Looks to me like Gaikai has taken the OnLive system and improved upon it before it's even released...

I'm not sure exactly what Gaikai is, nor do I think I've ever heard of it, but other than that I think he's completely right. I personally think OnLive is not going to be what everyone is cracking it up to be. They've only just started beta with 100 or 1000 people and it's scheduled to be released this fall. 1 million people is much different than 100 or 1000. I'm not too confident in the service.

Jumplion:
I'm not sure exactly what Gaikai is, nor do I think I've ever heard of it, but other than that I think he's completely right. I personally think OnLive is not going to be what everyone is cracking it up to be. They've only just started beta with 100 or 1000 people and it's scheduled to be released this fall. 1 million people is much different than 100 or 1000. I'm not too confident in the service.

Basically this.

You know, except for the "micro-console" (which is a concept I don't quite grasp yet. What's it input device?) I don't really think OnLive is really directly competing with the consoles. All it's doing is allowing PC users to play games on their low-end systems. Which means it's target audience is people who exclusively play PC games, and people with consoles and low-end computers who want to play PC-exclusive games (because the consoles can never be obsolete until the next gen comes out). I mean, it's not like people are going to swear off consoles as a result of this, though they could. But, the sales of Empire: Total War generally don't conflict with the sales of Xbox-exclusive games because there's a comparably narrow section of gamers who have bought higher-end computers and a 360.

I mean, opening up new markets is critical to anyone in business. And to console-exclusive manufacturers, that's what the PC games market is. It's a dangerous market, too, because it's allegedly easier to pirate PC games. So here's OnLive, a subscription based service that holds game data somewhere else (meaning it's safe from the casual pirate). If I were a console-exclusive developer, I would be clamoring to have my game extended to OnLive, because PC gamers never buy my games, and there's a ton of them out there, and OnLive presents a system where, like WoW, you can only play if you pay. So it's safe, it's got the potential to bust open this new (from the console publishers' point of view) and previously untouchable market. Just makes good business sense, if you ask me.

I'll be listening to someone with actual credibility like Steve Perlman before I listen to this poser.

Perry explained. "My goal is to get people playing these games for free, until people either buy the console, buy the game, or decide to start paying for the game. That's the biggest differentiator between OnLive and us; we're not a portal at all, we're a service."

Models like that never tend to do well...

Quadtrix:
I'll be listening to someone with actual credibility like Steve Perlman before I listen to this poser.

And what exactly does his service do? I read their site and it sounds exactly like Onlive except it uses Flash. I also agree with Hobbes above me.

Malygris:
I have to admit to being a bit confused about his point. If Gaikai customers can play these games free, without the need for a console, what's the incentive to ever buy either? And how is Gaikai's promise of "no-console" gaming fundamentally different than that of OnLive? From the perspective that both OnLive and Gaikai promise high-end gaming without the need for high-end hardware, I don't see the console manufacturers being terribly thrilled about the prospect of either.

Here is what he's saying about how Gaikai will work: Gaikai won't work in the living room, only on a computer. It will only play computer games, not console games. It expands the market by reducing the system requirements (it can work on a netbook and doesn't require a 5 megabit connection). Presumably it is an ad-based or subscription (probably both, with the subscription being for ad-free play) service, where players can play whatever games they want on the service as much as they want. Some customers will want to pay for the service to get rid of the ads and some will want to buy specific games to play locally without ads and possibly with a higher video quality. Publishers will get something for people playing their games on the service, so they will want their games on there (also because it will allow them to access customers who otherwise would not meet the system requirements). For Gaikai the console manufacturers' opinions are irrelevant because it isn't competing with them.

Those are his claims, anyway. I don't know how well it works. But I'm positive OnLive will bomb.

HobbesMkii:
You know, except for the "micro-console" (which is a concept I don't quite grasp yet. What's it input device?)

The "micro-console" is a thin client device which hooks up to your TV, internet, and input device(s) to let you play OnLive. It's a "micro-console" because it doesn't have to do much processing at all, just compression/decompression, sending and receiving over the network, and outputting to the screen. As far as what input device(s) it will use, I've wondered that as well. I assume they will have to have a gamepad option and a keyboard/mouse option. Maybe it will have USB or Bluetooth/WiFi and drivers to handle input devices not made specifically for it.

Im not fully sure how this is working, but It seems something like this:

We will be able to buy this small thing, plug it into our USB (Or just buy the screen-attatched-to-onlive he mentioned) and then stream and play any PC game we want free? if thats the case, I am buying one...

I will probably end up not using either one.

Even on a non-busy day, the onlive system lags and suffers from downgraded graphics in their 100 person beta according to the initial news reports. Which is a very bad sign for something that wants to take on the PC and the consoles at the same time.

I'm still inclined to think that this technology will fail before it even gets on the market. Cloud computing isn't a new idea at all; it's been around in the form of time-sharing since the 1960s. Time-sharing was abandoned for a reason: personal computers grew more powerful, obsoleting the old mainframe-terminal relationship in most cases.

Ummm.... WTF, I really don't get it. Call me stupid, but can someone explain this to me slightly simpler. It sounds like they've basically got two similar, nigh the same, things, and one is slightly different so it gets support from sony etc.? Is that right?

Malygris:

SharedProphet:
Here is what he's saying about how Gaikai will work: Gaikai won't work in the living room, only on a computer. It will only play computer games, not console games.

But that doesn't make any sense either. If he's predicting OnLive's failure because it won't be supported by the console manufacturers, and Gaikai is PC-only which means it doesn't have console support... you see?

Also, in the video demo he posted on his blog (http://www.dperry.com/archives/news/dp_blog/gaikai_-_video/), among the games he shows off is an emulated version of Mario Kart 64, with obvious implications.

Gaikai doesn't require a stand-alone console but neither does OnLive, unless you don't have any other gaming hardware at all, in which case you'll be able to use their micro-console. Unless his argument is that Gaikai is less of a threat because they can't offer you anything if you don't have a PC, I still don't see what he's getting at.

Maybe Gaikai will play non-PC games also. But since only works on a computer (not in the living room), console companies won't be against supporting it, because it is not directly competing.

I think David Perry is way too fast to say something like that.

In services like ONLIVE everything is based on proper marketing and proper management connections with PUBLISHERS. Basicly Sony, Microsoft and everybody else will have to face the fact that if they don't want to join the service thay will have to just give a piece of market pie for free (multiplatform). I mean that they will not get the money for the multiplatform games.

Ok. I know that Sony and MS have their own development teams. But listen to this: if you have less money from content, less install base (potential buyers) then you have a limited budget. So in long term exclusives will eventualy suck because of less content and less quality of the content. Look at Havenly Sword (I love this game) - expensive game but according to Sony it was barely profitable. And we don't have a sequel as a result.

So... Gaikai is a system that offers demos of games that might encourage people to buy the games and/or a console? That's what I read out of that.

When it comes down to it.. I like discs and manuals.

And Gakai sounds like it's going to crash if the service is like SharedProphet says it will because in the end. I'm not to bothered by advertisements in free games.

DanniXXX:
Gaikai creator proudly expressing his desire to be everybodies bitch.

Why do you think I accidently pronounced it as gay-kai
But looks it's going to be a fiasco.

SharedProphet:

Maybe Gaikai will play non-PC games also. But since only works on a computer (not in the living room), console companies won't be against supporting it, because it is not directly competing.

If it's playing their games, it's competing.