Bethesda Softworks is removing most of its games from NVIDIA GeForce Now streaming. For unknown reasons, only Wolfenstein: Youngblood will remain.
The future is cloud streaming, but only if you don't own the game and use what we want you to use for cloud streaming.
its because its a third party service trying to make money off the games with out the companies paying them. This is why xcloud will be supreme because it will basically duplicate xbox once it launches. You pay to access the xbox menu and you pay for your games,Simple
Imagine if you knew how it really worked. Are you getting paid for this? Third party games are under contract. Unless the ip is owned by the company offering said product, they are only as guaranteed as the contracts are. Period. There is no “superior” version of this agreement. Microsoft does not make games, so no.. they are in no way superior.
Yeah, XCloud will forgo any money and just support the third-parties. That's how a business thrives into the future, forgoing profits at all. I also like how everyone knows how XCloud will work when Microsoft has said absolutely nothing about it nor have they mentioned anything about when it will even be revealed.
I think battlegrog is saying that MS will pay the companies some kind of cut and get them into a contract instead of just hoping they don't pull out. I agree that MS has the pockets and clout to do that better than Nvidia. Don't know about it being "supreme" because of that, but whatever 😊
***I think battlegrog is saying that MS will pay the companies some kind of cut and get them into a contract instead of just hoping they don't pull out. *** That's not at all what he said. He said it will basically duplicate xbox (and, ironically, NVidia Geforce Now). What you're talking about is standard licensing model. Which is accurate and reflective of most streaming services right now.
"because it will basically duplicate Xbox once it launches" - Ever wondered why there are only around 50 games in the service during the beta? Simple, MS will have to pay a licensing fee for each and every game which appears in their rental service. If you're expecting every single game on Xbox to be in the officially launched service, you may be disappointed. However, if you use the Xbox version of PlayStation's Remote Play - allowing you to stream your own console - then that'll let you access all of your own games, for free. Otherwise, you're paying for the selection of games MS has paid for.
It doesn't make any sense for these companies to be pulling out. You still have to buy the game, so the publisher loses zero dollars.
It would seem that there may be some companies that want to double dip on streaming. Or at least think of it that way. With GeForce now all you have to do is make a single game purchase and the stream access is continual with out a forced subscription. I guess some developers will get it as this actually promotes making purchases and supporting sales.
I have a feeling that streaming games from PC will become a standard in a Windows update sometime in the future. Probably won't cost anything either, unless MS tries to tie it to xCloud, which is something different. MS is making moves on the PC gaming front, and they've had remote desktop for the longest time. Games are impractical with that feature, but with today's hardware, there really is no reason why games couldn't use something in the same vein. I don't really see how companies can outright stop it if the game is being played on the hardware it was intended. Its a paid service, yes, but the user isn't violating any of the license agreements since the game isn't playing on unlicensed hardware.
There's no issue with streaming games from your own system - Steam Streaming is now available on mobile devices so you can stream your pc anywhere, like the PS4. The issue is, Geforce has a paid membership model where they are keeping all the proceeds for themselves and not paying the publishers - in Beta it was all free. So, unless they start paying to allow games in the service, publishers won't simply allow them to support their games. Similar issue with GamePass, MS can't put a game into the service until they've given a bunch of money to the dev/publisher.
Apparently they want another cut. I don't understand how Bethesda or Activision are entitled to a seperate check, unless they think they're entitled a fee for advertising? I don't know... We buy the game, pubs get their money, and then we pay Nvidia to stream it. It's probably one of the best models we've seen.
I keep telling people that this is the goal. No one believes me and here is more proof of it. It's all about control. No one should support any sort of streaming. Not even the Xcloud. Why? If you give them an inch.....
I don't like the fragmentation caused by multiple different streaming services, but it's not like companies aren't trying to control where you play by using exclusivity to encourage you to get locked into their ecosystems.
Streaming games doesn’t really make much sense for the most part, but it will be around for a little while. I could see it if games are being stored completely online eventually, and then processed locally (which is how video streaming works).
