Reviewers noted that the video quality and amount of input lag depended on the Internet connection and varied on a game-by-game basis.

On the other hand, the service received accolades for its built-in spectator mode and its ability to trial games without installing them.

Sony operated PlayStation Now, a similar service built using the infrastructure of Gaikai, a former competitor to OnLive,[2] until it was merged with PS Plus in 2022.

It came with the accessories needed to connect the equipment, and composite video users could purchase an additional optional cable.

For video and audio output it provided component, HDMI, TOSLINK ports, and an analog stereo minijack.

With this option players pay a monthly fee for unlimited access to "recent, classic and indie titles" in the OnLive library, which includes new releases.

[22] On April 7, 2012, it was discovered that the OnLive Desktop Service had changed and had begun to use Windows Server 2008, bringing it into license compliance.

For older, or lower-performance, games such as Lego Batman, multiple instances could be played on each server using virtualization technology.

Some analysts speculated that the true value of the patents held by the company was potentially in the hundreds of millions of dollars, but that the firm's poor bargaining position led to the cheap sale.

Both in terms of the hardware required in OnLive server centers to render and compress the video, as well as the impact of commercial Internet broadband connections on its delivery.

During GDC 2009, which was held in San Francisco, the OnLive service was 50 miles (80 km) from its Santa Clara data center.

[51] Near E3 in 2009, which is approximately 350 miles (560 km) away from their data center, OnLive demonstrated their service performed well with a consumer cable modem and Internet connection.

[52][53] Matt Peckham from PC World stated in his blog that it might be technically difficult to transfer the amount of data that a high definition game would require.

The article's analysis characterized OnLive as a faked demo that was technically impossible to accomplish over a consumer Internet connection.

[58][59][60][61] Hiawatha Bray of The Boston Globe stated, "It felt exactly as if I had installed the software on my local computer.

"[62] Chris Holt of Macworld, in his review of Assassin's Creed II on OnLive using his Mac, wrote that he looks forward to future higher resolution improvements that are already promised, he "never encountered any frame rate issues", and "the game is on the whole every bit as immersive, rewarding, and free as the console version".

[65] Furthermore, they also noted that while acceptable, these values ran contrary to figures suggested by OnLive before release of lag "being under 80ms" and "usually... between 35-40ms".

[67] Digital Foundry felt that the quality of rendering was mostly good, with high frame rates, but with less consistency than console counterparts and with screen-tearing in some scenarios.

[68] Gaming Examiner judged that the graphics were like "playing a PlayStation 3 on a 480p standard [definition] TV", that they thought that they experienced much lower framerates than expected, and that the controller was not working reliably.