Giant Bomb News

114 Comments

OnLive On For June

Pricing and availability announced for streaming game service.

 Users will be able to exchange video of their gameplay exploits and browse video user profiles.
In a talk given at GDC this morning, OnLive's Steve Perlman announced that the OnLive Game Service will go live on June 17, provided you live in the continental US. The base level of subscription service will run $14.95, with potential discounts for people willing to sign up for a multi-month subscription. That subscription doesn't include the actual rental or purchase of games, which will cost extra.

In case you forgot, OnLive is designed to be a streaming game service. Rather than running games on your local PC hardware, OnLive runs them on some server farm somewhere and streams video of the game directly to your device. The demos keep showing Crysis running on an iPhone, which is a funny little proof of concept, but not an especially useful one. You'll be able to stream it to "virtually any device," according to the announcement, but at launch this really means "PCs and Macs through a small browser plug-in." Last year, the company showed off a tiny video decoder device that'll let you stream out to a TV, as well. This "MicroConsole TV adapter" will be discussed later this year.

As for publisher support, OnLive is set to have games from THQ, 2K, Ubisoft, EA, and WBIE. The service is expecting to have somewhere between 12 and 25 games available at launch, and some of the included titles are Mass Effect 2, Assassin's Creed II, and Borderlands.

I'll be interested to give this another shot at some point, but I remain very skeptical. Last time I was able to actually play a game via OnLive, it seemed like a neat idea that would never work for action games that value split-second timing, such as Burnout Paradise, which is what I played when I saw it. But paying a monthly fee, then paying additional rental/purchase fees, just so I can play a latent version of a game doesn't replace having actual hardware in your home. If that problem hasn't been solved, then it's hard to imagine OnLive appealing to anyone other than less-discerning players who wouldn't know any better. Jeff Gerstmann on Google+
114 Comments
  • 114 results
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
Posted by Jeff
 Users will be able to exchange video of their gameplay exploits and browse video user profiles.
In a talk given at GDC this morning, OnLive's Steve Perlman announced that the OnLive Game Service will go live on June 17, provided you live in the continental US. The base level of subscription service will run $14.95, with potential discounts for people willing to sign up for a multi-month subscription. That subscription doesn't include the actual rental or purchase of games, which will cost extra.

In case you forgot, OnLive is designed to be a streaming game service. Rather than running games on your local PC hardware, OnLive runs them on some server farm somewhere and streams video of the game directly to your device. The demos keep showing Crysis running on an iPhone, which is a funny little proof of concept, but not an especially useful one. You'll be able to stream it to "virtually any device," according to the announcement, but at launch this really means "PCs and Macs through a small browser plug-in." Last year, the company showed off a tiny video decoder device that'll let you stream out to a TV, as well. This "MicroConsole TV adapter" will be discussed later this year.

As for publisher support, OnLive is set to have games from THQ, 2K, Ubisoft, EA, and WBIE. The service is expecting to have somewhere between 12 and 25 games available at launch, and some of the included titles are Mass Effect 2, Assassin's Creed II, and Borderlands.

I'll be interested to give this another shot at some point, but I remain very skeptical. Last time I was able to actually play a game via OnLive, it seemed like a neat idea that would never work for action games that value split-second timing, such as Burnout Paradise, which is what I played when I saw it. But paying a monthly fee, then paying additional rental/purchase fees, just so I can play a latent version of a game doesn't replace having actual hardware in your home. If that problem hasn't been solved, then it's hard to imagine OnLive appealing to anyone other than less-discerning players who wouldn't know any better.
Posted by RedJester1029

sweet
Posted by Scooper

"But paying a monthly fee, then paying additional rental/purchase fees, just so I can play a latent version of a game doesn't replace having actual hardware in your home."
 
I agree.

Posted by core1065

SAY WHAAAAAAAAAAAT!!!!!!! This... This is actually coming out.......... 
  

 

Posted by Bunnyman

I still say this is the future of gaming. Perhaps not in this exact form, but give it some time.

Posted by teh_destroyer

interesting, i don't know if i am sold on this yet though.

Posted by FinalDasa

I'd rather see an Xbox Live model, small yearly payment to have full access to all the On-Live goodies. 
And then a discounted price on game purchases and rentals, otherwise I could save my $15 a month a buy games.

Moderator Online
Edited by NoXious

$15 / month and you still have to buy games? Not to mention the broadband cost for using a bandwidth heavy service like OnLive.
I bet this will end up being more expensive then actual PC gaming (if you do it right, get geeky to do so!) on the long run.

Well for OnLive's defense: I don't even pay for Xbox 360 Live Gold, because I think that kind of service should come free with a inet connection.

@Stoneious:
Oh shit you're right! What if I buy a game and stop paying subscription? I don't like the sound of this service at all!

Edited by momentarylogic

Apple fans should be prone to giving it a go... just so long as OnLive market their product appropriately, and has the quality of apple products.. wait, what were we talking about?

