-
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.
Raphael van Lierop claims Nvidia added The Long Dark to GeForce Now without permission.
- Thread starter Video Games Are Dumb
- Start date
I figure they believe that the additional sales they think they might make off of the back of this are peanuts compared to the price of an exclusivity deal, so fuck you and me and whoever else already bought their game.
I've been thinking about this, and the only thing I can see that's different is because they can't install or use their DRMs properly on the virtual machines.
They can't track their customers usage or install their own launchers that will report to them with accurate consumer data, so they don't want to be a part of it.
They can't track their customers usage or install their own launchers that will report to them with accurate consumer data, so they don't want to be a part of it.
This is quite a mess, Nvidia did basically nothing wrong, this is not a good look for those publishers that are preventing customers from having another way to play games they already own using an account where they bought the game... Using a rented pc should not be an issue... Hope it bites them in the *ss honestly. A mass refund claiming that the purchase was made with GFN in mind would serve all of them well.
But, they can, you still have to log in to the launchers, if they can't track it it's no different than using a VPN on your PC and logging in.
Installing unsupported (aka untested) games from Steam was disabled for launch.
Devs think that users should pay them extra $$$ for streaming games that they've already bought.
Nothing. Just that GFN is cheaper and easier to setup.
I'm proud of Twitter. Basically everybody responding is against the dev on this one.
Rainway doesn't have a sub fee option as far as I know, because it just uses your hardware.
I wasn't even aware Shadow was a thing. Does it support all games? Is GeForce Now being targetted by devs solely for being a known entity? That makes this even crazier.
GeForce Now is a sub fee to use Nvidia's hardware.
Rainway doesn't have a sub fee option as far as I know, because it just uses your hardware.
I wasn't even aware Shadow was a thing. Does it support all games? Is GeForce Now being targetted by devs solely for being a known entity? That makes this even crazier.
Shadow supports anything you own it's just a 100% cloud based desktop
As someone who only loosely knew what Geforce Now was I thought it was pretty messed up this game was on their service or whatever without permission...but after reading a bit of this thread I'm more confused as to why a dev would choose to block this? The user still bought the game, and are playing the version they own, just streamed from a VM or whatever from Nvidia. Even if they are happy with the quality of streaming, its not like they stop me from trying to play it on my old ass desktop or anything.
I would ask any publisher and developer to check how much money car manufacturers get from rent-a-car companies. How much any game company gets from services that rent consoles?
Entertainment industry is only industry where consumers don't own their products and can't do whatever they want with their products.
Entertainment industry is only industry where consumers don't own their products and can't do whatever they want with their products.
The only reason devs are taking out their customers choice is in the hopes they can sign sn exclusivity deal for some other big name streaming service, like Stadia. Its not a good deal for them if you can keep your license when streaming, they want you to buy the game again.
Why are so many people in here siding with Nvidia?
They installed the game without permission on their servers. As a company you usually have to pay a licence to do that.
They even make money with games they put on their servers without having any licence to do so. Which is super scummy.
It doesn't matter if you own the game already. Nvidia has to pay their share, too.
That's like saying that you own Office 365 for your home pc so your employer can provide you office 365 on your work pc without paying Microsoft for any licence.
They installed the game without permission on their servers. As a company you usually have to pay a licence to do that.
They even make money with games they put on their servers without having any licence to do so. Which is super scummy.
It doesn't matter if you own the game already. Nvidia has to pay their share, too.
That's like saying that you own Office 365 for your home pc so your employer can provide you office 365 on your work pc without paying Microsoft for any licence.
You can use your Office 365 anywhere you want as far as I know. That's the point.
Nvidia does all the work and provide everything from hardware to OS, developers don't need to do anything. Nvidia is not renting games they are renting streamlined VMs.
Why does Nvidia need permission for me to install my own games on their hardware?
They also install the games on their servers, otherwise they couldn't provide that service. Though, quite obviously they didn't pay for that.
Many contractors already do this. I also use my work 365 license on my home machine.
Because you are not installing it on their hardware. Nvidia does install it on their own hardware. And they need a buisness licence / commercial agreement for that.
Contractors use their own hardware. They usually are not provided any hardware by the employer and are also not integrated in the company.
So the only thing Nvidia has to do to remain legal is force users to click through the installation?
Assuming a game was legally installed what precludes another licensed user from playing from that install? Ownership of the hardware obviously isn't a prerequisite for using the license.
This sounded so cool when it first came out of beta. Now publishers are pulling games left and right and Nvidia isn't asking devs permission for games?
Last edited:
No, you need to press install button after you log-in to launcher you need to use. Nvidia does cache files needed to install games to speed up process but they are not installing games on VMs.
Linus Media Group has cache server for games so employees can just log in to their accounts and download games faster so do they also need to pay developers?
Why would they ask permission for games?
