(USER WAS BANNED FOR THIS POST)

the future
is here

lol that's actually what it'd look like if it used jpeg as the compression method

It will work using subspace channels.

>>3896543

So you have an idea how one does simply compress 720p picture to 10 KB ?

Ok I'll give the benefit of the doubt.

Let's suppose they invented a compression algorithm that is good enough to send 720p hd signal through a 5mbit connection in a stable way.

How they solve the input latency problems?
I've read about "predictive lag algorithms" WTF IS THAT SUPPOSED TO MEAN

>>3896562
>I've read about "predictive lag algorithms" WTF IS THAT SUPPOSED TO MEAN
A quantum computer calculates all the possible outcomes for every millisecond of the game and renders them in advance. Once you take an action, the other quantum possibilities will cease to exist and only the right one will be streamed to your computer.

>>3896562
>How they solve the input latency problems?
Impossible.
>I've read about "predictive lag algorithms" WTF IS THAT SUPPOSED TO MEAN
It can foresee your commands in the future.

Also, 720p over 5Mbit is quite lossy... it'd look a lot worse then 360/PS3 which is raw 720p... there's even a few 1080p games.

>>3896571

Ok, now let's try to explain it without using fictional computers that still don't exist

720p @ 25fps I COULD believe if I really tried

720p @ 60fps makes me lol and nothing more

>>3896571

Wow so OnLive is Godlike omniscient. I want to buy myown God, pl0x.

>>3896571
>calculates all the possible outcomes for every millisecond
what the flying fuck

Anyone who actually invested in this shit gets a Darwin award in my book.

>>3896571
wat

>>3896571
they're using american native indian shamans for forecasting player moves

>>3896590

lrn2quantummechanics

Why do I get the feeling that this OnLive thing is just the work of some giant troll?

>>3896571
ENTANGLED PACKETS

>>3896560

>>3896590

Welcome to quantum computing. Also, welcome to 2025.

>>3896638
It is.
The same 3 assholes got $75M USD from the Phantom.
And 400M form WebTV.

You guys know that youtube's HD (720p) is at 2 megabits right?

5mbit is easy for 720p.

>>3896645
moar like 2125

>>3896669
>5mbit is easy for 720p
IF it isn't interactive and IF it isn't 60 fps

So how does digital TV even works? last time I checked there is cable services offering 1080p that looks just fine.

>>3896669
you can stream 720p on 1mbit but it'll look like shit

720p 60fps on a 5mbit line is currently impossible. maybe it never will be possible.

>>3896676
Can you control the characters?

>>3896678

How? Youtube's HD is 720p at 30fps, for which it uses 2 mbits. So wouldn't 720p at 60fps use 4 mbits? The sound and interactivity data etc wouldn't use more than the remaining 1mbit left, so the whole thing is still under their 5mbits target.

>>3896680
I thought we were discussing bandwidth problems not latency.

>>3896688
Bro, it will look like shit.

sage for fucking onlive viral marketing, don't respond to these goddamn morons /g/

>>3896688
In case you haven't realized it yet, YouTube HD looks like shit.

>>3896690
dumbass a cable signal or hd signal is the same signal for everyone its just spliced everyone gets the same signal, now imagine one for every person with the service.

Fact: Real-Time HDTV Digitial Broadcast still have delays and latency.

And when some scammer say they can eliminate lags on IP, you know there are bullshitting. There in no way internet HD video streaming can beat digital broadcast.

>>3896722
they probably do it like in finallyfast.com, by injecting kilobytes into your conection, lulz

>>3896688
except youtube's HD isn't really HD

>>3896731
I'm not having lulz.
>by injecting kilobytes into your conection
He actually fucking said...
>by injecting bytes into packets

ITT noobs

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/High-definition_television

someone fucking read this please

>>3896752
Impressive.

>>3896751

Why bother? Decent 720p24 [lol buzzwords] movies, using the h264 standard, have a bitrate around 5Mbit and you're gonna have a minimum input lag (that's between every action) of 50ms or so

Try this: have a computer run some game online. Run the game on another computer and spectate the other machine. Watch the spectator screen while using the controls from the first computer.

>>3896772
lol, even when LANing the lag is still clear

and that's only like 10ms... 200 from onlive would be brutal

Is this shit gonna be in Yurop too?

