OnLive is sooooooooo awsum

[DraQ]

Stage 1:
Denial

 

[Xi]

Stage 1:
Denial

Denying it's possible. Check.

Denying it's economically possible. Check.

Denying it'll catch on. Check.

Sounds like there's lots of denial going on but who is to blame?

 

[Black Bart Charley]

I think, you are new to the business world.

According to who, some dumbfuck on the internet? Please.

Some dumbfuck on the internet is preaching in every thread how awesome paying Jewlive is to other dumbfucks, so there...

But no, according to hundreds of failed/sold startups with a bunch of capital behind their backs that were not profitable. Should I list examples or will you shut up?
Their business model is like many other IT startups. Customers will come and pay us. If we are not profitable, we will sell to some big guys like Google and MS.

Wanna see your quote?

I don't know what their business model is, but I suspect it is profitable or you wouldn't have seen all of the investments by the likes of Time Warner, AT&T, etc

You imply that venture capital has anything to do with profitability. Venture capital has nothing to do with profitability from the get go. Its a bet on potential and a risky one. Across industries at that, from IT like Twitter and to real hardware like Tesla Motors.

But go on. Tell us how awesome it is to bow to your Overlords.
See this fat fuck? He should be your natural enemy except when your work for him.

 

[MetalCraze]

I don't know what their business model is, but I suspect it is profitable or you wouldn't have seen all of the investments by the likes of Time Warner, AT&T, etc

I didn't see any investments. So far there are just hype and the only proof is them running it on a bunch of Win7 servers stuffed with common hardware incapable of serving multiple clients - and even then it's a huge fail with the quality and lags.

Also, if it didn't seem plausible none of the publishers would have ported games to the system.

You don't need to port "next-gen" games to Win7. They ported nothing nowhere. They just basically give you a software that sets up your PC in terminal mode and stream desktop screenshots from their server.
There is no supersikrit custom build hardware that Intel, AMD and Nvidia know nothing about.

This questions revolves around your complete lack of understanding of server tech and operation costs

Me? Man it's you who is telling me that it is possible to calculate graphics in real-time on the dedicated server with playable framerates with CPU/HDD/RAM being on another server
You sure you don't confuse anything here?

Not to mention, Onlive gets both $15 a month(after the initial free wave) and a cut of each game sale. Also, they get a piece of all rentals, and they plan to release movies for streaming over the service. There's a boatload of money in this.

Let's see. $15 to rent a multi-thousand dollar hardware for each user, pay multi-thousand dollar sallaries and buy multi-thousand dollar replacements due to repairs, not mentioning paying multithousand dollars rents for buildings and bandwidth.
This is SO financially viable.
Again you avoid the question - how the fuck $15 and $50, 50%+ from which will go to publishers, per month per user will pay for this?

I don't think onlive will struggle to get a few million subscribers.

Tell me where will they get all the money for a million of servers, staff, bandwidth, tech-support, etc?
It isn't some shitty server in the basement calculating whether mob killed the player or not in a shitty MMO.

 

[Overweight Manatee]

The only hope Onlive has to actually make money is through publisher bribes. Publishers see the 50-75% piracy rate, not only on the PC but also on the xbox, and will pay good money for a platform on which piracy is not possible.

 

[MetalCraze]

Oh yeah sure. Evil publishers are so mad with pirates they will actually... lose all the money just not to let pirates play the game.
Because they are not interested in profit if they will pay additional fees to OnLive besides % for selling their games as they will get none.

A kind uncle Sam will not buy you $1000 worth of hardware for $15/mo and pay for all supporting costs for it during the whole time just out of the blue. Please proceed to the nearest mouse trap for free cheese.

 

[Xi]

lol, skyway you are so ridiculous. I'm not sure if you are trolling or if you are just that stupid. It's amusing me though.

If they've launched the service, I'm pretty sure they understand operation costs. The real kicker is whether people will sign-up for the service or not. The operation costs are nothing once they have a few million subscribers. It's a mountain of gold.

They aren't buying 1 PC per user. They are virtualizing each game in a massive server cluster. All that matters is peak and baseline usage. With a million subscribers, only a small portion will be using the service at any given time. Peak might be 50-60%, base is probably around 30-40%. lol, I don't know why I care to explain this to you guys. Oh well..

 

[Melcar]

Jew gold.

 

[Xi]

Jew gold.

That's better than Nazi gold.

 

[MasterSmithFandango]

Jew gold.

That's better than Nazi gold.

[Perception]=fail

Jew Gold is Nazi Gold.

 

[MetalCraze]

If they've launched the service, I'm pretty sure they understand operation costs.

They launched nothing yet.

The operation costs are nothing once they have a few million subscribers. It's a mountain of gold.

You do know that the amount of needed financing will also rise proportionally?

They aren't buying 1 PC per user

Please post me hardware specs of what they are buying.
And how exactly can they run more than 4 weakling "next-gen" games on 8 core CPU, which mind you costs ~$700 if it's Intel, which ~$170 a user which is 3 months of $15 subscriptions from 4 people before they will be able to pay for a SINGLE cpu. While CPU is only a single part of the whole server. Add to that that you can still render only one game per GPU.

They are virtualizing each game in a massive server cluster

Virtualizing through what?
On which hardware? On which OS?

With a million subscribers, only a small portion will be using the service at any given time.

With a hundred of subscribers only a small portion will be using the service at any given time too. Your point?

