But you have a 3+ year old PC, judging by the video card you have. On the other hand, people with a computer younger than yours doesn't need to upgrade. The point is, you "need" to upgrade your PC every 3 years or so, which is really no big deal.Xi said:You missed my point. I have a 7900Gt. If the 8800 is struggling on modern games, then so would my card. What this means is that I would have to upgrade my entire system to play modern games.
Xi said:GarfunkeL said:WTF is wrong with you? GF 8600 was released in May 2007 and 8800 in November 2007 in any case. You are basically claiming that if you buy a 3 year old graphic card now, you would need to upgrade soon? NO SHIT SHERLOCK.
You missed my point. I have a 7900Gt. If the 8800 is struggling on modern games, then so would my card.
Xi said:What this means is that I would have to upgrade my entire system to play modern games. Why though? I mean, I'm not interested in anything at the moment. I don't want to drop 500 or more on a new computer that does exactly what the computer I'm typing to you on does. I don't want to be one of those old ladies with a super fast computer that emails. It's ridiculous.
Xi said:So, I have Onlive to make this work for me. I just activate the service when I see a game come along that I want to play. Play it for a month or two and then deactivate the service. Pretty simple and cost effective really.
Xi said:You think it makes sense for me to upgrade my entire computer to play a game here and there? Fuck you.
Spec:
3800+ X2 2ghz
1GB PC3200 RAM
7900GT
You mean all the Chinese manufacturers who pump out cloned parts by the millions and then stamp high-end brand name consumer labels on them? They'll just start making parts for the cloud servers.Norfleet said:I don't really see this as something that will catch on. Bigger players than publishers and developers stand to lose from this. Consider: If this actually could replace the desktop machine, what would happen to the companies making desktop computer parts, that can no longer sell them? I'm pretty sure these people are going to be opposed to this idea, and they have plenty of weight of their own.
What? Close your account and you lose everything? Good God, the horror! Why I thought if I closed my account, it would all still be active!Silellak said:That's right, motherfucker. Suspend your account for 12 months? Closed. Close your account? Say goodbye to anything you've purchased on the service.
The point is Xi's saying that with OnLive, he'd never "need" to. I mean, why bother? OnLive turns your PC into a dumb terminal as it puts all the processing on the server. You wouldn't need the latest schmatest graphics card or CPU processing power. Just a reasonably good connection which given time, will occur - as the article says, people in South Korea laugh at 700kb a sec which is all you need for OnLive.Mangoose said:But you have a 3+ year old PC, judging by the video card you have. On the other hand, people with a computer younger than yours doesn't need to upgrade. The point is, you "need" to upgrade your PC every 3 years or so, which is really no big deal.
I usually dump $1 - 2k AUD on a new PC every 2 - 3 years, which works out to about a cost of between $330 - $1000 a year depending on how much I spend. Even then I've bought the odd new graphics card here and there to keep an old machine alive a bit longer or because in one instance my motherboard fried. Then add the games I buy on top of that.MetalCraze said:He bitches that computers are so fucking pricy yet believes he will get the same PC power for just $15/mo?
They said the same thing about vacuum tubes.DraQ said:Additionally, we are approaching the physical limits quickly - both of hardware (as you might have heard, matter consists of atoms, and those aren't infinitely small)
For games maybe. Serious graphics power has typically always been used by high resolution medical imaging and a few other high-end applications (satellite image processing etc...). The kind of stuff you need a supercomputer for and the kind of place where being able to quickly manipulate an image at that extra resolution can help. Billions of dollars is spent on both.DraQ said:and of user perception, as well as financial limits - when the next several millions poured into development of newer, shinier graphics results in polys being visible from 5, rather than 10cm away, you simply stop pouring millions there.
You wish.DarkUnderlord said:They said the same thing about vacuum tubes.
And then someone went and invented the transistor.
Not particularly relevant to the gaming industry and Xi whining about the upgrades, though.DarkUnderlord said:For games maybe. Serious graphics power has typically always been used by high resolution medical imaging and a few other high-end applications (satellite image processing etc...). The kind of stuff you need a supercomputer for and the kind of place where being able to quickly manipulate an image at that extra resolution can help. Billions of dollars is spent on both.DraQ said:and of user perception, as well as financial limits - when the next several millions poured into development of newer, shinier graphics results in polys being visible from 5, rather than 10cm away, you simply stop pouring millions there.
DarkUnderlord said:What? Close your account and you lose everything? Good God, the horror! Why I thought if I closed my account, it would all still be active!
No shit sherlock. Of course if you choose to shutdown your account, they nuke it. That's what a shutdown is. It's why they offer a suspension. The suspension just seems like a fairly reasonable 12 month breather. A shutdown is the same as if you decide to throw out all of your discs. You lose everything!! OHMIGOSH!
