Games Messageboard: Re: True, though I'm assuming we do now (it launched a couple days ago, right? ) by soilent brad

Back to Messageboard

Post New Thread

Help

Stats

Rules

Re: True, though I'm assuming we do now (it launched a couple days ago, right? ) soilent brad Send a noteboard - 26/06/2010 10:42:45 PM

You might, but it's not because you're in love with 20 minute walks, or round pieces of shiny plastic. There is nothing inherently GOOD about needing physical crap to experience completely non-physical entertainment. The ideal situation, as I said before, is to play a game immediately as soon as you desire, wherever you may be, and Onlive lets you do that. It charges extra for the privilege, and it's not quite as technically nice (though most people I've read about have said it's very enjoyable), but from an accessibility standpoint, it can't be beat.

That's true. No more lending to friends, though

And it would sure beat having to switch discs to play a different game (or even the same game, in some cases).

The point isn't whether the hassle is acceptable, the point is that OnLive is LESS. Less hassle is better, regardless of how little hassle the first option had.

You might not mind a 20 minute walk, but you're lying if you say you'd prefer that to clicking a button, and playing immediately.

You've got me there. Clicking is less hassle.

This service is for gamers. It's for people who both buy and play games frequently. It's definitely not for people who buy one game and slowly complete it over the course of a few months, or whatever. Honestly, you need to think of it like Cable tv, or Netflix, or a similar service. You have access to the content while you pay for the service, and after you stop, you no longer do. Quit the service, and you have nothing. Except that you enjoyed watching 10 movies last month.

Ah, but with Netflix, you're not buying the movies and paying a subscription to watch them, are you? At least, you didn't have to with Canada's version of Netflix before it got bought out by ... well ... Netflix.

OnLive is much the same. If you wouldn't use it enough to justify the subscription fee, that's all well and good. Not for you. A lot of people would, though.

Oh, I'm sure they will.

Yeah, 8 major titles, but there are several smaller ones as well, like World of Goo, etc. Plenty more are in the pipeline though. Just a matter of time.

Anyway, I'll close with two more random benefits of the service that I haven't mentioned yet.

1) OnLive allows renting of PC games. 3-5 day rentals are about 5 bucks. Renting a PC game is currently impossible, as far as I know.

See, now that I'd be interested in. As it is, I no longer rent games. And being able to rent a PC game would be quite awesome. Does it support mouse/keyboard, or can you only use the controller? Anyways, I'd be fine with renting games and paying a $15 subscription to do so. It's the paying full price to "buy" a game, and only being able to play it if you pay your subscription fee that I don't like.

2) Many games that aren't available for Mac will now be playable on a Mac. I know of at least one game (Mass Effect 2) that's being restricted to Windows machines by licensing agreements, but for the most part, Mac users will be able to play stuff they haven't been able to.

Wait a second... I thought OnLive was a console you connect to your TV. Now I'm a little confused.

Anyway, off to read your review.

soilent brad is PEOPLE!

1 + 2 + 3 + 4 + 5 = EM2C <-- Define it!

"Uh...we don't support the Hannah Montana empire."
- My 6 year old niece

Reply to message

Continuing my personal publicity campaign, I remind you all that OnLive launches tomorrow.

Aemon - 16/06/2010 05:06:21 PM 747 Views

Not yet interested, but watching. I'm curious about how game ownership will work. (or not) *NM* Zalis - 16/06/2010 07:33:38 PM 225 Views

In the worst case, you buy for full price and pay 14.95 to play. Aemon - 16/06/2010 08:24:30 PM 508 Views

I can see that long-term, but the overlap of games I already own would be a huge rip-off. Zalis - 17/06/2010 02:49:19 PM 486 Views

Well no, I wouldn't re-buy a game. I almost never play old games, though. Aemon - 17/06/2010 03:13:53 PM 484 Views

Sales matter when good, under-publicized games don't sell millions, which means no sequels. Zalis - 17/06/2010 03:25:41 PM 489 Views

I just meant that the actual numbers aren't important. The dollars coming in obviously are.

