OnLive Impression: Should You Care?

[Twilight_guy]

Considering how batshit insane people went over Assassin's creed 2's DRM you would think a black cloud would descend over OnLive from angry games raging over needing an internet connection. Still, it seems like a good thing for people who don't want to pay for a system. A subscription fee and game cost seems a tad bit much though but I guess is still cheaper then buying a system, maybe.

 

[Baldr]

I want to point out "Perlman suggests that the $14.95 USD monthly subscription price talked about in March was only ever the 'worst case' amount. "We knew it was going to be less than that ... our worst fears about worst case peak loads turned out to be unfounded, and we're able to charge a much lower price."

This new, lower price is unconfirmed, but said to be $4.95 USD per month."

 

[GonzoGamer]

Onlive is a service that holds alot of potential. The thing holding it back, to my eyes, is the payment method. Maybe if you were to only pay a monthly fee and have access to all the games it would become much more appealing...to me atleast.

That's a way I can see this working: if it was a rental service like Gamefly but instant: you pay a monthly fee (amount depends on amount of games you want to instant-play) but don't buy the games outright. Asking consumer to buy the game is fine but only if they have a way of keeping it if they want to stop the service at some point and/or sell the titles for a lot cheaper than they are in stores.

As someone who's unsatisfied with the quality of this generation's consoles, I think it's a great model. They just need to make it more enticing. Do we have any details on the other services like this that are coming out?