OnLive Will "Never" Get Support From Console Makers, Says Gaikai Founder

[Andy Chalk]

OnLive Will "Never" Get Support From Console Makers, Says Gaikai Founder

OnLive [http://www.gaikai.com/] because it's competing directly with their services and threatening to take away their market share.

Unveiled at GDC [http://www.escapistmagazine.com/videos/view/gdc-2009/638-OnLive], OnLive uses "cloud computing," which involves transmitting user input and video back and forth over a high-speed network to remote servers that handle the actual gameplay chores, to offer on-demand gaming without requiring any kind of high-end gaming hardware. The service is intended to work on conventional desktop and laptop PCs or, for people who don't even have that, a "micro-console" provided by OnLive.

But according to Perry, who took the wraps off his competing system Gaikai Develop [http://www.escapistmagazine.com/news/view/90454]. "OnLive is trying to directly compete with the platform holders. It's trying to rule the living room."

"The OnLive team are positioning it as something where you won't need a Wii [http://www.playstation.com] any more; you can just have their box," he continued. "OnLive's model is to try and make a micro-console. If they succeed in doing so, they will take away some market share from the other platform holders."

Furthermore, Perry claimed publishers "aren't excited by the OnLive model" because even if it does succeed in cutting into the market share of the Big Three console makers, it will only serve to shuffle the audience around rather than grow it meaningfully. "It's not like the industry will see 100 million new consumers, but just the same ones who have moved to a fourth console," he said.

Gaikai, on the other hand, is different because it's "a service for publishers to find new audiences," Perry explained. "My goal is to get people playing these games for free, until people either buy the console, buy the game, or decide to start paying for the game. That's the biggest differentiator between OnLive and us; we're not a portal at all, we're a service."

"We're not in any way trying to get between publishers and platform holders. We're not trying to interfere with their policies," he continued. "We don't have to go to publishers and say [mocking tone] 'Would you please, please license your games to us?' I don't want their games, they put their games on our service. I showed all the main publishers at E3 [http://www.escapistmagazine.com/news/view/92826] and let them all play, and three of them offered to fund us during the demo."

I have to admit to being a bit confused about his point. If Gaikai customers can play these games free, without the need for a console, what's the incentive to ever buy either? And how is Gaikai's promise of "no-console" gaming fundamentally different than that of OnLive? From the perspective that both OnLive and Gaikai promise high-end gaming without the need for high-end hardware, I don't see the console manufacturers being terribly thrilled about the prospect of either.


Permalink

 

[xHipaboo420x]

Looks to me like Gaikai has taken the OnLive system and improved upon it before it's even released...

 

[Jumplion]

I'm not sure exactly what Gaikai is, nor do I think I've ever heard of it, but other than that I think he's completely right. I personally think OnLive is not going to be what everyone is cracking it up to be. They've only just started beta with 100 or 1000 people and it's scheduled to be released this fall. 1 million people is much different than 100 or 1000. I'm not too confident in the service.

 

[Radeonx]

I'm not sure exactly what Gaikai is, nor do I think I've ever heard of it, but other than that I think he's completely right. I personally think OnLive is not going to be what everyone is cracking it up to be. They've only just started beta with 100 or 1000 people and it's scheduled to be released this fall. 1 million people is much different than 100 or 1000. I'm not too confident in the service.

Basically this.

 

[HobbesMkii]

You know, except for the "micro-console" (which is a concept I don't quite grasp yet. What's it input device?) I don't really think OnLive is really directly competing with the consoles. All it's doing is allowing PC users to play games on their low-end systems. Which means it's target audience is people who exclusively play PC games, and people with consoles and low-end computers who want to play PC-exclusive games (because the consoles can never be obsolete until the next gen comes out). I mean, it's not like people are going to swear off consoles as a result of this, though they could. But, the sales of Empire: Total War generally don't conflict with the sales of Xbox-exclusive games because there's a comparably narrow section of gamers who have bought higher-end computers and a 360.

I mean, opening up new markets is critical to anyone in business. And to console-exclusive manufacturers, that's what the PC games market is. It's a dangerous market, too, because it's allegedly easier to pirate PC games. So here's OnLive, a subscription based service that holds game data somewhere else (meaning it's safe from the casual pirate). If I were a console-exclusive developer, I would be clamoring to have my game extended to OnLive, because PC gamers never buy my games, and there's a ton of them out there, and OnLive presents a system where, like WoW, you can only play if you pay. So it's safe, it's got the potential to bust open this new (from the console publishers' point of view) and previously untouchable market. Just makes good business sense, if you ask me.

 

[Quadtrix]

I'll be listening to someone with actual credibility like Steve Perlman before I listen to this poser.

