Maintenance for the week of January 5:
· [COMPLETE] NA megaservers for maintenance – January 7, 4:00AM EST (9:00 UTC) - 10:00AM EST (15:00 UTC)
· [COMPLETE] EU megaservers for maintenance – January 7, 4:00AM EST (9:00 UTC) - 10:00AM EST (15:00 UTC)
· [COMPLETE] NA megaservers for maintenance – January 7, 4:00AM EST (9:00 UTC) - 10:00AM EST (15:00 UTC)
· [COMPLETE] EU megaservers for maintenance – January 7, 4:00AM EST (9:00 UTC) - 10:00AM EST (15:00 UTC)
ESO bails on GeForce Now
-
thissocalledflower✭✭✭✭After careful consideration (and oh! so much deliberation) we have concluded that you circumstance sounds too much like a l2p issue for it to be just a mere coincidence.4 -
thissocalledflower✭✭✭✭
If all the buttons had worked they wouldnt need to be reassigned. If the buttons had been reassigned then the nvida overlay would have been disabled or some other in game functionality would have been compromised and you would have lost access to those needed functions. Bottom line is the game was NOT fully functional with their service as designed. AND since they made no correction to the service before it came out of beta, it is not surprising that the game was dropped when it came out of beta.Edited by thissocalledflower on February 22, 2020 4:21PMAfter careful consideration (and oh! so much deliberation) we have concluded that you circumstance sounds too much like a l2p issue for it to be just a mere coincidence.1 -
Bradyfjord✭✭✭✭✭It could also be a quality assurance move on the part of ZOS. If people on a platform are not happy with performance issues, ZOS may need to spend developer resources to work it out. It may be that QA on the NVidia platform was beyond the scope of the developers' work.0 -
Elsonso✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭✭✭Bradyfjord wrote: »It could also be a quality assurance move on the part of ZOS. If people on a platform are not happy with performance issues, ZOS may need to spend developer resources to work it out. It may be that QA on the NVidia platform was beyond the scope of the developers' work.
Yes, and before that, it becomes a customer service expense.XBox EU/NA:@ElsonsoJannus
PC NA/EU: @Elsonso
PSN NA/EU: @ElsonsoJannus
Total in-game hours: 11321
X/Twitter: ElsonsoJannus0 -
Nanfoodle✭✭✭✭✭Bradyfjord wrote: »It could also be a quality assurance move on the part of ZOS. If people on a platform are not happy with performance issues, ZOS may need to spend developer resources to work it out. It may be that QA on the NVidia platform was beyond the scope of the developers' work.
Performance on GeForce was awesome and it has Ray tracing now. Stadia is a mess, has really bad latency problems. GeForce is miles better performance.5 -
Nanfoodle✭✭✭✭✭butterrum222 wrote: »Want to play on your tv? Console > pc
Geforce is the pc platform. So when I wanted to play on my couch I would be playing with my PC copy and no need to start over. When I wanted to play on my gaming PC, same thing, no need to re-roll. Playing with all my friends. Best of both worlds.Edited by Nanfoodle on February 22, 2020 5:08PM3 -
Thokri✭✭✭✭✭butterrum222 wrote: »Want to play on your tv? Console > pc
Oh wow, no one has figured that out.
I am sure people love to
1. Buy second copy
2. Play worse version of game. No addons, graphics are same as on low at pc (and still fps is bad) and several removed features
3. listen annoying voice chat that is on default on with console versions
4. What I can tell from forums, servers are even worse on consoles.Edited by Thokri on February 22, 2020 5:10PM3 -
VaranisArano✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭✭✭StormeReigns wrote: »Was there an actual statement released on reasons why that can be linked or...?
Cause, it seems like a bunch of blanket statements right now all over and will turn into another Zo$ vs. ¢u$topo thread without any support.
Nvidia's blog post on the topic suggests that this turnover in games is part and parcel of the trial period with companies coming to an end: https://blogs.nvidia.com/blog/2020/02/20/pc-gaming-geforce-now/
"As we approach a paid service, some publishers may choose to remove games before the trial period ends. Ultimately, they maintain control over their content and decide whether the game you purchase includes streaming on GeForce NOW. Meanwhile, others will bring games back as they continue to realize GeForce Now's value."
