End of console gaming?

[g_e_oos]

http://www.onlive.com/

First check out the link. Maybe google it and look more in to it and tell me what you think. If this actually works it really could end consoles in my opinion.

[Hanzo_blade]

I'm confused... do you play with a controller if you're not playing on your PC? That is still a console in my opinion. This thing still confuses me and how it works.

[g_e_oos]

The one you play on your tv is pretty much a small comp that you hook up to your tv. You control it with a controller or a mouse and keyboard.

[Hanzo_blade]

so its a computer with forever good specs? o.o

[Plastic Jesus]

I'd put money into the future of gaming being run via internet. I am almost able to watch any movie I want, when I want with Nexflix. I can already download and play many games on my computer. I'm betting onlive (stupid name) or something like it will replace buying games completely. Eventually there will only be one platform, some sort of computer/TV/internet/sextoy hybrid and you're concern would not longer be your platform but the services that you buy though it. I said this about phones years ago, that eventually there would be a phone/portable game/camera/computer/sextoy hybrid and now we have iphones and blackberries (as far as the sextoy comment goes, have you ever put one on vibrate?). I'll wait for the tech to advace a bit before I make my descision, as I don't want to end up with a bunch of HD DVDs, Laser Discs, or Betamaxes.

[captainAngry]

onLive or whatever the fuck it is called is bullshit. There is no way you can play any game you want without having to download anything whithout losing some kind of performance. I mean, netflix movies are fine when you stream them but they have to buffer and the quality isn't great unless you have a nice connection. When you are talking about multiplayer games with graphics constantly being drawn to the screen to think that something won't suffer when that is moved to half way accross the country and accessed via the internet is a pipe dream.

[Divine Fate]

I agree with captain, this is physically impossible. Just check out http://instantaction.com/. It is pretty much the same thing, but it requires hoards of downloads and PC capabilities.

[steiner949]

OnLive is just another scheme for some company to try and monopolize on people that believe everything that they hear. I know the higher end functions of computers and servers are above my head, but I still have enough common sense to know that something that big would require massive ammounts of capital to put into practice. Not only that, it would also require better forms of data transfer, currently the best that we have is fiber optic (anyone can correct me it that is an incorrect statment), and even then that costs much more becuase they have to dig up all of the old copper wires to replace them. They would be better off trying to create a game that is controlled with thought and transmitted straight into your brain than think everything can be taken care of by some magical server.

[MrKerplunkers]

I'm betting onlive (stupid name) or something like it will replace buying games completely.

They tried that already with the phantom a few years back. It didn't really work, which may be why a good deal of people never heard of it.

With our current tech, such a thing as onlive is merely impossible, as much as I would love it. If this thing isn't delayed till 20XX, then it will probably be too expensive to be productive.

[Wamp Rats]

I just came

[GrimGriz]

When you are talking about multiplayer games

Are we? Or are we talking about single-player experience...and would it make a difference?

[captainAngry]

I would assume it would make a difference because in single player games, the console/computer is already calculating where the enimys are, where they are going to be etc. In a multiplayer game each player could move in any direction at any time and fire their weapon at any time so I would assume that would require at least some additional processing power.

[Original]

I actually saw a show awhile back on what they want to replace fiber optic with.

LAZERS!!!

seriously, they can transfer the data to light, then send a package every x seconds or whatever. On the other end it gets decoded.
The main reason is national security.
Through fiber optic you can 'gather' the data as it streams, with this tech Somebody could hack a small piece of data but the interuption they make in the stream is found right away.
Anyway, I'm typing fast and it's been awhile so I'm a bit fuzzy on details, I just thought about it so I figured I'd get up on my soapbox and rant a bit.

[arkawn]

vaporwarevaporwarevaporwarevaporwarevaporwarevaporwarevaporwarevaporwarevaporware
vaporwarevaporwarevaporwarevaporwarevaporwarevaporwarevaporwarevaporwarevaporware
vaporwarevaporwarevaporwarevaporwarevaporwarevaporwarevaporwarevaporwarevaporware
vaporwarevaporwarevaporwarevaporwarevaporwarevaporwarevaporwarevaporwarevaporware

[captainAngry]

vaporwarevaporwarevaporwarevaporwarevaporwarevaporwarevaporwarevaporwarevaporware
vaporwarevaporwarevaporwarevaporwarevaporwarevaporwarevaporwarevaporwarevaporware
vaporwarevaporwarevaporwarevaporwarevaporwarevaporwarevaporwarevaporwarevaporware
vaporwarevaporwarevaporwarevaporwarevaporwarevaporwarevaporwarevaporwarevaporware

second'd!