Raphael van Lierop claims Nvidia added The Long Dark to GeForce Now without permission.

spineduke · Mar 2, 2020

Necromanti said:
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).

Securom says hello

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SecuROM

edit: not specific hardware, but they tried to limit to the few instances of hardware you own. changing your cpu/mobo would qualify as an instance. You initially were given *three* installs. This is the mindset that some publishers have with their product.

Psamtik · Mar 2, 2020

If Nvidia wanted to fight this, I suspect they'd win, but given how many potential users and developers fundamentally misunderstand the nature of the service, it's not worth the bad press.

I get it: developers want to sell you a Switch port or a phone port or a PS5 port or whatever - they don't want you just playing the copy you bought during a Steam sale forever, regardless of platform. It's still shitty, and I say that as someone who double-dips all the time.

NumberThree said:
I guess WINE is also the devil, as is emulation.

I mean, emulation very much is the devil for a lot of people in the industry.

pagrab · Mar 2, 2020

I bought a new computer and installed my copy of The Long Dark on it. I completely forgot to inform Raphael about it. At this point I don't have the money to send a graphics card to him, so I am really worried my license will be revoked :(

Alexandros · Mar 2, 2020

pagrab said:
I bought a new computer and installed my copy of The Long Dark on it. I completely forgot to inform Raphael about it. At this point I don't have the money to send a graphics card to him, so I am really worried my license will be revoked :(

Lol, nice!

gofreak · Mar 2, 2020

If I bought the game I should be able to play it on whatever pc I want, my own or one I'm renting.

Anything less is the beginning of the fracturing of the PC space into separate gardens as steaming becomes common.

However if the developers' problem is that a service is using their trademarks to advertise a service then fair enough - maybe nVidia should simply advertise the hardware they're offering rather than any named games. If they did that I don't see how any developer could have a complaint, unless they want to control what hardware customers play their PC games on.

Deleted member 10234 · Mar 2, 2020

It kills the ability to commercialise ports for new platforms (partic mobile) or to negotiate exclusivity deals

Yikes. So basically you should not be able to play a game you've bought on a platform it was not made/sold for. I guess WINE is also the devil, as is emulation.

dgrdsv · Mar 2, 2020

Oh so it's not only Activision and Bethesda who always want money, eh?

Alexandros · Mar 2, 2020

NumberThree said:
Yikes. So basically you should not be able to play a game you've bought on a platform it was not made/sold for. I guess WINE is also the devil, as is emulation.

His argument is nonsensical. A native port is not the same as a streamed video.

Reinhardt Schneider · Mar 2, 2020

There should be no need to ask for permission, really. Nvidia isn't selling the games in a proprietary platform, they are literally setting cloud machines for people to play their owned games

This is absurd.

Armadilo · Mar 2, 2020

Reinhardt Schneider said:
There should be no need to ask for permission, really. Nvidia isn't selling the games in a proprietary platform, they are literally setting cloud machines for people to play their owned games

This is absurd.

Devs should have a say on where their games can be, you bought the game through steam ok but not through Nvidia who are charging people to access that game and then go through steam, it isn't too hard to understand

Zushin · Mar 2, 2020

uzipukki said:
Yes.

Syriel said:
Yes. Or the dev demanding you buy another copy just to use with the rented console.

Well then, I agree with nVidia in that case.That's ridiculous to demand payment from them in that case.

spineduke · Mar 2, 2020

NumberThree said:
Yikes. So basically you should not be able to play a game you've bought on a platform it was not made/sold for. I guess WINE is also the devil, as is emulation.

Getting flashbacks of the MP3 debacle. Remember when you couldn't play your legally paid music on the devices of your choice because...money?

uzipukki · Mar 2, 2020

Armadilo said:
Devs should have a say on where their games can be, you bought the game through steam ok but not through Nvidia who are charging people to access that game and then go through steam, it isn't too hard to understand

Ah, so a Dev should be able to tell what type of PC I am allowed to install a game? So you would be okay if a Dev said you can't install it on a laptop made by Lenovo?

Ikuu · Mar 2, 2020

Armadilo said:
Devs should have a say on where their games can be, you bought the game through steam ok but not through Nvidia who are charging people to access that game and then go through steam, it isn't too hard to understand

Do I need to ask their permission to install it on my friends machine?

