Jump to content
  • Welcome!

    Register and log in easily with Twitter or Google accounts!

    Or simply create a new Huddle account. 

    Members receive fewer ads , access our dark theme, and the ability to join the discussion!

     

OnLive: the future of Video games?


Doc Holiday

Recommended Posts

seems cool, but I'll wait and see the execution of it.

http://www.onlive.com/

this could seriously bring an end to gaming as we know it, but for some reason I doubt it.

Me thinks the main reason for doubt is the amount of bandwidth it would take to stream games to end users. With many ISP's already testing out the idea of charging people based on bandwidth usage, I can't imagine the monthly bill of an avid gamer who's being charged based on bandwidth usage.

(...and even if not charged by bandwidth, ISP's have already been accused of capping bandwidth)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Me thinks the main reason for doubt is the amount of bandwidth it would take to stream games to end users. With many ISP's already testing out the idea of charging people based on bandwidth usage, I can't imagine the monthly bill of an avid gamer who's being charged based on bandwidth usage.

(...and even if not charged by bandwidth, ISP's have already been accused of capping bandwidth)

when the fiber optic wire is finally the standard and not the exception I could see this work, and that's just a matter of time.

the charging based on bandwidth thing is something that execs that don't know poo about they're own industry are saying, think of it as the same way New Coke is viewed now, sounds like a good idea in the board room, will be doomed to failure and anyone who does it will loose they're ass till they switch back.

And I think the execs know this themselves to some extent but some moron is going to try it and loose they're ass when they do.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

American internet sucks WAY too much to run this combined with ISP's charging per bandwidth soon, no way. Maybe in Korea, Europe, etc, you know, where internet connections don't suck, they could do this. Here in America we pay more than anyone in the world for very bad internet.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

American internet sucks WAY too much to run this combined with ISP's charging per bandwidth soon, no way. Maybe in Korea, Europe, etc, you know, where internet connections don't suck, they could do this. Here in America we pay more than anyone in the world for very bad internet.

What he said. The US is so much larger than places like Japan and some of the European countries. Our technological infrastructure would take years of upgrading to see the quality of service that places like Japan already has. I live in a rural area and we STILL don't have anything better than dial up (I use satellite and that sucks ass/is expensive/and has unbearable download limits).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

soo...its like a 1-900 numbers for avid gamers....pay-to-play???

It sounds good on paper but i think it will take decades for everyone to get.it...I still can not get dsl or fiberoptics and wont get dsl for 2 years and fiber optics up to 5...and i live 3 miles from city limits....It will be an investment by the company to get it out there over a very long time

But i got cable internet and i signed up to be selected as a Beta tester...If they pick me i will let you know how it is

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Me thinks the main reason for doubt is the amount of bandwidth it would take to stream games to end users. With many ISP's already testing out the idea of charging people based on bandwidth usage, I can't imagine the monthly bill of an avid gamer who's being charged based on bandwidth usage.

(...and even if not charged by bandwidth, ISP's have already been accused of capping bandwidth)

This is one of the main reasons the switch to digital transmission tv.

Plus you are going to see a push in the next 5 years to seriously upgrade broadband nationwide.

Why we haven't already is beyond me.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Oh yeah, it'll be the future, but not the near future. Like others have stated, in rural areas of the country, getting anything more advanced than dial up is impossible at this moment in time. I don't think it'll be huge when it comes out, just because only a small percent of the country will be able to use it. However, in 10 years or so? This will be what video games are.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Charging for bandwidth is not a completely horrible thing imo. Although it sucks for someone like me, it took me literally 2 years to convince my mother to get off netzero, and even now she just has the road runner light. She checks her email and does a little work related stuff but 99% of the time she's perfectly fine with dial up speeds. Now myself, I'm essentially using bandwidth 24/7 with torrents. It's really not fair for my mother and I to pay the same amount for internet access.

I think it'd be a good idea for ISPs to offer plans that are much cheaper, but put caps on network usage. Maybe offer premium, uncapped, very fast internet for $50 and go as low as $10 for limited access. It would probably increase revenue and allow ISP to upgrade their networks for people that really want it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.


  • PMH4OWPW7JD2TDGWZKTOYL2T3E.jpg

  • Topics

  • Posts

    • https://x.com/stoolpresidente/status/1917656042735034782?s=46&t=f55N0zsNFevD-XGJBWj1-A   dang, this girl went from likely a high dollar escort for rich men to basically being the UNC Athletic Director overnight.   Girl wielding some crazy influence all over the map.      
    • Okay then, tell me what your expectations are for Thielen, XL, and Coker this year If someone wants to come out there and say they think Thielen is only getting 600-700 yards this year, then yea, I'm going to then expect T-Mac to get to 1,000. If someone wants to say they think XL or Coker is going to fall back to 300 yards this year, then yea, I'm going to expect T-Mac to get to 1,000. People seem to think I'm making excuses for why T-Mac can't get there, but it's the literal opposite, my expectations for him stem from my belief our other WRs for the first time in who knows how long.   We finally have a legitimate and full WR room, not sure that's happened since the Smitty and Moose days.  It's going to make them all better players, but it will also suppress all of their stats as they're all going to cannibalize each other a little bit.    
    • It’s certainly not my shining moment. But I still made it. Running the Sacramento marathon in December and hope to have a more Jake Delhomme-level of stardom there. The Everyman that overcomes obstacles to almost reach the pinnacle of success only to have it taken away by Adam Vinateri.
×
×
  • Create New...