[url]http://techcrunch.com/2015/04/02/sony-is-buying-onlives-cloud-gaming-patents-and-other-tech-onlive-to-close-april-30/[/url]
[quote=TechCrunch]A final coda to the opera that has been OnLive — the cloud gaming company that was once estimated to be worth $1.8 billion but, saddled with debt, went through a dramatic round of layoffs before a surprise sale for $4.8 million. Sony Computer Entertainment is now buying various assets of the company, including 140 U.S. and international patents for cloud gaming services. Meanwhile, Onlive itself will be closing its operations on April 30. As of today, the company is not renewing any subscriptions.
Specifically, OnLive says that the OnLive Game Service, OnLive Desktop and SL Go (Second Life) will all be available until April 30. But, “After today’s date, no further subscription renewals will be charged for any of these services. Users whose subscriptions renewed on or after March 28 will be refunded,” the company writes in a statement. “Following the termination of the company’s services and related products, OnLive will engage in an orderly wind-down of the company and cease operations.” It’s not mentioned but it sounds like CloudLift Enterprise is also included in this closure.
At one time, OnLive’s patent portfolio alone was estimated to be worth hundreds of millions of dollars, although it’s anyone’s guess whether the company was able to achieve that price because terms of the deal with Sony are not being disclosed.[/quote]
It was only a matter of time...
Onlive was still going??
Not even tachyons could save it.
I thought OnLive tanked years ago?
The only time I tried and was annoyed at onlive was when it first came out, and when they had the red faction Armageddon demo. Despite never maxing out my connection with the streaming and low ping it was still very annoying to control.
It was doomed to fail the minute it got released
I remember way back when I had first heard about OnLive I thought it sounded too good to be true. But yeah I thought they had already went under a couple of years ago.
The Fuck is Onlive. never heard about eh well maybe once and forgetting was it any good.?
I tried it once when it first came out, I played Driver San-Francisco and I was impressed with how well it was actually running. Unfortunately, it didn't justify the price when I could just purchase the game and play it forever and with better everything. It was a good idea for low-end computers, but it's assumed people with low-end computers have low-end internet anyways, so the idea kind of falls apart since it needs a lot of money to run and is only useful for a very small demographic, which many of those in that demographic probably wouldn't even know about it anyways.
Doomed from the start.
so good idea shitty planning.
I had it for a few months a couple years ago. It actually worked really well, provided your internet was good. Really the only problems I had with it (not sure if they were ever solved or not) is lack of mod support for games that support mods, pretty obvious since you play off of their servers. And you're isolated from main game servers, as in, you could only really play with other onlive users.
[QUOTE=theevilldeadII;47448328]so good idea shitty planning.[/QUOTE]
Bad idea, bad planning, bad execution.
We're in an age where the national standard for broadband is barely reaching over 1000 megabits per second. If whoever came up with this business model is still alive in several decades/centuries, they could try again when we actually have adequate infrastructure.
[QUOTE=theevilldeadII;47448212]The Fuck is Onlive. never heard about eh well maybe once and forgetting was it any good.?[/QUOTE]
It was a game streaming service, spend 5 bucks a month and the game is played on a server in the states rather locally.
It was praised for being the pioneer of streaming services. Things like Playstation Now was heavily influenced from it (also because they bought out a technology (Gaikai) to make it happen). Of course it won't be successful today because Cable companies are dicks and wont spend money to upgrade to Gigabit lines.
[QUOTE=A B.A. Survivor;47448408]Bad idea, bad planning, bad execution.
We're in an age where the national standard for broadband is barely reaching over 1000 megabits per second. If whoever came up with this business model is still alive in several decades/centuries, they could try again when we actually have adequate infrastructure.[/QUOTE]
or try again in Korea ( South. )
You mean to tell me that gamers don't want to spend money to play games with worse latency than they would get if they just played on their own computer?
And you mean to tell me that another stupid Second Life partnership turned out to be a [URL="http://www.kzero.co.uk/blog/second-life-rings-the-changes-with-avaline/"]complete failure that nobody ever cared about[/URL]?
Wow, definitely surprised there.
Aw, I really liked them. I played Dirt 3 on my phone 2 years ago.
I ended up getting Arkham Asylum on there for a penny, beat the whole game on there.
The quality was sorta hit or miss, so when I got to the [sp]3rd? Scarecrow segment where the game glitches out into the nightmare[/sp] I thought "Jesus, I know the servers are bad but holy shi- oooh"
Someone had to try it at some point. Sure, they failed miserably, but that's just how these things go. Someone else will try again in the near future and hey, maybe they'll get it right.
I feel sorry for those who are about to lose access to their paid games and it is honestly the biggest issue I have with this type of service. At least with download services we may have half a chance of making the game run independently of it. I know some Steam games have zero issues being directly launched from their executables and I know GTA 4 in particular can be made to run freely without GFWL.
I used it when it launched because I had a low-end computer but decent internet, so I loved it. Then I got a much better computer and never touched it again in years.
[QUOTE=BackSapper;47448416]It was a game streaming service, spend 5 bucks a month and the game is played on a server in the states rather locally.
It was praised for being the pioneer of streaming services. Things like Playstation Now was heavily influenced from it (also because they bought out a technology (Gaikai) to make it happen). Of course it won't be successful today because Cable companies are dicks and wont spend money to upgrade to Gigabit lines.[/QUOTE]
Even if you had gigabit lines, latency is still an issue.
Gone like lag in the wind.
Good, terrible fad that needed to die, hopefully it takes all the ideas of streaming games with it. Latency is the least of the issues with the whole concept.
Not having an immediate response to my actions drives me up the wall. It's the most disorienting thing about playing a game. As a result, OnLive is the pinnacle of confusion and latent frustration.
[QUOTE=Satane;47449221]They only went up to 720p and like 10 Mb was more than enough to play it. but as you said latency fucked everyone, probably their encoding/decoding software.[/QUOTE]
Also the fact that the latency of an internet connection will always be slower than that of a physical box in the same room as you. Making the thing useless for any game that requires precision control and quick reactions.
Excellent news for it's rival, PC by Post.
[video=youtube;QkPoSMClV1U]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QkPoSMClV1U[/video]
Is no one in this thread afraid of sony for buying shitloads of patents? Let's just stream games to the player so they will never own a physical copy ever again (Your argument about steam does not count - i have all the files and i can just download a crack for steam if steam ever goes down unexpected)
It'll be back. It was defeated because the implementation was pretty crappy and the technology just didn't scale well, especially for the price.
But as evidenced by phone apps, people will pay for DRM laden bullshit for the convenience. If you think this is the end of attempts retain full control over game licensing to consumers, don't make that mistake.
Man I haven't heard of OnLive in years. I remember getting borderlands on it because my laptop was too shitty to run it by itself. I mean this service was definitely catered towards people with laptops that couldn't run games but that was at a time where buying a cheap laptop meant you could only do the basics and getting to the point where you could play games meant spending a couple hundred dollars more than what you could. But technology as far as integrated graphics go, certainly have made leaps and bounds since then and we've come to the point where a $400 laptop can play games low to med depending on what you buy . It was a service that quickly got outpaced by time.
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.