What is your opinion about the new On Live game service?

[8bit]

CNET Article

On Live Wesite

Joystiq Article

On Live launches June 17th 2010! This service is really mind boggling when you think about what it is really accomplishing! This could be the new way to provide games that changes the industry, especially if this way is more economical. The video and list of games on their site is really nice so I recommend checking it out! I love the idea but there are some definite pros and cons I think.

Positives:
- Cloud Gaming
- No Hardware Required for premium graphics and sound.
- No Download ( who wants to waste time downloading 8gb games and 1gb demos?)
- Full Games and Demos on Demand
- Use your existing computer.
- Multiplayer online gaming included.
- Full game rentals available.
- We dont have to see the sun to get new games(lol)

Cons:
- No Download (its not installed on your machine)
- Fully dependent on your good high speed connection.
- No shiney new game to unwrap and keep forever or sell
- Service could have lag or interuptions
- Once you quit paying $14.95 all the games you bought are now unavailable
- Monthly cost $14.95 plus full games prices (which are unannounced at this time)
- Its different (lol)


What do you think about the service and where this idea is going to take gaming?

[SpaceBooger]

I dont have a 360 or PS3, but my PC runs SF4 and Batman AA cranked all the way up... but there is something more satisfying about playing games from the couch on my HDTV.
So, I was originally all about OnLive, until I realized you have to pay a monthly fee and buy the games. I would do either or, but not both.

[Cronson]

I want a cheaper way to play games yet I want to also feel like my money is going directly to the developers. If this is a way that could happen, then I'm on board. BUT I'm not even a collector yet I don't like the idea of not having a physical copy of the game. I'll definitely wait to see it pan out.

[8bit]

I dont have a 360 or PS3, but my PC runs SF4 and Batman AA cranked all the way up... but there is something more satisfying about playing games from the couch on my HDTV.
So, I was originally all about OnLive, until I realized you have to pay a monthly fee and buy the games. I would do either or, but not both.

I guess we will just have to see what kind of charge the games are going to be.... if its like $10 per full game and somehow you can recover your game library if you cancel and then renew the service... maybe thats not so bad... but who knows... they will price everything too high and fail because of their greed.

[J T]

When I first heard about On Live, I thought it was going to be something where you just paid a monthly subscription and had access to whatever games you wanted, sort of like the streamable movies on Netflix. Since I have found out that you have to buy access to each game, I've almost totally lost interest. I suppose it would be good for games that I don't have good enough hardware for, but then I'd be better off investing that subscription money into a new graphics card, so this service (assuming it even works) just falls short.

[Koopin_Krackerz]

When I first heard about On Live, I thought it was going to be something where you just paid a monthly subscription and had access to whatever games you wanted, sort of like the streamable movies on Netflix. Since I have found out that you have to buy access to each game, I've almost totally lost interest.

Same goes for me. I was really interested up to the point where I had to pay for the games too. Also, the bandwidth issue could kill it. You might pay for 5MB internet, but usually you only get 3MB and the issue of dips in the speeds is a possible problem. It's real shame that they decided to go with the pricing structure that they have though. I would've jumped on board but there's no chance now.

[LBJeff]

BUT I'm not even a collector yet I don't like the idea of not having a physical copy of the game

QFT.

I can't stand having virtual copies of games. I know it's pretty much the future of gaming but I'll fight that trend as long as I can. I bought my first games off of Steam last December and I just felt dirty.

As far as On Live goes, I think it will end up tanking - at least the micro console version. There are too many horses in the race right now for an unknown to enter and have a fighting chance. Yes, Xbox was an unknown but it had Microsoft's checkbook/name backing it. To think you can enter a fight vs. Nintendo, Sony, Microsoft and PC gaming and ask people to switch to your system? Well, that takes a lot of gumption.

The PC/Mac version just seems like Steam but without actually having the game on your rig and more dependability issues if your connection is shoddy or down.

[nickfil]

I'm reserving judgement until i see pricing on the games. If they are cheaper than retail release, or run sales like steam i'll probably jump on it.

There are a lot of games that i don't really want to collect, but play. Call of duty series springs to mind.

onlive will be good for that if the service works correctly.

[yomomma1]

I doubt the games are cheaper, they are just pc games streamed. Besides that, bitch about a $50 dollars for xbox live? Then your not going to like this.

[Limewater]

The biggest problem in my mind is latency. Between the latency between your input and it being registered on the server a thousand miles away, the latency inherent in video and audio compression, and the latency of sending the updated video and audio to your machine, I can't see this as being terribly playable for anything other than FPSs, where people are already used to terrible latency, or RPGs, where it doesn't matter that much.

But yeah, the idea is unappealing to me for a lot of other reasons, too.