A week or so ago, I talked about how Nintendo’s next generation console, beyond the Wii, wasn’t going to be a console at all, but a platform. A series of channels and streamed content that would show its mettle not on the console side of things, but in the services and functionality it provided over the web.
And today, as we sit eagerly in our seats wondering if Nintendo president Satoru Iwata will see his shadow during his GDC keynote (six more weeks of casual mini-games, oh noes!), I learned that this “next generation” platform is already here. It’s just not coming from Nintendo.
Indeed, as the GDC gets revved up into high gear, it was an unknown service called OnLive that had the blogs in a tizzy of excitement. Put simply, this service (if it works outside beta) will be a game changer.
If you haven’t yet heard of OnLive yet, you must first remove yourself, forcefully if necessary, from under that rock. Next, know this: It’s a powerful gaming delivered to you from the cloud. OnDemand’s super servers, scheduled to go live later this year, will stream Crysis in 720p with no lag. You can use the system with pretty much any computer you have handy. The graphics and horsepower are taken care of for you, out in the clouds.
The journalist response to the service so far has progressed something like this:
1. Journalist is doubtful the service can serve up Crysis in 720p, as advertised.
2. Journalist sees and plays demo in a controlled environment
3. Journalist needs to change pants
OK, so I exaggerate the last point. More seriously, said journalist probably runs back to his or her laptop to fire off a 1,500 word column about how OnLive is a game changer and the console guys should watch eff out.
But here’s the rub. I think Nintendo should be very worried about this kind of service, but not for the reasons all the blogs are going crazy over right now. 720p? Nintendo could care less. Add to that the fact that many of the demos are PC games-centric, and Nintendo cares even less. As with many video games stories these days, the “hardcore gaming press” is focusing on the extremes: The visuals, the audio, the online FPS multiplayer. Will this platform deliver the absolute best, “take my video games are art argument seriously” experience possible? I have yet to read an article on this service that does not mention HD, bandwidth rates and “latency” — all buzzwords that are largely irrelevant to a majority of people who play games today.
No, what should worry Nintendo is that this system is a work in progress for the beefy stuff mentioned above, but for the standard def games, family games, and other low bandwidth genres all the developers need to do is flick of a switch. OnLive has, in essence, scooped Nintendo with a low-cost service that has already proven it can pretty much handle the HD games and multiplayer that the fanatics love, meaning the simpler games will be delivered without so much as a thought. OnLive is, I think, what Nintendo’s end game looks like for the Wii, just minus the front loading optical disc drive and motion controls.
And even if OnLive fails, the platform can be easily shoehorned into any number of simple set top boxes that are finding a home under people’s TVs with greater numbers with each passing day. Apple has already filed an IR patent that synchs up with Apple TV, and it’s iPhone/iPod touch as a gaming platform was the talk of the town on GDC Day One.
This all makes what Satoru Iwata says today all the more interesting, I think. Simply saying “we’re a proven gaming company, and that is why our platform will prevail” isn’t enough anymore–not with the way tech is growing so quickly these days anyway. That train of thought certainly didn’t work for the PS3.
Nintendo, I’m sure, has its work cut out for it now.
"…anyone with a 1.5-Mb internet connection and a standard-definition TV or monitor, or a 5-Mb connection and a high-def TV or monitor…"
"… and is operated by an OnLive wireless controller…"
Being a developer working with cloud computing, I find these statments that Wired made to be a little disturbing…simply put, if you are a person with a dial-up, you are screwed.
Second, you should realize that many gamers operate off of a wireless network card, and the router is the one wired to the 1.5Mb connection – that means if you're networked wirelessly, you aren't going to be streaming at 1.5Mb, more likely 768Kb or less, depending if you are on a wireless-G or wireless-N card.
If you really do want to get the full experience out of cloud computing, you're going to have to connect that 50' LAN cable to your internet connection. And that's just half of it.
You do realize that in order to get clear, lag-less video, you have to have a LOT OF FREE MEMORY AVAILABLE.
That means a simple 1GB isn't going to do jack – the OnLive service is going to occupy half of that, as well as the video transition. The program you're going to play is going to need more, and with a hefty HD graphic game, 1GB simply isn't enough. You need at least 2 or 3 or 4 GB of free RAM for you to get it to work well.
Interesting idea, but from the eyes of a developer, it sounds like they're way too optimistic – just like Sony was with the P.O.S. 3.
Gotta agree with joltman, they'll have to prove that this will work in a real world situation to get my attention. I can just imagine heavy users getting their bandwidth capped by isps because of this.
