With NVIDIA entering this market, how relevant is OnLive?
Cloud Gaming should be used for demos and such to get people interested
... the upside there is that we don't have to download Gigabytes just to discover a game sucks. Should Sony stick with this kind of model rather than force us to go completely cloud-based, then it'll be a good thing. While many gamers may be tempted to "sell out" to the concept of cloud gaming that OnLive and others are pushing because of the convenience, you should go play Diablo 3 for a while and have that lovely experience of servers being down. Watching things like this weekends Netflix outage does not at all bode well for Cloud Gaming.
Oh, and you'll probably be able to play this on OnLive too
... but of course they're now probably too busy with cloud-based Windows Desktops.
Fair question which merits discussion. First, sreaming Crysis
... now pirating Office?
I hate to troll, but still think this company is trying to peddle technology that just isn't in demand, and when it is will be done by Apple, Microsoft, Google, or Sony.
There's simply one thing that turns me off from local TV news: That it's dominated by tales of assorted criminal doings, corruption, irrelevant stupid on-goings, or worthless weather forecasting. In one era it was perhaps useful; I don't see "local news" doing anything useful for years to come.
As we're talking about superstars here it's probably not going to affect them much either way. Self-starters generally know how to teach themselves anyway. Would would be better is if there was a tight bond between the grant and the school they're dropping out of and, perhaps, instead of dropping out for a period of time the University in question could give them credit or grant a different form of degree.
Games like this tend to go gold/platinum merely because gamers (or more likely, their parents) "buy the game on spec" sheerly on the brand name. The game industry gets it and uses that to their advantage. The trick is to discourage people from buying games like this so if you're a gamer and see someone who's making this decision and "just say no". Harder than it looks really
I've recently had a great discussion with a representative from my Cable company about reducing my bill. Paraphrasing, cutting the TV part of my service actually ends up costing me MORE. Makes sense when you just want to keep bilking customers for crap. With Netflix, Hulu Plus, and other services there's no real need for hundreds of channels of garbage.
I guess HTC is convinced enough to blow $40M on this, but this obsession with "streaming games from the cloud" really doesn't seem to have made much traction. I have to think that it makes even less sense on a cell phone because of how much bandwidth would be used.
just keep changing your business model!
Good find. As always, being a Cold Fusion Physicist generally qualifies you as a crank scientist. Not having a theory for how something works is cause for concern unless it was, of course, serendipity.
After watching OnLive struggle with gaining market acceptance, this is probably their best bet but people who want quality gaming experiences will stay away. They dropped the subscription fee probably out of sheer terror that they'd fail miserably. Now Android and TVs? Ultimately it looks to be headed to hotels to replace that crappy system you often find to entertain the kids. Sadly, no matter what they do there's the TANSTAAFL principle. Someone has to pay for all that computing power in carrier hotels throughout the US, plus you have crackdowns on bandwidth at the end-user level. Give it a couple more years and we won't hear any more from OnLive.
Looking back at Perlman's other ventures, it seems that he hypes a technology in an area and then ultimately makes money elsewhere. WebTV, for example
... that ended up getting picked up by other companies and was in one form turned into Moxi via Charter. Once this fails, it'll probably be picked up for a dime by some other company. No gamer is going to care if they have a patent ... and honestly does anyone?
Read the forums and responses throughout the Internet and you'll find that gamers really have no use for OnLive. It is a novelty ... a "gee whiz, I can play Crysis on a crappy laptop" kind of thing. In the United States we already have huge issues with broadband and the recent wins by various companies to throttle traffic is already hurting them. Why "stream" video of a game being played (by you, and elsewhere) when you offload all that onto your own machine?
They missed many targets and dropped prices already means that they're not reaching the market. "Cloud Gaming" is complete BS.
An anonymous reader writes "'Always bet on Duke.' It seems he was right about himself, at least. The longest, most storied in-development game in history seems like it's finally going to be released by Gearbox Software sometime within the next year. 'According to Pitchford, Gearbox began finishing Duke Nukem Forever in late 2009. "Clearly the game hadn't been finished at 3D Realms but a lot of content had been created," he says. "The approach and investment and process at 3D Realms didn't quite make it, and it cracked at the end. With Gearbox Software we brought all those pieces together. It's the game it was meant to be." The game is currently expected to ship in 2010 although given its history Pitchford is understandably reluctant to be more specific.'"
NNUfergs writes "Six Dutch gamers play Red Dead Redemption for 50 solid hours (minus breaks) to break the previous world record for longest time playing a video game of 40 hours 20 minutes."
Link to Original Source
Link to Original Source