Re: True, though I'm assuming we do now (it launched a couple days ago, right? )
Aemon Send a noteboard - 19/06/2010 10:42:05 PM
Physical baggage is good. In fact, I prefer physical copies over digital. I was pretty pissed off when I preordered C&C4 and didn't read the fine print, ended up getting the digital download rather than a physical copy mailed to me.
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.
Also, for me, going to the game store (EB Games, aka GameStop in the States, and HMV) isn't that much of a hassle. 20 minute walk, and I can swipe my card for that game I really have to play. Memory Express, Best Buy, or Future Shop, on the other hand ... not very fun to get to one of them just to upgrade my PC.
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.Oh, I get it. It's a genius business model, and I'm sure they'll make quite a bit of money. But it's a little much for me. I'm guessing the $15 subscription isn't per game (otherwise it's freaking insane ). But I don't like the thought of paying full price for a game then, for whatever reason, I can't pay the subscription so I can no longer even play the single player mode of a game. Of course, I'm talking about games like Call of Duty and whatnot, as I'm not a fan of MMOs (the only one I'm planning on playing is The Old Republic, and not for long even for that).
). But I don't like the thought of paying full price for a game then, for whatever reason, I can't pay the subscription so I can no longer even play the single player mode of a game. Of course, I'm talking about games like Call of Duty and whatnot, as I'm not a fan of MMOs (the only one I'm planning on playing is The Old Republic, and not for long even for that).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.
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.
Point made 
We'll see how it does, and if it finds a way to lure me in once they've got a larger library (if memory serves, their opening library is under 10 games, right? )
We'll see how it does, and if it finds a way to lure me in once they've got a larger library (if memory serves, their opening library is under 10 games, right? )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.
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.
Continuing my personal publicity campaign, I remind you all that OnLive launches tomorrow.
- 16/06/2010 05:06:21 PM
684 Views
- 16/06/2010 05:06:21 PM
684 Views
Not yet interested, but watching. I'm curious about how game ownership will work. (or not) *NM*
- 16/06/2010 07:33:38 PM
203 Views
In the worst case, you buy for full price and pay 14.95 to play.
- 16/06/2010 08:24:30 PM
448 Views
I can see that long-term, but the overlap of games I already own would be a huge rip-off.
- 17/06/2010 02:49:19 PM
427 Views
Well no, I wouldn't re-buy a game. I almost never play old games, though.
- 17/06/2010 03:13:53 PM
422 Views
Sales matter when good, under-publicized games don't sell millions, which means no sequels.
- 17/06/2010 03:25:41 PM
431 Views
I just meant that the actual numbers aren't important. The dollars coming in obviously are.
- 17/06/2010 06:33:45 PM
444 Views
- 17/06/2010 06:33:45 PM
444 Views
I like the concept of OnLive
- 16/06/2010 10:59:12 PM
479 Views
See my response to Zalis.
- 17/06/2010 04:27:22 AM
587 Views
What's the price that you pay for a new game?
- 17/06/2010 04:57:56 AM
536 Views
To be fair, I said that was the worst case. We don't really know the pricing model yet.
- 17/06/2010 03:07:37 PM
514 Views
True, though I'm assuming we do now (it launched a couple days ago, right? )
- 19/06/2010 04:47:15 PM
507 Views
Re: True, though I'm assuming we do now (it launched a couple days ago, right? )
- 19/06/2010 10:42:05 PM
434 Views
Re: True, though I'm assuming we do now (it launched a couple days ago, right? )
- 26/06/2010 10:42:45 PM
572 Views
I'm on the wait list - still waiting *NM*
- 21/06/2010 03:07:51 PM
214 Views
Me too. When I posted this, I didn't realize it was a phased rollout or whatever.
- 21/06/2010 06:56:12 PM
573 Views