There's also a comment on the geforce now forums from one of their staff: https://www.nvidia.com/en-us/geforce/forums/gfn-beta-updates/20/334153/geforce-now-community-update/
The pertinent part:
"Yes, we know the recent game removals are disappointing. We're disappointed, too. In an ideal world, every game would be playable on GeForce NOW, and that's the kind of world we're working toward. But the reality of the situation is that this is a new area in gaming: cloud streaming. There are both technical and business hurdles that must be cleared when we're bringing a game to the service. We're working to clear those hurdles in the background, but you won't see every part of that process. Please be patient. We're working hard to make as many games available as possible."6 -
Nanfoodle✭✭✭✭✭VaranisArano wrote: »StormeReigns wrote: »Was there an actual statement released on reasons why that can be linked or...?
Cause, it seems like a bunch of blanket statements right now all over and will turn into another Zo$ vs. ¢u$topo thread without any support.
Nvidia's blog post on the topic suggests that this turnover in games is part and parcel of the trial period with companies coming to an end: https://blogs.nvidia.com/blog/2020/02/20/pc-gaming-geforce-now/
"As we approach a paid service, some publishers may choose to remove games before the trial period ends. Ultimately, they maintain control over their content and decide whether the game you purchase includes streaming on GeForce NOW. Meanwhile, others will bring games back as they continue to realize GeForce Now's value."
There's also a comment on the geforce now forums from one of their staff: https://www.nvidia.com/en-us/geforce/forums/gfn-beta-updates/20/334153/geforce-now-community-update/
The pertinent part:
"Yes, we know the recent game removals are disappointing. We're disappointed, too. In an ideal world, every game would be playable on GeForce NOW, and that's the kind of world we're working toward. But the reality of the situation is that this is a new area in gaming: cloud streaming. There are both technical and business hurdles that must be cleared when we're bringing a game to the service. We're working to clear those hurdles in the background, but you won't see every part of that process. Please be patient. We're working hard to make as many games available as possible."
Bethesda better give us back our money for the steam copy of the game or a free Stadia copy.2 -
StormeReigns✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭VaranisArano wrote: »StormeReigns wrote: »Was there an actual statement released on reasons why that can be linked or...?
Cause, it seems like a bunch of blanket statements right now all over and will turn into another Zo$ vs. ¢u$topo thread without any support.
Nvidia's blog post on the topic suggests that this turnover in games is part and parcel of the trial period with companies coming to an end: https://blogs.nvidia.com/blog/2020/02/20/pc-gaming-geforce-now/
"As we approach a paid service, some publishers may choose to remove games before the trial period ends. Ultimately, they maintain control over their content and decide whether the game you purchase includes streaming on GeForce NOW. Meanwhile, others will bring games back as they continue to realize GeForce Now's value."
There's also a comment on the geforce now forums from one of their staff: https://www.nvidia.com/en-us/geforce/forums/gfn-beta-updates/20/334153/geforce-now-community-update/
The pertinent part:
"Yes, we know the recent game removals are disappointing. We're disappointed, too. In an ideal world, every game would be playable on GeForce NOW, and that's the kind of world we're working toward. But the reality of the situation is that this is a new area in gaming: cloud streaming. There are both technical and business hurdles that must be cleared when we're bringing a game to the service. We're working to clear those hurdles in the background, but you won't see every part of that process. Please be patient. We're working hard to make as many games available as possible."
Cool. Thanks. Sadly, many will probably skip it cause it not front page. But great info on the matter.0 -
VaranisArano✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭✭✭StormeReigns wrote: »VaranisArano wrote: »StormeReigns wrote: »Was there an actual statement released on reasons why that can be linked or...?
Cause, it seems like a bunch of blanket statements right now all over and will turn into another Zo$ vs. ¢u$topo thread without any support.
