Sign on Options
Theme:
To Dark

OnLive launching June 17, CEO Perlman interview inside

  • By Tor Thorsen, Sarju Shah, GameSpot
  • Posted Mar 10, 2010 10:52 am PT

Ambitious HD game-streaming service to debut on PC, Mac during E3, micro-consoles to follow; will cost $15/month; 1080p, 60fps service coming 2011.

One year after it was unveiled at the 2009 Game Developers Conference, OnLive finally has a launch date. Company CEO Steve Perlman announced today at his keynote address at the GamesBeat mini-conference at GDC 2010 that OnLive will go live on June 17. The service will initially be available as an application for the Windows and Mac operating systems, with a micro-console that can be attached directly to HDTVs to arrive later on in the year.

OnLive goes live in the lower 48 states on June 17.

OnLive goes live in the lower 48 states on June 17.

OnLive's launch will be limited to the contiguous lower 48 United States and will cost $14.95 per month. According to the OnLive Blog, the first 25,000 thousand people to sign up will have the service fee waived for three months. (To apply, sign up on the official OnLive site.) Multi-month pricing and other promotions will be announced prior to the service's debut.

OnLive's monthly fee does not include the purchase price of games themselves, which can be rented or bought from publishers directly at a lower-than-retail price. Publishers supporting the service with PC titles include Electronic Arts, Take-Two, THQ, Ubisoft, Epic, Atari, Codemasters, and Warner Bros. Interactive Entertainment. At the DICE Summit last month, Perlman demonstrated both Crysis and Unreal Tournament 3 running on the service with minimal lag.

The June launch will only be the start of the OnLive rollout. The service will offer 1080p high-definition gaming at 60 frames per second starting in 2011. An international launch is also planned for an undetermined date.

For those unfamiliar with OnLive, the service aims to offer lag-free PC gaming via the Web. The company claims that since the heavy lifting of graphics processing will be done on the service's servers, it will offer high-definition gaming on any PC or Mac, regardless of graphics card or CPU speed.

The addition of the micro-console will also allow the service to be streamed directly onto televisions, without the need for a standard game console. Perlman sees this as a positive because OnLive games will not be tied to increasingly antiquated consoles. He promised that the OnLive servers would receive graphical upgrades every six months in order to provide the latest PC graphics.

For a detailed look at OnLive in action, read GameSpot's coverage of Perlman's DICE presentation or watch the OnLive announcement video below.

489 Comments

  • SolidTy

    Posted Dec 7, 2011 9:12 pm GMT


    I'm not a fan of this idea, streaming games...but I know others dig it, so good on them.

  • wildfire1983

    Posted Dec 7, 2011 7:38 pm GMT

    is this even legit it seems to good to be true.. it might be a scam i never heard of onlive before just my opinion

  • howlingmage

    Posted May 20, 2010 11:38 pm GMT

    I can not see this working in the uk just yet cos most broadband providers still have caps on how much you can download a month.

  • SirWilliam86

    Posted Apr 3, 2010 7:13 am GMT

    "Honey"
    "YES mom"
    "We're moving!"
    "Where?"
    "Someplace where the only connection you can get is dial up!"
    "WTF, I just spent 200 dollars buying games for On Line. Wait, can I get 4G there?"
    "Probably not!"
    FAIL

    That is hilarious. LORL

  • SirWilliam86

    Posted Apr 3, 2010 7:06 am GMT

    So this guy is talking about taking the hardware part out of gaming. I might be wrong about this but wouldn't that take out well Microsoft,Sony,Nintendo,Nvidia,ATI,evga,asus,Gskill,XFX,MSI,zotac and all the other gaming hardware makers and distributors What about GameStop I love going to GameStop to buy a game and interact with other gamers in person. Also I have a hard time believeing that it will run games as nice as my bad ass gaming PC. What about things like Physx, or mod support Another thing the price is going to be $14.99 a month......um i've had my xbox 360 for I guess about four years now paid $400 for it when it first came out and have paid $50 a year for XBL (Xbox Live) that equals $600. On the other hand you can pay $14.99 a month for four years equaling $719.52....Lets say I build a PC then in a year or so new hardware comes out pay about $200 for a year of OnLive or pay about $200 for the new hardware.Yea and I hope a bunch of people don't buy games then it goes under and you all loss your money spent.

