-
Ever wanted an RSS feed of all your favorite gaming news sites? Go check out our new Gaming Headlines feed! Read more about it here.
-
We have made minor adjustments to how the search bar works on ResetEra. You can read about the changes here.
Nvidia’s GeForce Now is losing all Activision Blizzard games, a bad sign for cloud gaming (see threadmark for Nvidia statement)
- Thread starter Deleted member 18944
- Start date
This does not shock me at all.
Also, if Cloud gaming goes like game storefronts along the lines of Steam, which we have a ton of now, then everyone will just do their own thing and it will suck more than it already does. I'll land where I get the best bang for my buck, or where my fav games are. Same as I do with consoles.
Also, if Cloud gaming goes like game storefronts along the lines of Steam, which we have a ton of now, then everyone will just do their own thing and it will suck more than it already does. I'll land where I get the best bang for my buck, or where my fav games are. Same as I do with consoles.
With respect, i think you are saying more than you know about the license agreements. I'm sure that you're right about ActiBlizz threatening action. But I don't think it's so open and shut that license agreements don't include streaming from external hardware. Do you believe Actiblizz could C&D me for installing a game I own on a friend's fancy computer and then streaming that game to my computer 5 houses away? Maybe the licenses will be written to prevent that in the future, but I don't think there us strong evidence that that view holds up now.
For example: this is from Blizzard's 2018 EULA found here.
There's certainly a colorable argument that Geforce Now machines constitute "one or more computers under your legitimate control."
Last edited:
A lot of things might be happening here, but these are three that come to mind. It is possible that Activision Blizzard is looking to offer their own cloud streaming service. They don't have the infrastructure to make their own service from scratch and I doubt they will start investing the billions necessary to offer a worldwide scale service. This leaves the option for Activision Blizzard to collaborate with either Geforce Now, Xcloud, Stadia or even Amazon to run their own front end on top of these companies infrastructure, this way they can make money by selling the game and also charging for the processing power to play them on a cloud gaming service.
They might also have an exclusive deal with a cloud gaming service to only have their games there (Stadia or another cloud gaming service). They might think that Geforce now does not provide a good enough experience for most people to play their games.
They might also have an exclusive deal with a cloud gaming service to only have their games there (Stadia or another cloud gaming service). They might think that Geforce now does not provide a good enough experience for most people to play their games.
Last edited:
I don't they'll ignore Xbox, that's not it... But if Microsoft conditions de release to locking the games out of a market of interest to the publisher that would probably be a deal breaker unless MS has a strong lead in the market.
I think Nvidia do not want to risk litigation with every major publisher (given that some of them are notoriously litigious), and do not want to have to test this stuff in court. They also have an existing commercial relationship with many of these publishers (for example promo codes for games included with GPUs) that they do not want to jeopardize. Doesn't really matter what my or your interpretation of these terms are, it would be about convincing a jury.
I think publishers would not pursue legal action against an individual engaging in small scale EULA violations because it would be bad PR with very little upside. But Nvidia facilitating large scale EULA violation would not be something that they'd turn a blind eye toward.
There is nothing wrong or bad for the medium when it comes to subscription streaming.
So in case of streaming your own games, what kind of pricing structure would work for you?
Nothing?
I told my nephew about this and told him to download and try it, explaining it's like Stadia. "Why?" He asked, and I thought about it for a bit, and said that I guess it was for people that didn't have gaming PCs or data caps. He has a gaming PC and data cap.
I tried Path of Exile on it and it was horrible (no loot filter which is a must). It was 30 fps for the trial I think, and I can't even stand 60 because I like reading the loot while not slowing down much at 144fps. It was so nice when I went to the game on my hardware to finish the map after quitting the Geforce Now session.
Activision Blizzard is gonna Activision blizzard...
Wtf... It's not like they are missing out as you have to own the game to begin with and it's not like Nvidia are taking revenue from them either......
Wtf... It's not like they are missing out as you have to own the game to begin with and it's not like Nvidia are taking revenue from them either......
I guess this one did sound too good to be true. Shame =/
So game streaming definitely heading the same direction as TV streaming, where every publisher wants you to pay them ~$10/month for an incredibly fractured service. I'd like to say I'm amazed they consider that a sustainable model for the industry, but I don't think any of them do. They just want to milk some consumers while it lasts.
So game streaming definitely heading the same direction as TV streaming, where every publisher wants you to pay them ~$10/month for an incredibly fractured service. I'd like to say I'm amazed they consider that a sustainable model for the industry, but I don't think any of them do. They just want to milk some consumers while it lasts.
