OnLive Had Me Until They Went Crazy With Subscription Fees
So yesterday, we finally got the big reveal from the guys putting together the OnLive service. We now know that the service will go live this summer and will run $14.95 a month for the service. At first glance that sounds pretty good. I mean who wouldn’t like to have a service that has full streaming video, tons of games across all platforms all available for one low price. Think of it like Gametap, but with newer games. Of course that bubble burst when they said that the $14.95 a month fee was just giving you access the service, not the game. Games, apparently, are an extra cost, available as rentals or purchase.
Yes, they have since released word that there will be a free option that gives people “access to select rentals and game demos” when bandwidth permits. So if a game rental is in high demand, you might be shit out of luck in playing that game. Basically the free service is a way for OnLive to save some face by saying they have a free option, but they neglect to tell people that the free option is a hunk of crap compared to the full featured, pay us now service.
Also, I did not realize they were going to be selling games on the OnLive service. This just takes another step of ownership away from the consumer at that point. I mean right now, I barely own the games in my collection right now, but I can at least say they are installed locally on my hard drives, be it Xbox 360, Playstation 3, Wii or PC. Now we have a service that does not even let me install the game on my computer. So imagine if I buy a host of games on OnLive, and the service goes belly up in a year. What then? Will publishers make good on getting me a copy of that game from some other service, or will they champion the phrase “Caveat emptor” and basically demand another chunk of money to get a physical or Steam download of the game.
Also, while some would not give care about HD gaming, I do. I enjoy high end graphics. It is why I spend a ton of cash every two years for a video card, and why I have all my consoles hooked up via component or HDMI cables. OnLive will deliver HD 720p graphics, but only if you can connect to the OnLive servers with a consistent 5Mbps connection. Right now, I can safely say that with a section of the country still on dial up, this will be out of reach for most consumers, which means the service will shift to 480p. Yeah, something tells me that 640×480 graphics will not keep me interested for long. That medium was passed in 1996-98 era of DOS and Windows gaming. I refuse to pay for a game that will deliver 14 year old graphics at the most.
I was very skeptical when we talked about OnLive in a podcast several months ago, but I had warmed up to the service as of late, and was amazed by the video presentation we had on the site a couple of months ago. The service seemed very robust, and the inclusion of live video feeds, brag reels and more gave the serivce a ton of style and substance not found currently on any network I have for gaming. The pricing was what I was waiting for, and now that I have that information, I will steer far away from OnLive. $15 a month as an access fee is not appealing. I would rather be charged $25-30 and have access to all the games I want to play.
But hey, maybe I am missing the point here. Let me know if you think this is a good or bad idea from OnLive. Also, if they offer Burnout: Paradise, will I have to buy it out of sheer need to own on all platforms?
Tags: bad idea, burnout paradise, cloud computing, dos, free, hd, onlive, poorly implemented, subscription, windows
9 Comments »
Leave a comment!
There should just be a subscription to have access to have all games on the service.
http://www.gaikai.com/
I was pretty excited when I heard about onlive. I pretty much had my money ready….if it worked that is. I was completely fine with paying 15 bucks a month for unlimited games. They never said you get unlimited games but I just kinda assumed. But now that you have to pay a monthly subscription and a fee for each game I am no longer interested.
injulen has it right: Gaikai has the basic service for free with purchases additional. And they have 300 data center locations whereas OnLive has 6. Since the Ubisoft debacle, I've become more sceptical about services which are entirely online.
OnLive should be called OnLie. It was bad enough when were trumpeting unrealistic silliness that everyone would play in HD. Now the reality that most will play in SD's 480p with framerate TBD. And with $15 per month you get access to nothing but the right to give them more money. I have less than zero interest in this. Its now shifted in line with my feelings years back around Circuit City's Divx/DVD initiative, I can't wait for them to crumble and die. Good riddance.
I too was very interested in this service since it was going to be able to save me from having to pay hundreds of $$ each year to keep a gaming PC up-to-date. It was perfect, roll the cost of the ownership of the hardware and software into one fee and be done with it.
But now that they want to charge an extra fee for the games, here's a big hardy : “NO EFFING WAY”. I'll stick to my PS3 thank you.
Geez, NO ONE has any respect for the PC anymore.
Oh, and the 5Mbit connection is insane. That alienates over 50% of the “broadband” users in the US since the FCC only said that “broadband” had to be 2Mbit. And even then its only “up to a possible” meaning that for people like me who are shafted by AT&T not caring about their copper lines which are being slowly devoured by the goddamn gophers, we can only peak at 2Mbit and slowly retard to a ~1.2-1.5Mbit connection, before having to reboot our DSL modems.
That means that now you have limited your customer base to those that use cable, and as we've seen over the past 2 years, streaming ANYTHING over cable has become the thorn in those providers side and they'll do whatever they can to limit your bandwidth or charge you extra.
Epic Fail FTL.
great post
Nice stuff