I don't see how any server could handle this, even just 1000 people playing crysis at once is.
they'd have to limit the amount of people that can play the game at once.. so i now have to wait in a line at my pc so i can play a game? I think not.. I'd much rather spend the extra dough, supe up my pc and play it myself…
on top of that, what happens when you play an online game with said 1.5mb connection? you're eating all your internet downlink capacity just streaming the game, lag anyone?
Vaporware.
LOL with this set up nintendo could just upgrade the serve and put crysis on the Wii LOL with motion+. This would be a hell of a service if nintendo got in on it.
The system would only need a HDMI link and a USB port so that the Wii could at as the controller system rather than the system it self.
So basically you would need the small hub that onlive would offer. SDK to make the Wii and all it's controls to work with the hub. The small box allows for HDMI so no need for the Wii to have it now.
The new SD card having 32 GBs and being interchangeable is a big trump card for nintendo also. With 3 cards you have close to a terabyte.
So there wouldn't need to be another system release if such a thing did work. Nintendo would only need to keep making cool controllers and game play for every one.
This would also be prefect for nintendo because the graphic whore would be limitless in what they would now have access to play.
Hey but who knows if it even works. At 5 megs online any thing could work LOL. I think there will always be a place for consoles with some type of disk or cart.
The curious thing is are SD card now a viable way to release a huge game for the Wii? That is some thing to think about as the prices begin to fall.
@ Run Line 10
30 cards to a terabyte actually 😛
but yeah, releasing games on the wii? an excellent idea if you ask me!
if they could find a way to stop people copying them (no idea how) that'd be sweet, pretty sure good quality SD cards have faster load times compared to the 4x or 5x dvd drive in the wii at the moment.
@Joltman – I agree. But forget the HD crap. And the 32-player multiplayer FPS of the month.
What of less powerful games? Non traditional games. games presented in 480i. Standard def stuff. Nintendo's current bread and butter. Same story? That's kind of the point of the post.
For the price of the internet fees necessary to use this for a year I could easily buy the raddest gaming box around.
Still not convinced it won't be laggy as hell though…
I don't believe in the technology, from a technical standpoint, as a tool for delivering interactive, real-time content, especially in a quick twitch environment. I'll stick to my quite affordable self-built rig to play Crysis and the like at 1080p, not 720p. Nintendo, nor Sony or Microsoft, should be worried about this service.
Oh, and it's "couldn't care less", not "could care less", unless you're trying to imply that Nintendo does in fact care about 720p graphics.
@Joltman: Stclick to "being a developer" because you know NOTHING about hardware. STANDARD 802.11 (a, b or g) operates at 54 Mbps, not this arbitrary 756k you pulled out of nowhere. Also, 802.11n runs off dual band allowing up to 108 Mbps.
Next, how many people who are playing or wanting to play games like Crysis are only sporting dial-up? I get 8 Mbps cheap and I don't live in a highly developed area.
All that having been said, I think this has interesting potential. If this works it pretty much validates everything cloud computing has claimed to be able to offer. While I don't think this will be a threat to the big three, it has potential and might get bought up by someone like MS.
I too don't believe that the big three have much to worry about. They have there own areas. They haven't even mentioned the price. They would need to keep the price at less than $60 per year to get the 360 players out there. It would have to be free to get me interested. I have both a PS3 and Wii and am VERY happy with the online experiences. It is still the 'local' experience that I enjoy playing games from Nintendo. I also don't want to download $50~$??? games and not have anything physical to show for it. Just think of the Gamestop's etc… I do believe that games will go this way in the future, but not by the end of the year. They have even stated that this will be 'in addition' to the physical media out there now.
Push on, Nintendo!!! Push on!!!
Latency is a bigger problem than bandwidth. You know, any game that requieres fast reaction from the player would be unplayable.
But I agree, this is the future for home computing (not necessarily gaming).
to frstOne: You are totally correct. Any game that requires a fast response (or even response of any kind) where you press a button and see something happen… will NOT WORK!!
Just imagine playing Quake online where you fire then wait for 1 sec for the remote server to get the command from you (upload is lower, latency is say 100ms), then the remote server process the input, makes the change to the next frame to be put in the queue and then passes the data to the encoder/compressor. The compressor then has another latency (lets assume 500mS) and then the data is sent to you home (another 100ms of latency)
Even assuming unlimited bandwidth speeds the latency would kill the experience. You have now waited 700ms since you pressed the button until the screen responded. I see motion sickness, annoyed users and a worthless investment in the future of onlive.