OnLive willl give you a free console if you buy a game

http://venturebeat.com/2011/02/25/onlive-willl-give-you-a-free-console-if-you-buy-a-game/

by zoowar • 15 years ago

58 34 15 years ago

jhuckestein2• 15 years ago

This reminds me of the transition to SaaS. (Gaas??)

Soon game devs can develop their games for idealized virtual environments which is much easier than developing for a video game console (or more than one console). If a dev needs features that a console doesn't provide, they can just 'host' it on a different data center.

The slow release cycle of consoles that Microsoft, Nintendo and Sony are basing their businesses on is about to be obsoleted and replaced with frequent software updates.

From here, it's only a small step to conceiving a world in which it is incredibly easy to build multiplayer games, too. If the whole simulation lives on the server and nowhere else, then you don't need any network code.

The OnLive team must be incredibly excited!

windsurfer• 15 years ago

As a counter-point:

Soon game devs can develop their games for idealized hardware environments which is much easier than developing for the myriad of centralized mainframes. If a dev needs features that a mainframe couldn't provide, they can build the hardware that's needed.

The high cost of servers and bandwidth that Onlive are basing their businesses on is about to be obsoleted and replaced with dedicated rendering hardware for the consumer.

From here, it's only a small step to conceiving a world in which it is incredibly easy to build graphically intensive games, too. If the whole simulation lives on the one piece of hardware and nowhere else, then you don't need any network code or fancy servers or massive bandwidth.

I'm excited for the future console wars!

PureSin• 15 years ago

I heard about OnLive two years ago when they presented at E3. Glad to see their product is actually out and they're pushing hard to get it adapted. I'm interested to take up this offer just to test out the response time.

PHPAdam• 15 years ago

I had this idea years ago, but its implementation that matters for that I wish it all the best! (and its quick expansion into England)

e1ven• 15 years ago

Does anyone know what the cost of the Pre-Order is? I don't have an account, so can't easily check this out.

I'd worked on tech like this before, but never got acceptable performance, so I'd be curious how well theirs work, if I could get it cheap.

wmf2• 15 years ago

$50

sshirokov• 15 years ago

They also gave out a free console to anyone that pre-ordered one with intent to pay when they came out, and that came with a free game as well.

If there was ever a business that got attracting customers and rewarding early adopters, it's OnLive.

chaostheory• 15 years ago

The big question is how good are broadband connections in the US? I can see this working in Korea, Japan, or HK really well; but I have my doubts given the wide range of internet access quality here in the US.

Given the complaints about always on Internet DRM schemes, there's bound to be some problems I don't want to deal with for Onlive.

jhuckestein2• 15 years ago

I don't think it has to work super well right now, the benefits are so big that we'll find a way to make this work.

The first SaaS applications were horrible to use and it has taken 10 years until webapps have arrived at desktop performance (as far as responsiveness goes).

lazyronin• 15 years ago

I tried out OnLive over the Christmas break and it was great. Played Mafia 2 on a 4 year old MacBook and it ran perfectly.

But I can't use the service because over 2 days I had used 40GB of my 65GB bandwidth (thanks Rogers). Although it's an extreme example, 3GB/hr is still too much for my capped internet service.

geuis• 15 years ago

Well, their UX is bad. Initially when you don't have an account and you click anywhere on the big homepage ad, it takes you to info about the offer but no where to click "Buy". So then it leads to creating an account, and after that when you click on the homepage ad it just takes you back to your account page.

Edit: This might have been an instant buy for me. Except I can't figure out how to pre-order their damn game, so now I've lost interest. There's no way to even search for games. Its like no one actually sat down with a credit card and walked through the "We Like Money" part of this whole operation.

CrazedGeek2• 15 years ago

You're supposed to download the desktop app and buy it through there, I think.

jaysonelliot2• 15 years ago

Helpful to know, thanks. But how would anyone ever discover that fact on their own?

jaysonelliot2• 15 years ago

Fully agree. There's no clear CTA connected to the offer, so the user's only option is to fill out the form and hope it's got something to do with it.

I followed the same hopeless loop you did, and lost interest as well.

It may be possible to pre-order the game through the .exe they want you to install, but I've only got a Mac and a Linux box at home, and a Mac at work. It's not really worth my time to hunt down a PC just to participate in this offer.

