OnLive Extends Free Year for Founding Members to Labor Day
Interested parties are free to sign-up, but there is a waiting list before being given access. Once in, players have access to several free demos along with the options to buy and/or purchase other titles. A full list of games and pricing can be found here.
I've been playing around with OnLive for a few days and, while the technology is impressive, I can't agree with the pricing structure. In this age of digital distribution, we already buy licenses for games through services like Steam and Impulse, but those services include a method to play the game offline. Furthermore, they do not cost anything on top of purchasing the games.
I would be all over OnLive if it could be used to play the games I already own or became an all-you-can-play service. What about you?
-
first2di3
replyI agree... I got into the founders program and while the tech is cool I am not even close to paying for a game inside a service I have to pay by month for, and if I don't pay I lose my game.
-
100% agreed. I was impressed with the tech, but seeing a 3 or 5 day rental ONLY option on Batman REALLY turned me off as a business practice. Paying twice for a game I already own, and paying a standard retail price, also a turn-off. I'm hoping they change their tune in the next year, as I think this conceptually holds a lot of promise.
-
[deleted]
-
[deleted]
-
He's saying two things:
- Batman: AA doesn't have a "purchase" option, you can only rent it for a certain number of days:
http://www.shacknews.com/onearticle.x/64443
If there was a purchase option he might buy it but there's not.
- He has a number of games he already owns but he cannot play those on OnLive. And if that game is on OnLive, he has to purchase it again, at full retail price.
I think the really hilarious thing about OnLive is that one of the supposed benefits - hardware ubiquity - is already being circumvented by the publishers. You can't play Mass Effect 2 through OnLive on the Macintosh for example - the client literally forbids you. Probably because of that "Only on Windows and Xbox 360" bit. So much for making hardware a commodity. -
Renting = if this indicates that future titles will become 'rental only', I don't want to be prevented from purchasing a future title by being nickel-and-dimed with rental fees. Again, I just don't like it as a business practice ; it makes feel less in control of the service I'm paying for (well, not yet). What if the next Mass Effect is rental only for the first few months ? Do I need to shell out multiple rental fees for a game I know will take me 1 month or more to get through what I want ?
Paying twice = I guess that was worded poorly. Steam gives me ownership of a game, on and offline, and provides a small service on top of it for free (configs saved, download anytime). Onlive wants a monthly fee and the same upfront fee, but a pretty amazing service. I like the ability to play via on my aging laptop via OnLive and have a great experience; but I also want to own the game should I want to play offline. I essentially want OnLive as a service-layer on top of Steam; not a wholly independent platform. A guy can dream.-
[deleted]
-
-
-
One of two things needs to happen...
1) Charge more for the service, the games are free to play as much as you want.
or
2) Allow people to add games they already own to the service based on verification of the purchase (eg, show it your steam account, it loads all games that are compatable with Onlive).
If they will do one of those things, it will succeed, if they continue the way they are they will crash and fucking burn.
You can't fuck someone coming AND going, or they will fuck back.-
[deleted]
-
These thing can't happen because of the publisher. Of course the OnLive guys would love to be able to that, but they are not.
-
-
yep. no need to blame the service - they don't have much options
-
-
-
-
-
-
I'm in the founders club, and OnLive needs to add the option for 1920x1200 streaming, and add an unlimited games plan for 29.99 a month. They are trying to sell themselves as a service like cable tv, but the only service I see is watching other people play games or other things I don't give a rats ass about. Right now the service is akin to paying a monthly fee for cable, and then only being able to watch shows that you then pay 50 dollars a season for, which run at a lower quality than if you bought it on DVD and you lose access to if you cancel your subscripton. It's lunacy.
If I had to pay for OnLive right now, I would cancel in a heartbeat.
-
