After a year of teasing skeptics, OnLive finally announced a launch date and price earlier this week. For $14.95 a month, users will have access to demos, various social features and the ability to watch others play games. You'd expect at least a handful of full length titles to be included as well, even if for a limited time to sweeten the deal, but that doesn't seem to be the case. The platform will open with around 20 games and those will bear an additional undisclosed charge -- supposedly discounted versus standard retail pricing.

Read the whole story

Most gamers have though xbox live at $50 a year was to much to pay. This at 14.95$ a month looks to offer the same things xbl offers on an unproven system. I will say this system is a game dev dream. It all but stops privacy, if the dev wants their gamers to move onto the next game they can just take the old one down. Using OnLive to me seems like a way to just **** yourself in the ***. I am sure if it works right it will be pretty cool but I really like the idea that I own my games.

I think this will fail. Its overpriced and people don't have the connection needed to use it. I buy games on steam, I like that. I buy games on Xbox live, PSN. I like that. I stream Tv Via BBC I player, Sky player, and other video streaming sites. I like that. BUT I only do that when Nobody else is watchin TV. To watch Skyplayer it says u need at least 2Meg. I have 1.5 and it works fine with no cut outs so long as I only person using Internet. Streaming games. No. I will not do it. I will be shooting someone and then somebody downstairs will start watching a youtube video, downloading a PS3 demo and it will start to lag, cut out, Buffer, and FAIL.

Untill we all have high speed Internet connection, (I mean 20Mb +) it will be Right all my room mates, people in my hosue NO using the internet Im playign a game. That will be unfair and stupid. Its funny I start downloading a 15gig game on steam, it takes 20 hours. In that Time I get ''STOP LAGGING MY GAME'' AHHH stop downloading'' The very few people with un capped Internet connections with ISPs that do not have fair usage policys may get this to work. Thats a small market. This will only work in Large Towns and Citys (and maybe the lucky few who live near an Telephone Exchange)

This will probably work on some areas, mainly US.The concept is actually ingenious because I can see this the final solution to piracy, but they need to prove it through consistency especially if the newer games requires a powerhouse system on maximum settings.

Is it wrong of me to hope they fail?
I just wouldn't want the future of gaming sitting in their hands. It actually scares me.

it is doomed to fail...since most ISPs have cap limits...

unless of course you are capable of paying for a premium "unlimited" internet access (which would make you more than able to buy dvd games priced at 50-60$).

The future of gaming? Simply, NO. How many billions of dollars are invested in Hardware? Consoles, PC hardware and the distribution and marketing of games? That isn't going to die quitely.

And then there is the connection issues with streaming games, it might be fine in the US, Japan, Korea. But it will be a LONG time before I am able to stream games on my connection here in Australia.Downloading games from Steam and other digital distributors is quite a pain for me already on my connection.

Then there is the fact that I am opposed to a scheme like this, I want to own my games, well at least as much as I am able to currently. Digital distribution and DRM currently means that I am reliant on a third party being able to deliver or authenticate the content for me.

I'll keep a slightly open mind with this but I just think it's going to fail. It seems awfully expensive for a new service that hasn't been proven. I think the latency/lag is going to be a killer for most games. If somehow performance is acceptable, this may be an option for some people.

When I first glanced at this, I assumed it was some "all you can eat" deal for $15 a month, as long as you kept up the subscription. I think that could do really, really well.

But wait, what do you get? Download demos, ie "shareware" that companies sometimes PAY to distribute? Watch people play games, social features? Are you kidding me?

If that's the feature set, epic fail.

I think it's the way things are going. Less CPU power at users' hands, more available remotely through a fast internet connection. Hook your phone to a TV or monitor and play a HD game. Countries are starting to make a broadband connection into a human right, and while in the short term the people who have the required connection may be the minority, I think it won't be long before that won't be the case. The terms of the service will likely adapt to what users are willing to pay, and we're already living in the age of paying for services and not products. I pay something for my phone access, I pay some more for internet access on my phone, I pay some more per month for music and TV on my phone (well, I don't, but people do). So paying some more for the ability to play high quality AAA games games on my phone won't be that strange. (And I realised that currently phones are just for spectating, but I definitely see this going that way.)

damm.... me and my friend thought of cloud gaming yeras ago and then someone goes and does it lol.

This looks like a great system and its defiantly going to work, maybe not for a year or so but soon. A lot of people are starting to get 10+mb broadband now in the UK and gaming doesn't use a lot of bandwidth, check when your playing a game how little it uses.

This system is also cheaper than running a high-end gaming rig at home, and will be cheaper than next gen consoles. Can't wait to see it in action and i hope it works.

There has to be something were missing here... or else EPIC FAIL!

I can see having to pay twice for a game the reason why this will fail. They will have to offer at least something with the monthly subscription to make this work.

Don't seem very agreable this idea, I would pay 14,99 for WoW and never ever even see a console :P

So for $15 a month you can

play game demos that can be downloaded elsewhere for free...

social networking that can be done on other established sites & with other programs for free...

watch someone else have a good time playing games which can be done over a person's shoulder for free...

I don't think caps will come into play as much as connection speed. You are not downloading the entire game, just transmitting data back and forth like any other online game. The game itself is stored on their servers.

I do like the concept, as I would love to be able to play games on a low-end laptop, but as soon as I saw the double paywall I thought "Too much." I wish them the best of luck, but unless the games have a one-time cost of less than $10 for unlimited play for an indefinite time, I'll have stick with playing only on my desktop at home, and maybe on a gaming laptop if I win the lottery.

@epic fail and will have to go ad supported free and probably still GOOB.

They don't offer anything new for the fee they charge, and everything they do offer you can find elsewhere for free... so... sounds like fail to me.

The pricing scheme seems a little wonky to me. For 14.95 per month you'd expect at least ONE full game to be playable per month. I wouldn't pay .01 to play demos and watch oher people play. Without any more details in terms of pricing I can't really give Onlive any more attention. This will be one of my last comments about it untill they can release more usefull information.

I signed up to try to get the 3 months free for being one of the first. There is no way they are going to get me to pay a subscription though. Anyone serious enough about PC gaming to be interested in paying a monthly fee already has a good enough computer to just buy the game from the store. Unfortunately I don't think its going to work out.