Nvidia's blog post on the topic suggests that this turnover in games is part and parcel of the trial period with companies coming to an end: https://blogs.nvidia.com/blog/2020/02/20/pc-gaming-geforce-now/
"As we approach a paid service, some publishers may choose to remove games before the trial period ends. Ultimately, they maintain control over their content and decide whether the game you purchase includes streaming on GeForce NOW. Meanwhile, others will bring games back as they continue to realize GeForce Now's value."
There's also a comment on the geforce now forums from one of their staff: https://www.nvidia.com/en-us/geforce/forums/gfn-beta-updates/20/334153/geforce-now-community-update/
The pertinent part:
"Yes, we know the recent game removals are disappointing. We're disappointed, too. In an ideal world, every game would be playable on GeForce NOW, and that's the kind of world we're working toward. But the reality of the situation is that this is a new area in gaming: cloud streaming. There are both technical and business hurdles that must be cleared when we're bringing a game to the service. We're working to clear those hurdles in the background, but you won't see every part of that process. Please be patient. We're working hard to make as many games available as possible."
Cool. Thanks. Sadly, many will probably skip it cause it not front page. But great info on the matter.
The front page does have an article linked that explains the situation pretty well.
I think what I find interesting about the whole situation is that Nvidia seems to have been well aware that game publishers could choose to pull their games from the streaming service at the end of the trial period.
I'm rather curious as to how well that was communicated to their customers.5 -
StormeReigns✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭VaranisArano wrote: »StormeReigns wrote: »VaranisArano wrote: »StormeReigns wrote: »Was there an actual statement released on reasons why that can be linked or...?
Cause, it seems like a bunch of blanket statements right now all over and will turn into another Zo$ vs. ¢u$topo thread without any support.
Nvidia's blog post on the topic suggests that this turnover in games is part and parcel of the trial period with companies coming to an end: https://blogs.nvidia.com/blog/2020/02/20/pc-gaming-geforce-now/
"As we approach a paid service, some publishers may choose to remove games before the trial period ends. Ultimately, they maintain control over their content and decide whether the game you purchase includes streaming on GeForce NOW. Meanwhile, others will bring games back as they continue to realize GeForce Now's value."
There's also a comment on the geforce now forums from one of their staff: https://www.nvidia.com/en-us/geforce/forums/gfn-beta-updates/20/334153/geforce-now-community-update/
The pertinent part:
"Yes, we know the recent game removals are disappointing. We're disappointed, too. In an ideal world, every game would be playable on GeForce NOW, and that's the kind of world we're working toward. But the reality of the situation is that this is a new area in gaming: cloud streaming. There are both technical and business hurdles that must be cleared when we're bringing a game to the service. We're working to clear those hurdles in the background, but you won't see every part of that process. Please be patient. We're working hard to make as many games available as possible."
Cool. Thanks. Sadly, many will probably skip it cause it not front page. But great info on the matter.
The front page does have an article linked that explains the situation pretty well.
I think what I find interesting about the whole situation is that Nvidia seems to have been well aware that game publishers could choose to pull their games from the streaming service at the end of the trial period.
I'm rather curious as to how well that was communicated to their customers.
Hmm. Might be cause i am on ghettoized phone why i am not seeing it. Lol.0 -
VaranisArano✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭✭✭StormeReigns wrote: »VaranisArano wrote: »StormeReigns wrote: »VaranisArano wrote: »StormeReigns wrote: »Was there an actual statement released on reasons why that can be linked or...?
Cause, it seems like a bunch of blanket statements right now all over and will turn into another Zo$ vs. ¢u$topo thread without any support.
Nvidia's blog post on the topic suggests that this turnover in games is part and parcel of the trial period with companies coming to an end: https://blogs.nvidia.com/blog/2020/02/20/pc-gaming-geforce-now/
"As we approach a paid service, some publishers may choose to remove games before the trial period ends. Ultimately, they maintain control over their content and decide whether the game you purchase includes streaming on GeForce NOW. Meanwhile, others will bring games back as they continue to realize GeForce Now's value."
