March 19, 2010

OnLive Pricing Flaw

OnLive will launch this year in June for PC users.  It will run users a sub­scrip­tion fee of @ 14.95 a month, and will allow PC users run­ning XP, Vista or Win­dows 7 or Mac users run­ning OS X as well as smart phones to play games that would gen­er­al­ly require much high­er hard­ware require­ments to run the same game if bough through Steam for exam­ple.  The games offered are syn­chro­nized, ren­dered, and stored on a serv­er main­tained by OnLive and offered online.  The cool thing about this is, if ur com­put­er can play video, then ur in, even if u haven’t updat­ed ur GPU in 5 years.  They will also be sell­ing a con­sole called the “Micro­Con­sole” that will con­nect direct­ly to ur TV mak­ing it pos­si­ble to have this ser­vice with­out a com­put­er.  The down sides are far too many for this to appeal to me though.  Let’s point out the obvi­ous.

An inter­net con­nec­tion speed of 1.5 Mbps is required to deliv­er games in SDTV res­o­lu­tion, aka res­o­lu­tion giv­en from the orig­i­nal Xbox or the PS2 or the cur­rent Wii.  And for res­o­lu­tion that will be con­sid­ered High Def, 4–5 Mbps will be required, I just hope ur sis­ter is not on YouTube dur­ing any­time u want to use this ser­vice.  Besides this, the month­ly sub­scrip­tion fee allows only for demos to be played, no full games.  And on top of that if you do decide to buy a full game through OnLive u are depen­dant on that ser­vice to stay up and run­ning or will find urself with­out rights to your game.  So I can see how this ser­vice would appeal to peo­ple that do not have con­soles and have out­dat­ed com­put­ers.  But to some­one that has both a con­sole and an updat­ed com­put­er, this looks like a waste of mon­ey to me.


  1. PimpmasterF - March 19, 2010 8:39 pm

    I see this fail­ing on an epic scale, (just fin­ished god of war 3 so ive been say­ing epic alot late­ly, lol)
    I mean yes its awsome if you­ve got the cash to spend on games and sub­scrip­tion fees and dont have an up to date PC, dont know how to build one or feel buy­ing one is too much. How­ev­er Onlive ofcourse is geared towards gamers and any true gamer has either a 360, PS3, Wii or PC or a mix of the four. And why on earth would any­one with a major con­sole or PC pay $15/mo and pay full retail to play a game they cant touch. I know this some­what com­pares to Steam but at least steam has an “offline” mode to allow you to play most games bought through them. Also in the long run its cheap­er to save, wait for tax returns or what­ev­er and just buy a con­sole or PC rather than pay­ing a sub­scrip­tion fee and pay­ing for games on a reg­u­lar basis to make the sub­scrip­tion worth it. And like I said any­one who plays games that much has no need for some­thing like Onlive cuz they already have a con­sole and/or PC. So in short I real­ly dont see this tak­ing off too well or at least last­ing for any sig­nif­i­cant length of time. But I guess we will see

  2. PimpmasterF - March 19, 2010 8:47 pm

    Oh I almost for­got to men­tion that if you dont have the mon­ey for games or gam­ing hard­ware its not like­ly you have the cash for an inter­net con­nec­tion capa­ble of a con­si­tant 5mb/s. sure 1.5mb/s con­nec­tions are offered for SD res­o­lu­tions but SD not only brings down the expe­ri­ence but also kin­da defeats the pur­pose if you ask me. Not to men­tion that most inter­net con­nec­tions just arent that sta­ble, I have a 16mb/s con­nec­tion and can down­load most things at a con­sis­tant 2+mb/s and watch HD online con­tent pret­ty well but its not per­fect and videos and down­loads will bot­tom out from time to time. I for one would­nt want to rely on a source that isnt guar­an­teed to pro­vide con­sis­tant playable qual­i­ty, I dont want to be play­ing a game only to have my crys­tal clear image get all dis­tort­ed and fuzzy. I did­nt pay $50–60 for a game that has vari­able qual­i­ty, yaknow

  3. DeathProof - March 19, 2010 8:50 pm

    Yea for sure it looks like it will be an epic fail. But the ppl behind this project are not noobs in the indus­try, and I think they will have a much younger audi­ence of supreme­ly noob gamers that will be attract­ed to this. I can just pic­ture 12 yr olds cry­ing to their par­ents to get them this while promis­ing not to ask for anoth­er $60.00 game ever again, then get­ting bored, but their SOL cuz their stuck with a year con­tract or some­thing like that, lol. This is some­thing that I hope fails, but I have a feel­ing that the boys behind this did the research and will make a good chunk of change… We’ll see : )

  4. PimpmasterF - March 19, 2010 11:31 pm

    Im sure the peo­ple behind this have done their research and know what theyre doing but I also think that the com­pe­ti­tion, sony, microsoft and nin­ten­do arent going to let some­thing like this go unno­ticed. If it were to real­ly take off and be a huge suc­cess they would lose mil­lions in the loss of con­sole sales. I see more tight­ly wound con­tracts between them and devel­op­ers in the future. I agree though that their tar­get audi­ence is the noob com­mu­ni­ty, also Im curi­ous how they intend to han­dle online mul­ti­play­er, Im no expert but it seems that they would have to implent a serv­er with­in a serv­er or a seper­ate serv­er that con­nects to the source serv­er severe­ly hin­der­ing band­width or at least requir­ing sig­nif­cant­ly more than the 1.5–5mb/s requirment.

  5. PimpmasterF - March 19, 2010 11:42 pm

    For­got to men­tion the fact that Nvidia and AMD/ATI and Intel would prob­a­bly have some­thing to say about it also as the need for hard­war upgrades and/or new­er hard­ware would­nt real­ly be need­ed and thus they would lost tons of mon­ey from poten­tial buy­ers


Have your say

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

Archives - Powered by WordPress - A theme by