DarkUnderlord said:The point is Xi's saying that with OnLive, he'd never "need" to. I mean, why bother? OnLive turns your PC into a dumb terminal as it puts all the processing on the server. You wouldn't need the latest schmatest graphics card or CPU processing power. Just a reasonably good connection which given time, will occur - as the article says, people in South Korea laugh at 700kb a sec which is all you need for OnLive.
DarkUnderlord said:I usually dump $1 - 2k AUD on a new PC every 2 - 3 years, which works out to about a cost of between $330 - $1000 a year depending on how much I spend. Even then I've bought the odd new graphics card here and there to keep an old machine alive a bit longer or because in one instance my motherboard fried. Then add the games I buy on top of that.
$15/mo USD is $180 USD a year or $204 AUD. That works our to even less than what I spend now - at the lowest end of the scale. Assuming the day comes that Australia ever gets a Broadband network, OnLive would be cheaper. And I could keep using the computer I have right now. All I need to be able to do is play video.
DarkUnderlord said:I usually dump $1 - 2k AUD on a new PC every 2 - 3 years, which works out to about a cost of between $330 - $1000 a year depending on how much I spend. Even then I've bought the odd new graphics card here and there to keep an old machine alive
DarkUnderlord said:a bit longer or because in one instance my motherboard fried.
Maybe they will use wormholes.Kraszu said:You also don't take into accounts the pings, close to server it may not be much of a difference when you play with gamepad lolz, but there is many people that will not be close to them, and having 1Gbs connection will not help with that.
You've seen the number of people who ask if they can delete their STEAM account right? If you're not using the service anyway, you're not losing out on a lot if you choose to de-activate your account. It's also not like an MMO in that you pay your $15 a month to only play that game. You, ultimately, get to play a lot more games so there's more reason for you to have your account. If you're not using your account, you likely aren't playing too many games at all.Kraszu said:They keep your login information so they could like omg reactivate your account imagine that.
If you're not playing enough games to warrant keeping your OnLive account active, you likely don't have a PC and a bunch of discs of games.Kraszu said:If you stop paying/suspension period ends you have to keep paying monthly to keep the games that you had already brought.
You don't have to pay monthly for disc, and if you buy PC instead of OnLive you actually own hardware that can run them that you don't pay monthly for.
Well, the video in the blog showed a from dead start-up of a game he didn't have installed compared to installing the game and downloading all the patches for it again. It was 20 mins to install vs 3 mins to get into the game in OnLive.Kraszu said:Yeah why ever have most disc space it is not like movies, and shit will ever take more space, why have PC that run your duplications faster, or start faster?DarkUnderlord said:The point is Xi's saying that with OnLive, he'd never "need" to. I mean, why bother?
Yeah, that's why I think they're still about 10 - 20 years too early. The network capacity just isn't there to support it yet. It will get there though.Kraszu said:You can manage with old PC but you can't say that there is no advantage to better one. You also don't take into accounts the pings, close to server it may not be much of a difference when you play with gamepad lolz, but there is many people that will not close to them, and having 1Gbs connection will not help with that.
That isn't on max settings. That PC runs Crysis in medium resolution. Any higher than that and she chugs like a bitch.Kraszu said:Yeah becouse video stream of console level gfx with input lag offers the same as 1.5k$ gaming PC.
If you just want to run the game not on maxed settings then why you do you spend so much on PC?
That was Oblivion. I bought a PC in 2004 with a mid-range graphics card (from memory, it was a Radeon of some sort). In 2006 Oblivion wouldn't run on it because the graphics card didn't support whatever shader technology it was Oblivion required. All I got was that white-screen error. I bought a new graphics card to keep the machine going for another year and then bought a whole new machine afterwards. I wouldn't have had that problem with OnLive and I'd still be able to play games with that PC even today. That's Crysis, at decent settings, on a Windows XP machine bought in 2004.Kraszu said:What so how old it was? You buy PC every 2-3 years, and you had to change gfx card? Details what game you couldn't run what you had actually brought in what year, that sound rather off from reality.DarkUnderlord said:I usually dump $1 - 2k AUD on a new PC every 2 - 3 years, which works out to about a cost of between $330 - $1000 a year depending on how much I spend. Even then I've bought the odd new graphics card here and there to keep an old machine alive
It didn't happen under warranty and again, with OnLive, I wouldn't "need" to upgrade. Why would I bother? When OnLive's motherboard fries you don't have to pay for a new one. They just switch you over to one of their other servers and you probably wouldn't even notice the downtime.Kraszu said:DarkUnderlord said:a bit longer or because in one instance my motherboard fried.
