In Theory: How Blu-ray players could host cloud gaming

By Richard Leadbetter Published 11 June, 2010

Is this OnLive and Gaikai's secret weapon?

Page 1 of 2

Whether we like it or not, whether we're ready or not, cloud gaming is coming. The idea is simple - instead of buying consoles or high-end PCs, instead we log in to servers many miles away hosting the requisite hardware and while our control inputs are transmitted across the net, video streams of the gameplay are beamed back over IP. Say goodbye to the console and indeed piracy as we know it, say hello to the dumb terminal.

While the concept may still seem implausible, the technology that powers the likes of OnLive and Gaikai is now a known quantity. Basic human ingenuity, combined with an enormous Space Race-sized piles of cash has overcome many of the key concerns, and the astonishing truth is that future Blu-ray players, HD cable receiver boxes and even HDTVs themselves could easily handle cloud gaming video streams. The browser plug-ins, Flash players and "microconsoles" we've seen thus far are just the beginning.

Key to this mammoth convergence of technology is the video compression system that makes it all possible: h264. It has swiftly become the de facto standard video codec for all major HD transmission systems in the wake of the DVD and MPEG2 era. Blu-ray uses it, satellite HDTV systems like SkyHD use it. So do the cloud gaming systems and therein lies the common ground.

'In Theory: How Blu-ray players could host cloud gaming' Screenshot gaikai1
'In Theory: How Blu-ray players could host cloud gaming' Screenshot gaikai2

David Perry's original Gaikai demo presented a wealth of on-screen data on the streaming tech that helps understand how the system works. This is from an early demo - we would expect the system to have improved immensely in the meanwhile, something we'll discover for sure at E3.

While OnLive talks about proprietary compression technology, insiders insist that the firm is using h264 in line with our thoughts in the wake of the firm's launch at GDC 2009. OnLive's main competitor, Gaikai, is typically more transparent, with David Perry's demo utilising a Flash player explicitly mentioning the codec's usage on-screen.

However, to sound a cautionary note, it should be explained that the h264 standard has been tweaked and enhanced to allow for ultra low-latency encoding, so it's not 100 per cent identical to the traditional iterations we've seen thus far. This is the human ingenuity we're talking about that has seen the best existing video compression scheme repurposed to work with streaming gameplay.

The ways and means with which this has been done have been explained at length by key codec developer Jason Garrett-Glaser, who has added the necessary encoding technology to the open-source compressor, x264, and is currently working with an unnamed OnLive competitor.

There are two major new elements that have been added to h264 to make gameplay streaming possible. The first is increased parallelism in the encoding. The image is split into slices, which are then encoded at the same time, thus minimising this particular latency hot spot. According to Garrett-Glaser, OnLive uses a similar, if less efficient system, where each frame is divided into 16 rectangles which are dispatched to 16 individual video encoders, effectively making the encoding process 16 times faster than it would be otherwise.

Garratt-Glaser maintains that the "slices" technique offers more efficiency because each slice can still draw upon video information from other areas of the frame. He has suggested in the past that OnLive's discrete encoder approach doesn't offer that flexibility.

The second technological leap is known as "periodic intra refresh". Currently, h264 along with most compressors, works on the "group of pictures" (GOP) principle. The video stream kicks off with a fresh key frame, or intra frame, with all the major information required to compose the image contained in that one packet of data. Subsequent frames are encoded only as changes in relation to other frames in the group, before a new intra frame is beamed down to repeat the process anew.

'In Theory: How Blu-ray players could host cloud gaming' Screenshot onlive1
'In Theory: How Blu-ray players could host cloud gaming' Screenshot onlive2

Everything about OnLive is based on streaming video, even the front-end (shots here presumably taken before encoding). All the player uses is a dumb terminal dealing with the basic inputs and outputs. No actual game code ever leaves the server.

All fine and dandy, but no good for gaming: a large buffer is required to get decent efficiency and ideally it would contain video information from the "future", only available by buffering frames and adding drastically to the lag. Periodic intra refresh helps solve this issue by dividing the screen into columns with new key frame-style information constantly being updated column by column.