There's also a comment on the geforce now forums from one of their staff: https://www.nvidia.com/en-us/geforce/forums/gfn-beta-updates/20/334153/geforce-now-community-update/
The pertinent part:
"Yes, we know the recent game removals are disappointing. We're disappointed, too. In an ideal world, every game would be playable on GeForce NOW, and that's the kind of world we're working toward. But the reality of the situation is that this is a new area in gaming: cloud streaming. There are both technical and business hurdles that must be cleared when we're bringing a game to the service. We're working to clear those hurdles in the background, but you won't see every part of that process. Please be patient. We're working hard to make as many games available as possible."
Cool. Thanks. Sadly, many will probably skip it cause it not front page. But great info on the matter.
The front page does have an article linked that explains the situation pretty well.
I think what I find interesting about the whole situation is that Nvidia seems to have been well aware that game publishers could choose to pull their games from the streaming service at the end of the trial period.
I'm rather curious as to how well that was communicated to their customers.
Hmm. Might be cause i am on ghettoized phone why i am not seeing it. Lol.
Maybe this will help?
https://www.pcgamer.com/au/bethesda-softworks-games-have-been-removed-from-geforce-now/1 -
Reverb✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭✭✭VaranisArano wrote: »StormeReigns wrote: »Was there an actual statement released on reasons why that can be linked or...?
Cause, it seems like a bunch of blanket statements right now all over and will turn into another Zo$ vs. ¢u$topo thread without any support.
Nvidia's blog post on the topic suggests that this turnover in games is part and parcel of the trial period with companies coming to an end: https://blogs.nvidia.com/blog/2020/02/20/pc-gaming-geforce-now/
"As we approach a paid service, some publishers may choose to remove games before the trial period ends. Ultimately, they maintain control over their content and decide whether the game you purchase includes streaming on GeForce NOW. Meanwhile, others will bring games back as they continue to realize GeForce Now's value."
There's also a comment on the geforce now forums from one of their staff: https://www.nvidia.com/en-us/geforce/forums/gfn-beta-updates/20/334153/geforce-now-community-update/
The pertinent part:
"Yes, we know the recent game removals are disappointing. We're disappointed, too. In an ideal world, every game would be playable on GeForce NOW, and that's the kind of world we're working toward. But the reality of the situation is that this is a new area in gaming: cloud streaming. There are both technical and business hurdles that must be cleared when we're bringing a game to the service. We're working to clear those hurdles in the background, but you won't see every part of that process. Please be patient. We're working hard to make as many games available as possible."
Bethesda better give us back our money for the steam copy of the game or a free Stadia copy.
Why would they need to do that? Cloud gaming (on any platform) isn’t one of the services they committed to in the tos, which specifies “ ZeniMax does not warrant, represent or guarantee that a Service will be accessible or useable on all equipment”.
And in the ESO eula they refer to the game as software for your computer or console, over and over. No other platforms are specified and a part of the license.
Lastly, participation in a trial period is just that, a trial. It’s not permanence or a guarantee of future participation.
I understand that you bought it hoping the functions being trialed would end up being permanent, and you’re disappointed that it’s not working out that way, but that’s not Zenimax’s or BethSoft’s responsibility.Battle not with monsters, lest ye become a monster, and if you gaze into the abyss, the abyss gazes also into you. ~Friedrich Nietzsche4 -
thissocalledflower✭✭✭✭VaranisArano wrote: »StormeReigns wrote: »VaranisArano wrote: »StormeReigns wrote: »Was there an actual statement released on reasons why that can be linked or...?
Cause, it seems like a bunch of blanket statements right now all over and will turn into another Zo$ vs. ¢u$topo thread without any support.
Nvidia's blog post on the topic suggests that this turnover in games is part and parcel of the trial period with companies coming to an end: https://blogs.nvidia.com/blog/2020/02/20/pc-gaming-geforce-now/
"As we approach a paid service, some publishers may choose to remove games before the trial period ends. Ultimately, they maintain control over their content and decide whether the game you purchase includes streaming on GeForce NOW. Meanwhile, others will bring games back as they continue to realize GeForce Now's value."
