OnLive On For June

All I'm sayin'....
 
  Results 1 - 10 of about 13,300 for onlive "never work". (0.42 seconds)

The only thing that I could probably use this for is... PC games that I can't run, and 360 games that I can't play in HD.

" @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. "

Let's hope for Jeff's sake they don't offer a lifetime subscription :)

The concept is interesting but this really doesn't appeal to me at all. I prefer just buying my games in physical form or, at the very least, on my hard drive.

" Oh joy, another Yankee only service. Just what the world needs. "

Wow, first news for OnLive for a long time.

Seems like the only thing left for this to prove is the games!

It depends how much each game costs. $14.95 is definitely a better price to pay than the thousands it costs to make sure your PC is always up to snuff.

Well, If you can stream it to a PSP screen, I could hook up a ps3 controller via bluetooth. That would be crazy playing mass effect 2 on my PSP.
 
Or I could just play it on my 360.

Bring this to Canada >.<

Oh joy, another Yankee only service. Just what the world needs.

" 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.  "

I'm sure this thing will fail.

" 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. "

" $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. "

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

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.

no thx

" $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. "

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

 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.  

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.

" 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. "

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

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.

$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.

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. 

Paying a subscription fee automatically makes this useless.

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.

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.

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.

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. 

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

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.

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

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.

No way! really?

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.

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.

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.

OnLive will be OnDead in a year tops.

I am very doubtful about this but hopefully it suprises

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.

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.

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.

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

I'm going to hold out for a Phantom.