IQ of onlive!!

busydude

Diamond Member
Feb 5, 2010
8,793
5
76
Today I got an invitation to register for onlive they call it the 'Founding Members Program'. So the first thing I did was to compare the IQ of games. I know the games usually played at 720p but I was not sure of the quality settings. After playing the demos and looking at the game, I can say that the Image quality is abysmal.

1. Screenshot of Borderlands(Onlive) 720p, Quality Settings: ???




2. On PC, 1680X1050, High quality, No AA, 16X AF.




onlive Day shot.


Update:

Dirt 2: FPS was very low, not playable even encountered severe stutters. Uses Dx9 and audio stutters sometimes.

Onlive



PC

 
Last edited:

busydude

Diamond Member
Feb 5, 2010
8,793
5
76
That is looking pretty damn sad.

Yeah It does. Any one who games on a PC will sure be disappointed like I am. Other than the interface, which looks slick and stunning, the gameplay and IQ has a lot to be desired. I am not sure how the console playing crowd reacts as I never played on one but the quality is unacceptable. I looks appealing to laptop users, but you cannot play wireless which makes it useless for them to play while traveling.

There is no ambient occlusion on any games so far, no bloom, no shadows. Definitely no AA and not sure about AF. Games looks absolutely dull.

How is the FPS? Is the game playable?
I am not so sure regarding FPS, but I can tell you its below 60 FPS. The gameplay is OK. Borderlands was not good, a lot of noticeable input lag.
 
Last edited:

Sheninat0r

Senior member
Jun 8, 2007
515
1
81
I see ambient occlusion in the Borderlands screenshot, and the IQ difference isn't as big as you say. OnLive is a little blurrier, but I can only tell because of the text; does it look worse in motion?
 

Will Robinson

Golden Member
Dec 19, 2009
1,408
0
0
If you checked the images above the IQ is difference is as big as he has shown....not just said...
 

busydude

Diamond Member
Feb 5, 2010
8,793
5
76
I see ambient occlusion in the Borderlands screenshot, and the IQ difference isn't as big as you say. OnLive is a little blurrier, but I can only tell because of the text; does it look worse in motion?

Oh, its way worse in motion. You see stuttering a lot. Input lag is very noticeable. The DiRT 2 screenshot does not do any justice to the crappy visuals. Ohh and the load times are significantly higher too.

My bad, the first image was a night shot. Did not check that one. Any way here is the day shot.

 
Last edited:

Matrices

Golden Member
Aug 9, 2003
1,377
0
0
This is meaningless without knowing your connection speed and distance to the nearest server.

Granted, most people will be in your situation, or a situation much like yours, rather than the situation of someone with 20 mbps, but we still need info.
 

busydude

Diamond Member
Feb 5, 2010
8,793
5
76
This is meaningless without knowing your connection speed and distance to the nearest server.

Granted, most people will be in your situation, or a situation much like yours, rather than the situation of someone with 20 mbps, but we still need info.

You are right, but I have a 8 Mbps connection and the nearest city being St.Louis ~ 110 mi. I assume it to have a server there.

I satisfy their minimum requirements by a long shot.

What are the Minimum Recommended Requirements?
OnLive games are played through the Internet from an OnLive game data center. Currently all OnLive games are HD resolution. The Minimum Recommended Requirements are:

  • PC: Windows® 7 or Vista (32 or 64-bit) or XP (32-bit)
  • Mac: Mac OS X 10.6 or later
  • Processor: Dual-core CPU
  • Screen Resolution: 1280x720
  • Internet Connection: 5 Mbps located inside the contiguous United States (wired connection required)
 

Lonbjerg

Diamond Member
Dec 6, 2009
4,419
0
0
OnLive is no threat to PC, but to console.
Same I.Q as consoles...just without the console.
 

bka4u2c

Senior member
Mar 17, 2006
551
0
0
I got the invitation to. Got a coupon for a free game so I choose the new Prince of Persia game. Haven't had a chance to play it yet but it was free so I can't complain to much.
 

Lonbjerg

Diamond Member
Dec 6, 2009
4,419
0
0
Even I know thats not correct...

720p, no AA, crappy AF, lower textures, lower shadowmaps ect...you are sure you know what crappy I.Q a console has compard to a PC?

Add in the consolcontroller delay (vs the online lag of OnLive) and they are a perfect match.

You just don't need to pay for a console, an old laptop will do.
 

