Game Streaming Platforms and Technology (xCloud, PSNow, GeforceNow, Luna) (Rip: Stadia)

Actually last year there was a ruling against Steam who tried to prohibit the sale of digitized games.

The courts found that under EU law, users should be able to resell digital games, deeming the controversial Steam clauses unlawful. They argue that when a product passes on to the purchaser, the seller loses the right to restrict subsequent sales within the secondhand market.

In other words, game ownership passes on to the buyer.
...
Additionally, the French courts say that the description of Steam as a subscription service within the user agreement is counter to the nature of purchases on the platform. Users spend defined monetary amounts on single products in standalone transactions that grant access to the game forever, while subscription services (like the upcoming Apple Arcade) have a defined accessibility period and don’t imply ownership.
Click to expand...


I would not be surprised to see a challenge regarding consumer rights to games they own.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
pharma said:
Actually last year there was a ruling against Steam who tried to prohibit the sale of digitized games ("In other words, game ownership passes on to the buyer.")
I would not be surprised to see a challenge regarding consumer rights to games they own.
Click to expand...

Yeah, still waiting to see when Sony and Microsoft allow reselling of PS4 and XBO games. Also waiting to see when Apple and Google allow reselling of digital apps and games purchased on their platforms. I wonder when I'll be allowed to resell my WinRAR license or FastPictureViewer license. :p

Also waiting to see when Amazon and other companies allow reselling of digital content (music and movies).

Oh yeah, and even better the reselling of Stadia games. :D Oooh, and how about reselling of games bought through Onlive? :D

Also, any applications bought on NVidia's shield.

That French ruling is a not very well thought out ruling, IMO. Digital goods don't suffer the wear and tear that physical goods suffer.

Regards,
SB
 
Offtopic but one does not rule out the other IMHO. Just because there is no physical wear doesn't mean you shouldn't be allowed to resell digital content or that digital content doesn't diminish in value over time. It obviously does. Digital games only decrease in price, for example. OTOH physical products, despite wear and tear, can and obviously do increase in value over time.

The ruling in itself is fine. Now there needs to be sensible legislation that governs how digital content can be resold. I don't see any real problems with the likes of Google, Apple and Steam. For them it would be pretty straight forward to build a market place where people can sell their stuff, take a cut as a service fee, and remove the item from one's library. Hell, Stream market place is exactly that.

DRM free content might be a bigger issue. Though even that should be doable as long as content can only be resold through the same platform you bought it on.
 
tongue_of_colicab said:
Digital games only decrease in price, for example. OTOH physical products, despite wear and tear, can and obviously do increase in value over time.
Click to expand...

Physical goods very rarely increase in price. It can happen, certainly, but it's pretty rare. For the vast majority of cases, the value decreases sharply in the first couple years. Sometimes in the first week of ownership (Automobiles, for example).

I suppose a fair way to do it is to prorate the max value a digital title can be resold for that goes down over time. So, as an example, it can be resold for 75% of the new value in the first few months. Then 50% over the next year or two. Then 25% down to 5% over the course of a decade.

And on top of that the developer of the title gets a cut of the sale every time it is resold. That would be fair, IMO.

Of course, this would penalize developers that don't go the F2P or microtransaction models which may push more and more developers to move to F2P or heavily push microtransactions for "temporary" game benefits (IE - increased bag space in an RPG costs you 5 USD and lasts for 30 days) and consumables. Although a developer getting a %cut (say 30%) everytime a title is resold may prevent something like this happening.

Regards,
SB
 
Last edited:
I agree devs/pubs should be getting a cut, I disagree with setting a minimum price. Capitalism, free markets and all that. I also don't think it would really make much difference. Maybe a set time between purchase and resell would be more sensible. Especially in the case of games where most sales or front loaded.

If a game is sold for 60, it is unlikely large amount of people are going to severely undercut that price. They might if the game is rubbish and they try to recoup at least something or if the game is very short. Both cases sound like the product was not up to consumer standards and if that is the case, should products like that really be protected?

I don't see a game like Witcher 3 being resold for much lower prices soon after launch. You could also argue many people don't want to pay full price so netting a smaller part of a resale might actually not be that bad in the long run.