Alexandros · Mar 2, 2020

Armadilo said:
Devs should have a say on where their games can be, you bought the game through steam ok but not through Nvidia who are charging people to access that game and then go through steam, it isn't too hard to understand

Nvidia are charging for the computer that runs the game, not the game itself. Customers already paid for access to the game themselves.

Gelf · Mar 2, 2020

This is why we can't have nice things. It should be seen as a boost to devs as people who can't afford high end PCs are now able to buy and play thier games but no they are more concerned with getting double dippers and being able to sign awful exclusivity deals.

Rickenslacker · Mar 2, 2020

Armadilo said:
Devs should have a say on where their games can be, you bought the game through steam ok but not through Nvidia who are charging people to access that game and then go through steam, it isn't too hard to understand

Nvidia isn't charging people to access any games, they're charging you to rent their hardware remotely. You buy the game through Steam, and you're still playing it through Steam.

Reinhardt Schneider · Mar 2, 2020

Armadilo said:
Devs should have a say on where their games can be, you bought the game through steam ok but not through Nvidia who are charging people to access that game and then go through steam, it isn't too hard to understand

The service is free, they paid only gives you access to better hardware, longer sessions and shorter wait times

You're literally paying for a cloud VM, game publishers should have no say in what you play on them or not since it's not another platform, it's literally a Windows machine with the usual clients in wich you log in with your account and play the games you have already paid

Candescence · Mar 2, 2020

NumberThree said:
Yikes. So basically you should not be able to play a game you've bought on a platform it was not made/sold for. I guess WINE is also the devil, as is emulation.

Holy shit, seriously? Throwing a fit because you can't sign exclusivity deals or might make less money from double-dipping? Yeah, fuck that greedy bullshit.

Armadilo · Mar 2, 2020

Gelf said:
This is why we can't have nice things. It should be seen as a boost to devs as people who can't afford high end PCs are now able to buy and play thier games but no they are more concerned with getting double dippers and being able to sign awful exclusivity deals.

The devs have the right to their video games ip, good for them as from the look of it, it's a damn struggle for them to defend themselves before someone calls them greedy and try to make them the villain

Stacey · Mar 2, 2020

I just can't wrap my head around developers/publishers removing games from this service.

They are literally losing money from people who couldn't previously run their games who are now potential customers.

It makes zero sense.

Ales34 · Mar 2, 2020

NumberThree said:
Yikes. So basically you should not be able to play a game you've bought on a platform it was not made/sold for.

Well, yes.
Do you think Sony would be okay with it if Nvidia builds a virtual PS4 emulator and streams Sony exclusives to any mobile phone or PC as long as you own a PS4 copy? Of course not. It's the same thing happening here, and of course the devs wouldn't like to have no control over it. I think if Nvidia were streaming only to PCs, the devs wouldn't have any issue with it.

Windu · Mar 2, 2020

Lol I just can't. This thread makes my head hurt. Anyway, the dev is in the right imo. I'll just leave it at that.

uzipukki · Mar 2, 2020

Armadilo said:
The devs have the right to their video games ip, good for them as from the look of it, it's a damn struggle for them to defend themselves before someone calls them greedy and try to make them the villain

That would only be a valid point if Nvidia was modifying the game files and pretending to own the rights to the game. They are not doing that. Only thing they are doing is letting you use a virtual machine to play a game that you yourself own. It's not that hard of a thing to grasp. And also, see that tweet from the ACTUAL DEV saying he is a greedy villain in this story lol.

Windu said:
Lol I just can't. This thread makes my head hurt. Anyway, the dev is in the right imo. I'll just leave it at that.

You didn't answer my question regarding me setting up a VPS from OVH and streaming a game from there. Should OVH pay or not allow me to do that because the dev isn't getting that money that I am paying to OVH?
EDIT: Or should the Dev be able to ask for OVH to disable my VPS, or remove the game installation from my VPS?

Deleted member 61326 · Mar 2, 2020

Windu said:
Lol I just can't. This thread makes my head hurt. Anyway, the dev is in the right imo. I'll just leave it at that.

This, but actually the reverse.

Rickenslacker · Mar 2, 2020

I noticed that they also had the game removed from GOG a while back, so it seems like they just hate people having options.

