I think that Apple should dip into the reserves and buy this company now. They could easily incorporate it into iTunes. This would solve Apples gaming problem as well as possibly generating more revenue than their current music and movie sales. Get rid of the onlive mini adapter adapter thing for tv and add that function to a new apple tv product. It also could have great implications on the iphone 3.0 now with the possibility of hooking up an external game pad (like the glucose monitor they demoed).
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Should Apple buy onlive? I think so...
- Thread starter Quixotic3
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
This would be a cool feature to incorporate in AppleTV or even a future gaming console that you could dock your iPhone or iPod Touch. I think that this could be profitable for Apple and would be very interesting to see.
David
David
apple would never buy this. they are just not interested in games. it would be cool if they did but this is a company that already has a bunch of big game publishers as shareholders such as EA. i'm sure there would be a lot of headaches to buyout because of this.
the big game publishers have already seen the battles apple has had with record labels and studios and i'm sure they won't want themselves in the same boat. the game companies view this as a way to cut out the middle man (eb,gamestop,etc.) and game consoles fees to maximize profits. they're not going to let apple come in and become another middle man for distribution.
would love to see it though. people would then take it a lot more seriously.
the big game publishers have already seen the battles apple has had with record labels and studios and i'm sure they won't want themselves in the same boat. the game companies view this as a way to cut out the middle man (eb,gamestop,etc.) and game consoles fees to maximize profits. they're not going to let apple come in and become another middle man for distribution.
would love to see it though. people would then take it a lot more seriously.
... Some interesting points, But I think that game publishers would love this model because there is no way to pirate the game, they are able to eliminate the cost of retail packaging (think about the cost of a game that does not do well... go to your local dollar store to see what I mean) and they can eliminate sharing profits with box store. They are basically free to make the most graphically intensive version they can render. The cloud computing model is the way of the future it gives the software company all the control and allows for more profits... As far as lag goes They explained in the video that you would connect to one of three data servers across the country does this mean that you can't play your buddy in Boston from LA yeah but that is not really a deal killer. Lastly Apple isn't into games... no, they are into profits and doing things the right way or not doing them at all even if it means losing some sort term profits. This technology ... if it works as stated... I know big if ... could be used in other ways other than games and I think that it is the technology and being the only ones who would hold a patent for it that would interest Apple. As far as record label companies you are right they don't like to share the profits with Apple and they don't like Apple dictating the terms and conditions of their sales... but they do it because iTunes is the best way for them to get their product to the market and that is exactly WHY they should buy this company.
Uh, there's a little known service called Steam that does exactly this. It has been going since 2003-2004ish, stops piracy but you own the contents of the game. In as much as you are free to do as you want with them provided you don't sell the game on (which is impossible). And you can still play no matter your internet connection, fast slow or currently down.
As for the concept of running high end games; how are they going to manage running tens of thousands of potential people playing Crysis in HD? High end systems can just about run it at max settings. They're going to need a 1:1 ratio of servers to clients. The only way Apple could profit from that, after the proceeds go onto the game publishers and developers from licensing their products, is by charging one hell of a subscription fee.
Hmm - they do seem to have a lot of backing form the games industry. The one thing Steam doesn't have afaik is Mac game support really. I think they could very well have something going for them - the GPU /server power to run these games is really coming on, and it's not like a gamer's expectations suddenly double every 12 months - there's a decent passable level of graphics that onLive have ot give, beyond that, it's all good.
Why would Apple be making a HUGE data centre again?
Why would Apple be making a HUGE data centre again?