Aemon - 17/06/2010 06:33:45 PM 500 Views

On the wait list... we'll see *NM* BlackAdder - 16/06/2010 08:37:25 PM 341 Views

I like the concept of OnLive soilent brad - 16/06/2010 10:59:12 PM 539 Views

See my response to Zalis. Aemon - 17/06/2010 04:27:22 AM 652 Views

What's the price that you pay for a new game? soilent brad - 17/06/2010 04:57:56 AM 599 Views

To be fair, I said that was the worst case. We don't really know the pricing model yet. Aemon - 17/06/2010 03:07:37 PM 571 Views

True, though I'm assuming we do now (it launched a couple days ago, right? ) soilent brad - 19/06/2010 04:47:15 PM 572 Views

Re: True, though I'm assuming we do now (it launched a couple days ago, right? ) Aemon - 19/06/2010 10:42:05 PM 494 Views

Re: True, though I'm assuming we do now (it launched a couple days ago, right? ) soilent brad - 26/06/2010 10:42:45 PM 640 Views

AT&T? Really? Good luck with that.

*NM* Ghavrel - 17/06/2010 12:32:02 AM 223 Views

I like the concept... Jacob - 17/06/2010 03:46:58 PM 503 Views

Exactly my opinion. Aemon - 17/06/2010 06:38:57 PM 469 Views

Sure... Jacob - 18/06/2010 03:21:40 PM 526 Views

I'm on the wait list - still waiting *NM* Sir Tybalt - 21/06/2010 03:07:51 PM 236 Views

Me too. When I posted this, I didn't realize it was a phased rollout or whatever. Aemon - 21/06/2010 06:56:12 PM 643 Views

Back to Messageboard

Post New Thread

Help

Stats

Rules

Reply to Message

Subject

Formatting

Smiley Codes

Body

<quote id="122808">
<quote id="120605">You might, but it's not because you're in love with 20 minute walks, or round pieces of shiny plastic. There is nothing inherently GOOD about needing physical crap to experience completely non-physical entertainment. The ideal situation, as I said before, is to play a game immediately as soon as you desire, wherever you may be, and Onlive lets you do that. It charges extra for the privilege, and it's not quite as technically nice (though most people I've read about have said it's very enjoyable), but from an accessibility standpoint, it can't be beat.</quote>
That's true. No more lending to friends, though :P And it would sure beat having to switch discs to play a different game (or even the same game, in some cases).

<quote id="120605">The point isn't whether the hassle is acceptable, the point is that OnLive is LESS. Less hassle is better, regardless of how little hassle the first option had. :P You might not mind a 20 minute walk, but you're lying if you say you'd prefer that to clicking a button, and playing immediately.</quote>
You've got me there. Clicking is less hassle.

<quote id="120605">This service is for gamers. It's for people who both buy and play games frequently. It's definitely not for people who buy one game and slowly complete it over the course of a few months, or whatever. Honestly, you need to think of it like Cable tv, or Netflix, or a similar service. You have access to the content while you pay for the service, and after you stop, you no longer do. Quit the service, and you have nothing. Except that you enjoyed watching 10 movies last month. </quote>
Ah, but with Netflix, you're not buying the movies and paying a subscription to watch them, are you? At least, you didn't have to with Canada's version of Netflix before it got bought out by ... well ... Netflix.

<quote id="120605">OnLive is much the same. If you wouldn't use it enough to justify the subscription fee, that's all well and good. Not for you. A lot of people would, though. :)</quote>
Oh, I'm sure they will.

<quote id="120605">Yeah, 8 major titles, but there are several smaller ones as well, like World of Goo, etc. Plenty more are in the pipeline though. Just a matter of time. </quote>
<quote id="120605">Anyway, I'll close with two more random benefits of the service that I haven't mentioned yet.

1) OnLive allows renting of PC games. 3-5 day rentals are about 5 bucks. Renting a PC game is currently impossible, as far as I know. </quote>
See, now <i>that</i> I'd be interested in. As it is, I no longer rent games. And being able to rent a PC game would be quite awesome. Does it support mouse/keyboard, or can you only use the controller? Anyways, I'd be fine with renting games and paying a $15 subscription to do so. It's the paying full price to "buy" a game, and only being able to play it if you pay your subscription fee that I don't like.

<quote id="120605">2) Many games that aren't available for Mac will now be playable on a Mac. I know of at least one game (Mass Effect 2) that's being restricted to Windows machines by licensing agreements, but for the most part, Mac users will be able to play stuff they haven't been able to.</quote>
Wait a second... I thought OnLive was a console you connect to your TV. Now I'm a little confused.

Anyway, off to read your review.
</quote>

Link title

Link url

Send notification emails?

Username

Password