So, can conventional h264 decoders work with these enhancements? The evidence suggests so. Periodic intra refresh has already been deployed in live streaming using Flash's standards-compliant (if rather ropey) h264 decoder (presumably within Gaikai's own Flash player) while the parallel slicing technique, in a slightly different form, is already an element of the Blu-ray spec.

In short, there's plenty of evidence to suggest that the bespoke h264 playback hardware in millions of chipsets already out there could well be compatible with cloud gaming video streams.

Page 1 of 2

Comments (68) Latest comment 2 years ago

Comments threads automatically close after 30 days, but please feel free to continue chatting on the forum!

  • cianchristopher #1 2 years ago

    "In theory, communism works. In theory"

  • LHH #2 2 years ago

    Whether we like it or not, whether we're ready or not, cloud gaming is coming.

    Not for me it's not. I don't like the concept of "cloud gaming", maybe for shit like Farmville. I'd still rather have a console with media capabilities rather than a router with a disk drive.

  • Shikasama #3 2 years ago

    Count me out

  • coolbritannia #4 2 years ago

    In theory. In reality, Blu Ray has given us longer loading times and better cut scenes, and I can't see much else on the horizon. Rejoice.

  • vx-chemical #5 2 years ago

    I smell bankruptcy in the heir.

    They are 10 years a head of their time.

    I dont want any latency while playing games.

  • matrim83 #6 2 years ago

    Yep. I like owning stuff. A good PC with a decent GPU, Consoles, games with neat little boxes and (mostly crappy) manuals, LEs, CEs, plastic figurines etc etc etc. Cant get enough of them.

    Part of the whole joy of gaming is opening a sealed plastic box. A new console, new game whatever. I am a sucker for that little rush that you get when you do that.

    So I guess this whole thing is not really for me either. But I guess its a good idea for some people.

  • KayJay #7 2 years ago

    "Say goodbye to the console and indeed [piracy] as we know it"
    Has the PS3 (So Far) pretty much done this. Nobody has sucesfully hacked it yet.
    I think I will stick to my console thank you very much.
    Just ensure XBLA & PSN keep pumping out decent stuff and thats as cloudy as I want to get.

  • KayJay #8 2 years ago

    I Heart matrim83 :-)

    Exactly how I feel. Exactly.

    /+1

  • Fab4 #9 2 years ago

    "I dont want any latency while playing games."

    In this house we obey the Laws of Physics.

  • miiiguel #10 2 years ago

    Whether we like it or not, whether we're ready or not, cloud gaming is coming.

    I find it very amusing these lines which come from these new self-appointed Oracles. Buddy, take it easy, you don't know that. No one does. No one knows if it'll ever be big enough to be more than a funny litle offer from cable TV providers, like my Sailing Chanell which my provider kindly offered me.
    Edited by 3 at 11/06/10 @ 11:09

  • Kaminari #11 2 years ago

    Even Sony realized that serious gamers want their games on physical media. Notwithstanding the issues with average PQ and unavoidable lag, cloud gaming is never going to win the heart of hardcore gamers, the ones who precisely play such games as racing games of FPS on dedicated hardware.

    Mark my words: I predict that the day cloud gaming is forced down our throat will see a massive decline of the hardcore gaming market.

  • duckncover #12 2 years ago

    I do find the idea of cloud gaming interesting. If I picture a future far beyond our own, then I really don't see retailers or boxed products lasting forever. I see an always online world where I can have what I want in an instant and it's things like this that are going to make that future possible.

    Whether it's a Utopia or Dystopia to you, how do you see the future of gaming in 20 or 30 years?

    I want my computer as a chip in my arm that reads my thoughts and augments games into my reality. :)

  • spekkeh #13 2 years ago

    To stream video from the internet you're going to need a LAN port: no problem

    Actually, I think this is the culprit that everyone is glossing over way too easily. Who still uses ethernet cables in their house? Especially near the tv. I've gone completely wireless, I don't want sloppy cables anywhere near my living room. However, I noticed wifi is going to have real problems streaming anything above 480p; and I would not have my girlfriend use her laptop when I'm gaming on OnLive.

    So there's the rub: either we go back to cables, or we go back to playing SD games. Both suck.