Soon there is 10 different gaming streaming services, as there is for movies / tv shows. F this. Time to put on my eye patch again.
This is why I think hardware will remain for a while. There's only 3 hardware systems, and Nintendo, for the games people are talking about going to the cloud. And while there are growing number of services on those platforms, people know they can buy and play games like always without having to mix it up with those services let alone cloud-based services. It's also why GamePass is so popular. It's an option, and it doesn't change how people otherwise game.
"Why do people keep pirating our games/movies/shows?!" This. This is why. Stop taking away options
People should always keep an emergency eyepatch in their closet in case stuff like this happen.
Emergency eyepatch *squawk* emergency eyepatch
Geforce now had so much promise. Ahh well.
Am I missing something? How is Nvidia profiting off streaming the game for you any different than any of the several gaming pc manufacturers profiting off selling you a machine to run said games??? Why are so many publishers demanding not to have their games run on the service?
I'm curious too. I like your analogy with the PC. Maybe because they're doing some magic with those Steam installs and marketing the games directly they're being treated like a reseller? Maybe if they just rented you a PC on the cloud they wouldn't have to honor takedowns. But then the companies could just block online services for those IPs.. Nvidia can't win without $$$ I think publishers are pulling back because they want a slice of the $$$, and they know the big players will pay them
The issue to them is that you aren't being tied to hardware. They want you tied to hardware or forced to pay a licensing fee for the accessibility. This world of streaming to any device from your owned library isn't what they want, it removes their control and desire to get you to buy games multiple times on multiple platforms.
That's where I'm kind of confused as well. Game is still running on the device it was licensed for. This is like remote play basically. It's a different input and output method, but I dont see how these companies can legally say that nvidia is not allowed to do what they're doing. Nvidia isn't making money off the games directly. Just proving another way to display and interact with the games. Windows has done this for regular software since remote desktop in win3.1. It hasn't been practical for games until more recently, but same principal applies. It's why sony doesnt need permission for remote play on ps4, although they do have a white list due to wanting to keep good relations with the publishers.
Maybe cause it requires games to also come with a Steam key, and some publishers are looking to ditch Steam forever.
The issue is licencing. When the service was in beta, every package for the service was free. Now it's launched, there's a paid-for service meaning that Geforce is making money off other people's games without giving the publisher any money for using their games as, effectively, rental copies. That's why a bunch of them are being pulled as it wasn't in the agreement that Nvidia would ever charge for them. They'll return if/when they discuss the amount they want to be re-inserted
But the games have been bought and paid for. Nvidia is just allowing you to stream games that Bethesda, Activision, etc. have already gotten paid for by the users. Nvidia is basically renting out a PC for you to play your games on. I could see if they need to simply update agreements generally, but I don't understand why the pubs should be entitled to an additional fee. Removing hardware barriers actually helps the software makers.
@atom, because Nvidia has added the games without getting full permission from the publishers. Nvidia now have a paid-for version of their service, charging people to play a publishers games on their service without the rights. Ever buy a physical dvd or bluray and see the big “not for rental” sticker on there? That’s because those who with to rent or use the products in a service have to get permission (usually bought) first. Imagine if Nextflix bought a load of dvds and then put them on their service without permission - same situation. I know that this only lets you use the games if you’ve bought them on Steam, but the games ‘on’ Nvidia servers aren’t technically yours, they’re all pre-downloaded and ready to play - hence Nvidia has a load of games sat on their servers which they have no rights to have stored, thus they are being removed.
I understand their issues with the license agreements maybe not being updated, but my point is that it doesn't justify asking for a cut. If the licensing agreement that allowed them to utilize the game code during the free trial was agreeable, it's a bit unclear why suddenly the paid service would change their view outside of needing minor changes to the language. I say "a bit unclear," but we know the real reason. The pubs benefit from the the service because it encourages more users to buy PC titles that they may not have purchased otherwise. Nvidia is doing the heavy lifting to allow more customers to be available to the pubs here. You equate it to netflix buying DVDs and streaming them without permission, but it's really not quite like that. It's the equivalent of a movie company giving Netflix a DVD and saying: Hey, you take on the expense of streaming it, but only let verified purchasers stream it. That seems fair. Licenses are paid for by Netflix, but they don't require you already own the movie. Pubs and devs are paid to add titles to gamepass and PSNow, but they don't require you to already own the games. Here? You have to buy the damn game. I'm with Rich on this one, it seems like BS from some of the usual suspects... https://youtu.be/qW3kYCC3WN...
