OctavarIan

This won't replace consoles for a long time. If it doesn't run as smoothly as a console in a stable environment the chances of it running smoothly for the rest of the world are slim.

Basically they're offering the latency and server downtimes associated with MMORPGs except they'll be using much more server resources per user, sending more information to each user and (potentially) serving more users. Yeah I'm gonna have to step back and be pessimistic here.

As much as I want to see this succeed, I doubt it will seriously threaten the existing market in any way unless the games are significantly cheaper.

BopNiblets

thebman wrote: »

Because it will p*ss off ISP's less and users won't hit their caps when they forget to turn it off or won't waste massive bandwidth causing contention to other users on the same ISP (with not all that many users on a service this demanding).

I don't think they care about caps and that stuff in the USA (do they even exist?), but you're right if the system was running in Ireland nowadays, eircoms infrastructure would probably melt.

Cuddlesworth

BopNiblets wrote: »

I don't think they care about caps and that stuff in the USA (do they even exist?), but you're right if the system was running in Ireland nowadays, eircoms infrastructure would probably melt.

Yes, they do. Most of America has net infrastructure that is ten times worse then us.

BopNiblets

Oh yeah? Huh I thought they were ahead, where's that chart of better broadband countries when you need it, I think Japan and Korea are top, naturally.

wayne040576

This thing has generated a lot of talk over the last few days.

Maybe I'm being paranoid but is there any possibility that it is an April fool's joke orchestrated by the GDC crowd? With the intention of announcing the joke tomorrow.

thebman

wayne040576 wrote: »

This thing has generated a lot of talk over the last few days.

Maybe I'm being paranoid but is there any possibility that it is an April fool's joke orchestrated by the GDC crowd? With the intention of announcing the joke tomorrow.

Could be but the ISP for the event has said that OnLive didn't have any connections going to their booth.

They have released a statement saying they got their own line in due to bandwidth requirements. That should be easily to confirm with the organisers if they had permission to do that.

I doubt it, most likely they are lying and it was run locally or it is an April Fools.

WolfForager

http://uk.ps3.ign.com/articles/967/967931p1.html

Sony retaliates?

silvine

It’s scheduled for the first half of 2009. According to wikipedia, the people behind it seem have a lot of credit.

* Steve Perlman is Onlive's CEO who is well known for QuickTime, WebTV, and other ventures.

* Mike McGarvey is Onlive's COO who was Eidos' former CEO
* Tom Paquin is Onlive's executive vice president of engineering. He is most well known as being a key developer behind Netscape and as the founder of Mozilla.org.
* John Spinale is Onlive's vice president of Games and Media. John has built and rebuilt numerous development organizations, serving as SVP of Product Development at Eidos during its recent turnaround and sale. Prior to this, he played a key role in the revitalization of Activision as a Director and Executive Producer, building the products and teams to fuel the resurgence. A successful entrepreneur as well, John founded and ran Bitmo.[11]
* Paul V. Weinstein is Onlive's vice president of business development.
* Charlie Jablonski is Onlive's vice president of operations.

Genghiz Cohen

WolfForager wrote: »

http://uk.ps3.ign.com/articles/967/967931p1.html

Sony retaliates?

Is it too much of a coincidence?
Probably Steam Cloud for the PSTriple.

thebman

Genghiz Cohen wrote: »

Is it too much of a coincidence?
Probably Steam Cloud for the PSTriple.

Its more brand protection than anything else I imagine.

Genghiz Cohen

thebman wrote: »

Its more brand protection than anything else I imagine.

That's much more likely.

Krieg

Im on the skeptic side like most people, but let me ask a question -

Say onlive is launched and it delivers what it promises. Theres little/no issues regarding lag/ISP's etc. They expand to europe, subscription price of €30pm & €45 for new games

Would you use the service?
Would you abandon your console / stop upgrading your PC?

silvine

Onlive defend themselves: http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/technology/7976206.stm


Kreig, I would use the service but not exclusively. Xbox Live is pretty sweet and PC gaming has a lot of cool feautures e.g. mods, specialised controls etc. Even if OnLive works it will take a while for it establish itself.

thebman

Pasting my comment from Digg:

Even if it does work, it will be less good than what Pc gamers and console gamers are currently used to so why would you use it?

So the market is outside of the hardcore gamer except they don't want a subscription service because they don't play enough (e.g. Wii users) and they don't want to play Crysis.

I guess they could get the inbetween market maybe but it is dependent on costs and quality of service. The biggest question remains server costs. It isn't so much getting it going as keeping it going with incremental updates to run the latest games every 6 months or so. It has to run them at top graphics or people will question what they pay for.

Personally I can see an excellent service at the start sliding over time as they fail to invest in keeping the infrastructure up to date.

Hell if people are on here complaining about digg/myspace/facebook/youtube not making a profit, my god will this ever have a hell of a job making money.

Then you have their algorithm and chip which although revolutionary, I've yet to hear the word patented or patent pending and why wouldn't you do that if it was that revolutionary?

I know the guys behind it are supposed to be credible but its not that it doesn't work in test, its that it probably doesn't scale and will be difficult to make a profit out of.

Kimbot

The way I look at it is this:

Phantom was first announced in 2002? Thats 7 years ago. According to the creators of this they have been developing this for 7 years, one company wanted in on the hype of Phantom and conducted their own research. They might have a trick up their sleeve as 7 years is a long time to be working on a machine.

I think this could be pulled off, maybe if they also provided you with a dish back to their datacenters in your region it would work. You are using bankwidth supplied by the data center that your subscription pays for every month, no ISP problems then.

thebman

Installation costs would be high if they did that though killing the main appeal of the product.