The Long Dark Removal, page 1 - Forum - GOG.com

Download the best games on Windows & Mac. A vast selection of titles, DRM-free, with free goodies, and lots of pure customer love.

www.gog.com

dex3108 · Mar 2, 2020

Ales34 said:
Well, yes.
Do you think Sony would be okay with it if Nvidia builds a virtual PS4 emulator and streams Sony exclusives to any mobile phone or PC as long as you own a PS4 copy? Of course not. It's the same thing happening here, and of course the devs wouldn't like to have no control over it. I think if Nvidia were streaming only to PCs, the devs wouldn't have any issue with it.

Nope emulating hardware is not the same as running VM.

ghostcrew · Mar 2, 2020

Windu said:
Lol I just can't. This thread makes my head hurt. Anyway, the dev is in the right imo. I'll just leave it at that.

Honestly it doesn't matter if the dev is in the right morally or in the wrong or whatever.

Nvidia publicly state that it's the rights holders (devs or pubs) who have the final say on whether their games are part of GeForce Now or not. If people are so outraged about this then they should probably not use GeForce Now as it's a pretty core part of their strategy. This dev is just using the offer that Nvidia is giving them to not be part of the service if they don't want to be for whatever reason.

It doesn't matter about legalities or moral arguments. Nvidia say that devs can remove their games whenever they want and this dev has said 'alright'.

"Some publishers may choose to remove games before the Founders trial period ends. Ultimately, they maintain control over their content and decide whether the game you purchase includes the ability to stream it on GeForce Now."

Alexandros · Mar 2, 2020

Armadilo said:
The devs have the right to their video games ip, good for them as from the look of it, it's a damn struggle for them to defend themselves before someone calls them greedy and try to make them the villain

The devs sold a licence to their ip to the customer. Nvidia sold a licence to their hardware to the customer. What is the developer's claim here?

Alexandros · Mar 2, 2020

ghostcrew said:
Honestly it doesn't matter if the dev is in the right morally or in the wrong or whatever.

Nvidia publicly state that it's the rights holders (devs or pubs) who have the final say on whether their games are part of GeForce Now or not. If people are so outraged about this then they should probably not use GeForce Now as it's a pretty core part of their strategy. This dev is just using the offer that Nvidia is giving them to not be part of the service if they don't want to be for whatever reason.

It doesn't matter about legalities or moral arguments. Nvidia say that devs can remove their games whenever they want and this dev has said 'alright'.

I think that it does matter, both for ethical and practical reasons. As a customer I don't want to give developers the idea that they have any authority to dictate what kind of computer I can play my games on or through what method after a sale has been finalized.

Edit: I apologize for the consecutive posts.

Rosebud · Mar 2, 2020

NumberThree said:
Yikes. So basically you should not be able to play a game you've bought on a platform it was not made/sold for. I guess WINE is also the devil, as is emulation.

So streaming your own library is too good for consumers, so can't happen.

The future of gaming will suck.

SMD · Mar 2, 2020

itchi · Mar 2, 2020

Devs continuing the tradition of making things as inconvenient as possible for paying customers.

.exe · Mar 2, 2020

If some developer said they don't want their game to be supported by Proton or be included in a multi-OS purchase on Steam, because they want to nickel and dime Linux users for a separate copy I would laugh.

Wok · Mar 2, 2020

NumberThree said:
Yikes. So basically you should not be able to play a game you've bought on a platform it was not made/sold for. I guess WINE is also the devil, as is emulation.

If the goal is to release the game on Stadia, why isn't the game removed from Steam? I am sure the dev could negotiate an even better exclusivity deal.

boris_feinbrand · Mar 2, 2020

Sounds like Napster era Lars Ulrich to me.

modiz · Mar 2, 2020

I get where the dev is coming from tbh, they should be the ones to decide where their game gets published, what is NVidia's right to profit over the game without their agreement?

.exe · Mar 2, 2020

Wok said:
If the goal is to release the game on Stadia, why isn't the game removed from Steam? I am sure the dev could negotiate an even better exclusivity deal.

Even if that's the case, GFN and Stadia are not even targeting remotely the same market. Stadia is largely marketed for people who play on a couch and value ease of use, plug and play, etc. These people avoid PC like the plague. The overlap there is going to be minimal.

uzipukki · Mar 2, 2020

modiz said:
I get where the dev is coming from tbh, they should be the ones to decide where their game gets published, what is NVidia's right to profit over the game without their agreement?

GFN has nothing to do where or how games a published. Only thing they offer you is a virtual PC that you can play games you own.

modiz · Mar 2, 2020

uzipukki said:
Nvidia has nothing to do where or how games a published. Only thing they offer you is a virtual PC that you can play games you own.

