Same thing as Playstation Now. You stream games like you stream movies on Netflix. Unless you have godly and consistent internet it's not worth it. You'll get stuttering, input lag, and drop in resolution.

Same thing as Playstation Now. You stream games like you stream movies on Netflix. Unless you have godly and consistent internet it's not worth it. You'll get stuttering, input lag, and drop in resolution.

Apparently they did something to drastically reduce that, but I would have to see that to believe it. The fact its a service and exists is incredible. Its more then Playstation Now since this would allow a Mac user to play windows games, as well as playing games at ultra on their computer

OnLive 2.0.

25 dollars for 20 hours

im not proud of it but there are weeks where ive played 60+

around the summer that would get very expensive

https://steamdb.info/calculator/76561198042321806/?cc=us

i have 4500 hrs total

how much would that cost me

>relying on online services to be able to play your games, even single player ones


El oh el oh el

I swear, you guys have no business sense.

I imagine the selection of games is very limited.

Quote from: Desty on January 05, 2017, 04:00:11 AM

I swear, you guys have no business sense.

Because I'm not looking at this as an investor, um looking at it as a consumer (which I am). There are consumers who would buy this, but have too poor of an Internet connection to do so; then there are others like me, who have no interest in the concept itself, where ownership is still an important issue. Digital games push that boundary a bit, but a streaming service where you are merely renting the product is over that line.

I could see this being more profitable stateside once optic fiber connections become more common, but right now most of the continent is stuck with dial up or seventy year old copper lines that cable companies are milking.

I want to dream about the possibilities, I want it to be a realized product that will change the future for all of mankind, because let's face it, virtual reality is up there with hovering cars. Used to be back in the days we imagined 2020 to be full of teleporters, space colonisation, and a pill that gave you all of the nutrition you needed. That vision changed throughout the years, and we became more cynical when we thought we were nowhere close to achieving such concepts, but with a plan and a vision, I see 2020 as a year of human advancement.

You can't recruit the mountain people if you don't shoot for the stars, so if you have a willing mind you oughta make the best of it. Using the momentum you can recruit people who will take care of other aspects like a space suit, or food for when you're outside of Earth. Why? Because they also want to see space, and there's profit in it for them.

Much rather own my own gaming rig.

dumbest shit i ever heard.

If I heard they created portals but couldn't use them I wouldn't say that it was dumb, I'd say "Wow that's amazing, but why would you be so dumb to not use portals?". The concept is good, but the execution might be bad. Don't say that the concept is stupid.

VR could become much more mainstream with this, because not everyone wants to pay 7000 sek for an Oculus Rift, but I once saw VR goggles for 300 sek in some random shop magazine. This means that you buy those goggles, buy the service, and then start up some VR wherever you are.

The headset isn't what processes the game though, you still need a computer or console for that. The $800 for an Oculus Rift (or whatever it is) doesn't include any hardware to actually run the games; the headset itself just streams video and uses onboard accelerometers to detect motion. That $300 set you saw probably has significantly less graphical and control capability than the OR. nVidia's streaming wouldn't reduce costs for VR at all.

Quote from: Desty on January 05, 2017, 03:59:54 AM

VR could become much more mainstream with this, because not everyone wants to pay 7000 sek for an Oculus Rift, but I once saw VR goggles for 300 sek in some random shop magazine. This means that you buy those goggles, buy the service, and then start up some VR wherever you are.

The headset isn't what processes the game though, you still need a computer or console for that. The $800 for an Oculus Rift (or whatever it is) doesn't include any hardware to actually run the games; the headset itself just streams video and uses onboard accelerometers to detect motion. That $300 set you saw probably has significantly less graphical and control capability than the OR. nVidia's streaming wouldn't reduce costs for VR at all.

English isn't my primary language, so I'm sorry that I've confused you.

What I'm trying to say is that you can use that cheap laptop you bought + a pair of VR goggles for 300 sek (more like 500), which is not $300, it's $33. These goggles are for the PC, and so you can use them for whichever shitty computer you have. Sure, it has significantly less graphical capabilities, but I don't see why that matters when you mass-brand something like this.

The Oculus rift requires you to have a high-end PC with NVIDIA GTX 970 / AMD 290 equivalent or greater in order to run it. Most people aren't gamers, but they are people who go on youtube, or watch porn. Why would you market your brand to a select few when you can market it to almost everyone and because of the popularity the tech would grow? Just get goggles that cost less than $100, pay some money to access the GRID, and you're all done. If it's as easy as that to access VR, then clearly it's worth the downgrade in quality.

I imagine it would not be a good idea to stream VR games, and probably won't be for a long time.  VR headsets put heavy constraints on engines, essentially giving them an extremely tiny window of opportunity to actually render (something like under 10ms/frame on a game that must stay locked at 90FPS with particular FOV settings, etc...).  That's all fine and manageable, and is necessary to keep the effect going and (more importantly) to keep players from feeling nauseous.

Reducing input lag so that your extremely precise head motions can be reliably sent uncompressed, ordered, and at the same extremely fast rate back and forth to NVidia would be a lot more difficult, though.  Just something to think about: by the time this becomes a reality, we would have had to greatly improve the way data is sent so the average person doesn't puke 3 seconds into streaming to a headset.

Quote from: BC on January 04, 2017, 09:16:32 PM

For $25 for 20 hours.

lol dude you have a water-cooled tower you don't need to care about this

It's still a cool initiative nonetheless, and knowing a lot of people have PCs, just not ones that can play games well, it's a cool service to pay into.