All Things Microsoft > Microsoft Hardware

OnLive Microconsole more awesome than PC gaming?

<< < (2/2)

Refalm:

--- Quote from: Kintaro on 11 May 2010, 23:49 ---What the fuck incentive does anyone have to write games for it?

--- End quote ---
Because it takes almost no effort, since they are basically modified Windows games. If this proves successful, independent developers have yet another good platform besides Steam to release games without distributors that come with associated costs, packaging, stores that disregard the release date, and overall butthurt. And of course, hoping to get gamers back that exclusively pirate games.

Also, I appear to be wrong with that 20 Mbit remark. 5 Mbit is the minimum (no HD though at that speed, but I personally don't care).

Kintaro:

--- Quote from: Refalm on 11 May 2010, 23:58 ---
--- Quote from: Kintaro on 11 May 2010, 23:49 ---What the fuck incentive does anyone have to write games for it?

--- End quote ---
Because it takes almost no effort, since they are basically modified Windows games. If this proves successful, independent developers have yet another good platform besides Steam to release games without distributors that come with associated costs, packaging, stores that disregard the release date, and overall butthurt. And of course, hoping to get gamers back that exclusively pirate games.

Also, I appear to be wrong with that 20 Mbit remark. 5 Mbit is the minimum (no HD though at that speed, but I personally don't care).

--- End quote ---

So it would split users in their choice of games even further? I swear these game companies should stop being faggots and either publish with everyone or nobody. In the end it would mean I could choose a console, a game, another guy could chose another console, but still get the same game and horrah: I have more usability and game developers have more customers. Without the bullshit legal runaround and expense developers might decide to team with eachother rather than bloated patent hoarding consortiums like Sony and Microsoft.

Personally I'll stick with a PS3 and Windows. No point in having Windows x64 and Windows Xenon as well really.

Refalm:
http://www.1up.com/do/newsStory?cId=3180014

Now that it's released, and looking at the prices, it doesn't look as appealing.
Comments from actual users claim that they have tried it on a 90 Mbit connection, and what they got wasn't even good enough to be called 480p. While OnLive claimed 720p at more than 5 Mbit connections.

To recap, you pay $50 for a game, you don't own that game, and when you decide to quit OnLive, your game is lost. Renting a game for a week is $9, but that's way more expensive then renting a game at a normal shop.
On top of that, a subscription fee that will be between $5 to $15 a month.

Aloone_Jonez:
Sounds shit.

I don't play games anyway so don't care myself.

Lead Head:
 I just read some other articles and they were saying it is 720p, but its highly compressed garbage. Probably comparable to youtube. Another person was saying they tried it out at E3 where they had a demo setup, and the input lag was huge on the system.

After reading that article though about its costs, I don't see this going anywhere. At least with a service like steam you still have the actual game data on your harddrive, and I'm sure valve would provide means for users to play the games offline in the event they did fold. With this, what do you do if the service goes down?

Navigation

[0] Message Index

[*] Previous page