OnLive CEO quits

Founder and former president of cloud-gaming company Steve Perlman exits firm to work on a "myriad of other projects."

Cloud-gaming company OnLive has lost its founder, president, and CEO, Steve Perlman, the firm has announced. Perlman left the Palo Alto, California, company to pursue a "myriad of other projects," though none of these were named.

Steve Perlman is out at OnLive.

The company also announced that Gary Lauder, managing director of Lauder Partners LLC, will become OnLive's new chairman. In addition, former head of OnLive operations Charlie Jablonski will become OnLive's COO and acting CEO.

"The new OnLive is emerging with greater financial security and a brighter outlook on the future," reads a line from Lauder's statement on the corporate shuffling. "OnLive is now positioned to execute against longer-term projects with our breakthrough technology, products and services."

Earlier this month, rumors of OnLive's death proved to be exaggerated. The company's entire assets were sold, but the firm will continue as a newly formed outfit. All current OnLive initiatives remain uninterrupted, and the new company plans to rehire a "large percentage" of those previously affected.

Written By

Discussion

90 comments
MXVIII
MXVIII

There downfall was trying to break into the console market. Like the Phantom they wanted to offer everyone's games on one console. Which only would have worked if they got the rights to a platforms exclusive titles. So if you wanted to play Xbox, Wii, and PS3 games without having to buy all three consoles Onlive would have been a banging deal for only a hundred bucks and a small monthly fee.

 

Personally they should pull out of the console market entirely and focus on a PC service only. This would be amazing to allow people with strapped budgets to play high profile games without having to shell out hundreds of dollars on computer upgrades. Not to mention this would probably drive hardware prices down in the long run.

jaijames
jaijames

anyone who thought online would be a success i have a bridge i can sell you

BoltNinety
BoltNinety

Onlive for me has ended up being a demo platform. I'll try games on it then buy them through other means.

tightwad34
tightwad34

Wasn't this Onlive supposed to rival consoles? I never ever thought it would. Not that I want it to go down the tubes, but they probably should have went a different route, like maybe starting out on a bit of a smaller scale? I don't know much about Onlive or any of their ambitions, just trying to put in my 2 one hundredths of a dollar.

keyb0red
keyb0red

ahead of its time... until every fr1ggin household in America and 85% of the planet has got super duper HYPER DSL SATELLITE 1000000MBPS internet this thing will languish in the internet graveyard along with Yahoo, Myspace and Geocities

 

(ok I was joking about Yahoo)

IevildirkI
IevildirkI

If steam made this it would explode and be the best gaming device ever created even if it only offered 3rd party and indy stuff from steam like puzzlers and adventure games and this dude is dippin cus it wont compete with anything out there it will just fail.  dreamcast.

DarthLod
DarthLod

Like I have said on here before. The second this was ever even talked about I knew it was an epic fail. Not interested.

dbass999
dbass999

onlive is great , it is your internet connection that is not good. i use onlive and it works perfect.

 

7rooper
7rooper

Like rats, he leaves the ship before it sinks

Spartan_418
Spartan_418

Oh well. Even if OnLive goes under, the concept is there, and will be emulated much more successfully by other companies in the future. There likely won't be a 4th Xbox console, after 720 it will all be Microsoft cloud gaming services.

Vickman178
Vickman178

lol he's not leaving to pursue other projects, he's leaving the company and taking all his money before it goes under  so he doesn't have to pay for his debt when it does finally collapse. :P

P90E21
P90E21

Another Dreamcas idea? Just ahead of it s time or a bad idea?

00J
00J

and who the hell thought it was a good idea or feasible to "stream" GB games over the internet... Packets man packets!!!

00J
00J

lol, when the founder and creator of the company heads for the hills you know it's time to look elsewhere for employment... lol

 

I knew this was coming, i said this when his lame brained idea first hatched out of his head. 

 

The only smart thing he's done is take the money he's made and try to re-invent himself... 

 

The dude that's taking over is basically trying to see if anything can be done to bail out the sinking ship, but when the founder has lost faith in the company hah hah... 

 

Oh well. Try try try again... 

cf_Kage
cf_Kage

I certainly think OnLive is on rocky ground. It might be the start of the end for this service at least

anotherone10
anotherone10

So he is basically running away when things are starting to get tough, hmm.

deviant74
deviant74

If you got kick ass internet connection.  Then you got everything that goes along with that.  I mean you paying $50 to $70 a month for your connection you don't give a fuck about saving a few dollars on not buying a video card or a 8 year old console.  They are going to need some games that are awesome and exclusive to them.  Find a way to stream to a Iphone over 4g that works good.  Perlman did #3 get out while the getting is good.