There's also a comment on the geforce now forums from one of their staff: https://www.nvidia.com/en-us/geforce/forums/gfn-beta-updates/20/334153/geforce-now-community-update/
The pertinent part:
"Yes, we know the recent game removals are disappointing. We're disappointed, too. In an ideal world, every game would be playable on GeForce NOW, and that's the kind of world we're working toward. But the reality of the situation is that this is a new area in gaming: cloud streaming. There are both technical and business hurdles that must be cleared when we're bringing a game to the service. We're working to clear those hurdles in the background, but you won't see every part of that process. Please be patient. We're working hard to make as many games available as possible."
Cool. Thanks. Sadly, many will probably skip it cause it not front page. But great info on the matter.
The front page does have an article linked that explains the situation pretty well.
I think what I find interesting about the whole situation is that Nvidia seems to have been well aware that game publishers could choose to pull their games from the streaming service at the end of the trial period.
I'm rather curious as to how well that was communicated to their customers.
ESO wasnt the first game to be yanked from nvidias service. Games have come and gone before the close of beta. No games were guaranteed to stay.
After careful consideration (and oh! so much deliberation) we have concluded that you circumstance sounds too much like a l2p issue for it to be just a mere coincidence.1 -
nafensoriel✭✭✭✭✭Little upset here, I bought the game a second time on steam just to be able to play ESO on my PC or on my Shield in the living room. Also love doing things like crafting on my phone while I watch TV. I bought a Shield just for this option. Pls don't do this
Maybe Nvidia should stop being predatory jerks and trying to force everyone else to do whatever they think everyone else should do.
People are dropping them like the turd they are because they can't seem to understand that they are not allowed to tell other businesses what to do.0 -
krayphysh✭✭✭Caved in and got a gaming PC...invested too much time and money to not be able to play.2 -
VaranisArano✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭✭✭thissocalledflower wrote: »VaranisArano wrote: »StormeReigns wrote: »VaranisArano wrote: »StormeReigns wrote: »Was there an actual statement released on reasons why that can be linked or...?
Cause, it seems like a bunch of blanket statements right now all over and will turn into another Zo$ vs. ¢u$topo thread without any support.
Nvidia's blog post on the topic suggests that this turnover in games is part and parcel of the trial period with companies coming to an end: https://blogs.nvidia.com/blog/2020/02/20/pc-gaming-geforce-now/
"As we approach a paid service, some publishers may choose to remove games before the trial period ends. Ultimately, they maintain control over their content and decide whether the game you purchase includes streaming on GeForce NOW. Meanwhile, others will bring games back as they continue to realize GeForce Now's value."
There's also a comment on the geforce now forums from one of their staff: https://www.nvidia.com/en-us/geforce/forums/gfn-beta-updates/20/334153/geforce-now-community-update/
The pertinent part:
"Yes, we know the recent game removals are disappointing. We're disappointed, too. In an ideal world, every game would be playable on GeForce NOW, and that's the kind of world we're working toward. But the reality of the situation is that this is a new area in gaming: cloud streaming. There are both technical and business hurdles that must be cleared when we're bringing a game to the service. We're working to clear those hurdles in the background, but you won't see every part of that process. Please be patient. We're working hard to make as many games available as possible."
Cool. Thanks. Sadly, many will probably skip it cause it not front page. But great info on the matter.
The front page does have an article linked that explains the situation pretty well.
I think what I find interesting about the whole situation is that Nvidia seems to have been well aware that game publishers could choose to pull their games from the streaming service at the end of the trial period.
I'm rather curious as to how well that was communicated to their customers.
ESO wasnt the first game to be yanked from nvidias service. Games have come and gone before the close of beta. No games were guaranteed to stay.
Yeah, I got that impression.
I guess what I've been trying to figure out is where the expectation that Bethesda's games and others were going to be consistently available came from. Particularly when Nvidia seems to have expected a degree of turnover at the end of the trial period, though they hope that publishers will come back.
I mean, I understand the frustration of players who sunk money into the service in order to play a particular game and now they find out that the publisher has removed that game at the end of the trial period.