    OnLive can only work if superduperWiFi would catch on and everyone invested in new wireless routers.

  • AgentBalti #14 2 years ago

    It's a bit like iTunes, innit. All that music. It's all there, I can have it if I want it. I just can't be arsed to find it all. I mean, if I know what I want then I'll go and find it. Push a button. It's all there. A bit soulless, no?

    I'd miss that 'rush' of seeing the postie (not the postie himself, it's a man usually. Not my bag.) arrive with my goods. That feeling of ownership is still with most of us who have been brought up on 'boxes' and actually 'waiting' for it to arrive.

    I'd feel that OnLive makes it all feel a bit 'Insert 10p for another go.' It's like renting. It's not really mine, I'm just sharing. I don't like to share.

  • cyacomini #15 2 years ago

    Can you say 'Gizmondo' ?

  • IronGiant #16 2 years ago

    No ta, happy with my consoles as they are.

  • MENTAL1ST Verified Senior Software Engineer, Picsel UK Ltd. #17 2 years ago

    Whether we like it or not, whether we're ready or not, cloud gaming is coming.

    What he says is true enough though, indeed, in beta form, cloud gaming is here already. Whether it causes any significant impact, or goes the way of Virtual Reality (which arrived in the early 90s, and fairly promptly left again), remains to be seen.

  • KayJay #18 2 years ago

    "And please don't tell me Virgin are totally fibre, they aren't, and their uploads are crap."

    +1 on this.

  • dbranchevans #19 2 years ago

    'Even Sony realised that gamers want their games on physical media' I realise where your coming from but XBLA, PSN and Steam on the PC indicate that many of them aren't bothered. Already you can stream/ buy films, music and other media which you pay for but don't 'own' physical copies of. Cloud gaming will be an extension of that, I'm more inclined to agree with VX Chemical, unless I play games online outside of peak time I lose at least half of BTs connection speed, I can see a terribly inconsistent service, the wider infrastructure needed just isn't there yet. I wouldn't be surprised if South Korea were nearly there though...

  • MENTAL1ST Verified Senior Software Engineer, Picsel UK Ltd. #20 2 years ago

    either we go back to cables, or we go back to playing SD games

    It's entirely possible that the majority of people who play games currently do so in SD, and maybe even don't realise it.

  • Stuz359 #21 2 years ago

    This is really the problem, until the internet is completely consistent in terms of speed, and indeed, staying connected surely this can never catch on? I can't think of anything worse than coming to the end of a game, you're about to face the final boss, and the internet disconnects. Wouldn't happy with physical media if you owned the game (unless you're unfortunate to have bought an Ubisoft game recently).

  • miiiguel #22 2 years ago

    I'm willing to bet my house that in 10-15 years it will be the norm

    15 years ?! Who the heck knows what'll happen in 15 years, in technology (on anything for that matter). Prediction fail, based on time window alone. Will we have bases on Mars? Will there be enough oil at the time? The world economy will colapse?
    What if scenarios are fun to discuss, but let's be fair, you don't know.
    Edited by 2 at 11/06/10 @ 11:30

  • funkateer #23 2 years ago

    Having to add 16 CPU's per user just to do encoding seems just wasteful.
    And don't forget that this encoding just degrades image picture to make it fit in the current internet bandwidth. Who's going to pay for those 16 CPUs? Right: you the gamer. You are paying for 16 CPUs to degrade image quality for you.

    I can think of dozens of reasons why could gaming won't work for high-end gaming:
    Cloud computing works because a user typically asks a short slice of computer resources so that computer resources can be used more efficiently. High-end games on the other hand requires typically close to 100% resources per user for 100% of the time the user is playing. Could computing will thus only add an enormous amount of overhead costs with no real benefit.

    Result: it will be hugely expensive and the experience will be of lower quality.

  • sneetch #24 2 years ago

    I still think the hardware and software manufacturers will have the ultimate say in how well this does.

    The publishers will probably be happy: you'll still have to buy their games to play them so they get paid and it pretty much removes the piracy problem. Microsoft would rather you buy Windows though and Steam and other distribution platforms won't go for this (unless they themselves provide the service, obviously).

