2 ms·

I'm not so sure. To make an impact it would have to be a very popular IP designed with OnLive's stack in mind coupled with platform exclusivity (at least at lau

I'm not so sure. To make an impact it would have to be a very popular IP designed with OnLive's stack in mind coupled with platform exclusivity (at least at launch). The problem I see for OnLive is that their target demographic (gamers who purchase AAA titles) are the consumers who are most critical of performance issues. If OnLive were serving up content to casual gamers, the service's shortcomings would be less of an obstacle, but I just don't see how they're going to get tech-aware consumers to jump on board.

regularfry 15y ago
There's another angle, though: while the control round-trip might be hideous on OnLive, the inter-user round-trip is negligible; presumably everyone will be sitting on the same gigabit (or better) LAN. Games currently have to pull all sorts of tricks to make the inter-user latency appear not to be present. They've got good enough that generally you just don't notice. I think the same thing will happen here, although I admit that nobody's demonstrated that they're capable of surmounting the technical challenge, and I doubt it's as simple as tweaking #defines in the network stack.
- eropple 15y ago
  It's a lot easier for a game to let you shoot at where your client-side prediction thinks the guy is supposed to be than to allow players to react to things that happened before their input for a given time tick was processed. What you're saying is nontrivial and may not even be workable, because it's impossible to really separate "stupid slow player" from "player whose latency is high enough that he can't react".