>>3896787
yurop, no
yuranus, yes

>>3896688
no double the fps doesn't necessary mean it requires double the bandwith

it's more like a 2mbit 25fps stream will look exactly like a 2.5mbit 60fps stream because that's how video compression works

Everyone has connections over 5 mbits now, even 3rd world countries like Europe.

It should work just fine. I for one can't wait.

>>3896836
>even 3rd world countries like Europe.

>>3896560
rite?

>>3896854
Funny because onlive claims they support a LoTR game.

>>3896836

>3rd world countries like Europe

2/10 Too obvious

>>3896836

Europe has better broadband than USA!

...and now cue the trolled eurofags

>>3896871

>Scandinavia has better broadband than USA!

fixd

every thread about OnLive create a discussion between /g/eeks and /v/irgins that end in rage

I hope this shit may be installed in Linux

Also if this is an April fool.....I will become an hero

>>3896887
Why dont you just believe the people who know their shit. Theres NO WAY this is going to work with current technology.

>>3896902
Never used VNC? It's only been around for years and will happily do 1920x1200 with insignificant lag on a 1.5MBit line.

>>3896902

let me dream

>>3896920
WRONG.
Even at 24fps, that frame would have to be...
5000/8/24=26.0416667
26KB.

What's more important, how are they going to make run crysis at constant 60fps!?!

>>3896957
TACHYONS

>>3896957
Getting 60fps in Crysis at 720p isn't too hard.
I get 30 at 1920x1200 with my 4850.

>>3896963
...while running a local GPU, CPU, HD, etc. You're not playing through a bandwidth pipe.

>>3896925

lolwut

I've got pretty crazy lag running at 1280x1024 on a 100mbit connection (lan).

Now I can finally play Crysis on my TV.

With my girlfriend.

Real time encoding.

Let me repeat that once more: Real time encoding.

You can talk about compression ratios all day but if it has to be done in under 20ms then that really limits your options. Also 20ms would even be huge once you add in the input and output lag. You ping 30 to their server (that is being slightly generous) so you send a signal 30ms, they render the frame and encode it 20ms, they send it back 30ms, and so that is 80ms between the time you move the mouse and it starts to move ... that is fucking huge. I know some idiot is going to say well I play with 80ping all the time and it is no big deal! When you play a game with 80 ping the only thing that is affected is when your weapon hits the other player ... your mouse and keyboard movements are not being lagged.

>>3896976

That was believable up to a point but then you had to take it too far.

At 30fps the streaming part could be somewhat believable.

I recorded a clip of Mass Effect at 30FPS (with Film Grain effect off but settings otherwise maximized with what you can get through the settings menu) and encoded it in x264 settings resulting in faster-than-realtime single-pass ABR encoding which is basically required for this.

Bitrate is about 3.5 Mbps for video, since 4.5 Mbps took longer to encode at the same settings and lowering the settings made it actually look worse than this 3.5 Mbps version.

Since the OnLive microconsole thing has 5.1 audio output, there should be enough bitrate for 5.1 AAC audio that won't sound like shit (say something like 192 kbps, leaving room for the video bitrate to change without the total bitrate going over 5 Mbps).

In any case, this is what it looks like. Now a supercomputer could probably improve upon the x264 settings I used with my Q6600 @ 3.0 GHz and still achieve realtime encoding, but considering you'd have to encode multiple streams at the same time can put quite a stress on them.

>>3896985

agreed.

>>3896995
Here are the x264 settings and logs:

T:\Games>x264 --subme 7 -i 30 -I 300 --merange 12 --bframes 0 --ref 1 --progress --trellis 0 --threads auto --bitrate 3500 -o "masseffect.mkv" "derp.avs"
avis [info]: 1280x720 @ 30.00 fps (2300 frames)
x264 [info]: using cpu capabilities: MMX2 SSE2Fast SSSE3 Cache64
x264 [info]: profile Main, level 3.1
x264 [info]: slice I:11 Avg QP:13.97 size: 67830 PSNR Mean Y:50.83 U:53.25 V:53.56 Avg:51.51 Global:49.51
x264 [info]: slice P:2289 Avg QP:15.30 size: 14400 PSNR Mean Y:48.41 U:51.22 V:51.49 Avg:49.14 Global:46.97
x264 [info]: mb I I16..4: 35.1% 0.0% 64.9%
x264 [info]: mb P I16..4: 3.8% 0.0% 3.2% P16..4: 37.3% 11.8% 8.7% 0.0% 0.0% skip:35.2%
x264 [info]: final ratefactor: 20.66
x264 [info]: SSIM Mean Y:0.9924704
x264 [info]: PSNR Mean Y:48.419 U:51.226 V:51.504 Avg:49.155 Global:46.977 kb/s: 3517.35

encoded 2300 frames, 37.18 fps, 3517.45 kb/s

>>3897004
But then there's also the fact that they have told nothing to us about the "magical" compression they're using, so they might not even use H.264.