Posted by WitchHunter_Z

Oh wow... $15 monthly fee gets you exactly... what? Is it just to cover server costs? Shouldn't that be included in the pricing of the games?

Posted by Ineedaname

How's this looking these days?
Last I time I heard of it, it was a post Diamond linked to, and it never looked so good.

Posted by dutch42

definitely interested to see how this works out. the company I work for has very recently branched out into cloud capability, it really seems to be the 'little black dress' of the IT industry at the moment.

Posted by FreakAche

I'm glad that this is actually coming out, simply because it will inevitably lead to competitors with better network architecture and a more reasonable pricing structure.

Posted by Demyx

ouch, no thanks. Having to pay a subscription and rental/purchase fees isn't something I want. I'd rather just build my own PC and have games on my computer.

Posted by strangeling

I'm going to hold out for a Phantom.

Posted by DannyJ

I've heard that it's still kind of laggy

Posted by Stoneious

Launches in June? Out of business by October. A monthly fee on top of a normally priced game that I don't actually own and lose access to if I stop the monthly payments? It will never work in this form.

Posted by Pakorn1

If they put the two or three PS3 exclusive games I want to play onto this service (Uncharted, Metal Gear 4 and Heavy Rain,) I would try it. Otherwise, I can already play all that stuff on my 360 and PC.

Edited by blackbeard

I am trying to have *less* *subscriptions* to things in my life. Far to many *services* nickel and dimeing us every month. I don't even know if I am going to bother to renew my xbox live subscription. PSN is free (well for now at least and hopefully it stays this way) so I use that the most. There is no way i am paying a subscription fee for another gaming service (or service on any kind) on top of then having to pay to rent them (probably on a minutes or hours basis). 
 
I buy the things I want and I use them over and over without paying again and again even if its twenty years later. I am tired of this trend of fees, subscriptions, micro payments, rentals, and other varying ways for locking people into recurring costs. 
 
As far as I am concerned if a company can't survive by selling a product I can use freely then that company doesn't deserve to survive. 
 
OnLive, unless something crazy happens, it a definite pass for me. 
 
Edit: DLC is something I am ok with and like. These are still things I can buy to extend the life of other things I already own that I can still use freely (after the initial cost) over and over to my hearts content.

Posted by i69edUrGpa

I am very doubtful about this but hopefully it suprises

Posted by Yzzerdd

OnLive will be OnDead in a year tops.

Posted by SneakerElph

Even a few milliseconds lag could throw a twitch game off like Counter-Strike of Modern Warfare. Other games wouldn't take too kindly to it either. 
 
So $15, plus games, plus lag.... I fail to see how this is a great deal compared to a traditional console. Perhaps this is the future of gaming, but not until we have fiber lines with <1ms latency. I think I'd still prefer a console for offline play, and the ability to let friends borrow games.

Posted by mnzy

I'm still extremely sceptical about this whole thing from a technical perspective.
Can somebody tell me why latency seems to be so unimportant now when in shooters people won't play with a ping higher 50? You will have more than that for every input you do in this thing.

Posted by TheHBK

This is great, but really... they need to expand this whole purchasing thing.  If I purchase a game on steam, then I should be able to play it on On Live and just have to pay the subscription service...?  14.99 a month... so thats basically charging for them to run the game and to stream it to me, not for the actual game? 
Lets break it down.  15 bucks a month.  So for now you have to have a computer to play this by streaming, mac or PC.  Why not just spend those 15 bucks a month on a new video card... or a console?  Every 24 months upgrade the video card at 300 bucks, cheaper than the $360 for those 24 months of On Live.  And what happens I dont want On Live anymore?  i lose those games even if I have a PC that can play them?  the only good thing I see is being able to play on a laptop, when you are away, since most laptops cant handle the latest games.  They need to answer more questions.

Posted by AllanIceman

No way! really?

Posted by scarace360

wow it made it this far good luck to those guys and hope your looking for a new job right now cause on live will be dead fast.  But i wonder if this thing actually is good like it works well what will happen to the market.

Posted by avantegardener

You win this round continental America, you win this round...

Posted by jos1ah

Man, not having the peace of mind of the physical, reliable disc is a dealbreaker.  Fuck the idea of it all relying on a bunch of internet connections and servers.  If rentals were just another option on xbox live, then that might be cool, but this idea is not.  Constant streaming is a ridiculous idea, and one that's only really convenient for and respectful of big business, not the consumer.
Edited by ChrisTaran

Hope this fails horribly.  This is the worst possible direction the gaming market could move in.
 
I refuse to rent my media.  If I can't own it, I don't want it.  Also very anti-Steam and other digital only places.

Posted by SoulAssassin808

Too bad only like 10 country's in the world offer a fast enough connection and no bandwidth cap for this. It will have a PS3 launch and die after a year because they don't have money to keep on losing

Edited by PenguinDust

If I am going to be renting, I prefer my subscription to Gamefly where I never have to worry about any lag issues except those from my own network. 