There is also other things that might entice people to buy new such as pre-order bonuses or steam trading cards. I think a lot of people also like to keep their games, especially the good ones.

I'm sure some will suffer but I don't think it will be all doom and gloom.
 
Selling digital downloads will just push games even more towards F2P models. No point selling a game for $40 if it'll be resold to 10 people over the years. Release it for free and have in-game consumables and money from everyone who plays it.
 
And entice big publishers to move to subscription models only.
 
I just read the ars technica comments and people are trashing Nvidia for the fact that they make people pay extra to "use features they paid for". This was because Nvidia said they would enable rtx features on pay tier. So some fools, or rabble rousers cannot distinguish between buying a card, or not buying it and paying $5 a month. If this is actual confusion from a theoretically astute audience I worry about Nvidia ability to explain the system to regular gamer people.
 
Cyberpunk 2077 is Coming to GeForce NOW
However, there is some good news for GeForce NOW coming. In its announcement blog, NVIDIA shared that upcoming game that is perhaps the most anticipated release of 2020, Cyberpunk 2077, will be available on its game streaming service. One of the NVIDIA staff shared that "GeForce NOW members will be able to grab their copy on Steam and play the game the moment it's available. GeForce NOW Founders members can explore the streets of Night City with RTX ON, fully optimized and instantly available, even on your Mac laptop."
Click to expand...
https://www.techpowerup.com/264046/cyberpunk-2077-is-coming-to-geforce-now
 
Nvidia's GeForce Now hits 1 million users after two weeks, pledges day-one Cyberpunk 2077 support
Mere weeks after GeForce Now’s formal launch, the company announced that over one million gamers have signed up to play their PC games anywhere, in stark contrast to Google Stadia’s disappointing user numbers.

The more important difference is in price. To use Google’s service, you currently need to pay $129 for a Stadia Premiere Edition, then you’ll probably want to pay $10 per month for a Stadia Pro subscription. GeForce Now, by contrast, offers a totally free tier, while the premium Founders subscription that unlocks longer play sessions and real-time ray tracing is currently in a 90-day free introductory period. You don’t need to pay anything to play GeForce Now at the moment, and it remains to be seen how many people will pay the $5 per month for a Founders subscription once the trial runs out.
Click to expand...
https://www.pcworld.com/article/3528285/nvidias-geforce-now-hits-1-million-users-after-two-weeks-pledges-day-one-cyberpunk-2077-support.html
 
I did not realize it did not support GOG so I am a bit frustrated now. I think I could actually see myself doing this otherwise, but I also tried to support GOG in the past for reasons... I don't have time to play regularly enough to justify a top end rig any more so this sort of setup is very appealing to me.
 
I think it may be about a few things.
  • Before it was fine when NV weren't monetizing those games. But now that they are charging for GeForce Now, they are tangentially monetizing those games.
  • With Google, Microsoft, and Sony making a play for cloud streaming, publishers are likely positioning themselves for licensing deals with various companies...assuming those deals aren't already in place.
    • This means that allowing games to be streamed on NV's service may be counterproductive.
I could see more publishers potentially pulling out of GeForce Now due to those 2 concerns.

In some ways it's similar to game modding using copyrighted material (say, for example, Mario and Luigi). As long as no money is involved at any point (including 3rd party download services like Nexus Mods) then it's mostly fine. But as soon as any money is involved at any point, many publishers will move very quickly to serve cease and desist letters.

Regards,
SB
 
Bethesda and Activision have one reason to step away from Geforce Now, Greed
February 24, 2020
Why are publishers pulling out of Geforce Now? The answer can only be greed. What Geforce Now offers is the ability for PC gaming to reach a wider audience, but it also stops publishers from getting its customers to purchase their favourite games again. Geforce Now can't have a Skyrim re-release, and unlike Stadia, I don't need to repurchase Destiny's expansions to enjoy playing Shadowkeep on the cloud.
...
Let's be clear here, Geforce Now is a service which offers PC gamers an Nvidia-powered gaming PC on the cloud. As such, publishers shouldn't be able to restrict what consumers do with the PC games they purchase. What's next? Will publishers crackdown on Steam in-home streaming, or Windows game emulation on Linux?