    The hardware manufacturers including Nintendo, Sony, Microsoft, nVidia, Intel and ATI/AMD would rather you buy their hardware and the console manufacturers would definitely prefer if you pay them their cut on each title. Which might mean two or three boxes under your TV rather than two or three consoles, I'd rather the consoles with all the advantages that not requiring a constant internet connection to play games offers.

  • Valver #25 2 years ago

    "I'm surprised that so many gamers - people who should really embrace new technology, seem so resistant to change. "

    I'm only in favour of change when it benefits me. What's the plus side for me with Onlive?

    Subscription fees = fail
    Lag = fail
    Poor picture quality = fail

  • Shinetop #26 2 years ago

    Even for regular office work using a remote desktop connection on a thin client PC is at best noticable and at worst infuriating. In no way is it the same experience as a local session, and this is for simple screen updates and mouse/keyboard commands in office software that don't require minimal input lag. If that scenario hasn't been mastered yet, why would it suddenly work for gaming, which demands much, much more?

  • HyZepher #27 2 years ago

    Who wants to be restricted to playing games only if they have online capabilities? All the comparisons given - XBLA, PSN, D/L movies etc can all be played/viewed offline after the download etc. Requiring an online capability just to play games - even for single-player campaigns - seems very restrictive and very much niche market.

    For this to take off we would have to live in a world where internet connections are a much larger part of our lives and infrastructures are a lot more efficient and reliable, not to mention more readily available at adequate speeds.

    It's a nice idea in principle but as useful as internet fridges that automatically re-order food from your local supermarket.

  • bad09 #28 2 years ago

    Whether we like it or not, whether we're ready or not, cloud gaming is coming.

    For rental maybe, but when it happens in buying games I'm out. I am just about sold on DD and not actually owning a disc/box manual but I still don't trust it completely and back up files as a sort of "physical" product for my money.

    I will never go to cloud gaming, never in a million years even it it means I can't play new games..plenty of already released games I've never played to last a lifetime anyway!

  • AgentBalti #29 2 years ago

    I wouldn't say it's because people are resistant to change. People love the printed word, still buy books and magazines in droves. But I love the internet (to read) more, which is newer?

    The fact that Cloud Gaming hasn't been proven beyond being a viable concept is the key point. People will want to see it to believe it and want to have their options before them before they decide if it's for them. I don't think anyone seriously is going to just dismiss it as a medium, people just need proof. "What will it give me that I can't already have?" "Will the cloud cope with thousands of gamers at once?" "Will the uptake of games be strong?" "How can I save my game AND know I can load it again without some hax0r scote sodding with my life?!" "How much will it cost? As much as the retail box? More? Less?"

    The facts haven't been laid bare for whichever community you live in. It may not even be on platform that everyone can get to for gratis. If people are on a given platform, it would take a pretty compelling (financial) case for people to sign up just for this when they still have a working console(s) at home.
    Edited by 2 at 11/06/10 @ 11:39

  • Azazel #30 2 years ago

    See also: http://spoon.net/

  • LHH #31 2 years ago

    I bet there'll be a pricing structure depending on quality.

    £39.99 a month for 1080p
    £19.99 for 720p

    or something similar

  • Retro_ #32 2 years ago

    The concept is fine and dandy but consoles will be ever more powerful and this service will fall behind unless the internet speeds up significantly. So Consoles will lag behind PC's and OnLive will lag behind Consoles.

    So, count me out.

  • miiiguel #33 2 years ago

    It's not just that zandergrin, there are many factors for a certain technology (or idea) to be succesfull or not, mass market is a very tricky buisness no one realy knows what'll work and what not (price is a major factor, and it works both way - you need money to have a good service/prodcut, on the other hand people love cheap).

    Take Segway example:

    This was Kamen "vison of the future":
    The world doesn't need the next generation of videogames."

