OnLive Builds Console-Quality Gaming Into LG Google TVs, No Console Required

[Cristian_25H]

OnLive, the leader of on-demand cloud gaming, announced that its OnLive Game Service has just been integrated into the LG Smart TV with Google TV (G2 Series), making console-quality games instantly playable as part of the TV experience. The OnLive app is the first commercial deployment of instant-response cloud gaming in a TV with no console necessary. OnLive offers something that consoles can't: the ability to continue playing your saved games on the go, on nearly any PC or Mac, and many Android tablets.

The OnLive app was delivered over the air today to the LG G2 Series TVs that are already in homes and will be preinstalled on future LG Google TVs. With the OnLive Wireless Controller (available at onlive.com/controller), LG G2 TV owners in the United States can go to the Premium Apps menu on their TVs and play hundreds of video games on demand. The OnLive catalog includes games from more than 80 publishers, with everything from blockbuster new releases to classic franchises to family-friendly sports, racing and action-adventure games.





Uniquely, OnLive makes console-quality gaming truly portable and accessible across multiple platforms. With a single purchase, OnLive games can be played on any OnLive-compatible device -- on PC, Mac, many Android tablets, TVs with the OnLive Game System, and now LG G2 TVs -- anywhere there is broadband. Users can start a game on one device and continue playing on any other device, with full saved game data intact in the cloud, whenever and wherever they want. OnLive even enables cross-platform multiplayer gaming, so that an LG G2 TV owner will be able to play with (or against) friends on PCs, Macs and tablets.

Games can be demoed free and purchased or rented a la carte, or players can subscribe to the OnLive PlayPack for unlimited play of more than 200 games, with more titles added monthly. OnLive also offers free access to unique social features, such as game spectating in the OnLive Arena, recording ten-second Brag Clip videos of players' best gaming moments, and sharing videos and Achievements with friends on OnLive and Facebook.

"We are proud to be working with OnLive to deliver an incredible home entertainment experience with a full range of interactive viewing and gaming possibilities on LG G2 Series TVs," said Georg Rasinski, Director of Home Entertainment Brand Management, LG Electronics USA. "OnLive's premium-quality gaming service offers customers a great opportunity to test the dual-core performance of our G2 Series TVs. We think customers will be very impressed."

"Our partnership with LG has enabled us to take an important step forward in making high-end gaming accessible to everyone, across a variety of consumer electronic devices," said Gary Lauder, OnLive Chairman. "Gamers can now enjoy hundreds of amazing console-quality games with no new hardware necessary beyond an OnLive controller and LG's fast and intuitive Google TV."

Combining the power of the Google TV platform with the speed of LG's L9 dual-core chipset and a user-friendly interface, the G2 Series is LG's first TV to make OnLive cloud gaming an integral part of the consumer experience. To find out more about OnLive or to purchase a Universal OnLive Wireless Controller, visit www.onlive.com or www.onlive.co.uk.

[XL-R8R]

The start of big things to come?



I hope.

[erixx]

RIP console plague, hail the Google plague. Armagedoom will get us gaming. 8)

[Xzibit]

Interesting.

No mention of SONY who bought OnLive a few months back.

Prior to Sony buying them SAMSUNG was their main partner and just interesting LG is the one they feature.

[Binge]

There are better uses of bandwidth and cloud computing. Always thought this was a waste of resources

[yogurt_21]

Originally Posted by Binge

There are better uses of bandwidth and cloud computing. Always thought this was a waste of resources

? what bandwidth? do you realize how many remote employees sign into virtual desktops from home? You're just transmitting pixels, it uses very little bandwidth. All the processing happens on the virtual server.

[Krneki]

The main issue is latency and in 2nd degree bandwidth. If you can cache 2D desktop graphics this does not apply to a full screen moving colours. Try to see a movie in Remote desktop and see how it goes.

Latency might not be in issue for turn based games, but anything done in real time will be a PITA. Might be ok for non-competitive gamers tho.

[Cortex]

Originally Posted by XL-R8R

The start of big things to come?



I hope.

I hope not.

A real PC Gamer will never give up on local system with MultiTFLOPS GPU. And kbd&mouse. Let the casual gamers play their Halos (i cant stand that game), Plants vs Zombies, Angry Birds, Zumas... (again, for latter 3 cloud computing resources aren't needed, and for Halo, wonder will they deliver 3-4 TFLOPS SP graphics performance [retina displays are next big thing] as for next gen, x720 class version, that is).


