OnLive Drops Monthly User Fees

[Andy Chalk]

OnLive Drops Monthly User Fees

Cloud gaming service OnLive has announced that its monthly service fee is now gone for good - for everyone.

OnLive was initially expected to have a monthly subscription fee of $14.95, on top of the costs of the games themselves. The prospect of paying a fee to access a pay-per-use gaming service didn't appeal much to anyone (June into September [http://www.escapistmagazine.com/news/view/99193-David-Perry-OnLive-Pricing-Good-for-Gaikai].

It's not really a huge surprise, then, that the company announced today that it is eliminating all subscription fees for everyone. You'll still have to pay for your games and other content, but the monthly charges are gone. "There is no precedent for OnLive, so we had to grow to a large number of active users in order to assess usage patterns and operating costs," said OnLive CEO Steve Perlman. "We've arrived at that stage, and as we had hoped, we are able to operate OnLive without charging a fee for access."

OnLive has also launched a free trial program that will allow new users to sample the service without having to use a credit card to create an account. Potential members can generate their player tag and browse the system with just an email address, password and date of birth, and won't need to provide any other information unless and until they decide to purchase a game.

By handling the heavy lifting at remote servers, OnLive makes high-end gaming available to anyone with a half-decent PC or Mac and a solid broadband connection. For those who prefer gaming from the comfort of their couch, a set-top "MicroConsole" is planned for release later this year. To learn more about what OnLive brings to the game, check out www.onlive.com [http://www.onlive.com].


Permalink

 

[Cyrax987]

But then how will they generate revenue from the service to pay for the computers the games run on and in the future when they need to be upgraded for newer games that have higher system requirements?

 

[The Austin]

But how will they pay for the servers?

 

[Brotherofwill]

So I take it they're not doing so well (just an assumption)? Kind of surprising, Cloud based gaming created a huge buzz when it was firts announced.

Physical media: 1 Digital media: 0

 

[Quaxar]

Eh, I still don't expect them to last more than a year. It's just so much easier to get a good gaming PC and play on your own without having to worry about connection issues and such.
Just sayin'.

 

[kouriichi]

Sweet. Now i never have to spend thousands of dollars upgrading my computer again.

HAHAHAHHAHHAHA. oh man, i kill myself some times.

 

[Booze Zombie]

But then how will they generate revenue from the service to pay for the computers the games run on and in the future when they need to be upgraded for newer games that have higher system requirements?

With the money generated from games themselves?

 

[manaman]

I would have rather they went the other way with this, a subscription based service where you don't own any of the games.

Eh, I still don't expect them to last more than a year. It's just so much easier to get a good gaming PC and play on your own without having to worry about connection issues and such.
Just sayin'.

I am willing to bet they could have lasted if this was subscription based system where you pay for unlimited (or possibly tiered to some degree) access to games from one account, so that you could hop on a buddies computer if you wanted and sign in and play, hop on a laptop at a coffee bar, or even a public computer at a net bar. However I bet it's licensing issues that forced them away from that idea. Who wouldn't want to pay for a service with a somewhat small monthly fee that allows you unlimited access to a large library of games from any computer you are in front of? Add that micro console into the mix to hook up to any number of TVs and it really sounds like a winning system to me.

But how will they pay for the servers?

Games sales revenue likely.

 

[Cynical skeptic]

Yep, I give it another six months, then pearlman walks away with another billion dollars in pump and dump investment money.

 

[Asehujiko]

They make no mention anywhere anymore that they're US only. Which they still are. Other 95% of world population beware.

 

[V8 Ninja]

That's a nice notice. Might think about it if they get a few exclusive games that Steam doesn't have.

 

[icyneesan]

Call me if they ever offer the service in Canada, because I wouldn't mind trying it.

 

[Cyrax987]

But then how will they generate revenue from the service to pay for the computers the games run on and in the future when they need to be upgraded for newer games that have higher system requirements?

With the money generated from games themselves?

Yeah but part of that goes to creators of said game, the whole monthly fee was put in place from the beginning to pay for the costs for the computers used to run the games and for the future when they have to upgrade parts and for maintenance. Games alone won't generate enough income for that to work especially considering that people buy more games from Steam and Direct2Drive over OnLive.

Also the people that monitor said computers need to be payed for their time, so I really don't see how game sales alone are going to pay for that.

 

[Booze Zombie]

Yeah but part of that goes to creators of said game, the whole monthly fee was put in place from the beginning to pay for the costs for the computers used to run the games and for the future when they have to upgrade parts and for maintenance. Games alone won't generate enough income for that to work especially considering that people buy more games from Steam and Direct2Drive over OnLive.

Also the people that monitor said computers need to be payed for their time, so I really don't see how game sales alone are going to pay for that.

I suppose I see where you're coming from, but if your current method of generating revenue is so amazingly unpopular that it might crush your entire operation, what do you do, keep going with it?

 

[Cyrax987]

Yeah but part of that goes to creators of said game, the whole monthly fee was put in place from the beginning to pay for the costs for the computers used to run the games and for the future when they have to upgrade parts and for maintenance. Games alone won't generate enough income for that to work especially considering that people buy more games from Steam and Direct2Drive over OnLive.

Also the people that monitor said computers need to be payed for their time, so I really don't see how game sales alone are going to pay for that.

I suppose I see where you're coming from, but if your current method of generating revenue is so amazingly unpopular that it might crush your entire operation, what do you do, keep going with it?

>_>

<_<

.....Yes..

 

[aseelt]

I'm more interested in it now.

The biggest issue for me was if you don't pay OnLive then you lose access to your purchases. That's no longer the issue.

That issue was NEVER present with Steam, the client is free. I think if Steam charged for the client, nobody would want to use it even if they have those mega sales.

 

[Booze Zombie]

>_>

<_<

.....Yes..

If they're popular, they'll generate income through sheer scale of games sold as opposed to trying to claw money out of people's wallets every month, this is most likely why they decided to drop the system.