Anyway, here's another screenshot.

You're all forgetting that we're talking TACHYONS here.

1. 720p gaming is a step too far backwards for PC gamers. That's not even a 19" monitor.
2. The lag is insane, stupid, retarded and ruins the whole thing. AND YOU CAN'T IGNORE IT OR SOLVE IT.
3. One company runs this, enjoy your monopoly abuse.
4. It's the 25th March, enjoy your April Fools joke.

Let's be realistic here, ping google. That's 32bytes of data and you can get anywhere from 30ms to 100ms on a good day and Google have the largest infrastructure in the world for doing this. Add an the input lag and the processing/rendering/compression/decompression time for this and I'll add a generous 10ms. That's 40 - 100 ms of fail.
CRT fags laugh at LCD fags for even having 5ms of lag, do you think anybody will ever take gaming seriously if it's at 40-50ms MINIMUM that will fluctuate wildly?
They even said in the stupid thing yesterday (with lots of bullshitting) that lag was a problem they were trynig to solve. But the bastard implied it would be 'noticeable' in Australia. If you fall for this I hope you lose all your money investing in this shit.

>>3897011
And one more while I'm at it.

Cloud computing is the FUTURE!!!!

ITT: People who support OnLive ignoring the input lag question.

Surely there's going to be some HUUUUGE lag?

>>3896995
>>3897004
>>3897011
>>3897020
how long did it take to encode it.

OnLive promises to do it in 1-2ms.

>>3897018
>AND YOU CAN'T IGNORE IT OR SOLVE IT

You're forgetting about tachyons.

Spoilers: Even on your own PC games struggle to have input lag of less than 2 frames.

Assuming 60fps that's 33.4ms ON YOUR OWN COMPUTER.

>>3896995
Turn off bloom will you?

>>3897022

Onlive input lag + LCD input lag = unplayable shit.

>>3897011
>"magical" compression
Exactly. If they have a video compression technology better than h.264, they should already jump on that business model. There are more money in video compression than gaming. Since they choose gaming, it probably they are hiding alot of shit.

>>3897033
They could also transmit the data to us via subspace instead of over cables.

>>3897040
Use a DVI cable, numbnuts.

>>3897048

That just makes it worse, idiot.

Now the slow ass LCD has to render the digital image. This is why CRTs are better.

>>3897054
>Durrr LCDs take hours and hours to display

>>3897031
See >>3896995 and >>3897004

>encoded it in x264 settings resulting in faster-than-realtime single-pass ABR encoding which is basically required for this.
>avis [info]: 1280x720 @ 30.00 fps (2300 frames)
>encoded 2300 frames, 37.18 fps, 3517.45 kb/s

Each frame took about 2,69 ms to encode.

I found an input lag simulator here:
http://img228.imageshack.us/my.php?image=mouselaggn6.swf

you can see what your mouse would feel like with 80 ping.

>>3897080
And to be faster than realtime at 60FPS, where every frame is about 1,6 ms long, you'd indeed have to spend lower amount than that for each frame, meaning that the encoding speed should be at least 65 FPS.

>>3897099
OH GOD ; ;

>>3897099
Now imagine playing games at this kind of responsiveness and this >>3897011 kind of graphics QUALITY.

ONLIVE WILL BE AWESOME GUISE

In just to tell you fags that a 10ms overhead is barely noticeable.
If you can play online fine with your PC, you probably wouldn't notice changes using Onlive.

I'm more worried about the business model.
The hardware/manteinance costs have to be significant.
The whole point of this service is to use them so you don't have to upgrade hardware, buy multiple consoles, so they NEED to have a huge selection of games.
I don't know if console developers will/can join the bandwagon.

>>3897099
HOLY FUCK

>>3897131
10ms wtf are you on? I ping 15ms to my isp game servers and that is not even really on the internet ... there are even no hops. That means if they set up servers at my ISP and somehow rendered and encoded the video in under 1ms that would still be friggen 30ms input lag.

>>3897131
More like 60-80 if you're lucky.