Another thing, about cloud computing in general: http://news.cnet.com/8301-30684_3-20025625-265.html

[yogurt_21]

Originally Posted by Krneki

The main issue is latency and in 2nd degree bandwidth. If you can cache 2D desktop graphics this does not apply to a full screen moving colours. Try to see a movie in Remote desktop and see how it goes.

Latency might not be in issue for turn based games, but anything done in real time will be a PITA. Might be ok for non-competitive gamers tho.

I work in online education, our product is video based. we're nearly entirely virtual. 60% of our employees are remote. This include our quality controllers for content.

you haven't run a virtual in the past 3 years based on your comments.

[digibucc]

Originally Posted by yogurt_21

? what bandwidth? do you realize how many remote employees sign into virtual desktops from home? You're just transmitting pixels, it uses very little bandwidth. All the processing happens on the virtual server.

this is a different monster, entirely. and do you know how much upstream bandwidth is required for a lagless, full color virtual desktop? more than you think i'm guessing. add to that 3d, motion, and the need for updates in increments of ms instead of seconds - and bandwidth is definitely, very important.

[yogurt_21]

Originally Posted by yogurt_21

I work in online education, our product is video based. we're nearly entirely virtual. 60% of our employees are remote. This include our quality controllers for content.

you haven't run a virtual in the past 3 years based on your comments.

Originally Posted by digibucc

this is a different monster, entirely. and do you know how much upstream bandwidth is required for a lagless, full color virtual desktop? more than you think i'm guessing. add to that 3d, motion, and the need for updates in increments of ms instead of seconds - and bandwidth is definitely, very important.

try again

[digibucc]

Originally Posted by yogurt_21

I work in online education, our product is video based. we're nearly entirely virtual. 60% of our employees are remote. This include our quality controllers for content.

you haven't run a virtual in the past 3 years based on your comments.

that is surprising based on your comment - and honestly you have offered nothing to make me "try again". all you have done is say "no i disagree" with no numbers or facts to back it up. i'm not going to change my opinion based on experience simply because you disagree.

Originally Posted by yogurt_21

try again

and no need to be snarky about it. your argument isn't that good. 60% of your un-numbered employees? how fast is your upstream? how many connect at any given time? what are their isps, and where are they connecting from? more info please.

and no matter what you cannot honestly say transmitting full color, hd images in increments of milliseconds is easy on bandwidth. well... you can say that, but you'd be wrong. what are the pixel dimensions of your videos?

[Lumpy]

Originally Posted by yogurt_21

try again

No. Your wrong. The bandwidth needed will be HUGE. More than hd movies, How can You even begin to argue that fact ? And You work for a school ? Its real simple math.

[vawrvawerawe]

From one of the leading Game Streaming services of today:

Required bandwidth to stream games:

Streaming games over broadband requires the following fast broadband uplink and a correctly configured router.
Broadband networks have far greater downlink speed than uplink speed.
The uplink speed determines the maximum resolution that can be streamed.
You need at least 4Mb-6Mb uplink to use StreamMyGame at 720p.

[theubersmurf]

Originally Posted by Binge

There are better uses of bandwidth and cloud computing. Always thought this was a waste of resources

Unfortunately, profit is the motive of the companies involved in this effort. I knew this would happen sooner or later.

[marsey99]

Originally Posted by vawrvawerawe

From one of the leading Game Streaming services of today:

so 6 up? thats great given most people in the uk can only get 6 down at best....

i think its great and is no doubt the way forward but when its only going to work in parts of the world which have invested lots into their infrastructure its going to take the rest of the world a while to catch up and be able to use this

[phanbuey]

controller latency will be mushy compared to a hard wired desktop... the bet is that they will not be so mushy as to be unplayable. It all depends on your connection - the bandwith needed is not much, but if someone starts uploading some massive file in the other room to skybox, you better believe that your game experience will change very quickly LOL.

Also, I have used onlive, and all I have to say is that the graphics quality is really crap. Played some assassins creed on it and it was no good .

