
Reports: OnLive fires all staff, service’s future unclear - shawndumas
http://arstechnica.com/gaming/2012/08/reports-onlive-fires-all-staff-services-future-unclear/
======
ars
> A new company will be formed and the management of the company will be in
> contact with you about the current initiatives in place, including the
> titles that will remain on the service

I hate that companies are allowed to do that. Sunrocket did that to me and
basically stole around $150 worth of unused service. The new company
apparently had no legal obligation to me.

It should be illegal to sell assets without also selling the debts/obligations
together with them.

------
mirsadm
I liked the idea of OnLive. In fact since I've been travelling a lot over the
past year I wanted to play some games that I couldn't (because my laptop
sucks). The problem I found is that it is just too expensive to play the games
I wanted. They cost the same amount as purchasing a physical copy. I couldn't
justify that as it provides a degraded experience and I know when I come home
I have a great computer I can play them on.

It's too bad they couldn't make it work since I the concept was pretty cool.

~~~
flyt
Also their selection of games was really poor.

~~~
metachris
Except for "Orcs Must Die", which is the title that got me to sign up to
OnLive! I really enjoy the service.

------
sp332
They're filing for ABC protection in California. Source:
[http://kotaku.com/5935767/onlive-filing-for-bankruptcy-
new-c...](http://kotaku.com/5935767/onlive-filing-for-bankruptcy-new-company-
to-take-its-place) Here's an explanation of what ABC is
<http://allmandlaw.com/bankruptcy/abc-vs-bankruptcy> Looks like they're re-
arranging OnLive into a new company
[http://www.forbes.com/sites/jasonevangelho/2012/08/17/onlive...](http://www.forbes.com/sites/jasonevangelho/2012/08/17/onlive-
we-are-not-going-out-of-business/)

------
_lex
I wonder how this is going to affect Ouya, who just raised over 8M on
kickstarter, and who was relying on Onlive to provide access to AAA titles
from day 1.

------
chaostheory
> Some of those employees may reportedly be hired back as the company
> transitions into a new iteration, which might be more focused on exercising
> its portfolio of streaming patents.

This doesn't sound good.

~~~
jhuckestein
I think it would be great if they licensed their technology to a company that
can leverage it. Fingers crossed that Apple does something with this.

This doesn't mean that they're becoming an evil patent troll.

~~~
vardump
I think and really hope it's Google. Onlive is a threat to Apple's walled
garden model. Apple might just want to shut it down.

~~~
Steko
I doubt Google would dick over the employees like this. Even the extraneous
Motorola employees they didn't want to acquire got to stay on through the
whole acquisition plus a year's severance.

------
stevencorona
Ah man- I played with OnLive a little bit and it seemed like a product that
had so much potential to revolutionize the industry. Maybe it was ahead of its
time?

~~~
bicknergseng
Need.... Google... Fiber...

~~~
Steko
We really just need more mature LTE networks. I've seen LTE pings around 40.
If they can get that down under 25 consistently that's pretty much all you
need to move the gaming world to thin clients.

------
mjfern
One of the major reasons why OnLive struggled (and now failed) is because they
launched their platform (20010) well after the launch of the XBox 360 (2005)
and PS3 (2006).

Serious gamers, the early adopter market for OnLive, already had purchased an
XBox 360 and/or PS3. Since OnLive, as far as I can tell, didn't have any
compelling, exclusive titles, and provided a gaming experience that was
inferior to alternatives, there was no reason for a serious gamer with a
console to try (or switch to) this new platform.

OnLive needed to launch around the same time as the other consoles and deliver
a superior experience, or an equivalent experience but at a lower price point
(upfront and over time).

~~~
superbeefy
The fallacy here is that only serious gamers play on consoles. PC gaming is
back on the upswing, and one could argue that PC gamers are just as serious or
even more so than console gamers.

The thing that OnLive offered was a way to play high quality AAA game titles
on basically any device that has a internet connection and can play video.
Where they failed I think was the pricing model, prices were too close to
retail products, and it was an ala carte service. If the moved to a
subscription based model similar to gamefly I think they could have had more
success.

~~~
malkia
OnLive is the ideal service for cpu/gpu games, and works great against
cheaters in multiplayer games (No more transparent or wireframe walls, boxes
around enemy players, and other tricks)

but then most social/casual games are not cpu/gpu hungry....

I really want technology like OnLive to succeed... There is Gaikai too

~~~
icebraining
I don't. OnLive is the ultimate DRM; abusive stuff like Securom can be
bypassed, but with this tech any game can be killed without recourse. While I
feel sympathy for the fired people, I'm also somewhat relieved that this was
further delayed.

~~~
malkia
It's the ultimate copy-protection without DRM - e.g. without crappy kernel
drivers sitting and trying to protect you from stealing something from your
own machine.

But not only that, it protects you from doing stupid things like cheating in
an multi-player game, and it's available everywhere if there is a good
connection.

Oh, and it's updated with the latest HW.

It's also more energy efficient, you no longer need massive HW in your room to
power your game. And the folks that run the similar HW in their server room,
would surely know better than the general game customer how to make it more
green efficient, and reuse the resource better.

So it could've been a great win. I could've (if Wi-fi allowed) played on my
iPad games, that are still not possible to play there, without any download,
install, updates, etc.

~~~
icebraining
Sure, but that's all irrelevant when you lose access to all your games. Like
when the company goes bankrupt.

If you bought a copy of the game and then you could play on their service with
a proof of purchase (and a monthly fee, for example), I wouldn't worry. But
their service was just more lock in.

------
delinka
This is why tech people should really begin negotiating severance into their
compensation. Yeah, yeah - how do you get rid of people who aren't a good fit?
I dunno. Maybe, make the formula for calculating severance account for
employment duration. What happens when you got hired a week ago and the whole
company is now being fired? I dunno. Perhaps a mass firing clause.

I don't have the answers, but severance pay sounds like a great way to protect
against these kinds of assholes.

~~~
hujjio
The only way to protect against this kind of abuse is to unionize.

~~~
krakensden
Unionization is a big step. You get protection, but it's also expensive, makes
HR sclerotic, and you run the risk of having union management wander off into
lala land.

If you're a competent programmer, unionization is probably a net loss for you.

~~~
_delirium
There are many models of unionization. I'm represented by a union (in
Denmark), and it's not particularly sclerotic or adversarial. It's just an
organization that is skilled in contracts and can provide advice and advocacy
on my behalf, along with some information aggregation.

Their #1 most useful service is probably their email address that provides
legal advice about whether I should sign a particular contract or not, and
what my options are. Strikes are extremely rare, but consultations to ensure
it never gets to that point are common. For example, if I were asked to sign a
never-before-seen contract provision, and I forwarded it to them, they might
use their backchannel contacts with the company to ask what this is all about,
and, if the answer isn't to their liking, warn other members to watch out for
this new provision. That helps make sure that changes like that don't slip by
unnoticed. It may, admittedly, help that there is a cultural value against
labor strife, so companies lose a lot of face if they get to the point of open
conflict with their union. That allows unions to mostly do their job without
having to exercise "hard power" like actual strikes.

The main things they do, imo, is to make sure that workers are informed about
what contracts they're signing, and that companies get appropriate pushback
about the more onerous provisions. Americans also do that to some extent, but
since they lack effective unions, they have to do it via legislation, like how
California has banned noncompetes.

------
mvzink
Well there goes the one draw I had to the Ouya.

------
rdl
They have (had?) a lot of great employees, so hiring feeding frenzy commence
in 3, 2, 1...