Posted by alternate

I didn't expect an all you could eat monthly fee - the publishers would never allow it - but if you buy or rent the OnLive version of a game then you can only ever play it on the OnLive service so their cut should be out of that - like steam not xbox live.

Posted by Jimbo

Assuming for a moment that it works flawlessly, that's still like ~$500 over 3 years, so it's hardly a cheap alternative to just buying the hardware.  Even in a best case scenario, I'm still not really seeing the benefit to the customer?
 
I really hope this doesn't take off in a big way.  Once those physical game retailers are put out of business they aren't coming back, and at that point, if this 'streaming games' market ends up looking like the PC digital distribution market does at present, then whoever the Steam of that market is will have a free hand to set the price of games at whatever they want.

Posted by ztiworoh

Interesting idea, but I sure hope they're going to have a good free-trial period before starting a subscription. As a Mac user, it'll be nice to have access to this game library but I'm going to need to try it before I commit.

Online
Posted by Milkman

Paying a subscription fee automatically makes this useless.

Posted by Box3ru13

quite interested to see how this  pans out, I might try it out if it works for ME2 no doubt. Seeing how my puter is broken right now and I'm on a netbook.  
  
Regardless of how OnLive turns out I think the ball is rolling on this concept and the streaming aspect can only get better as technology gets better. It may not set the world on fire this year but I wouldn't count it out in the years to come. 

Posted by DewRequired

$15 a month plus the price of the game? Pass, I'd rather buy a piece of hardware and not have to pay a monthly fee.

Posted by JoelTGM

Oh yeah a sub fee... I live in Canada so I can't get it yet anyway, but paying $15 a month ontop of the games sounds rough.  Although, if it's a good service, then I will totally pay for a sub because my PC is getting old now and I don't feel like paying hundreds to upgrade.

Posted by Sharpless

Countdown to failure: Three months, one week...

Posted by Shuborno
@ChrisTaran said:
" Hope this fails horribly.  This is the worst possible direction the gaming market could move in.  I refuse to rent my media.  If I can't own it, I don't want it.  Also very anti-Steam and other digital only places. "
I think renting is fine if the price is right.  I don't know if $15 is a good price unless they explain that this gets you X games a month or something.
Posted by PJ

I'm not going to pay for shit and not own it for real. They could just as well make it so that a year or so they dorp some games of their service to make room for more and then yout fucked if you want to play it again. If they don't to something like MS does whit GoD and XBLM(that you can redownload shit you bought even if its taken of the service) then this is a waste of time and money.
 
Also, I dont want to depend on my internet connection if I want to play a game. Some times it could go down or it can be capped and then what the hell do you do.
No, OnLive will fail in a spectaculer facion and I will stand there laughing my ass of because this is a retarded and won't work as well as the real thing 80% of the time. And what if you live far away from the servers? It simply will look shity.

Posted by TheAdmin

 I'm not paying to have something that, even if i buy the games, I really own nothing.  If I buy the games, but then I don't want the service anymore - I payed 60 bucks for a rental?   PASS.  

Posted by Jedted

The title of this article should be "OnLive will Go Live in June!" 
Posted by KaosAngel

Don't care anymore...Steam is coming out to OSX.

Posted by PLWolf
@DewRequired said:
" $15 a month plus the price of the game? Pass, I'd rather buy a piece of hardware and not have to pay a monthly fee. "
Werd! That's just setting their product up for failure.
Posted by Pinworm45

no thx

Posted by metalsnakezero

There are alot of things that is holding back OnLive. We already seen how being disconnected from the Internet has effected our ability to play our games (ex what happen to the DRM servers on Ubisoft PC games). Now the price of Onlive isn't making things better by not only paying for subscriptions but for renting and buy games on their service. I really don't this working.

Posted by ProfessorEss
@Bunnyman said:
" I still say this is the future of gaming. Perhaps not in this exact form, but give it some time. "
I'd agree with that statement if you change "some time" to "A LOT of time".
 
...and yes, the a lot must be capitalized and bold for my compliance (italic is optional but exceptable).
Online
Posted by Ghostiet
@DewRequired said:
" $15 a month plus the price of the game? Pass, I'd rather buy a piece of hardware and not have to pay a monthly fee. "

This. Also, renting? No way.
Posted by PJ
@Pakorn1 said:
" If they put the two or three PS3 exclusive games I want to play onto this service (Uncharted, Metal Gear 4 and Heavy Rain,) I would try it. Otherwise, I can already play all that stuff on my 360 and PC. "
I wouldn't hold my breath. Games like Uncharted, MGS4, Heavy Rain, Halo, Forza or any other console exclusives will never come to OnLive, especially if they are first party or published by MS or Sony. Simply becuase they want you to buy the games for their system. Also, these will be the PC versions of all games so if it doesn't have a PC port it ain't going OnLive.
And like you said, I can't see anyone using this when they have a console or PC that can run those games.
  • 114 results
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3