  • HonorOfGod

    Posted Apr 2, 2010 12:48 am GMT

    If this goes good than all Sony and MS have to do is stream games through the current consoles lol even Nintendo can do it, even game devs through there own sites.

  • WICGuardian

    Posted Mar 23, 2010 9:34 am GMT

    Hey Pop yoo made a very intresting point. Why don't they introduce this in other countries and give less fortunate a chance to play?

  • tsyunami

    Posted Mar 16, 2010 10:45 pm GMT

    "Honey"
    "YES mom"
    "We're moving!"
    "Where?"
    "Someplace where the only connection you can get is dial up!"
    "WTF, I just spent 200 dollars buying games for On Line. Wait, can I get 4G there?"
    "Probably not!"
    FAIL

  • Lionheart96mt

    Posted Mar 16, 2010 8:20 pm GMT

    A few questions for those who would pay money for all these games that you buy. What will happen If OnLive fails and goes under? What will have happened to all the money you spent on your games when they can't pay for the servers? You would have spent hundreds on it and you would not be able to play it. It's a risk to consider before you go about this. I love the idea but its risky.

  • bencarps41192

    Posted Mar 16, 2010 4:30 pm GMT

    Hey if you dont have to pay much to buy the thing then it really isnt that expensive. I mean you pay like 10 dollars a month to play WoW which is 1 game not many games. You pay 60 dollars a year for Xbox Live after paying 200 - 400 dollars for a console. So I mean if the initial thing is cheap then it sint that expensive. And if the games are cheaper online then you save more that way also. The only thing keeping me is if it has a lag when there is a lot of people but only time will tell.

  • Igetyourdogtag

    Posted Mar 16, 2010 4:02 pm GMT

    I don't see a problem with a monthly fee. If the server is what they say it is, its definitely worth it. Especially since you don't have to pay anything up front. Gaming PCs are like 600 dollars these days. 600/15=40. 40 Months until you've payed more then a gaming PC. Not to mention if it "just works" like they claim its so much better then a console or PC and I wouldn't mind spending a little bit more.

  • atrofiado

    Posted Mar 15, 2010 7:10 pm GMT

    Not only the price but the concept itself will make this project FAIL. Just think about how many people would be online, how much lag you'll get from that??
    And to think that if you don't have a strong Internet connection your games will be slow, not at the best quality or won't play at all. Better get a good computer or home console and have a smooth experience than the amounts of down times this will have.

  • PC-GAMER-CARTER

    Posted Mar 15, 2010 1:10 pm GMT

    Looks great but a little pricey

  • dannyatkinson

    Posted Mar 12, 2010 1:33 pm GMT

    Most of you equipment for a Gaming PC carry over when you upgrade.
    I upgraded my MB CPU and Video for about $200.
    My PC can play ANYTHING now.
    Yes it is cheaper. I will admit a New PC costs more but I bet I could build a decent one for about $400.

  • aghost2u

    Posted Mar 12, 2010 8:54 am GMT

    A PS3 is what $300? A decently equipped "gaming" PC" is $600. or so if you build it yourself? Capable of playing titles like MW2, BC2 etc. (we are not talking flash games here) Dannyatkinson you talk about misconceptions and stupid people, try pricing out a "gaming PC" that meets the recommended specifications for today's games.

  • dannyatkinson

    Posted Mar 12, 2010 7:51 am GMT

    How is this cheaper than building a new PC. Geez people are stupid.
    PC are cheap as Heck right now if you shop around instead of buying the first thing you see. I am amazed at how much people think it costs to play top PC games today.
    Honestly in the long run PC gaming is not like it used to be. It is dirt cheap these days.
    I recently built a new rig but can't afford a PS3.
    I just don't get it. There are some HUGE misconceptions out there.

  • maxsteel86

    Posted Mar 12, 2010 7:06 am GMT

    So you initially pay $15 a month just to access the service and on top of that, you pay to buy games? Then if you decide to no longer subscribe to the service, the games you bought are no longer available for you to play...