    It might not need them but it seems to want them, which is arguably the opposite of what happened with Kamen's ill-fated Segway Transporter. Kamen thought that his nippy, balancing scooter would "be to the car what the car was to the horse and buggy". He whipped up a media frenzy before its launch in 2001 and invested heavily in factories capable of producing 40,000 units a month. Eight years later, sales of Segway have only just passed the 50,000 mark.
    http://ww w.guardian.co.uk/technology/200...
    Edited by 2 at 11/06/10 @ 11:50

  • toy_brain #34 2 years ago

    Normally I'd be totally against this idea, but right now my PC has developed a power fault AGAIN!
    So, PC gaming without having to worry about maintaining your own gaming rig? Sounds lovely thanks.

    /Is not being 100% serious.

  • miiiguel #35 2 years ago

    @zandergrin : True, fair enough. Hope we're all be here to see if it works or not. I'll give it a chance, you can count me in. To try.
    Edited by 1 at 11/06/10 @ 12:07

  • GamesConnoisseur #36 2 years ago

    I honestly don't think OnLive will succeed as much as they would wishes, however naysayers beware, Cloud Gaming/Computing IS the future.

    Most effective at a point when networking is at to be optimal efficiency and the theory RESOLVING virtually all the baggages of today. Competing platform standards, hardware upgrades, faulty hardware replacements, costs, and so on.

    I suggest Cloud Computing as well, as already we have online emails and office suites, and indeed PC could be again the dominating standard with just new operating system that accommodates gaming, media, work and social requirements.

    Bluetooth type of control interfaces or even optional hand free control with just a large 3D screens and jockey devices in your rooms!

    Seems the most logical progression, remember those crying for physical medium such as DVDs, these will not last for long time as those will degrades over time.

    So backup of all your data, saves etc remotely and accessed securely anywhere and anytime.

    This is the future, but perhaps not before my time?!

  • miiiguel #37 2 years ago

    That's where I think you might be wrong zandergrin, I'm not sure "people" want it, either 3D or this. Or at least, at what price.

  • ISmoke #38 2 years ago

    "Part of the whole joy of gaming is opening a sealed plastic box. A new console, new game whatever. I am a sucker for that little rush that you get when you do that"


    So true. I also love smelling a new game manual... Or am i alone on that one?

  • dr_shambles #39 2 years ago

    The comments about physical product and ownership are interesting. Think this is a generational thing.

    I'm 35 (generation X) and personally like owning things with decent packaging (books, DVDs, games, Blu-Ray). Digital assets don't hold the same appeal. it's like e-readers. Until they can emulate the texture of paper and pipe in new book smell they don't appeal to me as much.

    However, ask a typical member of generation Y (born after 1988) and often they're far more comfortable with virtual ownership and no physical product.

    Horses for courses, but digital distribution is the future. Don't think it will replace physical product overnight, but certain publishers will give it a good go to improve their margins and save costs.

  • lordofthedunce #40 2 years ago

    @cyacomini

    lol

    OnLive has 'crashed Enzo' written all over it.

  • StooMonster #41 2 years ago

    Sky are enabling the broadband connection on their Sky HD boxes soon.

    I would not be surprised to see Onlive on in.

  • Shinetop #42 2 years ago

    I have to say, I was a big believer in physical ownership until games started shipping in boring DVD cases, covers stamped with corporate logos and a one-page manual inside. The packaging and contents aren't that valuable to me anymore as the good old cardboard boxes with tons of feelies inside were, and I'd gladly trade them for the convenience of digital ownership.

  • SilentNinja92 #43 2 years ago

    Sounds great to me

    music streaming works on the internet. There are many websites which play music virtually instantly as you press the play button. Vodeo content is going that way too, with BBC's iplayer, and many websites now hosting HD content which for many right now loads in a matter of seconds.

    Of course there are still many of us whos internet connections are not that fast yet. but in the UK the plan is to get average speeds to be the highest in europe and many other countries are doing the same.

    Games will then be run on much more powerful machines, lessening load times and meaning that we dont have to wait till next gen for a huge leap in grahics, they'll improve more steadily.

    All it is is streaming HD video content and sending information on what were doing with the controller, both things can already be done so tis plainly obvious that this is the way forwards. With bettering internet speeds what we get here is the preformance of a high end pc but with no installs

    No expensive hard drives to hold our games, no piracy, unlimited choice which can be accessed insantly as you dont have to go to a shop.

