that onLIVE stuff

[Chaos]

Pay money to play a game Vs. Pay money to own a game.

Is there really any argument?

EDIT:  Incidentally, what I said is not an assumption, it's a fact.  People are stupid.

[ARTgames]

Pay money to play a game Vs. Pay money to own a game.

Is there really any argument?

Well you cant over simply it. And you left out the idea of renting. Just wondering have you seen the video?

[Chaos]

Pay money to play a game Vs. Pay money to own a game.

Is there really any argument?

Well you cant over simply it. And you left out the idea of renting.

I can and did.  Am I wrong?

And no, I didn't.  Renting is paying to play a game.  Which is stupid.

[ARTgames]

Pay money to play a game Vs. Pay money to own a game.

Is there really any argument?

Well you cant over simply it. And you left out the idea of renting.

I can and did.  Am I wrong?

And no, I didn't.  Renting is paying to play a game.  Which is stupid.

Chaos to start the main idea of this topic was talking about onlive. If your not going to educate your shelf about it then why talk about it? It seem like 1 word "renting" has gotton you down on the idea.

This is off topic but i do like the idea of renting.

[Chaos]

Ahahahahaha.  So because I disagree with your seemingly fan-boish love of this, I'm not educated about the subject, huh?  Despite this, you seem to be the one utterly failing to respond.  I'm loving how you have absolutely no answer to my objection.

You're paying a company to PLAY games.  Do you dispute this?

You do not OWN said games you're paying to play.  Do you dispute this?

If this company goes down the shitter eventually, you will be unable to play all these games you paid to play.  Do you dispute this?

Let me spell this out for you again.  I am talking about 'onlive', and I am talking about how stupid it is.  It will NEVER replace hard copy.  Do you dispute this?

So what leg, exactly, are you trying on standing on, here?  Cause as far as I can tell, you're trying to levitate, and only succeeding to roll down a hill.

EDIT:  Incidentally, I'm not being antagonistic, I'm being serious.  If you want to convince me this is a good idea, I want some bloody answers.

[ARTgames]

your seemingly fan-boish love of this

Name calling really? we need to cool down. I dont have an fan-boish love on this. I just have a vary strong bleaife on what it might cause.

I will say i do have a "fan-boish love" love to dislike the way we are doing things now. As i think its wastfull.

Your point is onlive suckes because of your not owning your own game. My point is onlive can cause a big dent in the gaming industry if it get successful.

Yes you are renting games. But they offer a service that in the video i think might be worth it. it does do more than let you rent games. And i have a feeling that if you saw the video you see why i might think the way i do. Yes you are a bit educated on it (my bad im sorry i made sound like you know nothing) but i think the video would help in prove your idea of it.

I see both sides. I know why some one might want to own a copy.

But this is really how i feel.

I agree that this kind of thing has its uses. It's definitely convenient. I just don't think it will ever be the ONLY way of doing things. But who knows.

Say what you want now. I just want people to take this topic and read all the post (yours mine every one else's) and come up with conclusion for there self's. you do hold up points people should see.

Incidentally, I'm not being antagonistic, I'm being serious.  If you want to convince me this is a good idea, I want some bloody answers.

Ill haft to w8 and see when it comes out. I'm not too sure my self if i would want this. There not even pricing out there yet.

[Jake]

Pay money to play a game Vs. Pay money to own a game.

You're making a valid comparison, but Art was right in stating that you over-simplified it. I can do the same thing to draw a seemingly accurate conclusion. For example...

"You can pay 1500 dollars to play high end games or you can use onLIVE and do it for much cheaper. I think we know the better choice."

Drawing a conclusion with limited factors yields inaccurate results.

EDIT:  Incidentally, I'm not being antagonistic, I'm being serious.  If you want to convince me this is a good idea, I want some bloody answers.

You're still being antagonistic.

Either way, there's a multitude of good things about onLIVE that I pointed out to you over MSN. To you, these features aren't redeeming of it's downsides, and thats fine. I share the same point of view. On the other hand, not everyone cares if they don't have a digital or physical copy of the game, because the benefit of playing high quality games on their old rigs is more than worth it, allowing them to save time and money.

It seems your lashing out at the service because it's a threat to gaming as we know it. Well sorry, but it's not. It's a great alternative (and if you can't see that then you've really blinded yourself into hating it), and that's all it is. Nothing more.

