Sign on Options
Theme:
To Dark

OnLive gains mobile phone compatibility

Anticipated online game-streaming service to work on platforms such as Apple's iPhone; portable launch to follow desktop, TV versions.

OnLive has a number of attractive features going for it. Perhaps the most intriguing, though, is the online game-streaming service's promise to effectively eliminate the hardware barrier for playing high-performance games. Because OnLive hosts games on its own high-end servers, users will only have to download a small application to allow playable games to be streamed to virtually any desktop, laptop, or TV.

The latest visual representation of how OnLive works.

The latest visual representation of how OnLive works.

Over the weekend, OnLive CEO Steve Perlman added yet one more platform to that mix, saying on the company's blog that gamers will also be able to use the service with mobile smart phones. The mobile service will also let gamers watch others' gameplay, as well as engage in a number of other community-oriented features.

Perlman noted that the game-playing component of the mobile version of OnLive will not launch alongside the full service this winter. The executive also said that the mobile edition of OnLive can only be considered a tech demo. The company has no estimated time of arrival for when the full functionality will be available on smart phones, with barriers ranging from further development time to approval from certain cell-phone service providers.

"It's important to understand that a cell phone is a very different beast than TV, PC or Mac," Perlman wrote. "And while we're thrilled about eventually bringing many new games to cell phone platforms, currently, games on OnLive are tuned for TVs and computers. So initially, it's the community and social elements of OnLive that we're most excited about on mobile devices."

The PC, Mac, and TV editions of OnLive entered a closed beta-testing phase in early September. OnLive has yet to nail down an exact release date for when the service will be available or how much it will cost.

162 Comments

  • Inoubliable

    Posted Jan 23, 2010 3:57 pm GMT

    Regardless of whether or not Onlive will be immediately viable, in the long run it or some other service like it WILL take over. Games in the cloud are too attractive a proposition for publishers and those who don't want to spend 1000+ dollars on a gaming rig to pass up. No piracy, no 400$ a year on upgrades, no distribution costs, real time massive beta testing, instant rentals. And if you think Crysis looks good, just imagine games developed specifically for super computers. Within 5 years, games could go from cartoonish to absolutely, completely photo-realistic. If onlive doesn't launch with any exclusive titles, it will have them soon as developers free themselves from the need to worry about polycounts and effects optimization. I'm really hoping that they pull this off now, but if they don't, someone else will.

  • KSigMTSU

    Posted Nov 21, 2009 9:13 am GMT

    @fester420

    Here is a link to the facts and figures you requested, even though you never supplied anything proving anything you said.

    http://global.bsa.org/idcglobalstudy2007/studies/2007_global_piracy_study.pdf

    Piracy is on the decline in most markets, peaking around 22% in the US and down to around 20% in 07. I know 2% seems like not a lot, but that 2% accounts for a substantial amount of money. On the other hand, console piracy is up. I cannot track down the article where I was reading about that, but the last compiled article I read discussing piracy in the US showed PC piracy on the decline and a sharp spike at the same time in console piracy.

    In other news. EA stopped making PC games because they weren't selling. They were releasing the last years version for the PC rather than the same one they were releasing for consoles and people stopped buying them. I've heard several publishers complain about piracy, of course they will, it costs money, but the data does not in any way support what you are saying, and I doubt you had read any data before you started running off at the mouth about something you knew very little about.

  • Glade_Gnarr

    Posted Nov 19, 2009 10:19 pm GMT

    It seems like these guys can do everything.

  • silverchief

    Posted Nov 18, 2009 7:54 pm GMT

    take into actount that the 30 $60 games can trade in for store credit at gamestop and blockbuster, while Onlive has no method of trade in value or redeption for purchased games.

  • silverchief

    Posted Nov 18, 2009 7:51 pm GMT

    Maybe unimpressed wasn't the best word choice on my part on my past post, because I do see that this is a creative step in the gaming business world on devlivering a new product. I guess the better word choice should have been that if nothing besides streaming games for $20 to $50 a month (which equals $240 for twenty bucks and $600 a year for fifty bucks) is offered, then I'm UNINTERESTED instead of unimpressed. That means that if you use the system for five years, every month, at $35 (a median price between $20-50), then it will cost you over $2,100.00 to platy your games. On the other hand, you could use hard copy games and buy a new system for $300 and purchase 30 new $60 games for the same price. Does Onlive sound like much of a bargain?