    Its brilliant!! Im ready for it =D

  • spudsbuckley #44 2 years ago

    This idea is doomed to failure because it's based on an ideal world. There are entire countries that don't have good enough infrastructure to use this tech.

    I live in Ireland and have a 3mb DSL connection which is considered good in Ireland because hundreds of thousands of people can still only get dial-up or maybe, at best, ISDN. OnLive and it's ilk are just pipe dreams in situations like that.

    Sure, it could probably work on my fairly shitty connection...... at maybe 480p....... with intermittent lag.....and stero sound. Or i could just plug a console in to my TV at 1080p with no lag and 5.1 sound.
    Edited by 1 at 11/06/10 @ 12:49

  • patchbox360 #45 2 years ago

    this technology could end fanboyism and we can all live in peace and harmony - but what will Eurogamer do for hits?

  • Darren #46 2 years ago

    Why is cloud game an inevitability as this article suggests? :?

    I'd imagine the whole thing would fall apart if, say for example, all of the current 40 miilion Xbox 360, 30 million PS3 and 80 million Wii owners all tried to play games through their internet provider on a service like OnLive. I won't even include PC owners. And what about the prohibitive costs of the hardware at the server end because they're going to need one hell of a lot of computing power to keep 150 million users content, all of them potentially playing different titles. Or would cloud gaming take us back to the dark ages of gaming, playing simple Wii and Flash-type stuff that these services can handle better rather than having uber-powerful hardware that churns out awesome visuals at 1080p/60 fps?

    Given how much games cost now through digital distributors like Steam I personally live in absolute dread of the day when this kind of thing becomes the ONLY way I can play games because one thing I am sure of is that it'll be very expensive. If this day ever comes then I'd stop playing games, it's as simple as that but at 43 now I guess if it ever does happen then I'll be too old to bothered about games anyway! :D

  • makeamazing #47 2 years ago

    In some ways I can see this working in many cases in the future... I buy some music on iTunes, buy most PC games (especially cheaper ones) on steam or D2D.

    But as everyone else says, with the UK net struggling just to watch iPlayer, its not going to work with this for at least 10 years (and by then everyone will be downloading more stuff so the bandwidth upgrades still might not be enough).

    The problems i have is the owning of things, if i buy on steam, its great, can redownload everything any time i get a new PC, itunes i hate because i have to back everything up locally.... the PSN is great, but i dont see myself buying an expensive game on it, unless its not available elsewhere, and it would be slow to download on release day (steam struggles on release days).

    So there are many issues. I actually think there will still be boxed products, but with special codes to make them work with an online service of some kind. But i also see some of these online services will go under before we have some success with them,,.

  • Darren #48 2 years ago

    @dr_shambles - A good post which I agree with.

    I think the modern mentality toward digital downloads is partly borne out of the piracy myself and how easy it is to get hold of stuff. What I mean is that people who listen to MP3s on their iPods will think nothing of downloading them illegally because if they paid for them they'd still get exactly the same product. It's not like you get a nice shiny CD, a case and lyric booklet. Ditto for movies and TV shows.

    Obviously games are different for console owners at the moment because the hardware is designed to make playing illegal copies as awkward as possible. However, I'd wager that if games could only be obtained through digital downloads that the majority wouldn't consider that it was any more wrong to pirate them than they do downloading music and films now. In fact, isn't that what is happening to a large extent on the PC where it's an absolute doodle to get hold of the latest games, often before they're officially released?

    I think... no, I *know* that I'd actually be more tempted to download stuff illegally if it was only available via digital distribution, mostly because, for me, the important sense of owning something would be gone.

  • Gastrian #49 2 years ago

    This will only become the norm when Apple and Steam push it through, Apple for the casual market and Steam for the forward thinking core market.

  • Seoh #50 2 years ago

    I think the one issue that a lot of people seem to be missing is "mods". Although they are multi platform games and i own consoles games like oblivion, dragon age and fallout 3 i bought for my PC knowing that a wealth of free content would soon be available.

    A lot of budding games designers cut their teeth on the mod packages that come with these games and some even include them their CV as examples of their creativity.

    With Onlive or Gaikai, you are using their version of the game with their settings, getting patched upto date versions will be bad enough (initially) but i never see mods being added.