If onLIVE takes over gaming, it's because gamers wanted it to.

[ARTgames]

It seems your lashing out at the service because it's a threat to gaming as we know it. Well sorry, but it's not.

I think it can if it gets big. Which is what i was saying.

Do i think it will ever get big? Well its hard to say. But i have a feeling of no because the internet not up to something that can support this.

edit:

If onLIVE takes over gaming, it's because gamers wanted it to.

when you say that, who are the gamers? Do you mean hardcord people?

[Jake]

I think it can if it gets big. Which is what i was saying.

It will never be a threat to gaming, because the gamers are the one's who tagged along for the ride. Unless your talking about gaming as we know it.

when you say that, who are the gamers? Do you mean hardcord people?

Anyone who plays games. To be a little more general, I'm referring to the consumers. It is the consumers that choose whether or not onLIVE fails or becomes the next big thing.

[ARTgames]

I think it can if it gets big. Which is what i was saying.

It will never be a threat to gaming, because the gamers are the one's who tagged along for the ride.

I think i have misunderstood. Like i mean it will be the end to having powerfull hardware at home to play games. my bad.
edit:
does this help?

And if this is good enough for most of the people who play games i don't see how the gaming systems today could compete.

when you say that, who are the gamers? Do you mean hardcord people?

Anyone who plays games.

ill replay to this after i understand what your saying.

[Chaos]

Heh.  Hehe.  HAHAHAHA!

Seriously?

Let me re-iterate:

I said it the first time someone brought this up, and I say it again.  I think this is stupid.  I can see its uses for some people, but I have absolutely NO interest in it myself.  Give me cds, dvds, or what have you.  When this company goes bankrupt, as all companies eventually do, say bye-bye to your games.  I'll be sitting in my home playing all my old games whenever I want and laughing.

It's a nice service, but it will NEVER replace hard copies.

Let me break it down:

I said it the first time someone brought this up, and I say it again.  I think this is stupid.

Note the "I THINK".

I can see its uses for some people, but I have absolutely NO interest in it myself.

Note the first part, then the second part where I say "I" and "Myself".

Give me cds, dvds, or what have you.  When this company goes bankrupt, as all companies eventually do, say bye-bye to your games.

Does anyone dispute this?  Considering I've said it numerous times without so much as a response, I'm going to assume no.  Which is good, cause it's pretty much a fact at this point.  Something I felt necessary to point out as to WHY I do not like it.

I'll be sitting in my home playing all my old games whenever I want and laughing.

See above.

It's a nice service, but it will NEVER replace hard copies.

Once again, I acknowledge the fact that it has its uses, but state that will never replace hard copies (hard copies in this case either being cd/dvd, or digital backup).  Fairly straightforward stuff.

So, yeah.  When you try to argue with me about my position, try to understand it in the first place, yeah?


EDIT:  Additionally, I still haven't gotten an answer:

Pay money to play a game Vs. Pay money to own a game.

Is there really any argument?

Well you cant over simply it.

I can and did.  Am I wrong?

Well?  I'm apparently wrong, but no one feels it necessary to explain how.  What, exactly, is over-simplified?

[Jake]

Well?  I'm apparently wrong, but no one feels it necessary to explain how.  What, exactly, is over-simplified?

I explained that in my previous post.

[ARTgames]

So, yeah.  When you try to argue with me about my position, try to understand it in the first place, yeah?

ok ill tell you.

I said it the first time someone brought this up, and I say it again.  I think this is stupid.

Note the "I THINK".

I can see its uses for some people, but I have absolutely NO interest in it myself.

Note the first part, then the second part where I say "I" and "Myself".

That is fair and i will say i think i missed that.

Give me cds, dvds, or what have you.  When this company goes bankrupt, as all companies eventually do, say bye-bye to your games.

Does anyone dispute this?  Considering I've said it numerous times without so much as a response, I'm going to assume no.  Which is good, cause it's pretty much a fact at this point.  Something I felt necessary to point out as to WHY I do not like it.

I think thats true but that depends on a lot of things. Like why did they go bankrupt? If they whent bankrupt becase a compadter has a better poduckt and im already with them im fine. Yeah its true i loose my access to thoes game. Thats true of any service. Like my cellphone or my cable tv or my internet or my public works. If they go bankrupt i dont have it any more.

