Ed
04-07-2009, 01:45 PM
Article From: http://spawnkill.com/?p=1499
Will OnLive Change The Game Industry?
Posted by K-Tuck on April 7th, 2009
The newly-announced product/service known as OnLive will supposedly revolutionize the video games industry. Using “cloud computing” technology, OnLive’s “Microconsole” will be able to stream modern-era video games to just about any TV while their browser plug-in will stream to just about any computer regardless of it’s power, operating system, or other technical specifications.
The real draw to the system is that all movements within the game will be computed on the server side, and streamed quickly enough to the Microconsole that the game plays as if it is on the user’s PC or gaming console. OnLive service will be able to stream games using lower-end broadband connections; however, users with 5Mbps connections or higher will be able to enjoy 720p graphics at 60 frames per second.
Everything about the service sounds amazing. However, one has to wonder what exactly this will change for hardware and software developers as well as the average gamer.
Though official details are slim, the service will likely present itself as one of two scenarios: the first and least likely is an all-access membership service, where users pay a flat rate for full access to games. The second and more probable scenario is one where users will pay an average (but almost necessarily lower) price for individual games. I couldn’t find a single detail on the internet to confirm any particular plan, but I am sure that paying for individual games is the only plausible option.
This brings about new options for game players. While downloadable content, be it games or game demos has been around for a good while, it hasn’t exactly became mainstream until recently. Companies are just now jumping on to pay-to-download games, especially considering that it hasn’t been an option but for only a few years. It seems that the ultimate goal of OnLive is to cut out the middle ground between game maker and game player. Consumers will pay a rate surely less than the retail price of the game and be able to play it instantly.
The upside to this is that there will never be a shortage to the games: no reserves, no midnight launches, no running around town to find the last available copy. For the developer, this means no worrying about programming for a specific console or porting to a different machine and fixing inherent bugs, as well as almost entirely avoiding piracy. The games, while being advertised as priced competitively, could be subject to discounts at the developer’s option, much like delivery service Steam had a while back on titles such as Left For Dead. Also, games on OnLive’s side of the equation will have the latest updates and patches, ensuring 100 percent compatibility between players using the service.
The downsides to this service seem almost optimistic, though they will surely leave some feeling a bit uncomfortable. Since OnLive will handle all of the transactions, and no physical medium will be used, there will be no used titles available. While this doesn’t much hurt the developer, it does hurt the consumer. Many people rely on the low prices affixed to used games to get their fill. In an OnLive world, everyone will surely have to pay the same amount. On the same note, many players (myself included) are iffy about not having a hard copy of their software; without case in hand, its almost like one doesn’t own the game.
The real downside is the most prominent question: what does this mean for current-age console developers? OnLive already has contracts with companies such as EA, Ubisoft, and Eidos. With a cheaper online-only option, why would consumers who haven’t yet opted for a current-generation console want to buy a 200+ dollar machine to play newer titles? Assuming the service takes off, the only thing that would keep Microsoft and Sony consoles afloat would be the exclusive titles available for those consoles, be it disc-based exclusives like Metal Gear Solid 4 or downloadable games like Castle Crashers, or games from developers that don’t want to or haven’t yet agreed to develop for OnLive.
If there is one company that would feel the effects less than the others, it would be Nintendo. The main appeals to Nintendo’s Wii are the unique control mechanic offered and the old-school games readily available for purchase. Neither of these are something that OnLive has to offer… yet, at least. Fortunately for Nintendo, their biggest games are first-party games such as Zelda or Mario titles. These types of games will be missing from OnLive. Still, the rising popularity of the newest and most cutting-edge technology will surely detract from the Wii’s install base, just as it would for Sony or Microsoft.
One can just imagine the impact it would have on players on both sides of the spectrum. The slow-to-adopt or slow-to-choose player without a Sony, Microsoft, or Nintendo console could adopt the OnLive service as the preferred gaming medium just as readily as someone who has bought them all so far. And, upon consideration, with a game release across all platforms, someone owning all four would probably opt for the cheaper, quicker, best-performing option. Since this is the main appeal to OnLive’s service, this surely spells bad news in some form or fashion for today’s consoles.
Ultimately, one can only wonder which way the service will go. Will the quick availability of titles and the relatively low-cost requirements to play be the end of disc-based gaming, or will gamers who previously fought each other and frothed at the mouth to defend their consoles of choice band together for the good of home console gaming in general? Will developers rush to work for a truly new-age console for the ease of programming and distribution, or will Microsoft just drop fat checks on everyone to keep them around? Only time will tell.