    The big problem is that 90% of people in the UK still arn't getting fast enough broadband for this to work, most are paying for 10-20MB but only getting 1-2MB during peak which means its not feasible and i seriously don't trust BT to not oversell this and slow everyone down even more. Like all these remote client type systems (and trust me i've dealt with a lot) there will be a max number of active users before the system slows down or just refuses to allow others to login.

    So to summarise end result is loss of creativity and free content for the community, worse broadband speeds at peak and when the speed is good enough you can't login as the max number of users is exceeded.

  • Negotiator #51 2 years ago

    Onlive will be around for about 6 to 9 months and then it will fold, mark my words. As for cloud gaming being the future, yeah in about 5 to 10 years but as far as the next few years, it's motion control, meaning Natal.

  • Darren #52 2 years ago

    The thought of playing a game with compromised image quality because of bandwidth restrictions and at settings dictated at the server end just puts me off the whole OnLive thing personally so it doesn't matter to me one jolt how successful it is or isn't, I'm not interested in it, period.

    One of the great things about gaming on the PC particularly is that I can decide how good or bad I want the game to look through software settings and hardware upgrades, it's all part of the enjoyment for me. Plus I don't have to rely on having a 100% stable internet connection to play Super Mario Galaxy 2 or Red Dead Redemption's campaign.

  • miiiguel #53 2 years ago

    put you in front of a truly 3D game, no galsses or stupid peripherals, true depth perception, no headaches

    Regarding functionality I think you covered the basics with the "no headaches and depth perception", but I'd be cautious regarding price. I still have a life besides digital entertainment. I'm sure we could all have a even more fantastic way of life if price didn't matter.
    Edited by 1 at 11/06/10 @ 14:00

  • Sanxo #54 2 years ago

    "People like owning physical things" - I would say that's completely true for a lot of older people, where old > 20, but is that really true for teh kidz? I'm not so sure - iPods et al have definitively broken the link between physical media and content and I think that it's really a concern for the next generation of consoles. "I want to play what I what I own where I want"

    The R&D development costs of consoles is a serious pain in the ass. If Sony etc can get rid of the problem of covering HW developments costs with software sales and focus purely on the publishing aspect, that's a win for them. However they do then have to compete on a more or less equal basis as the HW platform ceases to be a (potential) competitive advantage. I can see Nintendo staying with HW since nobody else is really competing in their market segment - however (perversely) the relatively undemanding technical nature of their games is almost ideal for cloud computing



  • Zaiz #55 2 years ago

    >.> It loses visuals in Unreal Tournament 3? You mean the game that would run perfectly on a five year old PC? Huh? Might be a h264 problem, but seriously, you have to work that out. Until laws are drawn up to protect the digital consumer and the service stops being shit, I'm not buying.

  • Ryze #56 2 years ago

    @coolbritannia

    In theory. In reality, the PS3's premature, 2005 spec Blu Ray drive has given us longer loading times and better cut scenes...

    Fixed.

  • neems #57 2 years ago

    I can't effectively stream youtube videos. I have to pause them, let them load in for a bit, and hope I have enough of a headstart. I think it's gonna be a while before cloud gaming is the standard round these parts.

  • Josh128 #58 2 years ago

    I can see this eventually becoming the future standard, but I dont like it. Like someone else said--

    1. Subscription Fees = No thank you.
    2. Must have internet connection = No thank you
    3. Must have internet access in every room you game in = Nope
    4. Image quality of Broadcast HD still doesnt match Wii 480p (not even close for fast changing scenery/motion etc.)= Sorry
    5. No physical product= Nope, like someone else posted, I love the smell of new console box, game manuals etc.

    When this is all there is, I'll be playing my retro consoles or emus on a PC, or dead!

  • rayscoota #59 2 years ago

    The day we are forced to use this is the day I give up games

  • Bremenacht #60 2 years ago

    You should think of this in the same terms as pay TV, like Sky or Sentanta. Franchising it out to the like of BT and Sky will secure it's future. Maybe it'll come built in to future TVs. It could kill rental and 2nd-hand sales amongst it's users though, and I'm sure publishers know this.