Does OnLive mb anty frying protections goes with the standard packet or with DLC? That is rather stupid point when you actually change PC every 2-3 years how often does things like that happen with hardware that is just after warranty period, and just before you upgrade.
DarkUnderlord said:If you're not playing enough games to warrant keeping your OnLive account active, you likely don't have a PC and a bunch of discs of games.
Why not I didn't care to change my PC for a long, but I still can play plenty of old games on it, wouldn't be the case with OnLive
Using options designed for people who decide they don't want to use the service, as an example of why that service is bad, is asinine.
DarkUnderlord said:It didn't happen under warranty and again, with OnLive, I wouldn't "need" to upgrade. Why would I bother? When OnLive's motherboard fries you don't have to pay for a new one. They just switch you over to one of their other servers and you probably wouldn't even notice the downtime.
I wouldn't "need" to upgrade
Decide they don't want to, or have it decided for them because their account was suspended for 12 months. They are in essence holding your "purchases" hostage unless you give them $5 a year - a pittance, to be sure - but it's not about the money, it's about the philosophy. There's no technological justification for doing this, nor is there a benefit to the customer. Personally, I will simply never pay for a service where my entire "collection" could have the plug pulled on it at any time, be it because my account is closed, or the service itself goes out of business.DarkUnderlord said:Using options designed for people who decide they don't want to use the service, as an example of why that service is bad, is asinine.
Silellak said:Since OnLive is just glorified rental service, what OnLive should be is a straight-up monthly fee for access to all of their library, similar to the way Gametap works. They could also adopt a tier'd pricing system where you can play X games a month for Y dollars. The concept of paying full price for a game you don't even own is fundamentally flawed, I think, and slanted in favor of everyone except the customer. It's designed to convince stupid people they own something, when all they're actually buying is a "pass" to play it.
The most logical thing to do would be to split the monthly fee based on how much use each game gets, but there's no guarantee publishers would ever sign on for something that fair and balanced.Kraszu said:Yes the monthly fee makes much more sense, customers could really benefit from not having to install games then. That would not be necessery bad for developers/OnLive either, the difficulty of deciding on how to share monthly fees could be the biggest problem there. Now porting games to OnLive is apparently fast, and easy so for publishers it isn't really hard decision to put they game there with traditional pricing.
Silellak said:The most logical thing to do would be to split the monthly fee based on how much use each game gets, but there's no guarantee publishers would ever sign on for something that fair and balanced.Kraszu said:Yes the monthly fee makes much more sense, customers could really benefit from not having to install games then. That would not be necessery bad for developers/OnLive either, the difficulty of deciding on how to share monthly fees could be the biggest problem there. Now porting games to OnLive is apparently fast, and easy so for publishers it isn't really hard decision to put they game there with traditional pricing.
Kraszu said:Silellak said:The most logical thing to do would be to split the monthly fee based on how much use each game gets, but there's no guarantee publishers would ever sign on for something that fair and balanced.Kraszu said:Yes the monthly fee makes much more sense, customers could really benefit from not having to install games then. That would not be necessery bad for developers/OnLive either, the difficulty of deciding on how to share monthly fees could be the biggest problem there. Now porting games to OnLive is apparently fast, and easy so for publishers it isn't really hard decision to put they game there with traditional pricing.
I don't think that it would be necessery fair, game can be played more becouse of the grinding in it, Portal apparently is some gaming masterpiece for many people yet it had lasted for few hours, and Portal 2 is very anticipated. People probably had played team fortess 2 for longer then HL2 yet HL3 will sell better then TF3. Also each person pays the same so the time should rather be a % of time that he spend on his games. Maybe they could also factor player scores.
I understand Xi's point. I was simply trying to clarify the alternative, as it's not spending $500 every other year, but more reasonable in spending $200 every 2-3 years for a new gfx card. What I'm trying to say is that the trade-off isn't worth it, considering all the variables of implementation. That's including the network capacity, which you agree, won't be there for another 10-20 years.DU said:The point is Xi's saying that with OnLive, he'd never "need" to. I mean, why bother? OnLive turns your PC into a dumb terminal as it puts all the processing on the server. You wouldn't need the latest schmatest graphics card or CPU processing power. Just a reasonably good connection which given time, will occur - as the article says, people in South Korea laugh at 700kb a sec which is all you need for OnLive.
The home PC then becomes a very basic box. Effectively a television with cable access and a keyboard. And you don't upgrade your TV every 2 years. More like every 20. In that respect, they can upgrade a handful of their computers every year for people to play the latest games, and you can play the latest and greatest without spending a dime on extra hardware.
More to the point, it'll work too. If a game is optimised for one particular graphics card or feature, given demand, they can build a cluster that can handle it and rent it out. No issues about compatability or whether your card supports Shader 4.0 Technology and DirectX 11.