    I don't mean to sound hostile, I just felt like you were attacking me personally by saying I was ignorant on the topic because I share a different viewpoint than you. Onlive is very interesting and if this can be a major success for the gaming industry, it would definately shift the pendulum for game developers and gamers alike.

  • silverchief

    Posted Nov 18, 2009 7:51 pm GMT

    @ EKGProd

    I understand that the system streams games. I read it here and from other sources, such as a fantastic article about Onlive in Fast Company (a business magazine). I get that it frees up space and sends the game through to any monitor. I also saw that this game does have game industry support from people such as Warner Brothers, EA and THQ, but... I still feel like you didn't get my main point:

    NO FIRST PARTY SUPPORT. While it may play great titles, such as Assasin's Creed and Lego Batman, there are currently no blockbuster exclusives. So while the technilogical advancement may be impressive, there is nothing exclusive to this console that can't be had elsewhere in terms of software. Imagine a system with no Mario, Zelda, Metroid, Halo, Gears of War, Killzone, Little Big Planet, Resistance, or any other exculsive title, and you have Onlive. Offering everthing that everyone has, just by streaming software.

  • KaizerJinn

    Posted Nov 18, 2009 1:36 pm GMT

    Nice idea for those not willing to spend the money needed for PS3 or 360, but dont want to be stuck with just the Wii... assuming that it'll be less expensive, which it should because it wont have all the features that PS3 or 360 has. now that i think of it, consumer who never liked the idea of a console doing more than just playing games would probably buy it too.... intriguing, BUT i HIGHLY doubt i'll trade my PS3 for this.

  • Steveo1313

    Posted Nov 17, 2009 10:37 pm GMT

    I checked out OnLive's FAQ, and they claim that standard def gaming only requires 1.5 Mbps, and HD requires 5 Mbps. So if that's true, then this doesn't seem too impossible to be able to have quality gaming with OnLive. I'm still a tad skeptical, but I hope it works, and I hope it's cheap. If it is, I'll consider investing...

  • Brainkiller05

    Posted Nov 17, 2009 5:20 pm GMT

    Works by magic

  • grigjd3

    Posted Nov 17, 2009 4:04 pm GMT

    I don't think the idea is bad, I just don't think the infrastructure is there to make this a reality.

  • alexkn64

    Posted Nov 17, 2009 2:45 pm GMT

    @07pops07
    Last I checked, I pay a monthly fee on my phone, and that's it.

    I don't pay 30 or 40 dollars a month for my cellphone, and then have to pay another 30 or 40 dollars for every call I make.

    That's the pricing scheme behind OnLive. I hope all you fools who think this will work, OR ACTUALLY BE GOOD FOR THE CONSUMER go out, purchase OnLive and buy like 15 games for it. Then when they go out of business because it doesn't work, just like The Phantom, you'll lose ever. Single. Game. You purchased, and you'll finally see the light at how misguided you all were to support something so bad.

  • ionkizz

    Posted Nov 17, 2009 12:19 pm GMT

    Haloman04: >>You guys are all going to look like idiots when this works and I'll laugh in your faces.

    Haloman04, you will look like idiot when this does not work and we will all laugh in your face.

  • remysola

    Posted Nov 17, 2009 11:59 am GMT

    My bet is these players that complain about paying are:
    a) PC pirates
    b) Console pirates

    And... MS, Sony, Nintendo, EPIC, Activision are thinking right now about streaming content.

    Another point with this is about piracy if there isn't a hard copy, makes extreme difficult to pirate. So the pirates need to create a streamrecorder, save all the textures and make their own 3d engine to render it.. since there aren't any pirate that bring to PC any console exclusive (by the same) this kind of services are the heaven for publishers/developers. The time will prove it.

    You can go to amazon.com and use it, maybe save every page on their site.. but if you want to make your own amazon.com you need your own engine.

    In summary you can steal key access or passes to online content but you can't steal the content. (ok you can but is going to be hard.) the f... pirates want all easy: a cd crack, a firmware hack.. etc... why they don't make your own games from the scratch? and release them for free to everyone.

    Where I live, I know a couple of pirates that sale a lot of illegal copies (music, movies, games) and they are rich, while they don't create nothing only steal.

  • xexis

    Posted Nov 17, 2009 11:10 am GMT

    Now if only WoW was on it....