 

[megapenguinx]

Perry explained. "My goal is to get people playing these games for free, until people either buy the console, buy the game, or decide to start paying for the game. That's the biggest differentiator between OnLive and us; we're not a portal at all, we're a service."

Models like that never tend to do well...

 

[SharedProphet]

I have to admit to being a bit confused about his point. If Gaikai customers can play these games free, without the need for a console, what's the incentive to ever buy either? And how is Gaikai's promise of "no-console" gaming fundamentally different than that of OnLive? From the perspective that both OnLive and Gaikai promise high-end gaming without the need for high-end hardware, I don't see the console manufacturers being terribly thrilled about the prospect of either.

Here is what he's saying about how Gaikai will work: Gaikai won't work in the living room, only on a computer. It will only play computer games, not console games. It expands the market by reducing the system requirements (it can work on a netbook and doesn't require a 5 megabit connection). Presumably it is an ad-based or subscription (probably both, with the subscription being for ad-free play) service, where players can play whatever games they want on the service as much as they want. Some customers will want to pay for the service to get rid of the ads and some will want to buy specific games to play locally without ads and possibly with a higher video quality. Publishers will get something for people playing their games on the service, so they will want their games on there (also because it will allow them to access customers who otherwise would not meet the system requirements). For Gaikai the console manufacturers' opinions are irrelevant because it isn't competing with them.

Those are his claims, anyway. I don't know how well it works. But I'm positive OnLive will bomb.

You know, except for the "micro-console" (which is a concept I don't quite grasp yet. What's it input device?)

The "micro-console" is a thin client device which hooks up to your TV, internet, and input device(s) to let you play OnLive. It's a "micro-console" because it doesn't have to do much processing at all, just compression/decompression, sending and receiving over the network, and outputting to the screen. As far as what input device(s) it will use, I've wondered that as well. I assume they will have to have a gamepad option and a keyboard/mouse option. Maybe it will have USB or Bluetooth/WiFi and drivers to handle input devices not made specifically for it.

 

[Ashbax]

Im not fully sure how this is working, but It seems something like this:

We will be able to buy this small thing, plug it into our USB (Or just buy the screen-attatched-to-onlive he mentioned) and then stream and play any PC game we want free? if thats the case, I am buying one...

 

[findler]

I will probably end up not using either one.

 

[Asehujiko]

Even on a non-busy day, the onlive system lags and suffers from downgraded graphics in their 100 person beta according to the initial news reports. Which is a very bad sign for something that wants to take on the PC and the consoles at the same time.

 

[Andy Chalk]

Here is what he's saying about how Gaikai will work: Gaikai won't work in the living room, only on a computer. It will only play computer games, not console games.

But that doesn't make any sense either. If he's predicting OnLive's failure because it won't be supported by the console manufacturers, and Gaikai is PC-only which means it doesn't have console support... you see?

Also, in the video demo he posted on his blog (http://www.dperry.com/archives/news/dp_blog/gaikai_-_video/ [http://www.dperry.com/archives/news/dp_blog/gaikai_-_video/]), among the games he shows off is an emulated version of Mario Kart 64, with obvious implications.

Gaikai doesn't require a stand-alone console but neither does OnLive, unless you don't have any other gaming hardware at all, in which case you'll be able to use their micro-console. Unless his argument is that Gaikai is less of a threat because they can't offer you anything if you don't have a PC, I still don't see what he's getting at.

 

[Sevre]

I don't think I'll get either of them.

 

[Jamous]

Ummm.... WTF, I really don't get it. Call me stupid, but can someone explain this to me slightly simpler. It sounds like they've basically got two similar, nigh the same, things, and one is slightly different so it gets support from sony etc.? Is that right?

 

[SharedProphet]

Here is what he's saying about how Gaikai will work: Gaikai won't work in the living room, only on a computer. It will only play computer games, not console games.

But that doesn't make any sense either. If he's predicting OnLive's failure because it won't be supported by the console manufacturers, and Gaikai is PC-only which means it doesn't have console support... you see?

Also, in the video demo he posted on his blog (http://www.dperry.com/archives/news/dp_blog/gaikai_-_video/ [http://www.dperry.com/archives/news/dp_blog/gaikai_-_video/]), among the games he shows off is an emulated version of Mario Kart 64, with obvious implications.

Gaikai doesn't require a stand-alone console but neither does OnLive, unless you don't have any other gaming hardware at all, in which case you'll be able to use their micro-console. Unless his argument is that Gaikai is less of a threat because they can't offer you anything if you don't have a PC, I still don't see what he's getting at.

Maybe Gaikai will play non-PC games also. But since only works on a computer (not in the living room), console companies won't be against supporting it, because it is not directly competing.