Prez wrote on Mar 10, 2010, 17:18: In theory, this could be worth it to someone who has an old or proprietary PC, or is just too tech-adverse to upgrade but still wants to play PC games.
Seriously who the fuck would that be? No one who is unwilling to spend money to periodically upgrade or replace a PC is going to pay $30 or $50 per game plus a recurring subscription fee to play PC games.
PC hardware is relatively dirt-cheap and the price-performance ratio has continued to fall over the years. There are plenty of free PC games available both legally and illegally. People who want an inexpensive gaming solution are not going to turn to OnLive because it is not cheaper than the alternatives on the PC, and it is not any simpler than what is available on a game console.
OnLive is truely a solution to a problem no consumer has. It is simply a wet dream for content providers because they get complete control over the use and availability of their offerings and it eliminates piracy. As a market solution OnLive is nothing but a pipe dream.