  • fascinationjx

    Posted Nov 17, 2009 11:00 am GMT

    anyone remember the Phantom? Gizmondo? ... anyone? promises promises

  • 07pops07

    Posted Nov 17, 2009 10:41 am GMT

    you guys can talk crap about how you don't wanna pay monthly and stuff. but you do it already for your phone so when someone says a monthly bill for a cell phone i don't see the shock...when you can bust out your cell phone and load a mobile version of crysis that's worth a monthly charge to me..(yes i know there is no mobile crysis)

  • MattyVonP

    Posted Nov 17, 2009 10:22 am GMT

    I hope it works great but I can't help but feel a little skeptical

  • Ralph_Lauren

    Posted Nov 17, 2009 10:04 am GMT

    unfortunately you wont be able to play console exclusive game and most of the WII games since you need the special controller.

  • halomonkey1_3_5

    Posted Nov 17, 2009 10:01 am GMT

    paying more then $30 for a digital(as in i don't own a hard copy) copy of a game is ridiculous but paying for interactive video? never in a million years.

  • Haloman04

    Posted Nov 17, 2009 9:31 am GMT

    You guys are all going to look like idiots when this works and I'll laugh in your faces.

  • mrzero1982pt2

    Posted Nov 17, 2009 9:31 am GMT

    something like this exists already. GAMETAP

  • rgjj

    Posted Nov 17, 2009 9:25 am GMT

    i think some people are missing the real point of this, those who have high end pc pricy pc's will realise how much better games look on them compared with current consols and u aint getting a pc with this sort of gaming potential for 249 quid and as the years go by the pc advances and the consols dont untill they bring the new models out. Now apparently with this service you will always be kept upto date so it should make the consols look very dated hardware wise in the near future. they know they can do it the question is will the internet providers be reliable enough for a service like this. i personaly think it'd be rude not to try it after all no major hardware needs to be purchase like the grand plus on my pc and the 300 plus on xbox and ps3 when they was released jus hope the games are fairly price for buying and rental

  • InsertWittyID

    Posted Nov 17, 2009 9:23 am GMT

    I'll be curious to see this if it ever goes international. It probably won't be a worthwhile investment though.

  • mrzero1982pt2

    Posted Nov 17, 2009 9:15 am GMT

    that IS a good question. how will they handle exclusive games? i mean i dont see microsoft or bungie even though they dont do halo anymore giving onlive these games, or sony giving them the ability to distribute jak and daxter, rachet and clank, and uncharted, or nintendo giving up mario or metroid they are going into a war where they want all of these games and its not going to work. i cant see it working.

  • mrzero1982pt2

    Posted Nov 17, 2009 9:12 am GMT

    i will believe this when i see it. but all the hype is nothing. not a skeptic, just not really thinking this will happen. sorry

  • djpetitte

    Posted Nov 17, 2009 8:29 am GMT

    @TripSe7en You have to be kidding me! This could never compete in the gaming industry in todays or the near futures market. Onlive is limited by internet connection. They are also limiting their market, because we already have systems like the wii. You think grandma and grandpa are going be geared tward something like this? not a chance. It would never sell as much as xbox, sony or Nintendo has. With the big boy like Microsoft around and onlive's limited market, it would never survive unless maybe Microsoft bought it out. Why do you think things like Linux and Mac don't succeed in gaming. One word Microsoft! Onlive falls flat on it's face- Mark my words! Not to metion we already have steam-- the Wal mart of pc gaming

  • Hvac0120

    Posted Nov 17, 2009 8:29 am GMT

    http://www.onlive.com/

    I am intrigued by the concepts. I am skeptical about the quality it will have with real-world scenarios.

    They seem to have a good line-up of Publishers and Games. Their service looks fairly fleshed out and up-to-speed with XBL and PSN.

    A big mystery is: "How Much?"
    _

  • joshuahaveron

    Posted Nov 17, 2009 8:25 am GMT

    @ques4d4
    You should be ashamed of yourself. YOU are responsible for the decline in developer's interest in the PC platform.

  • djpetitte

    Posted Nov 17, 2009 8:19 am GMT

    Yes, that's all its good for, because it's a piece of poop and a bad idea.

  • Ralph_Lauren

    Posted Nov 17, 2009 7:29 am GMT

    but u stil cant play halo, gow, mgs, gt, uncharted, etc, and what about motion sensitive games like wii or project natal?

  • Ralph_Lauren

    Posted Nov 17, 2009 6:56 am GMT

    after watching this, it looks pretty cool

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OGdecNDDr9g&feature=player_embedded#

    too bad it wont come in europe till like 2015...