Dribble

Platinum Member
Aug 9, 2005
2,076
611
136
Graphics look fine imo. Sure they aren't as good as a maxed out PC but what did you expect? If you are a pc gaming graphics nerd then it's obviously not for you, but for someone who doesn't PC game, and doesn't really notice the textures aren't quite as sharp it looks pretty good.

Lag/stuttering is the big problem. The combination of your isp being unable to handle that much data without stuttering, and the lag onlive inserts compressing the images is probably the killer.
 

busydude

Diamond Member
Feb 5, 2010
8,793
5
76
Graphics look fine imo. Sure they aren't as good as a maxed out PC but what did you expect? If you are a pc gaming graphics nerd then it's obviously not for you, but for someone who doesn't PC game, and doesn't really notice the textures aren't quite as sharp it looks pretty good.

There is a lot of texture compression going on which blurs the whole image. I even played at its native res on my laptop, no change in my opinion.

This is a quote from onlive.

If you are more than 1000 miles from an OnLive data center, then the round trip communications delay (“ping” time) between your home and OnLive will be too long for fast-action video games

I play a lot of online FPS. I never had a lag problem.
They said they opened services thorough out US so I must definitely fall in that region. These are the FPS I got using FRAPS.

Frames, Time (ms), Min, Max, Avg
6657, 134054, 32, 61, 49.659

I can tell you the experience is no way near as smooth as the numbers shown.
The FPS are reasonable enough but why is the gameplay so poor?
 

taltamir

Lifer
Mar 21, 2004
13,576
6
76
its not being compared to a maxed out PC, but to a mid ranged PC...
while the thing is blurrier and doesn't seem to have Anisotropic Filtering on (definitely no AA either), it doesn't seem that bad. The pictures look of acceptable quality. (definitely lower quality than a PC though)

However the OPs description says that the pictures don't tell the whole story, that there is stutter and lag and artifacts and many other issues that are not readily visible in a screenshot.
 

Sheninat0r

Senior member
Jun 8, 2007
515
1
81
Oh, its way worse in motion. You see stuttering a lot. Input lag is very noticeable. The DiRT 2 screenshot does not do any justice to the crappy visuals. Ohh and the load times are significantly higher too.

My bad, the first image was a night shot. Did not check that one. Any way here is the day shot.

snip

Oh boy... stutter and input lag. The best. OnLive has turned out just as poorly as I expected.

It still looks like they have ambient occlusion on in Borderlands, but shadows off - what were they thinking?
 

busydude

Diamond Member
Feb 5, 2010
8,793
5
76
its not being compared to a maxed out PC, but to a mid ranged PC... while the thing is blurrier and doesn't seem to have Anisotropic Filtering on (definitely no AA either), it doesn't seem that bad. The pictures look of acceptable quality. (definitely lower quality than a PC though) However the OPs description says that the pictures don't tell the whole story, that there is stutter and lag and artifacts and many other issues that are not readily visible in a screenshot.

Exactly. Stutter in DiRT 2 was horrible, and the blurriness of the image was insane while playing. I, for a moment, felt like I was playing without my glasses on and I am not exaggerating. The detail is completely lost while playing.

On the other hand, Borderlands was comparatively better, somewhat acceptable IQ. That is until you pull the trigger or perform any actions like picking up loot, opening doors etc where you notice a lot of input lag. In case of onlive, the latency amounts to input lag in my understanding, 50ms of ping time in onlive= 50 ms of input lag. If you play online FPS you will know the point I am trying to make.

I am in no way opposed to onlive. But I am not happy with the performance of the service. Before the release they were bragging about their proprietary compression algorithms which have greater compression while maintaining good IQ, and after experiencing it first hand, I feel it has failed its promise.
 
Apr 20, 2008
10,067
990
126
You are right, but I have a 8 Mbps connection and the nearest city being St.Louis ~ 110 mi. I assume it to have a server there.

I satisfy their minimum requirements by a long shot.

That's actually quite far in terms of latency. Easily it must be about 60ms each way. In city it should be less than half of that, which would be probably playable.

You live out in the boonies and expect good latency...
 
Apr 20, 2008
10,067
990
126
You are right I live in boonies. Well then, how do you answer this.


24ms is decent, but you said you're 110 miles away. This is most likely how it goes for you.

[On Live Frame]>>>5-10ms response time on monitor>>>[input]>>>30-60ms>>>[server responds, maybe 10ms internal response time at most]>>>30-60ms frame dispatch>>>[on live frame response]>>>5-10ms response time

So, you're averaging about 115ms of total input lag from estimated values above. Lets pretend you live in a major city where Onlive exist that has only 8-15ms lag.