    There's a lot I dont like about this. The only advantage they have over a games console is that you wont have to buy a new one every 7-10 years. And what about server outages or if there's a problem with your internet connection?? They'll have to demonstrate good reliability on their end atleast but still, I think its too soon for an all digital distribution system just yet

  • aghost2u

    Posted Mar 12, 2010 5:53 am GMT

    We love our services so we can do things without thinking about them too much. You can buy a gaming PC and a few game titles (more cost up front) and maybe/maybe not save some in the end, but in three years time that once top shelf gaming PC will be almost useless for modern titles without replacing or upgrading it. The onlive service is another way to get into PC gaming and I support that, however I don't think it will replace traditional PC gaming anytime soon.

  • GeneralHawx

    Posted Mar 11, 2010 7:40 pm GMT

    OH WOW I SAVE $45 dollars for being the first 25, 000 very impressive they should get the service for free for a year and only for the first 5000 the rest can get this deal and $15 a month add that up three years later that's $540 if the people use the service for more than 3 years they can get a decent PC and it'll probably be better than this

  • Shiftfallout

    Posted Mar 11, 2010 5:05 pm GMT

    I dont like this concept. I think it is bad for the future of the industry. What drives new technology? What inspires both ATI and NVIDIA to poor tons of money competing with eachother and thus giving the consumers the latest tech? SALES with consumers. If you just have the consumer playing without purchasing the hardware, there is really no need for the technologies to advance as fast as it can or even keep prices competitive. Furthermore, games will always be ahead of the bandwidth required. Meaning, with OnLive you will always be playing with lower resolutions, low settings..ect Furthermore, I believe that owning a product you can use at any time is better than one that they own and can disappear at a moments notice. Why should you have to have internet access to play a game for example? If your internet goes out... too bad. Thus, owning the product keeps competition up, keeps better technology coming out faster and cheaper for the consumer.

  • lamprey263

    Posted Mar 11, 2010 3:17 pm GMT

    I'll probably try this out, but I'm waiting for the micro-console adapter.

  • DeadReckoning19

    Posted Mar 11, 2010 2:53 pm GMT

    Jesus, you guy's are aware that these same arguements can be used for any system? "Omg hunny, I just bought a SNES for 300 dollars and Earthbound for 50 bucks! Awesome deal!"

    5 years later

    "OMG HUNNY, Nintendo isn't making any more games for the SNES and the battery in my Earthbound game died, I can't play it anymore!"

  • MERGATROYDER

    Posted Mar 11, 2010 2:08 pm GMT

    The first guy repeated the same thing four times. The idea seems cool, but I don't know if enough people will hop on to support it. If OnLive can deliver Crysis at max settings and max resolution on a 46" LCD, with at least 30fps, I'll give it a try. Now given this is new, I will sit back for at least six months.

  • Solid_Azeus

    Posted Mar 11, 2010 1:43 pm GMT

    i smell fail

  • ben151

    Posted Mar 11, 2010 1:35 pm GMT

    Not too bad a price. $15 is $10 more expensive than xbox live, and if you purchase a 360 for around $300, it would take 2 1/2 years for onlive to become more expensive than buying an xbox. However, if games are $10 cheaper, like on the pc, it could be potentially cheaper in the long run depending on how often you buy games.

  • Solidshark21

    Posted Mar 11, 2010 12:55 pm GMT

    I hope it goes well. Better competition will force sony and xbox to step up their game.

  • k0r3aN_pR1d3

    Posted Mar 11, 2010 12:29 pm GMT

    @hass94

    nVidia and ATI make a killing from their other divisions. nVidia has enough money to counter Intel in court so I doubt they are going out of business any time soon.

  • pop_yoo

    Posted Mar 11, 2010 12:25 pm GMT

    this service should be released in romania asap, maybe it will get rid of some pirates and if an Onlve server would be here 13ms connections nobody in my house uses internet, unlimited bandwith fiber 100mbs. And screw buying a 600euro PC every 2yrs. Well it kinda sucks that if you stop paying you can't play anything, they should let you add games that you already own. Anyway i hope it works it would be pretty awesome.

  • jaredcrazy3232

    Posted Mar 11, 2010 12:22 pm GMT

    however it might help bolster PC content

  • jaredcrazy3232

    Posted Mar 11, 2010 12:21 pm GMT

    but they are limited to PC/Mac games only... I doubt you'll be able to get any valve games...