As a UX professional, things like this make me die a little inside.

reedlaw2• 15 years ago

There is a Mac client. The download starts after you register.

T-R5• 15 years ago

Is my understanding of this correct - that they're maintaining state and performing rendering on the server for every connection to the service, and then sending each frame over the network?

I am so very confused as to how this is scaling. Isn't the rule of thumb for scalability and performance to move client state and UI processing onto the client? Are they going to run an XBox VM for every simultaneously connected customer? How does it perform for games that require low controller lag, like FPS - or Megaman for that matter.

wmf2• 15 years ago

Yes, it's basically VNC applied to games. I would guess that each simultaneous user has a dedicated PC on the server side.

CrazedGeek2• 15 years ago

Supposedly, they can run four or so off of the same PC for lower-end games.

T-R5• 15 years ago

That sounds very very expensive.

Charuru3• 15 years ago

It's virtualized, and considering not everyone plays games at the same time, you would prob get a lot more than 4 players per "pc"

reedlaw2• 15 years ago

Seems like they will need high-end video cards for new games too. Doesn't seem like it could scale much that way.

cma• 15 years ago

>I am so very confused as to how this is scaling. Isn't the rule of thumb for scalability and performance to move client state and UI processing onto the client?

Then, for say, casual gamers, you have excess client capacity (capital) sitting idle more than 95% of the time.

T-R5• 15 years ago

That's true, and that investment's on the customers, so idle clients aren't really a problem, unless you sell the hardware too far below cost, and they don't buy enough media. If you're Steam, this doesn't even cross your mind. When the required hardware's expensive, centralizing is a gamble - you want to run close to 100% capacity, but you don't ever want to go above it.

6ren• 15 years ago

I used to think this was a stupid idea, because of latency; and the only reason it got funding was because it would be fantastic for publishers (if it worked): no pirating, can charge by the hour, most people don't play their console 24/7, so it's a better utilization of resources (you can even time-zone it, albeit with worse latency), etc.

But just today I recognized it as a profound disruption: a service that isn't very good, with a cheaper business model, that targets non-consumption.

When the network does become good enough - and it's only getting faster - these guys will have encountered and solved all the myriad other technical problems (like iron man and altitude freeze). And they will also have solved all the problems with the business model (suppliers, charging, customer issues). It will be hard to catch them.

And... turns out people are saying the latency isn't actually as off-putting as you'd think, for FPS etc. I've heard a bigger problem is with mouse-pointers - the latency between the mouse moving and the pointer moving is apparently much more perceptible.

So, I say congratulations to these guys. Make a crap product for cheap; let everyone laugh at you; make it better. They are the visionary entrepreneurs, who actually change everything. No derision means no revolution.

GeorgeTirebiter• 15 years ago

OnLive was founded by Steve Perlman - one of the 3 co-founders of WebTV. Steve is the consummate Silicon Valley serial entrepreneur - brilliant geek, business guy, product visionary, cheerleader -- all rolled into one with a nice-guy personality to boot.

OnLive does some spectacularly clever things to perform so well; and it will continue to deliver better and better experiences without you needing to upgrade your video card or computer.

I can't say more (disclosure: I'm under NDA), but OnLive is <i>definitely</i> the Real Deal.

div2• 15 years ago

I think you're exactly right. I had the same reaction the first time I read about them, then I saw their product again recently and there was no doubt anymore that this is going to be the future of gaming.

True, they may not be there yet, but they most likely will.

_cbsz2• 15 years ago

Wait...this sounded fantastic, but this isn't like a normal games console or even Steam. If OnLive folds or stops supporting older games, your console is worthless, right?

div2• 15 years ago

Since their model is subscription based, they don't have an incentive to stop supporting older games.

_cbsz2• 15 years ago

So if I stop paying, the games I already bought are worthless, right? After all, the headline says "if you buy a game." Yech.

chris11• 15 years ago

I wonder how long it will take before someone hacks it to stream hulu and netflix. It should be able to if it streams video games in 720p;

Charuru3• 15 years ago

What they really need is some sort of Flash plugin version. I have a CR-48 that would be perfect for this.

OnLive willl give you a free console if you buy a game

Related Stories