Nvidia's GeForce Now Will Lose Access To Titles From Xbox Game Studios and Warner Bros. (theverge.com) 22
Nvidia's GeForce Now cloud gaming service is losing access to more titles later this month, the company announced said. From a report: Starting April 24th, GeForce Now will no longer be able to play titles from Microsoft's Xbox Game Studios, Warner Bros. Interactive Entertainment, Codemasters, and Klei Entertainment. Without Xbox Game Studios, GeForce Now can't access popular titles like Halo: The Master Chief Collection or games in the Gears of War or Forza franchises. Warner Bros.' game division is another popular publisher, owning the rights to series like the Batman: Arkham games developed by Rocksteady and Mortal Kombat titles from NetherRealm. Codemasters is well known for developing racing titles with the Formula 1 brand and rally racing games under the Dirt series. And Klei is well known for making indie hits like Don't Starve and Mark of the Ninja The news is another blow for GeForce Now, which differs from Google Stadia by letting subscribers stream games from their existing Steam libraries on a remote PC. .
Welp (Score:2)
at least you don't lose games paided for when they (Score:2)
at least you don't lose games paided for when they close down.
Netflix Style (Score:2)
Kind of a bad look (Score:2)
It seems like reducing any options people have for playing your games during widespread stay at home orders, is inherently a move that makes you look like a jerk.
Game streaming wont work (Score:5, Insightful)
At this point we've tried it both ways. The pro-corporate way with Stadia where you own nothing and there are platform exclusives. Nobody bought it.
And the pro-consumer way with Geforce Now which is essentially remote desktop for all of your games. And the developers pulled their titles because they think you should have to rebuy your games from them.
So game streaming is effectively dead because the developers/publishers and gamers can't agree on a business model. Gamers refuse to accept SaaS and devs/publishers refuse to respect the first sale doctrine.
Re: (Score:2)
You are making an assumption that publishers are seeing additional sales from nvidia's service. Their response appears to indicate the opposite, that they are not seeing any meaningful extra sales, and that nvidia's service is likely hurting their chances of selling on streaming platforms that do force people to re-buy their favourite games.
And for all the corporatocratic nonsense, people who do market analysis to figure these things out tend to be the ones making these decisions. And they are also people w
Re: (Score:3)
They are pulling them from geforcenow in anticipation of sometime in the future creating a streamed form.
Xbox absolutely has a streaming service in the works.
https://www.xbox.com/en-US/xbo... [xbox.com]
It's not really crazy to deprive your competitor of content, when the product will live or die on the content it has to offer. Why let Nvidia profit and build for the next however many months or years until xcloud gets up and running? Seems like a pretty smart strategic move to me.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Re: (Score:2)
Most of the "smart" in the business sense - people at google are likely gone at this point. This isn't really about "google" either. Every major IT startup that becomes a massively successful corporation hits a point where people who built it's successful product get massively outnumbered by typical corporate drones who get hired after the fact. You can't expand a massive corporation on just a handful of people. Maintenance and expansion of existing products will continue to require more and more people.
And
Re: (Score:2)
And when those corporate drones outnumber the excellent ones (literally, aristocrats) that build the successful products of the company by sufficient margin, it becomes what google became and is today. A typical Silicon Valley quasi-monopoly that has long purged its top talent in favour of corporatocratic mediocrity and is hanging on only because of its core product remaining a quasi monopoly, funding most of the rest.
Built a humanity-changing search engine? Sure, what what have to done for me lately?
Oh, spread mobile devices to the far reaches of the first and third world? Okay, but what since then?
Built a cloud email, office, calendar suite in use by billions? Okay, but what's next?
Developed a browser that has surpassed all others in usage? And then?
The most successful video streaming platform in existence? ... ?
Added bonus for most Silicon Valley comes from "diversity and inclusion" nonsense which is an ideology that is strictly anti-excellence and focuses on purging the best and hiring the worst. Which is literally what the goal of this ideology, "equity", equality of outcome regardless of input is.
Compare the innovation + economy of SV vs. anywhere else in the US (since the 70s). Now tell me again about
Re: (Score:2)
Note how all those things happened quite a long time ago.
Now contrast it with the following:
1. Are recent changes to products you mentioned mostly good or mostly bad?
2. How many other products has this company tried to start and failed/abandoned?
You can always look at a patient who has a serious illness from having aged badly and note that many of his organs are working just fine. It's all a matter of what you choose to look at. I choose to look at a whole. You chose to look at a few specific points and wit
Re: (Score:2)
Built a humanity-changing search engine? Sure, what what have to done for me lately?
That search engine remains least-bad, but it's clearly being optimized for natural language queries at the expense of technical terms. It has a tendency to go to either one extreme (ignoring key parts of a query) or the other ('verbatim' won't even acommodate different word orders). I'm fine with Google optimizing for its assistant, but 2020 Google searches are nowhere near as good as 2010 Google searches.
Oh, spread mobile devices to the far reaches of the first and third world?
Android was a purchase, and up until the Pixel, hardware was designed by third parties. It's difficult
Re: (Score:2)
That search engine remains least-bad
I use it for technical purposes tens or hundreds of times a day and it works for me. It is least bad by a country mile, for technical use.
That was also an acquisition.
It was a purchased over a decade ago. When it was purchased it wasn't even a product yet. Seems like things have evolved a bit for the positive since then. You might even say Google made it a success? Going from zero devices to billions. Well, you probably won't say that. And you said:
Most of the "smart" in the business sense - people at google are likely gone
So we KNOW that none of the smart people from the acquisition are still employed there.
Re: (Score:1)
Yep, the problem is apparently it's legal for the games companies to decide which machine you play your legally obtained copy on.
Re: (Score:1)
> And the pro-consumer way with Geforce Now which is essentially remote desktop for all of your games.
The pro-consumer way is actually Steam. They have a Steam Link service that lets you remote play games over either LAN or the Internet itself.
You need a gaming PC, of course, but the client is available on most devices, including Raspberry Pis.
It's not just limited to games installed via Steam either. You can use emulators like Dolphin with it. The desktop itself can be streamed as well.
Buy Hardware on Its Merits, Alone (Score:1)
It's not yours if you can't use it (Score:2)
Nobody likes middlemen (Score:1)
I don't even deal with dealerships when getting a car, I buy used from the owner.
You don't like middlemen in the buying process when you're getting your drugs, right?
Why the hell would you tolerate them anywhere else?