  • albatrossdrums

    Posted Mar 11, 2010 12:21 pm GMT

    I honestly think this is destined to fail. Everything is going the way of digital downloading/streaming EVENTUALLY, but company after company has failed by simply under estimating how long it will take consumers to catch up, acclimatize to a new way or doing things, or even simply want to. The vast majority of people simply are not ready for this service and it is launching too soon to sustain itself until the concept is more financially viable. This reminds me of the kinds of things Josh Harris, the "We live in public" guy did. Makes complete sense, maybe even visionary - but simply ill timed, too soon and out of scale with what the majority of the public will buy in to or understand.

  • andrew_ribbons

    Posted Mar 11, 2010 12:02 pm GMT

    "Please come out in UK. My computer can hardly play tetris."

    Right....so you can't pay for a PC but you can pay $180 a YEAR for this service?

    I see....

    Trust me, you'd be better off dumping $600 in a general gaming PC and replacing it every 3 years than putting up with this service. Also, you don't have to keep paying to enjoy your PC, if you stop paying for this service you lose your games.

    Somebody grab me some popcorn, this service is going to crash and burn it's far too presumptious on everyone having a superb internet connection with minimal ping, that just isn't the case a simple venture into online shooter games proves how bad it can be with just that amount of bandwidth usage.

    And everyone here is on the right about the market appeal. PC Gamers want their games running on their hardware, not someone elses, PC Gaming culture is a constantly upgrading, updating and evolving one, we don't do this "consolisation" thing. And if that does float your boat, there are 3 decent consoles out on the market to appeal.

  • sigerzx

    Posted Mar 11, 2010 12:00 pm GMT

    expensive $15p/m! rather save up my money for a console or decent pc that won't rely on servers and online availability.

  • ico92

    Posted Mar 11, 2010 11:57 am GMT

    honestly i think onlive is gonna be a huge hit among the PC gaming community but among console gamers not so much, i mean for starters its a monthly fee of $15 ,console gamers are gonna hate that i mean people complain about XBL and thats like $4 a month, on top of that the library ,so far most of the games we've seen on onlive can be played on consoles and have been playable on consoles for quite sometime, the only game i see hardcore consoles gamers buying onlive for is Crysis Warhead.

  • SibirskiyTigr

    Posted Mar 11, 2010 11:50 am GMT

    People with hardcore pc's will ignore this "up to date graphics" crap
    This will attract people that want to have a gaming pc but dont have money for it, so will go with cheap alternative, and then will be somewhat disappointed

  • chico129

    Posted Mar 11, 2010 11:43 am GMT

    @purecontrol
    Because then everybody else will be left wondering " Whycan't everybody get a PS3 or a 360 instead? Why does it have to be a PC?" A PC requires a lot more than just a graphics card update every few years If you want graphics better than the consoles, they cost a lot to run compared to consoles when you consider how frequently PC's need to upgrade opposed to how often a new console comes out.

  • Kakaroti4

    Posted Mar 11, 2010 11:41 am GMT

    How on earth is onlive going to meet the demand? For every player playing over onlive a GPU and CPU need to allocate resources to that user. They will need to provide a "PC" for every onlive user. I am really skeptical.

  • alik360

    Posted Mar 11, 2010 11:06 am GMT

    I think this service will have some attention for some time and then it will die, I am not againest the project but PS3 and X360 gamers won't buy it and pc gamers won't buy it either, maybe the wii gamers ( if they are gamers ).

  • alexnollent

    Posted Mar 11, 2010 10:58 am GMT

    Please come out in UK. My computer can hardly play tetris.

  • anique

    Posted Mar 11, 2010 10:56 am GMT

    Thing is, since it's online there's going to be a lag between the input and onscreen action. My connection gives a lag of abt 500ms from US servers and 15ms from servers of my own country. Onlive is US based so after pressing a button i'll have to wait half a second to see the results. I'm not going to pay for lag.