Not yet. But they will. So the last thing they want right now is future competition getting a good head start with something more consumer friendly like this.
Look at how reluctant so many gamers are to move from Steam to separate PC launchers for each publisher. And that's all free.
I think publishers will be open to having their games on a variety of services, if the terms they are offered by the service are compelling. I'm sure xCloud will be more than just first party games. Here, to the best of our knowledge, Nvidia was not offering these publishers anything, so of course they wouldn't play ball.
Yeah, I can see some of them doing that on a rotating basis. Same way some shows bounce between different TV streamers. Sell to the highest bidder each year. It was nice to imagine an option as consumer friendly as Nvidia's might exist though, where if you bought any game you can also stream it. No nice things allowed apparently =/
You are probably right that it's harder to change peoples habits.
This now means that every publisher will start setting up cloud streaming service, but they will be encountering lot of technical challenges which Nvidia already solved.
I suspect that will be something that is possible for Xbox games going forward, much like how Play Anywhere is a thing, but it will only happen on a case by case basis where Microsoft are able to convince publishers to agree. Likely will be something that they push for with games they are signing on to Game Pass, and of course first party games will allow it (except perhaps in cases like forza where is contingent on licenses for cars and music etc).
It certainly wouldn't apply retroactively to existing purchases without the publisher's explicit consent.
It will still end up with a couple of larger services with a few exclusives split among them just like with music and movie streaming services.
Blizzard makes game sense they are against World of Warcraft being played on streaming services, surprised about CoD tho
People comparing this to hardware you buy yourself need to realize these publishers would enact that kinda shit tomorrow if they could. Want to play EA games? Better have the right brand of RAM etc...
The likely argument from ActiBlizzs side is that by the game being on Nvidia's servers, they themselves need a license for the game as well. For all intents and purposes it's as if you have gone to a friends house and playing their copy of Overwatch using your account. Just in this case ActiBlizz never got the license fee for the friends copy.
It's a shame as I was waiting the possible future where I could play WoW on the Nintendo Switch with GeForce NOW (well I hope that happens anyway).
What if Nvidia now asks for a specific agreement involving money from ActivisionBlizzard so that they will make sure to put in effort to make their Nvidia GPUs optimised for the games? Else they would let ActivisionBlizzard sort out and fix those glitches themselves without Nvidia's help.
Then they're shooting themselves in the foot when PC gamers realize their games run better on AMD cards.
I could see this having the effect of forcing publishers to chase publishers to consolidate. It feels like we are just on the edge of this starting, waiting on someone making the first move.
I'm out of the loop on this... I was under the impression you could use GeForce Now to stream any pc game you bought in any store? In that case, GeForce Now is selling you a hardware rental, not game software - a hardware rental should have nothing to do with publishers. How can a publisher decide you can't run a game you bought, on a PC of your choosing, e.g. in the cloud? How does Activision 'take away' games from GeForce Now?
The ability to do that would set a scary precedent, no? 'You can play this game you bought on this PC but not on that PC'??
The ability to do that would set a scary precedent, no? 'You can play this game you bought on this PC but not on that PC'??
This has been discussed extensively in this very thread.
It offers the exact same control (VAC), all while eliminating most forms of cheating since you can't run any other software in your GFN instance anyway.
Has it?
I'm talking about installing it in the "Steam" mode, not running from launcher.
The "unsupported" mode Geforce Now offered in beta, at least.
You don't own your games =/ As outlined in the EULAs you agree to with each game that are so clearly and concisely written so as not to confuse consumers or train them into ignoring the terms of purchase.
nvidia should start making their own games
a mmorpg fps esport dotalike turn based real time first person overhead view shooter with storyline
a mmorpg fps esport dotalike turn based real time first person overhead view shooter with storyline
Not in the EU.
We own our software here.
And have the right to resell it, etc.
Irrelevant to what I'm trying to say here, in any case, I'm talking about installing unsupported games in GFN Steam directly, as described here for example:
I know I did this in beta a lot to try stuff out, maybe they'll reintroduce it (if it's even been cut).
Buying the game is not enough. Buying the DLC is not enough. You now have to join their subscription/streaming services and hand them more money every month. Will that be enough?
I'm not sure anyone has enforced a EULA they prohibits you running a game you bought on a particular piece of hardware before. Just to clarify, they're stopping you from running games you bought on Steam on GeForce Now or are just pulling their games from another Nvidia storefront? The former would be outrageous.