There are downsides to this stuff and i will say that. But i dont mind it to mutch. Ill move on to the next gamming thingy. I feel that the risks outway the benfits. other way around!! my bad. Most of the time i do get bord of a game and i dont mind loosing it after a while. thats just me thoe. It really matters who you are.

I will say it also matters how mutch the games cost and how mutch is the service. If its a lot than yeah its a rip off and i will not go for it. I dont know the pricing.

I'll be sitting in my home playing all my old games whenever I want and laughing.

See above.

Im not sure what you mean by that. Do you mean old games that were before onlive? Becase i will also still have those games. unless i sell them. But im missing your point here.

It's a nice service, but it will NEVER replace hard copies.

Once again, I acknowledge the fact that it has its uses, but state that will never replace hard copies (hard copies in this case either being cd/dvd, or digital backup).  Fairly straightforward stuff.

That is true. But for some people they dont need that.

[Chaos]

I am something of a legacy gamer.  I own a bunch of DOS games from my childhood.  I own a bunch of NES games, etc. from my childhood.  I still play and enjoy these games, and maintain that some of these games are the best games ever made.  I am of the opinion that Super Mario Bros 3 is THE best game ever.  An NES game.  As my conversation on Scotty was just going:

Scott says:
Think about it though, you may not "own" the game, but you do "own" the right to play them
Chris says:
Until the company goes out of business.
I'm sorry, but I'm not about to go and pay a ton of money to play games, only to lose all access 20 years later because the company died, and now lose 20 years worth of games.
I love my DOS games.
Scott says:
Ok... How many NES games do you own?
Chris says:
Right now?
Scott says:
and still play
Chris says:
That depends on your definition.
I still own every NES game I've ever had
I haven't technically PLAYED them
Because I have them as ROMs on my PSP
With an NES emulator
If you're including that
Scott says:
What I'm getting at, is that sure, Nintendo NES has gone under many many years ago, but how easy is it to still play them?
Chris says:
Excessively.
Very easy.
I play them all the time using an emulator.
Something that can't fix this things problem.
Assuming it replaces hard copies
Scott says:
So imagine how easy it'll be to get some of these games in one way or another 20 years from now
Chris says:
Which I maintain it never will
Not very, if no one can BUY them.
They all rent them from a shitty streaming service

Chris says:
It's the reason I didn't like the concept of Steam
Until you pointed out that they could release a patch for it or whatever and make it not require steam
If Steam ever goes belly-up
That's not something they can do with onlive.
Scott says:
That's exactly it
right
That I can agree
Chris says:
I don't have a problem with Steam
That was my only issue
Issue resolved, problem resolved
THIS?
Scott says:
And I understand
Chris says:
This doesn't have a solution like that.
Scott says:
I guess we'll just have to see what the subscription price is
if it's cheap, hell yeah I'll buy into it
Chris says:
As a supplementary service like Netflix, I can accept it.
Scott says:
if it's gonna cost me 50 bucks a month, !@#$ that
I'll have to cancel some of my pr0n subs to pay into that, and that ain't gonna happen!
Chris says:
But my argument is simply that it will NEVER replace hard-copy
(whether that be Cd/dvd, or digital data)
Scott says:
I wish we could ask them how they'd handle that
Chris says:
If they made this a service as is, but integrated a system like Steam were people could also download the games to run off their own computers
Hell, I would have NO problem with it.
I'd love it.

Assuming this company replaces hard-copy (something I maintain will NEVER happen), suddenly this company goes out of business in 20 years.  Now, 20 years of games are GONE from history, because there was never any hard-copies.  

Perhaps this post and those convos will shed a little light on my stance and dislike.



EDIT:  @Jake:  No you didn't.  "Drawing a conclusion with limited factors yields inaccurate results."  What factors, exactly, am I excluding from my conclusion?

[ARTgames]

I will say that is true. All i will say is time will tell. To me its the memory that counts. I think halo Ce was the best game i ever played. I still have the game and to tell you i don't really like the game that much any more. But remembering the fun times i do still have and a i cant have that taken away (i hope). That's just me.

edit:
I'm also a little bit of a tree huger also as i said before. I don't like the idea of making thosands of physical copyes of stuff and ship it every ware. I would not mide as much if it all was recycled some how but its not really.