Do you ask for permission from the devs whenever you install their game on a new device?
no, you're literally logging into your steam account and running through the steam game installation process on the other machine the exact same way you do at home
even had black desert ask if I wanted to put a shortcut on the computer desktop, which i don't think you can even access through geforce now (i could be wrong, i only messed with it for a few minutes)
Nvidia did nothing wrong. Shame on everyone siding with publishers and devs on this. Take a few minutes to educate yourself on the issues at hand instead of responding with your embryonic takes. Some of you have absolutely no idea what you're talking about and it's obvious within just a few words of your posts. Learn to be slow to speak, fast to learn.
Imagine stanning for continued loss of consumer rights and ownership in the digital space.
Imagine stanning for continued loss of consumer rights and ownership in the digital space.
Wow. The audacity of some devs to demand deals for every element of playing a game. Nvidia are enabling people to play in more ways, encouraging your sales and the first reaction is to shut it down because you want more money on top of what you earned. And I'm not surprised the devs are anti refund. Basically anything pro consumer is a problem to these hacks. Once Epic started waving dollars at everyone, we're all expecting dollar cheques for any initiative. Let the dev demand a cut of GPU sales as well, I heard those are sold in mind with playing videogames.
This is exactly the same as if I rented my own windows PC on the internet and then remoted in and installed MY games from MY steam account.
The only difference is that Nvidia is providing more GPU power and optimizations to the streaming.
Nvidia doesn't touch any licenses.
The only difference is that Nvidia is providing more GPU power and optimizations to the streaming.
Nvidia doesn't touch any licenses.
Do you think Valve owns all the servers that provide downloads games to people's PCs? Anyone can create a cache server CDN that ties into Steam's API. That's why there are so many of them around the world.
There was even talk where if Steam ever died for good they'd just unlock the authentication so that people could still download their games in the future from the unofficial servers.
Multiple people who own the same game playing on the same pc doesn't result in multiple installs, and installing your own game on a pc you don't own breaks no rules. If literally anyone who works at nvidia owns these games they paid for it.
Why? I bought the game from the game company through steam. My business with them is concluded. I should be able to install it on any computer i care to use. Devs and pubs trying to insert themselves into this can fuck off, I already paid em.
Again do car manufacturers get cut from taxi companies and rent-a-car companies?
Another reminder that developers are not your friends, indies or AAA.
This is just greed, pure and simple. I already paid for your game, no one is stealing anything here. If anything, Nvidia is actually helping developers to reach a wider audience from people with low end PC.
Hopefully they don't come after Shadow when it starts its wider release next month.
This is just greed, pure and simple. I already paid for your game, no one is stealing anything here. If anything, Nvidia is actually helping developers to reach a wider audience from people with low end PC.
Hopefully they don't come after Shadow when it starts its wider release next month.
That's my theory. Valve has admin-level remote access to all content servers (once upon a time, Valve accepted EOIs from anybody interested in hosting a content server, and the FAQ explicitly listed remote access with admin privileges as a requirement), so it'd update them to also act as authentication servers, meaning you could continue to download your games for as long as somebody somewhere is willing to host one.
Officially, all Valve has said is that "measures are in place to ensure that all users will continue to have access to their Steam games", which is rather vague but, to me, definitely points to more robust and long-term solution than the seemingly common theory that there'd just be a generous heads-up prior to the kill switch being flipped.
With this logic, literally every hardware component found in a PC would have the manufacturers owing these devs a cut.
If I go to a PC cafe and rent a PC where I access my steam account to play games I already paid for, do the devs deserve a cut of the money I paid to use that PC?
Yeah not sure how I feel with this.
I guess itd be nice to at least tell the devs/pubs concerned their games will be available on that platform, but really I only see that as a courtesy with this.
They aren't selling their games, they're selling a means to play them and customers have to have bought their games on steam to play their game, really I dont know why anyone would turn it down, other than the expectation of receiving money or their service isnt deemed to be doing their games a good service, which doesnt seem to be the case.
I guess itd be nice to at least tell the devs/pubs concerned their games will be available on that platform, but really I only see that as a courtesy with this.
They aren't selling their games, they're selling a means to play them and customers have to have bought their games on steam to play their game, really I dont know why anyone would turn it down, other than the expectation of receiving money or their service isnt deemed to be doing their games a good service, which doesnt seem to be the case.
Damn, I hope Asus talked to every single dev out there. I got quite a few of their component in my PC.
No. They definitely shouldn't, they've gotten the money from me already. Where I install and access said game shouldn't matter to them. But it does, because they're greedy bastards.
Here from other developer perspective
old.reddit.com
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 comments
old.reddit.com
But it's not you installing it, it's Nvidia right?
A car is hardware not software.
Again hardware.
I have never been on a internet Cafe. But you are using your license, if these games are on Nvidia servers it's not your licenses technically.
Yes, it is. You have to use your own Steam/Epic/Origin etc. account and have to have the game bought on that account. Geforce Now is nothing more than a Virtual Machine that you have to provide your own licenses and account to use. If I bought a VM from Hetzner, Virmach, OVH, Microsoft, Google or what ever, installed Windows and installed Steam and the game then, why would any of those providers need to pay for the dev?
You are installing it. And I fail to see with your logic why hardware is exempt, unless for the sake of winning internet arguments.