So Nvidia don't have any games on a server that they stream, how does that work.
Raphael van Lierop claims Nvidia added The Long Dark to GeForce Now without permission.
- Thread starter Video Games Are Dumb
- Start date
No, you have to press the install button on the nvidia pc. You are the one installing the game on Nvidia's servers.
Not correct, you use your license to install the game on the internet cafe pc.
And what's the difference between hardware and software? You should as person who paid one or another have full rights to that product and be able to do whatever you want with it. And you actually could do that 20+ years ago when you were buying games on disc. And you still can do it today on consoles for that reason. You can rent, sell, borrow or destroy your copy of console game. You can't do that on PC because developers and publishers abandoned physical releases and consumers don't have choice but to accept EULA that is not legally binding document.
Issue is that digital goods are still not as well regulated as physical ones.
As far as I understand the situation, yes. Nvidia are the good guys here. But of course some devs will get upset because they can sell streaming rights exclusively to other partners. Because it's not enough to pay for your games once...
The problem devs and publishers have with this is that it's actually really good. Nvidia has the best streaming tech I've used at home with moonlight, so they're scared that this clunky solution works better than their custom walled gardens.
It should be none of their business where I install my games I paid for or who's hardware I pay for to play.
It should be none of their business where I install my games I paid for or who's hardware I pay for to play.
What are you even talking about? Using GFN isn't any different than using your own PC at home to stream to your work for example. Only difference is that the actual PC is rented from a server provider. Let me ask this again, why would any VPS provider have to pay for a game dev if I install Windows and Steam and their game on a VPS I rent from them?
For fucks sake, can you read my fucking post? Where do I fucking disagree with you??????
HOW FUCKING THICK ARE YOU?
Oh lol xD Sorry about that. I confused you with Ombala Lack of sleep is getting the better of me. Edited my post to remove what I said to you. Really sorry about that. :)
The best way to solve this issue would be for Valve to implement an "opt out of cloud gaming" setting for developers, which will prevent installation on Geforce Now. They'll probably have to do that anyway if they're planning on releasing their own service.
This way everything on Steam is available on Geforce Now by default, unless the dev/pub has chosen to opt out.
This way everything on Steam is available on Geforce Now by default, unless the dev/pub has chosen to opt out.
This is a pretty good idea. Then customers can simply filter out greedy devs like these.
Why are you assuming Nvidia pirated those server copies instead of just buying them from their respective storefronts like the rest of us?
They have had to buy the game, or get it for free, to cache the installable files. All big LAN events do this also. I don't see Devs going after them for doing that.
Again Nvidia has nothing to do with game files except in worst case scenario caching them on their servers for quick access. To do that someone with actual license has to download game files first.
As much is obvious, IMO. There are valid concerns regarding quality control that are fair concerns. Were those the reasons a dev decided to opt out (especially games that are sensitive to latency like fighting games), I'd 100% get it. But we know the real reasons most devs are opting out: simple greed. And it's disgusting, quite frankly.Here from other developer perspective
The Long Dark Developer Asks Nvidia to Take Game Off GeForce Now, Saying Company Didn't Ask Permission to Host It on Their Service
Posted in r/Games by u/GotSka81 • 5,256 points and 1,386 commentsold.reddit.com
Also, I just remembered this dev. Pitch for the game was this amazing story told in chapters with characters that were voiced by David Hayter and Jennifer Hale. Then he released one very short chapter, a second one that was almost universally disliked, and then they took years to release a third one, all the while he was pissy as fuck that people were holding him to his word.
Edit: Reading that Reddit post, I was fucking right. They are doing this to take control out of the hands of players who BOUGHT their games in hopes that Stadia or other streaming service pay them. Fuck those people.
Edit: Reading that Reddit post, I was fucking right. They are doing this to take control out of the hands of players who BOUGHT their games in hopes that Stadia or other streaming service pay them. Fuck those people.
There is an impending updated SDA that'll address the "issue" of access via cloud-based services:
@SteamDB | Steam Database said:Valve is working on "Steam Cloud Gaming" according to partner site code update. Partners will need to sign an addendum to their terms.
Could this be a competitor to @GoogleStadia?
22 files | newpartner.js, main.css, friends.css, main.js, broadcast_c… · SteamDatabase/SteamTracking@0947d12
…hat.js, chat.js, chathelpers.js, friends.js, shared_english.js, profile.js, steammessages.js, shared_global.js, main.css, main.css, divingbell.css, search.css, main.js, main.js, dynamicstore.js, h...github.com
I presume it'll be published when SCG, which appears to encompass Valve's own service in addition to GFN and the like, is formally announced.
Last edited:
You have to install the games you play.
You have to log in to your Epic/Steam/uPlay account to install and start the games.
You are renting an on-demand cloud machine for the time you are playing.
How does cloud computing work?
You get access to a virtualized server. You install your software on it. You run your software.
GFN is not a games subscription service. Nvidia has to have a full set of paid Windows licenses since they are providing the OS in the virtualized machine, but Nvidia is not providing the games.
