OnLive Crysis Screenshots.

Certainly a lot of compression, especially when you view these screens at the native res(Can be tolerable if you're playing this on an Television at a distance). From an earlier article it was reported that Crysis was running at 24-30fps.

Sources: http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/digitalfoundry-onlive-beta-article

http://www.ubergizmo.com/15/archives/2009/03/onlive_handson_at_gdc_09.html

Lol i liked the one with the little turtle :D

Only 24-30 FPS? With that much compression?

Yeah, this service is ****. I feel bad for anyone who's invested a lot of money into this thing.

Its a really crazy idea. You know how much processing power they actually need to provide this service? I hope it will work good but im highly sceptical about it.

does not look that bad, jesusArtosa

It doesn't look at bad at first, but then you notice the muddiness of the textures as if they're in the middle of being loaded and the extreme pixelation of debris and leaves. Compare:

See the difference?

Also, I took the liberty of pointing out the compression:

I'd point out what's wrong in the other pic as well except for the fact that, well, everything in the first pic is muddy and compressed. I'd post a comparison shot except I can't find anything on the first few pages of google image search that are comparable and large enough.

Only 24-30 FPS? With that much compression?

Yeah, this service is ****. I feel bad for anyone who's invested a lot of money into this thing.

gameguy6700

does not look that bad, jesusArtosa

WTF is Onlive?

Only 24-30 FPS? With that much compression?

Yeah, this service is ****. I feel bad for anyone who's invested a lot of money into this thing.

gameguy6700

[QUOTE="Artosa"]does not look that bad, jesusgameguy6700

It doesn't look at bad at first, but then you notice the muddiness of the textures as if they're in the middle of being loaded and the extreme pixelation of debris and leaves. Compare:

See the difference?

Also, I took the liberty of pointing out the compression:

I'd point out what's wrong in the other pic as well except for the fact that, well, everything in the first pic is muddy and compressed. I'd post a comparison shot except I can't find anything on the first few pages of google image search that are comparable and large enough.

i don't really care, graphics are not the most important part of a game, gameplay is.

Artosa

Have another look at your first post. You know, the one I responded to where you said "does not look that bad, jesus". IE the post that entirely about the graphics and not the gameplay.

Besides, this topic is about OnLive, not Crysis. OnLive is a service that's supposed to let you play maxed out PC games without the need for an expensive gaming rig. But if the graphics look like mud and the game runs at a mediocre framerate then what's the point of paying for the service? Speaking of which...

[QUOTE="gameguy6700"]

Only 24-30 FPS? With that much compression?

Yeah, this service is ****. I feel bad for anyone who's invested a lot of money into this thing.

KHAndAnime

Yes, compression is unrelated to framerate. But like I said, this service is about getting maxed out PC games running smoothly without needing a $1500 gaming rig. Obviously it is not performing to OnLive's promises of 60 FPS 720p maxed out gameplay if we've got Crysis running at 24 FPS with compression so heavy that it looks like a youtube video.

Thats how Crysis would look if it came out in 2001.

Thats how Crysis would look if it came out in 2001.

RossRichard

WTF is Onlive?

mattuk69

Yes, compression is unrelated to framerate. But like I said, this service is about getting maxed out PC games running smoothly without needing a $1500 gaming rig. Obviously it is not performing to OnLive's promises of 60 FPS 720p maxed out gameplay if we've got Crysis running at 24 FPS with compression so heavy that it looks like a youtube video.

gameguy6700

Yo. This is Crysis. Running at... what, high/very high? Streamed from a beta server at an average distance of 70 kilometers from your home... And it still looks about as good as the major console titles.

Of course hardcore gamers won't like this, but OnLive isn't a service for ubergamers. Casuals will love it.

Yo. This is Crysis. Running at... what, high/very high? Streamed from a beta server at an average distance of 70 kilometers from your home... And it still looks about as good as the major console titles.

Of course hardcore gamers won't like this, but OnLive isn't a service for ubergamers. Casuals will love it.

Baranga

[QUOTE="Baranga"]

Yo. This is Crysis. Running at... what, high/very high? Streamed from a beta server at an average distance of 70 kilometers from your home... And it still looks about as good as the major console titles.

Of course hardcore gamers won't like this, but OnLive isn't a service for ubergamers. Casuals will love it.

RK-Mara

Medium shaders look different, it's a very ugly and shiny green. I think it's all set to high, maybe with shadows and object distance on medium.

OnLive would have more success in Europe, where the infrastructure is better than in North America and PC is king. They'd make a fortune out of streaming console games, especially in the East.

Still better than the Consoles out right now and the Fact that they can upgrade their Servers without you having to buy a new Console makes OnLive interesting.