    As long at the latency isn't pure awful, it'll be fine. Plenty of on-line games have ropey latency at times, but rarely enough for people to stop playing a game altogether.

  • BuckEntropy #61 2 years ago

    For the immediate future I think this can only succeed as a distinct demographic, somewhat parallel to the current dynamic for Wii's market. Since it has little front end investment, it could be attractive to people who can't actually see themselves as gamers. And as such I think it will only gain traction with things like WoW or other adventure centered experiences, or basically glorified flash games.

    But I do feel unnerved even reading about it... vaguely unclean. If it ever took over I could see myself suddenly becoming 'too old' for games.

  • Sunyavadin #62 2 years ago

    I noticed the videos posted by PC Perspective have had copyright takedowns by OnLive.


    ...afraid of what they show by any chance?

    Given the quality difference between the static screenshots - I'm tempted to say yes.
    Once the copies they have locally finish downloading I'll get back to you on that.
    Edited by 1 at 11/06/10 @ 23:26

  • Loghorn #63 2 years ago

    remember those crying for physical medium such as DVDs, these will not last for long time as those will degrades over time.

    Wrong. Regular store bought discs, no, but CDR's and DVDR's will break down and become unreadable, they're made differently than the regular stuff.

    Store (Retail) bought discs are pressed, "home made" discs are laser etched, they're made from different materials. A DVD is said to last for about 30 years, or so. Plus people like myself can still play DVD's in years from now, as long as we learn to take care of them properly.

  • albertofustinoni #64 2 years ago

    I think people focusing on the need to have a physical copy vs. a digital one are partially off the mark: it's not really about wanting to hold a box/dvd/manual, it's about the many, many more restrictions placed on digital copies vs. old style boxes. While the situation has become reasonable in the case of music, with most major online stores offering DRM free MP3s, videos, ebooks and games are still held hostage by it. When people are asked to pay a similar price to the boxed product for something that's tied to a specific device (or ecosystem in the best case), which is often of inferior quality (think 128kbps MP3 vs CD or "HD" iTunes video vs Blu-ray) and which they can not resell, it should come as no surprise that they are going to fight "cloud" anything.

  • Boz0r #65 2 years ago

    I don't think this will be usable until scientists increase the speed of light in 2208.

  • freakzilla #66 2 years ago

    I still think its unrealistic (although I wish them good luck), my £500 pc made of salvage and a relatively weak GPU can easily achieve 1080p60fps on a lot of games at max settings but getting the same experience on OnLive requires a subscription and a good internet connection.

    And then there's the future of gaming graphics, as textures become bigger, effects become more impressive how will onlive keep up? It could end up looking very dated very quickly.

    Although this is actually an issue Onlive will never take some of the tech freaks like me, because we love to have powerful/complicated/rare tech just for the hell of it.

  • Grayvern #67 2 years ago

    You have to pay subscription and for games for something less reliable, if you only buy one console every 5-6 years or so then even with low subscription it makes no sense to choose it over consoles.

    Iit's not necessarily speed but bandwidth that is the problem. Lets face it if Spotify offers play offline partly because of bandwidth restriction problems for some users. How much of a problem would that be for games. And bandwidth is set to be an even bigger problem in future not a lesser one.

    Even in 10 years I don't imagine the service would be able to appeal to enough users to have any larger impact on videogames. And while any service like this remains small the amount of money that Microsoft and Sony et al would need to pay game companies to keep their games off of onlive and similar companies or to at least put time delays on them would remain small, making onlive an easy service to crush, muscle out, or buy out and break up.
    Edited by 1 at 13/06/10 @ 22:05

  • curtlikesmeat #68 2 years ago

    "Sure, it could probably work on my fairly shitty connection...... at maybe 480p....... with intermittent lag.....and stero sound. Or i could just plug a console in to my TV at 1080p with no lag and 5.1 sound."

    This. Totally not interested and if you live a more than 30 miles from the UK backbone you should be agreeing with it too. Internet in the UK as it stands at the moment is utter bilge (mostly thanks to BT).

    Also, every now and then I like to break out my Dreamcast - these services would kill that nostalgia so I'd rather have physical media any day.