It is basically an optimized cloud instance that you spin up when you connect. Anyone who has ever used AWS or Azure on-demand services will be familiar with the concept. It is NOT Stadia (Nvidia does not sell any games on GFN).
I think that's for storefronts, not individual game titles?NVidia has a GeForce Now SDK that developers can integrate into their titles to provide instant access. Those are probably the games not requiring installs.
GeForce NOW Developer Platform
Gamers can transform nearly any laptop, desktop, or Android device into a high-powered gaming PC with GeForce NOW. Developers can seamlessly add the power of GeForce NOW cloud gaming to their ecosystem with GeForce NOW SDK: a set of APIs, components, and tools facilitating the simple integration anddeveloper.nvidia.com
Why Integrate the GeForce NOW SDK?
- Add GeForce NOW cloud gaming to your digital store and expand the market for your games to any PC, Mac or Android device
- Enable instant play without long wait times for digital downloads
- Deliver invisible patches to users through auto cloud updates
- Improve the user experience with single sign-on
- Enable games to launch in seconds with pre-loading
The licenses that devs sell on Steam are personal licenses. They are not to be used for commercial endeavors. Nvidia must contact the dev to get a license for business use.
Again Nvidia has nothing to do with those licenses. It is still your personal license that you use not someone else.
Steam LAN caching is not forbidden in the least though. Internet cafes, big LAN parties, Linus Tech Tips and others use it. All players still need to own the game, all you do is cache the installation files for faster access, nothing else.
Which would be a valid point if users were relying on Nvidia's accounts to access the games, but that's not the case. GFN isn't log in to your own account -> silently log in to Nvidia's account -> access Nvidia's library of supported games, it's log in to your own account -> access your own library of supported games.
Edit: To be clear, I'm not saying Nvidia shouldn't oblige requests to have games removed, just that the argument that it's skirting a responsibility to financially compensate devs/pubs is a weak one.
Last edited:
Nvidia needs a license to copy and distribute the files across their servers. And you need a license to play the game.
Why are developers pissed at GeForce Now, but not Playstation Now and Remote Play while those services do the exact same thing (playing games you own/have access to from a remote location)?
Remote Play is just you accessing your own hardware. PS Now, Sony has made deals with the publishers.
The agreement with Sony they have in regards to releasing on the digital store or on the platform in general might cover streaming too (or they have separate agreements for Now). Nvidia has just decided to promote their paid service with the availability of games on no basis whatsoever. Contrary to what some are trying to paddle here, I'm fairly certain GFN doesn't allow you to arbitrarily stream any game in your library, but just select titles.
There isn't much difference between GeForce Now and Shadow. Both are running games on third party computers in the cloud, but no one bothers going after Shadow for some reason.
Why is renting an VPS any different? In essence you own that VPS, the resources allocated for that VPS are your hardware.
Nvidia is not distributing game files.
The end user is installing game files on rented hardware via a licensed PC storefront (EGS, Steam, Uplay).
Nvidia would need a license of some sort to provide games directly to users. It is not doing that.
No they don't. As I said before you don't need anything to make cache server. And that server is populated with files as users are downloading them.
Playstation Now is limited to the game library that is part of the service. You can't buy a game on PS Store and then play it through Now.
Remote Play (both Playstation and Steam) is used with your own hardware so there isn't much publishers can do to stop it.
Why would nvidia need a license to distribute the content? If a friend has shit internet but owns the same game as me, I should be able to copy my game folder and give it to him to copy to his steam folder and play after steam notices the game.
Also, you can add a caching server to your own home to download content more quickly (after the first time) without steam vetting. This is the same thing.
So without having read the whole thread, is this the equivalent of hiring a console from VideoEzy (Blockbuster) back in the day to play a game you already own physically, and then the devs getting cranky that you aren't playing it on your own console and demanding a fee from the store?
Because they can't sell more copies on closed-off streaming services (Stadia).
Yes. Or the dev demanding you buy another copy just to use with the rented console.
I went into this thread expecting to side with the developer, but in this case I absolutely don't. While I perfectly understand that there might be distribution agreements in place that make the legal aspect obvious, from an end-user point of view this is unacceptable. If I buy a game, I expect that I can install it however I want as long as I of course don't give copies away. I don't see how it makes any difference when a third party installs it for me and provide access.
Adding developer to my mental list of developers to avoid.
Adding developer to my mental list of developers to avoid.
Not even quality control has a leg to stand on. People already stream locally (or play directly) on TV's with 100+ms lag on terrible networks, or run games on underpowered laptops (or desktops) at 20fps. There is nothing to control on PC, it's bedlam.
Last edited:
Thank god publishers and developers haven't had the bright idea to extend this to physical computers as well. It would suck to have games you can only install on authorized hardware (e.g. Alienware, HP).
I see no reason for the publisher or developer to have any sort of say in which computer I play my game on. Nvidia isn't selling access to the content itself, they sell access to a computer that you can play you legally purchaced content on. This sort of reaction is completely unacceptable.
They would if they could. If greedy devs and publishers had their way, every game purchase would be tied to your hardware id.
The used games shenanigans last gen was proof of that. Thank god that stupid shit failed.