I don't get why games are being pulled. It streams games you already own right?
Yeah....but now there is a middle man (nvidia) involved who is charging money for a service involving these games. These publishers want a piece of the pie. I'm sure this is all a licensing mess. But.....cloud gaming is the future. /s
But it's not the games specifically that are being added to the service is it? It's just streaming the images just like it would be outputting them to a screen if you had an NVidia GPU. It will also handle input commands. Am I misunderstanding how this service works?
"But it's not the games specifically that are being added to the service is it?" Yes, it is. You choose from your games that are available in the Geforce Now client app to add to the Geforce Now service. Only games approved games show up on the list. This is done before you ever get to the streaming part.
All cloud gaming can die and should die.
This kind of streaming service isn't bad honestly. You still own the games, but this allows you to stream what you already own without forcing you to exclusively use the streaming option itself. It's appreciated, and consumer friendly. It works sorta like Steam Link except you're not relying on your own hardware and home internet connection from far away in order to do so.
Youngblood is one the sh"""" games they have developed. NVIDIA should remove that one as well.
But but GFNow is the Stadia killer guys, haven't you heard!? Yea, first Activision and now Bethesda. Some Stadia killer. Meanwhile Stadia is getting Doom Eternal day and date as other consoles. And let the down votes commence in 3..2.. It's ok, I embrace them. I like Stadia and not ashamed to say it.
Stadia is it's own killer. It doesn't need anyone else to help it along. Even if Bethesda and Activision pull their games from the service....if that is even legal based on how I understand GeForce Now works, then GeForce Now still has significantly more content available to the player than Stadia. About all Stadia is doing is requiring people that might have the game already to pay for it again on these games, and you want to celebrate that as a win for Stadia? Buying an older game for full price, compared to a game you already have, that runs fine on hardware you already have, streaming somewhere where your hardware isn't located? Hooray for Stadia and these publishers I guess. Wonder what will happen if MS makes this a free feature in Windows, because MS has always been pretty open to remote access to their Windows desktop.
Well, this doesn't negate all Stadia's problem. You've got Android Central begging for cross play so they can find someone to play Destiny 2 with. That is probably the most damning indictment of Stadia yet. https://n4g.com/news/232743...
We're on a collision course with a situation similar to what the movie/TV industry is doing right now. Every publisher will have their own service, games will eventually be restricted to said services and you won't own the games. If you cancel your subscription, poof they're gone. I imagine once they fully get rid of physical games (if they can), prices will also go up with no middle man. Hope those who were screaming for an all-digital future are happy. Careful what you ask for.
Pricks. I was in the middle of playing through Skyrim again on there. My Laptop isn't powerful enough to run the Special Edition so it was nice to play it at 60fps compared to 30fps on console. In fact it was the only game that would run smoothly from my Steam collection. Every other game has fps issues (I use the steam fps counter so it's not my connection thats the problem). Even Rage 2 runs like shite. Mind you it doesn't matter. I can't play that anymore either. I bet Activision\Blizzard and Bethesda have done this so they can resell their games at full price on Stadia. It seems like its the kind of thing these greedy pricks would do.
This is the future of gaming and one of the things that will destroy it. Every major developer is going to have there own storefront and streaming service. You will have to pay monthly for 25 different plans and ultimately people will get sick of it and stop playing all together. Same for the movie industry.
This is the primary reason I don't care about any game streaming platforms
this is no different than a internet cafe.
N4G is a community of gamers posting and discussing the latest game news. It’s part of NewsBoiler, a network of social news sites covering today’s pop culture.