What do you think of OnLive?

But you're going to need a good internet connection for it and you're also going to have to pay for the games again, which will add up.

And for my opinion on Onlive, yea I think it's a good service, but it's no way going to revolutionize gaming.

I have some games on OnLive. I think it's great when I'm on my laptop. The only problem though is that users don't get to use mods, and that frustrate me a bit. Lack of mod support is enough to make me not commit to that service fully.

fail /thread

I tried playing Trine on OnLive a while ago, but it was quite choppy.

I have a 5mbps/800kbps down/up connection, but the picture quality was very bad (lots of artifacts and low resolution) and there was a clear input lag.

In my opinion, OnLive is a great idea, especially for those that do not have good hardware to play games (notebooks, for example). You do need a good Internet connection, however.

Personally I think it is a very nice idea. I do have a pretty nice ISP so i am usually pretty good playing it even ion wifi. I use it a lot for whenever I am just roaming around the house on a netbook. Although i think the most crucial factor that onlive is missing that steam excels at is a developed community and amount of games. Onlive has to have there games specifically made for there product, while steam does not. The things i don't like about onlive is that they keep on trying to push 'playpack' down your throat, and there amount of games needs improvement.

I don't like how you're locked out of modding and keeping the games for offline use. If modding support is added later on, I don't see how it can be anything but a walled garden like the Apple app store, but I suppose we'll have to wait and see how they do it. I think that will solidify my opinion of it for good either way. I've already disowned consoles for how much control they lock away from users, and to me this is just the ultimate restrictive DRM. :/ I don't think the convenience is worth it, and I really hope it isn't the future of gaming.

Something like Onlive is likely the future of gaming. But not until certain things are met, like higher universal internet speeds. It's an okay service for now, but I imagine it'll be huge in the future (or some competing version of it).

Its cool sustem ^_^

I heard you can't change game settings, right? Anyway, it'd be good with old-school titles (Wolf 3D, Blood, Dangerous Dave, etc). It doesn't worth money without'em. If you're interested in new games, it's easier to buy them once and for all without paying $15 each month.

I'm on a 16Mb cable connection and Amnesia ran like garbage for me. You know, when it would actually let me connect to the service, let alone play the game. I wasn't very impressed, but I did give it a shot.

I never really tried it. From what it seems to be, it requires an insanely fast Internet connection, something most people don't have.

It works great (which is very impressive considering I live in Sweden). The thing is that it's not a comparable experience to running the game locally. The image quality is acceptable but far from great and during scenes with lots of motion all details go right out of the window.

It's also "just" 720p... which again, is alright, but nothing compared to running a game in full 1920x1080 (or higher) without the blurriness added by the video compression.

Personally I don't see it as a worthy alternative to gaming locally (not unless connections get a whole lot better) but the service does have it's uses. Downloading several gigs just to try out a demo that's 20 minutes long (and perhaps not even good to begin with) is tedious. With OnLive developers don't even have to actually create the demos but can just put a time limit on the regular game. That part is brilliant and should be used more but the image quality etc. has quite a way to go imo.