  • Ralph_Lauren

    Posted Nov 17, 2009 6:47 am GMT

    my in country net connection is 100 mb/s and outside the country is 10 mb/s

  • TripSe7en

    Posted Nov 17, 2009 6:37 am GMT

    @ Ralph_Lauren
    Make sure you are typing "ONLIVE" and not "online"...

    I personally hope this takes off in some fashion. I am all for digital distribution and if this can be any bit of a success, I would love to see how the next gen of consoles would adapt something similar. YOu would be foolish to think MS and Sony aren't keeping onlive under a microscope.

  • left4right

    Posted Nov 17, 2009 6:25 am GMT

    @ Ralph_Lauren

    http://www.onlive.com/
    are you sure u used google for search not boogle or shmoogle?

  • Ralph_Lauren

    Posted Nov 17, 2009 6:23 am GMT

    Apple should totally buy this!!!!

  • Ralph_Lauren

    Posted Nov 17, 2009 5:46 am GMT

    when you will play one of those games, you wont be able to use the internet anymore for anything else!!! anyway, how come i cant find ANYTHING on this OnLine thing, nothing on google, nothing on wikipedia, nothing on youtube, no official website?

  • Zerosumgame

    Posted Nov 17, 2009 3:48 am GMT

    Good luck gaming with Iphone, those games are disgusting! F! F!

  • left4right

    Posted Nov 17, 2009 12:23 am GMT

    on lag

  • fester420

    Posted Nov 16, 2009 11:31 pm GMT

    @KSigMTSU

    You're twisting my words around, I never said people just now figured out how to pirate games. Piracy is a lot bigger nowadays than it ever was. EA has stopped making PC games due to piracy. Crytek said it would be impossible for them to make PC exclusive titles because of massive piracy. Capcom released the PC version of Street Fighter 4 nearly half a year after the console release because they wanted to actually make money off the game. So if piracy is less of a problem nowadays, let me see the facts and figures that prove your point.

  • KSigMTSU

    Posted Nov 16, 2009 11:11 pm GMT

    Lol, yeah all companies are going to stop making PC games because people just now figured out how to pirate them. Oh wait, that happened in the 80s. Seems like some games came out in the last 20 years. Piracy is probably LESS of a problem now than it was then, its absolutely less of a problem now than it was 5 years ago. In no way shape or form is the PC going to cease to be a gaming platform.

  • fester420

    Posted Nov 16, 2009 10:45 pm GMT

    The reason this will fail is because for one thing, people don't want to have to pay a monthly fee for it, and more people are learning how to pirate pc games. Since there are more people pirating games, companies are going to stop making them for the pc, hence there will be no good pc games at all. This is going to fail quicker than the Atari Jaguar.

  • shani_boy101

    Posted Nov 16, 2009 9:52 pm GMT

    will never be feasible in Australia or any other country with mediocre Broadband speeds and fees and tbh most people prefer hard copies or at least something they own. the reason why steam works is that you have a copy of the game on your hard drive and you can download the game to any computer in the world when logged into your steam account. this on the other hand is simply a gigantic waste of bandwidth. even idling on this thing will cost you.

  • firehawk998

    Posted Nov 16, 2009 8:43 pm GMT

    Call me old fashioned but at the end of the day I prefer having a hard copy of a game. This service doesnt offer anything that great they will stream high def games to your device. You dont get to ownership of your game. I remember a similar device that came out a few years ago called the Phantom. It was a huge flop.

  • ThisIsntLeonard

    Posted Nov 16, 2009 8:42 pm GMT

    Oh yeah.. This thing is still coming out. I almost forgot. Nevermind, I did forget.

  • valcrist09

    Posted Nov 16, 2009 8:37 pm GMT

    hmm 5mb a bandwidth to get 720... times that by what few million + users? yeah just see how long that takes before that pisses off cable providers, that doesnt include all the OTHER streaming services that are out there.. Yeah all this streaming sounds like a great idea but these companies forgot 1 thing.. ISPs...

  • shinspikes

    Posted Nov 16, 2009 8:30 pm GMT

    Boo! Give me the games on mobile.

  • akiwak

    Posted Nov 16, 2009 8:16 pm GMT

    Not liking not knowing the price.

  • killerzombieman

    Posted Nov 16, 2009 7:15 pm GMT

    it's winter 2009.. and no exact release date. I also dont like how the guy said, dont worry about it, "it just works" .... but if this does turn out good, then wow

Subscribe to GameSpot's YouTube Channel

Hot Stories

Newsmakers

Featured Stories

Submit News

Got tips? Send them in!