 

[Xi]

They launched nothing yet.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cokWy-NO ... re=channel

 

[MetalCraze]

A video from a user registered today just to post 2 OnLive videos.

Whoop-dee-doo.
Advertising bots are such a new shit to YouTube.

How about answering the rest of the questions?
Or telling how much OnLive pays you because really nobody can be that stupid

 

[GarfunkeL]

So, average graphic settings (not the MAX promised), both input/output lag (14ms ping, meaning 28ms there and back, jesus christ), and even the ridiculously positive beta tester admitting that only shitty console shooters with autoaim are fully playable and even they lose to the normal version...

Sure, it's just few kinks and they'll work it out soon!

 

[MetalCraze]

He's an advertising bot. In a second video you can see that all games are SUDDENLY available to him.
Xi, you just ate shit by posting a video from a guy who works for OnLive PR department as a "proof" that it works. Your comments?

 

[ever]

I feel bad about this.

Its like telling a kid santa clause doesn't exist.

We should start consoling Xi instead of persisting to drive the point home.

there, there Xi. there, there.

 

[DarkUnderlord]

According to the forums, the cost of Crysis through Onlive is $50.

For comparison:

Crysis is $30 on steam. $15 on Amazon.

Crysis Maximum edition (include Crysis, Crysis Warhead, and Crysis Wars): $40 on steam. $37 on Amazon.

Its almost like you are paying extra money to have them buy crappy hardware that can hardly run medium settings at low resolution, ontop of having rampant compression artifacts and input lag. You also can't play MW: Living Legends on your Onlive Crysis game, which is approximately 40% of the reason someone would be buying Crysis in the first place

Their pricing model is a bit fucked. Almost like when home video was introduced, the story goes that movie execs wanted to charge something like $100 for people to rent a video for a week - given they were working on the basis of a family of Four watching the movie twice so it was still a discount based on ticket prices. Wasn't until they went "Hey, drop it to like two bucks" and the industry took off and they made millions out of it.

Under this system, the only model I can see working is a simple "Pay X per month" and you get access to every game on the system. How that money is distributed to the developers can be based on percentages of playing time. After taking out the basic ongoing monthly cost (which will have to be minimal - again why I think the technology is too early) the rest is split up amongst developers.

I mean, come on, the system prevents any and all piracy. Stopping piracy is supposed to see a massive increase in sales, right? Right? RIGHT? More than enough to justify a reduced price.

 

[ever]

This is the problem when you have a bunch of old men running entertainment companies: hurr piracy is baed durr

 

[fizzelopeguss]

A shitty computer could run UTIII at 720p.

 

[desocupado]

I'm curious to see where this goes. It won't be good for costumers, that's clear, but as to the service...

It does seem a crappy service, lag, no MAX graphics, small coverage (not everybody has decent broadband).

But on the other hand, never underestimate the biggest invention of the history of humanity. Marketing.

 

[Overweight Manatee]

I mean, come on, the system prevents any and all piracy. Stopping piracy is supposed to see a massive increase in sales, right? Right? RIGHT? More than enough to justify a reduced price.

I know, with all the bitching they make about piracy I'm surprised they aren't already adding in input lag in non-onlive versions of the game to balance it out and encourage people to adopt onlive.

I also really hope they don't read this post and discover this awesomely assholish idea to piss off people.

I suppose their way to drive people in is centered on the 1 year free + 1 or 2 free games. Encourage people to buy 2 or 3 more, then when the year is up its pay $5 or lose $150 worth of games. It couldn't be a more obvious marketing ploy, but I still think its probably not going to work and they should be making it much, much cheaper.

 

[Genma:TheDestroyer]

I'm curious to see where this goes.

Me too, but then I say that about most car wrecks.

 

[DraQ]

Stage 1:
Denial

Denying it's possible. Check.

Denying it's economically possible. Check.

Denying it'll catch on. Check.

Sounds like there's lots of denial going on but who is to blame?

So, how are they willing to accomplish setting servers in every major city of the world and laying fibres to every user's household? Will such a massive project cost much? How will authorities handle traffic disruption caused by so simultaneous groundworks this extensive?

Finally, are there any news of major gaming/hardware companies planning to force upgrades of users' retinas and brains, so the necessity of frequent upgrades onlive will save us all from remains the force driving the market?

 

[Xi]

So, how are they willing to accomplish setting servers in every major city of the world and laying fibres to every user's household? Will such a massive project cost much? How will authorities handle traffic disruption caused by so simultaneous groundworks this extensive?

You don't need a server in every city. They've determined that a 1000 mile radius around the server works(but no further and obviously the closer the better). With just 3 data centers, they've covered 85% of the entire United States.

The infrastructure you speak of will come with time. It's being upgraded daily. Shit, I have a 6mb connection in BFE Idaho.

They are launching in Europe next year as stated on there website. With just a few servers they will cover the entire area just like they did in the US.

 

[Turjan]

So, how are they willing to accomplish setting servers in every major city of the world and laying fibres to every user's household? Will such a massive project cost much? How will authorities handle traffic disruption caused by so simultaneous groundworks this extensive

Not sure about Onlive - I don't really think it will work well at the moment - but laying fast fibre-optic internet is happening at the moment by many providers, here where I live it's Qwest. Traffic is a bitch. They offer 40 Mbps for $19.99 for the first six months. After that, it will be $80 ($60 for 20 Mbps, $40 for 12 Mbps). So, this part of the cake goes to internet providers. Not sure whether providers will put up with traffic for Onlive.