SlowMotionKarma
SlowMotionKarma

Dreams crashing around on him, all of his big promises not coming to fruition, the realization sets in that he was selling a product he couldn't deliver. Instead of apologizing and starting renewed to provide the best service POSSIBLE, he pulls a Cartman: "Screw you guys, I'm going home."

"Pursuing a myriad of other projects." = eating, catching up on his soaps, finally going through his fridge and getting rid of the old leftovers, changing that pesky light bulb that keeps flickering over the dinner table, tries OnLive to pass the time but gets frustrated at the lag and low quality "HD" stream and curses at it for taking his money before realizing he helped create it, fixing that squeaky back door, clipping his toenails, playing Guitar Hero, trolling the Steam boards, ironing his underwear, installing the Clapper in his bedroom, using the Clapper for 2 hours straight, removing the Clapper because it's boring now, cleaning out his dirty fish tank only to find out there weren't any fish in there, checking his bank account... yeah, a LOT of projects.

kkee
kkee

Basically, the company hasn't lived up to the hype, screwed over its investors and he is now running away with a nice cheque.

mpack47
mpack47

pursue a "myriad of other projects" = he is taking his buyout and going yachting for 2 years.

nurnberg
nurnberg

I will not get their goddawful ads anymore I hope.

SecularSage
SecularSage

It's likely that Perlman is being blamed internally for the financial problems that got them into the need to switch owners. He may have also wanted a cashout so he could move on and this was the only way to get it. He might be one of those folks who's a great visionary and entrepreneur, but a terrible leader. I definitely would argue he's one of the reasons OnLive hasn't been focused on what it needs to be doing now to grow: lots and lots of marketing.

 

It's really good that OnLive is going to be able to continue on in a new form and that most of the employees will get their jobs back. Hopefully Perlman moves on to new innovations and ideas. He seems to be a sharp guy with a really good perspective on the future.

thom_maytees
thom_maytees

The fact that its CEO and founder resigned from the company he founded does not seem like good news to me.

Tekcor
Tekcor

SHAFTMASTER!!!!

 

Really. Fire your employees, sell your company, reap profits, rehire your employees, quit. Stand up guy. May your future be filled with barbed vaginas.

ryangcnx-2
ryangcnx-2

I'm glad for this. I did not want the industry moving towards this model for gaming. So if Onlive totally plummets and the service is no longer there at all, kiss all those games you guys purchased goodbye. Mine are sitting right on my shelf, with their beautiful case artwork and will always be able to played as long as my console still works. And just like how you can get a NES today thats used or been reconditioned, I will be able to get a PS3/360/Wii years later too if any die.

maxp84
maxp84

I was really hoping that onlive would take off.  I've tried it out and I'm in impressed.  All you need is a kick ass internet connection!!  Which most of us serious gamers have. You can say it was ahead of its time.   But the reality is, it's not.  The time is now.  Unfortunately they didn't market the service properly. They didn't get the contracts with big gaming companies.etc etc.  totally mismanged.                                                                                                                               

SolidTy
SolidTy

This was bound to happen after the last few debacles.

godzillavskong
godzillavskong

Who didnt see all this coming? I guess those investors didn't. Lol

cshourihan
cshourihan

I knew this shit wouldn't work from day one.  We don't have the internet capabilities to try to play a game on a computer thousands of miles away.  The funny thing is this idea may have worked, at some point in the later future.  Just not now.

MXVIII
MXVIII

 @tightwad34 Onlive provides its users the ability to play hig profile games on any hardware on the go. Got a crappy laptop you can still play Assassin's Creed III, Civilization V, Homefront, etc. Because all the high end hardware is on their end, and it streams the game to you. Pretty great idea all told, I just dont think everyone's internet is up to the task. 

blackace
blackace

 @keyb0red 

Yeah.. like 10-15 yrs ahead of it's time. The bandwidth to run this thing properly isn't in place yet. Only Verizon FIOS subscribers and Korean gamers could possibly benefit from OnLive. I just don't see the point of paying all that money to rent games. If I really want to do that I'd sign up with GameFly.

stealth6spy
stealth6spy

 @00J It actually worked really well. Before building my pc, I only had a P.o.S. laptop which could only play Doom on a good day. With Onlive, there may have been a bit of lag at times, but still it allowed me to play games I would otherwise been completely incapable of playing. It also had quite a few other good ideas such as being able to save the last 10 seconds of your game and able to demo any game on the market. Plus the games were extremely cheap and could be rented with no download wait. Overall, I would say it was good service.

