Slashdot Mirror
OnLive CEO On Post-Launch Status, Game Licenses
CNET has a lengthy interview with OnLive CEO Steve Perlman about how the service is shaping up almost a month after launch. Demand seems to have outstripped their expectations, and it required some quick server expansion to compensate. He also addresses a common concern among gamers — that the licenses for games could expire in three years. Perlman says, "It's less of an issue about the licenses evaporating, and more of an issue of whether or not we continue to maintain the operating systems and the graphics cards to run those games. If a game is tied to a particular Nvidia or ATI card, or if it's relying on a particular version of Windows with different drivers, we can't be sure that those will continue to be available as our servers age and need to be replaced. If it's a popular game that can't run on old hardware anymore, the publishers can do an upgrade for the game. Also, servers usually do last longer than three years, so chances are we'll keep running them. But we have a legal obligation to disclose what might happen. I think the probability of us pulling a game in three years is on the order of 0.1 percent. It's also highly unlikely that a game server will evaporate after three years, but we have to allow for that possibility." He also goes into future plans for expanding OnLive, both in terms of the content they offer and the devices they may support. The Digital Foundry blog followed up the latency tests we discussed with a full review, if you'd like an unbiased opinion of the service.
if they sent you a physical copy of the game and your renting there hardware it would be different.who cares if my current pc cant play said game but at least i litterly bought it. then when onlive drops support or fail's as a company at least the stuff you bought doesn't vanish. or maybe do away with the entire rental system charge maybe 50 bucks a month to play there entire library. now that would get people on there.
its a good idea but done wrong. paying a fee and buying the games just isn't gonna attract people. what they should have done was aim to be the net flicks of gaming. maybe a 50 or 60$ fee to play every game they have on there hardware would have gotten everyone's attention. but i have to rent/buy everything i wanna play on there hardware ill just build my own pc and use my own hardware without fees and at higher qualty.
Could you be a more obvious shill for OnLine, bro? You get way too defensive over any criticism of this service.