[yogurt_21]

sigh in virtualization you don't stream the content.

steaming = downloading incrments and only storing the few seconds of video around what's played.

that is not how virtualization works and until all of you start researching how it does I'm not going to waste my time.

I will say that we employ 1600 people and their home net speeds average 1.5mbps. (tthis varies widely as they pay for their own connection) there is no lag. videos vary from introduction videos at 720p to "ask for help" videos at 640x480 that are designed to be run next to content.


edit:

http://blogs.citrix.com/2010/05/20/h...rtual-desktop/

that's 2 years old, current ones can use more or less depending on server configuration.

hmm link seems to be not working, try this one
http://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j...i-snZFRa-T9lFg

[3870x2]

Originally Posted by vawrvawerawe

From one of the leading Game Streaming services of today:

If they are using Mb correctly, that is pretty small, between 250 and 800KBps. That isn't a lot, but it is also heavily compressed, and 1080p is going to need much more than that.

I would hate to play my games at a compressed 1080p, where the video gets blurry if there is a hiccup in my internet connection.

[vawrvawerawe]

Originally Posted by phanbuey

controller latency will be mushy compared to a hard wired desktop... the bet is that they will not be so mushy as to be unplayable. It all depends on your connection - the bandwith needed is not much, but if someone starts uploading some massive file in the other room to skybox, you better believe that your game experience will change very quickly LOL.

Also, I have used onlive, and all I have to say is that the graphics quality is really crap. Played some assassins creed on it and it was no good .

That's only because we're spoiled
You got GTX 570 and I got (currently) GTX 570M.
PS1 can't touch it. PS2 can't touch it. PS3 can't even touch it.

And I'm about to get HD 7870, which is like twice as powerful. Bye bye PS4, you've got nothing on us!

Originally Posted by 3870x2

If they are using Mb correctly, that is pretty small, between 250 and 800KBps. That isn't a lot, but it is also heavily compressed, and 1080p is going to need much more than that.

I would hate to play my games at a compressed 1080p, where the video gets blurry if there is a hiccup in my internet connection.

I agree. One reason I don't think the world will ever go the way of streaming and abandon consoles.

[3870x2]

Originally Posted by vawrvawerawe

That's only because we're spoiled
You got GTX 570 and I got (currently) GTX 570M.
PS1 can't touch it. PS2 can't touch it. PS3 can't even touch it.

And I'm about to get HD 7870, which is like twice as powerful. Bye bye PS4, you've got nothing on us!



I agree. One reason I don't think the world will ever go the way of streaming and abandon consoles.

Also, you're right. If they meant MegaBIT, then everyone EASILY gets that. And I think that's why they meant because only like .001% of the world has 6MegaBYTE per second upload speed.

8 Mb (megaBITS) = 1 MB (megaBYTE)

The problem is that on netflix, hulu, and amazon Prime go to shit for no reason sometimes (more often than not per sitting), and have to be refreshed to get my quality back. That would seriously make immersion difficult in a game. My connection never goes under 30Mb down on a bad day.

[UbErN00b]

Onlive works pretty well, I tried the free beta and I didn't get any stuttering or noticeable input lag which surprised me, that said it was only single player games I tried (pretty sure multiplayer would see some noticeable lag/stuttering) and the quality is like compressed 720p upscaled to 1080p, and it still takes a good 5Mb (megabit) connection to be able to play issue free which is quite a lot of bandwidth and of course playing for a few hours everyday is likely to take a lot of people over the alocated ISP bandwidth usage.

[3870x2]

Originally Posted by UbErN00b

Onlive works pretty well, I tried the free beta and I didn't get any stuttering or noticeable input lag which surprised me, that said it was only single player games I tried (pretty sure multiplayer would see some noticeable lag/stuttering) and the quality is like compressed 720p upscaled to 1080p, and it still takes a good 5Mb (megabit) connection to be able to play issue free which is quite a lot of bandwidth and of course playing for a few hours everyday is likely to take a lot of people over the alocated ISP bandwidth usage.

My bandwidth allocation is 50GB. I am not sure if that is higher or lower than most. After that it is supposed to be $0.50 per GB.

On a 50MB connection, I use that in a week.

[Oberon]

Originally Posted by Lumpy

Your wrong.

What about his wrong?

[vawrvawerawe]

Originally Posted by Oberon

What about his wrong?

It's unzipped.