marrec

" @marrec said:

I see big things for the tech at the very least, it's quite impressive and works very well. The fact that they can sell this for 99$ is kinda remarkable.

It's a video decompressor and not a lot else.  I wouldn't be surprised if they're going to make a substantial profit on each of these microconsoles sold.
 
What's impressive about it?  I don't get how anyone could be particularly impressed with it.  In fact the entire idea is so completely backwards (literally backwards, in that this is how computers were usually used more than 3 decades ago) that it strikes me as a drastic deevolution.  It's like making a modern computer with vacuum tubes.
 
As usual I could see this as a fine service for people who really didn't care about games.  Those who cared so little they didn't even bother to buy a Xbox 360, for example.  Again, the problem continues that they're charging too much to really reach that market.
 
Everything OnLive does can be done better with a console or cheap PC.  You may save a hundred or two off the initial price, but you're immediately locked into OnLive's pricing structure, paying your bandwidth fees, and you're still not getting an equivalent experience.
 
If services like OnLive do eventually catch on it'll just mean less consumer rights than ever, stagnation in the evolution of gaming tech, and standards for quality bottoming out.  It's painful to imagine a world where no one has private data storage, no one can alter data without permission, no one has any legal rights to those things they purchase... "

" @marrec said:

" @Branthog said:

" OnLive is a tremendous idea that will flounder for years, like virtual reality, except you'll actually be able to own it.  I see too many problems. The bandwidth involved, the degradation in quality as has already been seen, the lack of depth and breadth in their library, etc. I'd love to see it blow up and become the greatest thing ever. I just don't see it. Not this iteration, at least. And probably not even this decade. "

They've been able to keep this thing tredding water while still keeping promises like removing the monthy subscription fee and released this TV-Top unit.... I wouldn't be surprised if it just skids along for a few years until broadband penetration reaches critical-mass and/or the tech is improved a bit.   It wouldn't take much for this to become the next little black box to go along with Boxee/Roku. "

I think that's only part of the concern. Their biggest issue is going to be developers, who already have relationships with console makers - if they're not already directly owned by console makers. The existing names in the business will adopt this or buy the company out and adopt it, long before they'll just give up their interface domination and start going through OnLive. They have a hard enough time dealing with Steam and these hurdles make those look like stepping stones. "

" OnLive is a tremendous idea that will flounder for years, like virtual reality, except you'll actually be able to own it.  I see too many problems. The bandwidth involved, the degradation in quality as has already been seen, the lack of depth and breadth in their library, etc. I'd love to see it blow up and become the greatest thing ever. I just don't see it. Not this iteration, at least. And probably not even this decade. "

So now Harmonix and Bizarre can form a new company that makes rhythm based driving games. 

" @Spoonman671:@Blair: What's laughable is your shitty post, here's a sticker for participation. Mention better characters or stories, otherwise you're a troll who should GTFO. Although based on your three-word posting I'm afraid to hear what you would consider good writing. "

Demon's Souls was actually released in '09 in the US, but it is a 2010 release for Europe so it still counts... RIGHT?