P90E21
P90E21

 @deviant74 And the new guy says " I'll ride this baby into the fire ball crash in the ground"

tightwad34
tightwad34

 @Tekcor

 That last part is pretty funny. Never heard that one before.

00J
00J

 @ryangcnx-2 cloud sucks. if they want cloud gaming i want to give them cloud money.

anvilone
anvilone moderator

 @ryangcnx-2There's something to be said for physical copies of games, but what's wrong with offering a cloud service that does the heavy lifting and allows you to take your games where ever you go without having to a lug a trunk full of consoles? Is that really such a dark future?

dxBIGBOSSxb
dxBIGBOSSxb

 @cshourihan It's actually entirely possible. It's no more different from Netflix streaming. It really is THAT SIMPLE. They were mismanaged and unmarketed. THAT is why they failed, not because the "internet capabilities aren't good enough".

 

Hell, there are plenty of streaming gaming sites that exist that get no recognition. One of my friends played Crysis on Day 1 on a computer that was already 3 years outdated by that point.

MXVIII
MXVIII

 @blackace  @keyb0red  Not even close, its only a couple of years ahead of its time. Google Fiber is coming.

AmphibiousChimp
AmphibiousChimp

 @Cruisemissile  @dbass999 I have crap internet and it works well enough for me. Mainly because I didn't spend any money on a console or pc that I would normally need to run the games I have with Onlive.

00J
00J

 @stealth6spy well, you would have eventually saved up enough money to buy a pc, they are the cheapest they have ever been. XBOX and PS3 are also affordable, new only about $300, used variable prices. 

P90E21
P90E21

 @deviant74 Also say the plane was hit and lost a wing CEO says time to bail, new guy said " No it can still fly!!!"

00J
00J

 @anvilone  @ryangcnx-2 dark future? nope it's a great bright future... Once they make gaming consoles with hard drives big enough, you can take your gaming library with you, by simply installing the games you want, no "trunk" needed. Plus no one said you have to take the games and their cd cases, you can use a cd sleeve. Plus Onlive don't allow multiplayer so you can't link consoles or even play online games. It's utter crap.

Yomigaeru
Yomigaeru

@anvilone @ryangcnx-2 Not at all. I'm all for giving gamers who take their consoles in their travels a convenient alternative to lugging around all your expensive consoles. However, the only worry I have is that cloud storage is where all these proponents of the "digital only" future want the industry to go.

 

Whether they are physical or digital, I want to be able to have my games stored locally. As long as there is the option for that, I've got no problems with cloud gaming.

cshourihan
cshourihan

 @dxBIGBOSSxb  It is more complex than a Netflix stream.  The problem is input; when you press Button A there will be a latency before the host computer that is running the game will get the signal for Button A.  It's inherent lag in the interface that you only see on Netflix when you're trying to pause it.  There would be 1920x1080 streaming in beautiful graphics quality with pristine framerate, but it plays clunky for anyone without a nice internet connection. 

 

I will admit though, I didn't realize there already were streaming sites.  Gonna hafta google that.

 

Call me a skeptic but I feel like If they could reliably sustain this service for a competitive market base, they'd be making a lot of money off of it right now.  If they can indeed do it, someone fucked up big time lol.

davedrastic
davedrastic

 @00J  @anvilone  @ryangcnx-2 No multiplayer? Well that's it's key flaw right there. OnLive is/was revolutionary, ahead of it's time and really for forward thinkers that will be able to see the beauty in its philosophy and approach - and that would be hardcore gamers in the first instance, those with technical nouse, excellent internet connection and are experimental enough to take on new things. The first batch of OnLive customers were never going to be casual players.

 

But these hardcore players want multiplayer. They already own a PS3/360 or are quite capable of sourcing one, and they may very well have a recent PC.

 

From this, OnLives core market simply does not need the service.

 

And then the other downsides are that you don't get to keep physical media, if OnLive disappears you lose purchased games, inevitable lag and technical issues, a drain on your internet download quota, yet another monthly subscription.

 

I think / thought that OnLive is amazing in theory, but it seems like they're the Chicken, which is nice, but everyone already owns half a dozen eggs, so we don't need another Chicken.

 

I can see OnLive dying now. 1800 users is pathetic. Sony must have looked at purchasing OnLive before doing the deal with Gaikai, and they turned up their nose to it, so did MS by the look of it.

 

Yes a groundbreaking, revolutionary and exciting new technology, but one that was arguably ahead of its time and with a flawed business model.

anvilone
anvilone moderator

 @00J  @ryangcnx-2 You have to figure they'd be working on multiplayer for the future though.