I hope Onlive succeeds (they really have some amazing technology) but I would really hate to have my fate tied to the fickle finger of the big content publishers. They've already had issues with EA (Mass Effect and Assasins Creed have been pulled).<p>Their current library emphasizes shooters when Onlive is really perfect for casual players with lots of disposable income who may be more interested in Lego Batman than F.E.A.R. and are much more comfortable with $X per month than $X<i>100 for a gaming rig or even $X</i>10 for a console.
"To Continue Reading Subscribe Now" I get that the key piece of information is in the snippet but it is frustrating none the less.<p>Some coverage we can all read: <a href="http://www.engadget.com/2011/02/08/htc-to-invest-40-million-into-onlive-to-help-with-games-on-smar/" rel="nofollow">http://www.engadget.com/2011/02/08/htc-to-invest-40-million-...</a>
I just don't understand how they're going to conquer the network latency issue. Latency is everything to gamers. In theory this is an amazing idea with one huge gaping critical flaw -- I look forward to seeing them solve it. Quantum entanglement, anyone?