Yea, they use a developer without their agreement to profit from their platform.

Principate · Mar 2, 2020

ghostcrew said:
Honestly it doesn't matter if the dev is in the right morally or in the wrong or whatever.

Nvidia publicly state that it's the rights holders (devs or pubs) who have the final say on whether their games are part of GeForce Now or not. If people are so outraged about this then they should probably not use GeForce Now as it's a pretty core part of their strategy. This dev is just using the offer that Nvidia is giving them to not be part of the service if they don't want to be for whatever reason.

It doesn't matter about legalities or moral arguments. Nvidia say that devs can remove their games whenever they want and this dev has said 'alright'.

That's not what this thread is even about. The devs are upset that Nvidia added the game without their permission when it's pretty obvious Nvidia works via an opt out scheme rather than opt-in like stated in that paragraph right there. The reason they do so because Nvidia is simply providing a hardware service to their consumers the effects to the devs themselves are indirect at best.

Launchpad · Mar 2, 2020

This just comes across as greed no matter who does it. It should have nothing to do with the devs. You already own the game, you should be able to play it any way you want.

Unclebenny · Mar 2, 2020

The Long Dark dev here is dealing with a totally different situation from when the game was originally released in 2014. Game streaming wasn't a thing. It's not a ridiculous notion to suggest that the devs may think they should go back and re-assess how their IP is treated. Especially if another company is making money from it without even asking permission first.

As someone else mentioned it's not even a moral quandary, Nvidia have already said that anyone can leave the service. The reason they've added that text that is because they can't hold a game hostage on their platform, they would have no leg to stand on, legally.

HellofaMouse · Mar 2, 2020

The whole gefore now thing is one big grey area

uzipukki · Mar 2, 2020

modiz said:
Yea, they use a developer without their agreement to profit from their platform.

Why should GFN have to have an agreement with a developer when the only thing they are doing is renting hardware? If I rent a PC from a PC rental place and play a game that I have bought already, why should the rental place have to have an agreement with every developer?

LilScooby77 · Mar 2, 2020

Is this about how Nvidia are getting access to the games?

.exe · Mar 2, 2020

modiz said:
Yea, they use a developer without their agreement to profit from their platform.

This reminds me of the Let's Play (or other long-form video content) monetization issue. Please let me reach out to a developer to ask them if I can play their game on video. Like come on, get with the times.

ghostcrew · Mar 2, 2020

Principate said:
That's not what this thread is even about. The devs are upset that Nvidia added the game without their permission when it's pretty obvious Nvidia works via an opt out scheme rather than opt-in like stated in that paragraph right there. The reason they do so because Nvidia is simply providing a hardware service to their consumers the effects to the devs themselves are indirect at best.

The devs obviously annoyed that they're using an opt-out method rather than asking devs and publishers for their content for the service. They even say in a later reply that they'd probably have been cool with it if Nvidia had asked beforehand. Regardless, Nvidia allow them to remove their game from the service as they've allowed tons of others to leave.

I do think that, as a user of the service, Nvidia need to quickly deal with this problem. At this point there are barely any major publishers titles on the service. Capcom, Konami, Bethesda, Namco, Activision Blizzard, Rockstar, Remedy etc have chosen not to be part of it. And now indie developers are pulling their works from it. The service is gonna be pretttttty shite if it doesn't have any games on it.

NekoNeko · Mar 2, 2020

cry me a river.
i bought the game.

Armadilo · Mar 2, 2020

ghostcrew said:
Honestly it doesn't matter if the dev is in the right morally or in the wrong or whatever.

Nvidia publicly state that it's the rights holders (devs or pubs) who have the final say on whether their games are part of GeForce Now or not. If people are so outraged about this then they should probably not use GeForce Now as it's a pretty core part of their strategy. This dev is just using the offer that Nvidia is giving them to not be part of the service if they don't want to be for whatever reason.

It doesn't matter about legalities or moral arguments. Nvidia say that devs can remove their games whenever they want and this dev has said 'alright'.

You literally Put everything in perspective, let's see what people try to say after this

Raphael van Lierop claims Nvidia added The Long Dark to GeForce Now without permission.

User requested account closure

Attempted to circumvent ban with alt account

Attempted to circumvent ban with alt account

User requested account closure

The Shrouded Ghost

Two Pieces

Attempted to circumvent ban with alt account

Attempted to circumvent ban with alt account

The Shrouded Ghost