[On Live Frame]>>>5-10ms response time on monitor>>>[input]>>>8-15ms>>>[server responds, maybe 10ms internal response time at most]>>>8-15ms frame dispatch>>>[on live frame response]>>>5-10ms response time.

If you're in-town, you'd be averaging about 48ms of total input lag. That's almost 60% less latency. The 15ms in town is actually very generous. Most pings in town are about 5-8ms. We're talking only 30-40ms of input lag at all. That's pretty solid.
 

busydude

Diamond Member
Feb 5, 2010
8,793
5
76
24ms is decent, but you said you're 110 miles away. This is most likely how it goes for you. [On Live Frame]>>>5-10ms response time on monitor>>>[input]>>>30-60ms>>>[server responds, maybe 10ms internal response time at most]>>>30-60ms frame dispatch>>>[on live frame response]>>>5-10ms response time So, you're averaging about 115ms of total input lag from estimated values above. Lets pretend you live in a major city where Onlive exist that has only 8-15ms lag. [On Live Frame]>>>5-10ms response time on monitor>>>[input]>>>8-15ms>>>[server responds, maybe 10ms internal response time at most]>>>8-15ms frame dispatch>>>[on live frame response]>>>5-10ms response time. If you're in-town, you'd be averaging about 48ms of total input lag. That's almost 60% less latency. The 15ms in town is actually very generous. Most pings in town are about 5-8ms. We're talking only 30-40ms of input lag at all. That's pretty solid.

I am not going to argue with that. But that is the exact same issue they said will not happen in their demo at GDC 09. Check this link and start watching from 34:00.
 

taltamir

Lifer
Mar 21, 2004
13,576
6
76
start at 35:30, not 34:00

and he is wrong, it isn't about the speed of light, it is about the speed of processors... the gateways, the routers, the chips that encode/decode packets... they are the main cause of latency.
Light takes 0.0053681937522257481207215693198 seconds to travel 1000 miles.
thats 5ms to travel a distance GREATER than the length of texas at its widest. so from a center of each state it should take under 2ms to reach most location in the state.
And electricity propagates at the speed of light

from texas to syndy australia it will take light 46 ms
 
Last edited:
sale-70-410-exam    | Exam-200-125-pdf    | we-sale-70-410-exam    | hot-sale-70-410-exam    | Latest-exam-700-603-Dumps    | Dumps-98-363-exams-date    | Certs-200-125-date    | Dumps-300-075-exams-date    | hot-sale-book-C8010-726-book    | Hot-Sale-200-310-Exam    | Exam-Description-200-310-dumps?    | hot-sale-book-200-125-book    | Latest-Updated-300-209-Exam    | Dumps-210-260-exams-date    | Download-200-125-Exam-PDF    | Exam-Description-300-101-dumps    | Certs-300-101-date    | Hot-Sale-300-075-Exam    | Latest-exam-200-125-Dumps    | Exam-Description-200-125-dumps    | Latest-Updated-300-075-Exam    | hot-sale-book-210-260-book    | Dumps-200-901-exams-date    | Certs-200-901-date    | Latest-exam-1Z0-062-Dumps    | Hot-Sale-1Z0-062-Exam    | Certs-CSSLP-date    | 100%-Pass-70-383-Exams    | Latest-JN0-360-real-exam-questions    | 100%-Pass-4A0-100-Real-Exam-Questions    | Dumps-300-135-exams-date    | Passed-200-105-Tech-Exams    | Latest-Updated-200-310-Exam    | Download-300-070-Exam-PDF    | Hot-Sale-JN0-360-Exam    | 100%-Pass-JN0-360-Exams    | 100%-Pass-JN0-360-Real-Exam-Questions    | Dumps-JN0-360-exams-date    | Exam-Description-1Z0-876-dumps    | Latest-exam-1Z0-876-Dumps    | Dumps-HPE0-Y53-exams-date    | 2017-Latest-HPE0-Y53-Exam    | 100%-Pass-HPE0-Y53-Real-Exam-Questions    | Pass-4A0-100-Exam    | Latest-4A0-100-Questions    | Dumps-98-365-exams-date    | 2017-Latest-98-365-Exam    | 100%-Pass-VCS-254-Exams    | 2017-Latest-VCS-273-Exam    | Dumps-200-355-exams-date    | 2017-Latest-300-320-Exam    | Pass-300-101-Exam    | 100%-Pass-300-115-Exams    |
http://www.portvapes.co.uk/    | http://www.portvapes.co.uk/    |