OnLive Adding Wi-Fi To Game Streaming Device

I am just laughing at the idea of it working on Verizon DSL, here in Lanesborough(3/768, but never quite reaches the rated downstream speed, even on a great day). With cable ISPs and such capping and DSL providers stuck in 1999, this was a bad idea for the US market and will almost certainly fail. Besides, I think many of us still like owning a copy of a game on our hard drive and being able to play said game if our internet connection goes down. Now they think it will improve matters by taking this terminal from mere online bandwidth glutton to being a wireless bandwidth glutton(the 802.11n is probably needed for it to work over a decent range). So, what to do with 5+ mbps of bandwidth that can normally be done on a 56k modem for those who actually own their games. Epic fail.

This reviewer agrees with you:
»www.notebookreview.com/d ··· e+Review

Besides the system says you need sustained 5 mbps download speeds, so that leaves you and most DSL users out in the cold anyway.

The reviewer also hates the idea of a monthly fee AND paying for each game as well. He feels it should be one or the other.

and said people should develop their own gaming system or add to it just like these people did »www.wtol.com/global/stor ··· 13085610

Why develop my own when the current offerings get the job done? We are just merely pointing out this offering has some very fatal flaws. The worst of which is mentioned in the article FFH5 linked(thanks for that), which is the games costing full retail, besides the service fee. It did point out the potential niche of netbooks, but most of those will likely be shut out on the go by the 5mbps requirement. Do you know many public wifi spots that deliver that consistently? I have lived in some of the biggest cvities this side of the pond and it seems to be a relative handful.

and why are you using the resources of a public hotspot to game? that's not why its offered. Speeds are limited there due to this. People that game on their systems and just want ot free load for the bandwidth.

And why develop? Because its a way for you to make what you want for yourself and anyone else that has a problem with the way their products are build/designed for the public. but instead you take the lazy way out and bitch about their product and how it has flaws and is going to fail. Well news flash! they're investor and partner is the largest Telco in the United States. It's far from going to fall.

The lazy way out because I critique a product that has obvious flaws, you are a funny guy LOL. Most of which don't exist in any other product on the market(retail price for a 1-2 year rental, latency issues, insane bandwidth requirements). I never said I run this on hotspots. I wouldn't run it period, mainly because of full retail price for rentals and not a fast enough broadband connection available even at home to support it(though I am looking at wirelessly backhauling a 15 mbit TWC connection from the next city, but not for this thing with its 1-2 year rental bullshit). I guess I am too busy designing networks to worry about learning to design gaming hardware too. So sorry LOL. As to freeloading, I almost never use public, wifi for anything. I play FFXI on the go over my good ole AT&T data card. The game requires less than a 56k modem to work perfectly. The stereotype you buy into that games are bandwidth intensive is just false. A few may be, but not the majority.

well why bitch about the product if you're not going to use it just becaues it has flaws. they have customers and are making the $$$. if they didn't the product still wouldn't be afloat but T also has a good share of $$$ invested.

and the latency issues aren't a problem with OnLive. I use them and it works just fine.

That is actually surprising, given you're in Ohio. Aren't all their servers in CA, at this point? You must have some good routing then. Still, you gotta figure at least +80ms or so on the controls plus server response time, especially under load. That would actually be good, but still not compare to a game running locally. For those sick of upgrading the PC just for games(especially if they run Linux), there is still the XBOX360 or PS3(even though I'm pissed at Sony). You would get a better experience that way and still own your games forever. I would try this service , other than my small test on a friend's laptop, if the pricing weren't so insulting. Full retail for a 1-2 year rental, plus an inevitable monthly fee just for the right to play? Screw that! I'll get the boxed game with all the art, etc and own it forever. I still play the old FF and Zelda games, to name a couple. They wouldn't be such classics if people only rented them for 1-2 years for around $60.

What I bolded is the only reason I'm not even willing to give this a try. If you're paying for the games, what's the monthly fee for?

I know for Playstation you don't have to, but don't you have to pay a subscription fee to XBox Live to play online? I don't have either, but what is the real difference between XBox Live and this OnLive stuff?

You can't even load the game and play 1 player games with On-Live without the service being paid for and your broadband connection working. Plenty of 1 or 2 player games for XBOX that also work on XBOX Live as multiplayer.

The difference is you own the game, and not have a two year rental.

The difference is that XBL gold allows you to play online multiplayer with friends and other players across the world. The $50 a year fee isn't for the games, it's just the online multiplayer component of those games. You don't need it to play single player games or local multiplayer. With onlive they charge the monthly fee, which doesn't actually get you anything but the right to call yourself a subscriber, then on top of that you have to pay for the games.

They're also having a labor day sale. Games are 50% off.

I'll never pay a subscription fee to play games I don't even own.

Yea it seems pretty dumb. I have access to it and you buy the games and then they expire in 1-2 years. The same price they charge you for games you could buy them at a store and own them for life!

Well the article says there's no monthly fee for at least the first year.

Pretty much sums up all the MMOG's out there too.

Though I fully agree with your statement on both regards.

OnLive definitely will NOT be replacing consoles or PC gaming anytime soon. For me, it is simply yet another way to play video games.

I have yet to pay a monthly fee, and with 50% off all games this weekend I will definitely purchase a few. With Xbox Live raising all of their tier prices here in the U.S. ($60/12m of Gold) as of November 1st, as well as Sony still exploring paid options, this being free to use right now isnt so bad.

ISP bandwidth caps is a bunch of crap, but I am on a business connection anyways so caps should not affect me.

OnLive just lowered the system requirements as well as the speed needed to access (3Mbps). But of course, faster download speed and better processing power is always recommended. With Wi-Fi being added later this month it will be fun testing the service over my 2.4GHz and 5GHz wireless signals with my new-ish laptop hooked up with Intel Centrino Advanced-N 620, which should make for a great Wi-Fi experience.

PS: Once again, pricing of the games is ALL set by the publishers, NOT OnLive.

I can't wait for Gaikai to go live. IT sounds much better than Onlive. From the sounds of it, it will be completely free and real big name games not the garbage games on OnLive.

Gaikai is not an on demand gaming site, it's a demo site only. Go to the FAQ section. It's for testing software and games before purchasing them.

Go away On Live, go away.

We don't need another game console - we already have three major players, and don't need minor ones coming in and making a mess.