Hey geniuses, it's not supposed to look perfect. Would you really expect the most techinically demanding game transferred through broadband from a beta server to look perfect? This technology will NEVER be as efficient as running it from your own rig, but that's not the point. That's like saying youtube sucks because it doesn't look as good as my blu-rays. It doesn't suck, it's just for casual viewers rather than enthusiasts. This is a very cool technology that I'm impressed with, and if it takes off it will only improve.

Hey geniuses, it's not supposed to look perfect. Would you really expect the most techinically demanding game transferred through broadband from a beta server to look perfect? This technology will NEVER be as efficient as running it from your own rig, but that's not the point. That's like saying youtube sucks because it doesn't look as good as my blu-rays. It doesn't suck, it's just for casual viewers rather than enthusiasts. This is a very cool technology that I'm impressed with, and if it takes off it will only improve.

FloydianBrad

There's enough time to refine the service. The chances for the partnership between the guy that invented QuickTime and every major IT company to fail are slim.

Last spring everybody was certain OnLive won't even make it into beta. Now that they did, haters gonna hate anyway...

[QUOTE="FloydianBrad"]

Hey geniuses, it's not supposed to look perfect. Would you really expect the most techinically demanding game transferred through broadband from a beta server to look perfect? This technology will NEVER be as efficient as running it from your own rig, but that's not the point. That's like saying youtube sucks because it doesn't look as good as my blu-rays. It doesn't suck, it's just for casual viewers rather than enthusiasts. This is a very cool technology that I'm impressed with, and if it takes off it will only improve.

zomglolcats

ourse hardcore gamers won't like this, but OnLive isn't a service for ubergamers. Casuals will love itBaranga

people are angry because they promised HIGHEST settings @ 60fps...

they obviously lied and I knew this would happen.

It has the potential to be good

I'm a complete nut when it comes to the image clarity of my games, even one res reduction blurs the image enough to bother me.

So the image quality isn't winning anything from me, though I knew not to expect crystal clear.

Why are you always pointing the gun at the turtle? Leave him alone!

Its a really crazy idea. You know how much processing power they actually need to provide this service? I hope it will work good but im highly sceptical about it.

XenoLair

Motion control, 3d glasses, and streaming games??? What failure will it take before console makers realized they need to sack up and at least attempt to catch up with PC hardware levels. They are holding the entire games industry back with these gimmicks.

Motion control, 3d glasses, and streaming games??? What failure will it take before console makers realized they need to sack up and at least attempt to catch up with PC hardware levels. They are holding the entire games industry back with these gimmicks.

Brendissimo35

I really don't see how in the world Onlive is suppose to be a solution for PC Gamers when hardware is currently accelerating at the speed as it is. It will be phenomenal to see a chart between progression with broadband and PC hardware, because it will not even be even a close race.

Onlive will have an incredible challenge to even make an attempt to keep up with PC hardware, making it the very low end. There are GPUs already rendering 7680x1600 resolutions, lol...

I really don't see how in the world Onlive is suppose to be a solution for PC Gamers when hardware is currently accelerating at the speed as it is. It will be phenomenal to see a chart between progression with broadband and PC hardware, because it will not even be even a close race.

Onlive will have an incredible challenge to even make an attempt to keep up with PC hardware, making it the very low end. There are GPUs already rendering 7680x1600 resolutions, lol...

OoSuperMarioO

Ah its not that bad, just install some custom graphics configs and- ...Oh wait.

[QUOTE="OoSuperMarioO"]

I really don't see how in the world Onlive is suppose to be a solution for PC Gamers when hardware is currently accelerating at the speed as it is. It will be phenomenal to see a chart between progression with broadband and PC hardware, because it will not even be even a close race.

Onlive will have an incredible challenge to even make an attempt to keep up with PC hardware, making it the very low end. There are GPUs already rendering 7680x1600 resolutions, lol...

k0r3aN_pR1d3

OnLive IS in beta. :|

Motion control, 3d glasses, and streaming games??? What failure will it take before console makers realized they need to sack up and at least attempt to catch up with PC hardware levels. They are holding the entire games industry back with these gimmicks.Brendissimo35

Right, because the pc exclusives that have better graphics than the consoles can perfom SOOO good with all those cutting edge hardware!!

Sure you can have a super rig and play crysis maxed out ith 3d glasses, but that does not mean that every gamedeveloper will make their games with 90% focus on spectacular graphics. Whats the point really when 90% of the population prefer optimazation and gameplay over spectacular graphics!!!

Its diffirent to say "We will develop a game with primary goal to have amazing graphics" and diffirent to just wanna make a good game with fun gameplay and plenty of sales!!

anyone have any more pics to post?Onlive-Lover

3

2

1

HERE COMES THE BAN HAMMER!!!

The console versions might run poorly at times but at least it looks good, this... not really.