I'm just not sure how much of that expectation that a particular game would always be available and thus worth putting money into the service specifically to play that game was warranted.2 -
daemonios✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭✭✭sekou_trayvond wrote: »It's early, but this is my nomination for "Most Adult and Level-headed Response to a Comment on ESO Forums" for 2020.darthgummibear_ESO wrote: »witchdoctor wrote: »It is not just Bethesda. Activision was the first to leave GeForce Now. Possibly more leaving soon.
https://www.pcgamer.com/au/bethesda-softworks-games-have-been-removed-from-geforce-now/
So far it's just those two, the main reason being they are greedy as hell and wanted a bigger piece of the pie. CDPR is certainly onboard with Nvidia, and that's huge.
It’s not unreasonable for content creators (movie makers, music makers, game developers) to want the lions share of any distributed material rather than handing that over to the distributor/platform. You can see exactly the same conflict over rights for Spotify, Apple Music etc and it’s clearly a driving force behind both Netflix and Amazon’s desire to produce their own programming rather than pay others to do that for them.
If I were running a game development studio I would be looking to safeguard my IP and revenue too, while if I ran one of many game streaming services I’d be wanting to drive down payments to content creators as that might damage my subscriber base. Clearly GeForce and some studios disagree on the value of the game content.
That would be the case, had the analysis not been way off target. With GeForce Now, players need to previously own the games or have valid access to them, i.e. it works on your existing game library. This is very different from Stadia, that provides access to a catalogue of games as part of the streaming service itself. As I see it, Activision Blizzard and Bethesda Softworks appear to be trying to double dip by getting the game price (as well as in-game purchases) AND part of the GeForce Now subscription.2 -
thissocalledflower✭✭✭✭VaranisArano wrote: »thissocalledflower wrote: »VaranisArano wrote: »StormeReigns wrote: »VaranisArano wrote: »StormeReigns wrote: »Was there an actual statement released on reasons why that can be linked or...?
Cause, it seems like a bunch of blanket statements right now all over and will turn into another Zo$ vs. ¢u$topo thread without any support.
Nvidia's blog post on the topic suggests that this turnover in games is part and parcel of the trial period with companies coming to an end: https://blogs.nvidia.com/blog/2020/02/20/pc-gaming-geforce-now/
"As we approach a paid service, some publishers may choose to remove games before the trial period ends. Ultimately, they maintain control over their content and decide whether the game you purchase includes streaming on GeForce NOW. Meanwhile, others will bring games back as they continue to realize GeForce Now's value."
There's also a comment on the geforce now forums from one of their staff: https://www.nvidia.com/en-us/geforce/forums/gfn-beta-updates/20/334153/geforce-now-community-update/
The pertinent part:
"Yes, we know the recent game removals are disappointing. We're disappointed, too. In an ideal world, every game would be playable on GeForce NOW, and that's the kind of world we're working toward. But the reality of the situation is that this is a new area in gaming: cloud streaming. There are both technical and business hurdles that must be cleared when we're bringing a game to the service. We're working to clear those hurdles in the background, but you won't see every part of that process. Please be patient. We're working hard to make as many games available as possible."
Cool. Thanks. Sadly, many will probably skip it cause it not front page. But great info on the matter.
The front page does have an article linked that explains the situation pretty well.
I think what I find interesting about the whole situation is that Nvidia seems to have been well aware that game publishers could choose to pull their games from the streaming service at the end of the trial period.
I'm rather curious as to how well that was communicated to their customers.
ESO wasnt the first game to be yanked from nvidias service. Games have come and gone before the close of beta. No games were guaranteed to stay.
Yeah, I got that impression.
I guess what I've been trying to figure out is where the expectation that Bethesda's games and others were going to be consistently available came from. Particularly when Nvidia seems to have expected a degree of turnover at the end of the trial period, though they hope that publishers will come back.
I mean, I understand the frustration of players who sunk money into the service in order to play a particular game and now they find out that the publisher has removed that game at the end of the trial period.