  • hassy94

    Posted Mar 11, 2010 10:41 am GMT

    I'm no PC gamer, but don't you see the HUGE problem with this? A bigger problem than anything else? If this DOES take over PC gaming, then surely noone but OnLive (and other cloud-gaming services) would ever need to buy graphics cards. If that's so, then Nvidia and ATI will no longer be making money, therefore they will eventually see there is no market for graphics cards. This would mean they will shut down and there will be no advancement in graphics cards for OnLive to use, and therefore no advancement in graphics in games.

    The only way this would work is if OnLive purchased lets say Nvidia and then used them as an internal graphics-card creating company, though this would cost A LOT and then subscription fees would go up.


    I wonder if anyone from the media will question OnLive CEOs about this.

  • EKGProd posted Mar 11, 2010 10:27 am GMT (does not meet display criteria. sign in to show)

    EKGProd

    Posted Mar 11, 2010 10:27 am GMT (hide)

    Wow, some of you crack me up. You try to justify your hate for "On Live" any way you can instead of just telling the truth. You can't afford it.

    It's ok, we wont judge you. You can sit there and try to pretend that being able to stream PC quality games to any TV or crappy computer virtually lag free isn't awesome, but not a single person is buying your story. Just come right out and say it. Here, I will help you. "In reality, I think On Live is amazing. The problem is, I can not afford it. So, like and juvenile in my situation, I will attempt to hide my disappointment beneath a false layer of contempt and hatred for this product. Please excuse my childish behavior, and hopefully one day I will actually be able to afford this revolutionary device, and I can stop pretending that I don't like it." There, feel better now??

  • sartnd

    Posted Mar 11, 2010 10:25 am GMT

    Too early to launch...

  • sartnd

    Posted Mar 11, 2010 10:22 am GMT

    Will this end up like psp go?

  • gshell

    Posted Mar 11, 2010 10:09 am GMT

    a little disappointed at the pricing but i understand it.....i was hoping they would have used a, tivo or xbox 360 pricing model. I wouldn't have been averse to paying say a $100-$150 yearly fee instead of the nickel and dime 15 bucks a month

  • diggyman

    Posted Mar 11, 2010 10:07 am GMT

    ok... um exclusives? ... This will be chock-full of 3rd party games only... No 'God of War,' 'Halo,' 'Mario,' 'GT5,' 'Forza3,' 'Mario Kart Wii' ... Nope just 3rd party games only.

    How are they gonna counter that problem? Maybe it isn't a problem for you guys, but I know that exclusives are usually the killer app for a console, which also means that the developer for that game took a little more time and effort in making the game. i'll stick with my consoles for now.

  • Xions-Fursy

    Posted Mar 11, 2010 10:03 am GMT

    I hope it fails. Not cause I'm against change just because everytime I've heard an interview with Steve Pearlman about this he seems to just say, "gamers are stupid fifteen year old kiddies who want things right now! Their parents have credit cards, so we're gonna take advantage of the people who want to be instantly gratified by nickle and diming the gaming community." Ya do I think it has some interesting ideas? I suppose so. But do I want another company to treat me like I'm a filthy dollar bill, no sorry we already have enough of those.

  • AnelZukic

    Posted Mar 11, 2010 9:49 am GMT

    I'm so against OnLive, but I also really want to see how well will it perform but no matter, I'll just buy it if I wouldn't have any alternatives

  • 07pops07

    Posted Mar 11, 2010 9:39 am GMT

    try and look at the bigger picture imagine playing the most graphical demanding game on any system. for example they said that they would add support for mobile devices sometime in 2010....can you imagine playing crysis on you iPhone?! also this gives devs more head room with their technology. meaning if enough people use this we could start seeing games that destroy crysis graphically become a standard in the industry.

Subscribe to GameSpot's YouTube Channel

Hot Stories

Newsmakers

Featured Stories

Tags

onlive

Submit News

Got tips? Send them in!

Related Game

Crysis

Crysis Boxshot
Follow:
  1. Not Following
    Xbox 360: Follow
  2. Not Following
    PC: Follow
  3. Not Following
    PlayStation 3: Follow
Add to List
  1. Xbox 360
  2. PC
  3. PlayStation 3

Follow for the latest news, videos, & tips from experts & insiders

GameSpot Fuse
    Platforms:

    Related Games

    Site Blogs