$20 x 12 months = ?????

I just realised that I can type "retards" with just my left hand. Awesome.

The reason you don't notice lag much playing online is because your computer takes the information received from the server and tries to estimate what it will look like between communications from the server. If you outsource the computing this is no longer possible.

>>3897192

More like 60$ per month and play whatever gayman you like.

>>3897212
What about mods?

>>3897212
Watch the interview, there is a monthly fee AND yo have to buy every single game you want to play.

>>3897225

DOHOHOHOHOHOHOHO

5 Mb/s? Jesus fucking christ that's terrible.

>>3897204
To see what its like without prediction try playing a quake 3 based game and set "cg_nopredict 1"

There's probably commands to do this with other games but I don't know them off the top of my head.

>>3897231

Why anyone would clog their interbutts with a shitty 720p stream and pay a monthly fee, when they can use that kind of money to buy a pc an play at 1080p?

how much will it cost a month? have they said?

Lets see ... for one year of service

20=240
30=360
40=480
50=600

So even at 20 dollars a month it would cost me as much as buying a new high end video card each year ... if they go up to 50 dollars a month then I could just build a brand new high end computer every other year for the same price. ... ok

5mbit = 640 kilobytes per second

That is 37.5 megabytes per minute

That is 2.19 gigabytes per hour

Say you play 3 hours a day, 5 days a week, every week and that would be 60 hours.

That is 131.4gb of bandwidth usage each month for that game alone ... I am sure your ISP will be fine with that.

>>3897289

It's not like they keep a high end computer farm for you free of charge, daisy.

fvrfxrc tang ina mo

>>3897337
Of course not but I am asking if it is cheaper for me to get their service or to upgrade my computer.

>>3897318

Sure they will be happy to give you that kind of bandwidth, you just have to subscribe to the "gamer" plan (add 30$ per month to your standard fee).

Meh, it's not like anyone but dumb rich fucks who know shit all about anything will be able to afford this anyway. lol streamed gaymen

>>3897367
Wow! So I can get my blurry and laggy GAYMAN on for the low, low price of $30(isp)+$50(onlive)+$50(game) $150 dollars!

>>3897337
but unless they convince hardware vendors to raise the end-user prices across the board or offer their service at cutthroat prices, onlive won't be any cheaper than simply having the hardware stored locally.

I could see parts of onlive working though. Imagine you're playing Crysis locally, except instead of having the entire scene rendered by your local graphics card, environmental details 20 ft away or so and further beyond is streamed to you, allowing your local graphics card and computer to handle the input, and eliminating the input lag concern in the process (Though this solution may require larger sized video streams to look good).

it's funny because this soon-to-be-failed startup is founded by randroids, what with naming their company "Rearden" lolz

it's an objectively shitty and infeasible idea, but hopefully some talented industrialist will magically violate the laws of physics and usher in the renaissance of US telco infrastructure

>>3896571

No such thing as a quantum computer. Faggot.

Predictive Algorithm is bullshit talk for "We play the game for you."

>>3897318
yes, except 5Mbit = 625 kByte

http://www.pcworld.com/article/161930-2/gdc_09_6_reasons_onlive_could_be_a_bust.html

Reason #1 - "Fair Access Policy."
Reason #2 - Real vs. Test Lab Performance.
Reason #3 - "My Internet Connection's Fallen and It Can't Get Up."
Reason #4 - R.I.P. Mod Scene.
Reason #5 - Privacy Issues.
Reason #6 - You Don't Own Anything.

>What's more, OnLive claims "any time, any where" access, but it won't be. Not really. You'll have to have dedicated broadband access for starters, which isn't everywhere.

Faggot got TOLD.

It takes something as stupid and retarded as this to sell millions these days, logic never comes first.

http://rapidshare.com/files/213397678/onlive-5mbit-192kbps_audio-720p-60fps.mp4.html

>>3897457

is that CPMA?

>>3897487
it's quake live. I set a high picmip so I can run fraps and still get a constant 60fps

>>3897457
ONLIVEFAGS GOT TOLD

It'll work. They just have to downgrade games to 5 colors. Red, yellow, blue, black, white.

We've been complaining for YEARS how games have been becoming bland. Now's our chance to reinject some old-fashioned color again.

>>3897457
even if onlive somehow manages to produce a video quality similar to some encoded x264 it doesn't solve the control lag issue

Finally, lagless online multiplayer Pong :D