Well, I'm sure it would operate as a sort of console timeshare, especially in instances such as your "Halo 4's" or your "Pretty Pretty Pony Rancher Gaiden's".
They just plop more blades on the server as the subscriber base goes up.
Printable View
Well, I'm sure it would operate as a sort of console timeshare, especially in instances such as your "Halo 4's" or your "Pretty Pretty Pony Rancher Gaiden's".
They just plop more blades on the server as the subscriber base goes up.
this.Quote:
Originally Posted by James
This is a great idea, but as mentioned by alot of other people, there's just no way it's possible with current technology. Latency is too much of an issue, lag spikes hitting could be HUGE problems.
Also is this shit going to be region blocked? If so they can fuck off and die.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Giga Power
Really good points.Quote:
Originally Posted by kedawa
The more I think about this it's the type of idea that produces an awesome demo, and thus secures a ton of investment funding and media hype, yet has little possibility of actually delivering the full product.
How is multiplayer out of the question? Why would it be incapable of accepting inputs from more than one source?
So previously owned games will no longer be an option? Count me out.
As annoying as it is to buy new hardware every five years, that cost is easily more than offset by the savings I get from buying older games. Plus I also have a hard copy of the game forever. Maybe I'm just getting old, but I really like that.
It wouldn't be bad IF they make the games cheaper like Steam does.
This is actually going to be a good thing for the industry in the long run. The $5 you save getting a pre-owned game from Gamespot, fucks the developer out of $30 or $40 of profit that they really do deserve.Quote:
Originally Posted by squall_vb
It ends up being a huge amount of money in Gamestop's pocket and it means developers are forced to charge more. If this was no longer an issue the industry would be more profitable for the people actually controlling the prices, and more viable in general.
You have a right to sell your games and to buy pre-owned games, but if you do it, you aren't supporting the industry and it's really not a good thing.Wrong. It actually means that the multiplayer networking can be handled locally on the server end. They're pushing this thing hard for multiplayer, actually, and the community features look fantastic. Watch the keynote on gamespot.Quote:
Originally Posted by Giga Power
I don't agree with this at all. When people trade games in GS, they aren't getting money (well I think you can choose the money and take an additional percentage off the ridiculously low trade-in value). People are using the credit toward NEW games which do benefit the developers/publishers. So it is not cut and dry that used games sale all cut into the new games sale.Quote:
Originally Posted by Frogacuda
From previous generation, Sony/Nintendo/MS learned that they can cut into the used game sale by introducing older/hit games at much lower price point. This is the way to combat used game market IMO. Lower the damn price on the games and people won't have to buy used games. I know this sounds ridiculous, but if every game is $10 MSRP, there would hardly be any used market since the trade in value would be virtually nothing and buying used wouldn't save you much anyway. plus we learn from economics that to maximize profit you set the price = marginal cost which is minimal in producing an additional game. Of course this will never happen in the real world.
The biggest downside I can think of to an industry running through formats like OnLive is if a game gets discontinued, it would probably become impossible to obtain if it's all stored on some company's computers and not something you actually own. I'm already iffy on existing download-only games but at least with the PC ones, if they discontinue them, someone will put them on an abandonware site.