Will OnLive Change The Game Industry?
Posted by K-Tuck on April 7th, 2009
The newly-announced product/service known as OnLive will supposedly revolutionize the video games industry. Using “cloud computing” technology, OnLive’s “Microconsole” will be able to stream modern-era video games to just about any TV while their browser plug-in will stream to just about any computer regardless of it’s power, operating system, or other technical specifications.
The real draw to the system is that all movements within the game will be computed on the server side, and streamed quickly enough to the Microconsole that the game plays as if it is on the user’s PC or gaming console. OnLive service will be able to stream games using lower-end broadband connections; however, users with 5Mbps connections or higher will be able to enjoy 720p graphics at 60 frames per second.
Everything about the service sounds amazing. However, one has to wonder what exactly this will change for hardware and software developers as well as the average gamer.
Though official details are slim, the service will likely present itself as one of two scenarios: the first and least likely is an all-access membership service, where users pay a flat rate for full access to games. The second and more probable scenario is one where users will pay an average (but almost necessarily lower) price for individual games. I couldn’t find a single detail on the internet to confirm any particular plan, but I am sure that paying for individual games is the only plausible option.
This brings about new options for game players. While downloadable content, be it games or game demos has been around for a good while, it hasn’t exactly became mainstream until recently. Companies are just now jumping on to pay-to-download games, especially considering that it hasn’t been an option but for only a few years. It seems that the ultimate goal of OnLive is to cut out the middle ground between game maker and game player. Consumers will pay a rate surely less than the retail price of the game and be able to play it instantly.
The upside to this is that there will never be a shortage to the games: no reserves, no midnight launches, no running around town to find the last available copy. For the developer, this means no worrying about programming for a specific console or porting to a different machine and fixing inherent bugs, as well as almost entirely avoiding piracy. The games, while being advertised as priced competitively, could be subject to discounts at the developer’s option, much like delivery service Steam had a while back on titles such as Left For Dead. Also, games on OnLive’s side of the equation will have the latest updates and patches, ensuring 100 percent compatibility between players using the service.
The downsides to this service seem almost optimistic, though they will surely leave some feeling a bit uncomfortable. Since OnLive will handle all of the transactions, and no physical medium will be used, there will be no used titles available. While this doesn’t much hurt the developer, it does hurt the consumer. Many people rely on the low prices affixed to used games to get their fill. In an OnLive world, everyone will surely have to pay the same amount. On the same note, many players (myself included) are iffy about not having a hard copy of their software; without case in hand, its almost like one doesn’t own the game.
The real downside is the most prominent question: what does this mean for current-age console developers? OnLive already has contracts with companies such as EA, Ubisoft, and Eidos. With a cheaper online-only option, why would consumers who haven’t yet opted for a current-generation console want to buy a 200+ dollar machine to play newer titles? Assuming the service takes off, the only thing that would keep Microsoft and Sony consoles afloat would be the exclusive titles available for those consoles, be it disc-based exclusives like Metal Gear Solid 4 or downloadable games like Castle Crashers, or games from developers that don’t want to or haven’t yet agreed to develop for OnLive.
If there is one company that would feel the effects less than the others, it would be Nintendo. The main appeals to Nintendo’s Wii are the unique control mechanic offered and the old-school games readily available for purchase. Neither of these are something that OnLive has to offer… yet, at least. Fortunately for Nintendo, their biggest games are first-party games such as Zelda or Mario titles. These types of games will be missing from OnLive. Still, the rising popularity of the newest and most cutting-edge technology will surely detract from the Wii’s install base, just as it would for Sony or Microsoft.
One can just imagine the impact it would have on players on both sides of the spectrum. The slow-to-adopt or slow-to-choose player without a Sony, Microsoft, or Nintendo console could adopt the OnLive service as the preferred gaming medium just as readily as someone who has bought them all so far. And, upon consideration, with a game release across all platforms, someone owning all four would probably opt for the cheaper, quicker, best-performing option. Since this is the main appeal to OnLive’s service, this surely spells bad news in some form or fashion for today’s consoles.
Ultimately, one can only wonder which way the service will go. Will the quick availability of titles and the relatively low-cost requirements to play be the end of disc-based gaming, or will gamers who previously fought each other and frothed at the mouth to defend their consoles of choice band together for the good of home console gaming in general? Will developers rush to work for a truly new-age console for the ease of programming and distribution, or will Microsoft just drop fat checks on everyone to keep them around? Only time will tell.