Bethesda's decision to remove most of its games from Geforce Now is anti-consumer, and our opinion on this matter won't change unless Bethesda gives us a good reason why they removed their most popular games from Geforce Now. Geforce Now is a great service for consumers, and it seems clear that many companies don't see profit in it.
Click to expand...
https://www.overclock3d.net/news/so..._reason_to_step_away_from_geforce_now_greed/1
 
TV and Cloud Gaming Market is Set for a 90% Jump According to Jon Peddie Research
JPR estimates the TV and Cloud Gaming hardware market will reach $ 25 billion by 2025 representing an 11.3% CAGR from 2019. This represents an unprecedented increase of almost $ 12 billion.
...
The big three of Microsoft, Sony and Nintendo are set to release new local processing hardware in this window. Cloud services such as Google Stadia, Nvidia GeForce Now, Sony PlayStation Now and other currently released cloud platforms should expand in quality and customer base. We expect new cloud gaming services from Microsoft xCloud, TenCent Start, and possibly something from Amazon to come into play. Additionally, we are forecasting AppleTV and other micro-console platforms to refine and expand. "
...
Jon Peddie, President of JPR, noted, "Like most other expansions in gaming this comes down to the pixels and the networks. The resolution of TVs has quadrupled from the previous generation with 4K displays replacing 1080p as the standard. Gamers demand high frame rates. The processing load to draw these frames requires powerful hardware whether it's local or in a data center. Internet speeds are getting faster and latency is dropping as the network edge moves closer to the user. We expect integrated cloud gaming services to come as a feature of future TVs.
Click to expand...
https://www.pdvg.it/en/2020/02/24/t...r-a-90-jump-according-to-jon-peddie-research/
 
Bethesda And Activision Blizzard Thumb Their Noses At Players Over GeForce Now
February 25, 2020
How many times have you come across someone from the video game industry saying something like “We’re all about the players. We want to bring you the games you love wherever, whenever, with whomever and on whatever platform you want”? Sometimes it rings true, other times not so much. Hearing this kind of industry boiler-speak is a good time to keep in mind that actions speak louder than words.
...
Why the games were pulled hasn’t been made clear by either the publishers or Nvidia. One obvious possibility is the publishers want Nvidia to pay them for the privilege of streaming their games. Never mind that players have already bought the games that are being streamed, these publishers want to be payed again if players want to play their game on a different platform. Another idea that has been floated is that Activision Blizzard may have a secret deal with Google to make their games Stadia exclusives.
...
Publishers would love getting paid again for playing games you already own but that ship has already sailed. Xbox lets you buy a game once and play it on PC or console and the expectation is the same will hold true when xCloud exits beta later this year. GFN offers the same buy-once, play-anywhere opportunity for a large library of Steam games. With these options available, players are unlikely to accept buying games twice or paying higher subscription fees to play games they already own.

Activision Blizzard and Bethesda are thumbing their noses at players who want to play their games anywhere. Remember George R.R. Martin’s dictum, “Words are wind . . . put more trust in deeds” and call BS when you hear these publishers talk about how much they love their players. From here it looks like what they really love is their player’s money.
Click to expand...
https://www.forbes.com/sites/kevinmurnane/2020/02/25/bethesda-and-activision-blizzard-thumb-their-noses-at-players-over-geforce-now/#37bde6612b7c
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Rys
Reopening Architecture and Products + rules and guidelines changes
3 4 5
Replies
90
Views
16K
Shifty Geezer
Shifty Geezer
Shortbread
Next-Generation NVMe SSD and I/O Technology [PC, PS5, XBSX|S]
105 106 107
Replies
2K
Views
218K
Karamazov
K
N
How do you feel about next-gen gaming? *remodelled
2
Replies
32
Views
8K
AlNom
A
A
Holy Wall of Text: My impressions post Playstation 4 (PS4) unveil
2 3 4
Replies
70
Views
20K
(((interference)))
I
A
Forza: A Test Case for next gen hardware discussion
2
Replies
32
Views
9K
tuna
T
Back
Top