I'm just not sure how much of that expectation that a particular game would always be available and thus worth putting money into the service specifically to play that game was warranted.
Well... i saw the writing on the wall but then everyone is not me. Yah it stinks. I put together a gaming pc some years ago when it was a strain on my finances to do so. It was clear to me from my time on their service that this would be a dud at some point. In another thread i see people c/o steam and not being able to login but that has only every been on time for me in the more than 2 years i have been playing through steam yet on Nvidia, every time there was an updated client the game was unplayable for as much as a week or more. I got fully frustrated with that circumstance on nvidia and made a big stink about it to amazon when i returned my shield tv with protests of false advertising on nvidias part about the playability of games through gforce now. Don't get me wrong, nvidias shield tv is the best android streaming device out there and the new device is even more powerful than previous generations. But if you look at heir present offering, they are clearly selling the newest generation, one device ideal for streamers only and the pro device looks like it could be a gaming device but now they dont even come with a single gaming controller as in previous years. It seems like there is a slow progression away from gaming on shield devices, at least as i have seen it. I wonder if in future generations the will even have android gaming on their devices tbh. As regards the person who bought 4 devices.. for playing eso through steam on them, ouch! but if you can afford 4 devices, you can likely afford to build a low end gaming pc. It's the people on disability or a fixed income that this really hurts because not everyone can afford to build a 400-500$ pc for low end gaming even.After careful consideration (and oh! so much deliberation) we have concluded that you circumstance sounds too much like a l2p issue for it to be just a mere coincidence.2 -
Nanfoodle✭✭✭✭✭sekou_trayvond wrote: »It's early, but this is my nomination for "Most Adult and Level-headed Response to a Comment on ESO Forums" for 2020.darthgummibear_ESO wrote: »witchdoctor wrote: »It is not just Bethesda. Activision was the first to leave GeForce Now. Possibly more leaving soon.
https://www.pcgamer.com/au/bethesda-softworks-games-have-been-removed-from-geforce-now/
So far it's just those two, the main reason being they are greedy as hell and wanted a bigger piece of the pie. CDPR is certainly onboard with Nvidia, and that's huge.
It’s not unreasonable for content creators (movie makers, music makers, game developers) to want the lions share of any distributed material rather than handing that over to the distributor/platform. You can see exactly the same conflict over rights for Spotify, Apple Music etc and it’s clearly a driving force behind both Netflix and Amazon’s desire to produce their own programming rather than pay others to do that for them.
If I were running a game development studio I would be looking to safeguard my IP and revenue too, while if I ran one of many game streaming services I’d be wanting to drive down payments to content creators as that might damage my subscriber base. Clearly GeForce and some studios disagree on the value of the game content.
That would be the case, had the analysis not been way off target. With GeForce Now, players need to previously own the games or have valid access to them, i.e. it works on your existing game library. This is very different from Stadia, that provides access to a catalogue of games as part of the streaming service itself. As I see it, Activision Blizzard and Bethesda Softworks appear to be trying to double dip by getting the game price (as well as in-game purchases) AND part of the GeForce Now subscription.
I owned a pc copy of the game, to play on GeForce I had to buy a copy on steam.2 -
Carespanker✭✭✭✭And here I thought I was cool for doing my crafting writs while at work via teamviewer on my phone.... you young whippersnappers and your newfangled technologies! *shakes fist angerly*.4
-
thissocalledflower✭✭✭✭sekou_trayvond wrote: »It's early, but this is my nomination for "Most Adult and Level-headed Response to a Comment on ESO Forums" for 2020.darthgummibear_ESO wrote: »witchdoctor wrote: »It is not just Bethesda. Activision was the first to leave GeForce Now. Possibly more leaving soon.
https://www.pcgamer.com/au/bethesda-softworks-games-have-been-removed-from-geforce-now/
So far it's just those two, the main reason being they are greedy as hell and wanted a bigger piece of the pie. CDPR is certainly onboard with Nvidia, and that's huge.
It’s not unreasonable for content creators (movie makers, music makers, game developers) to want the lions share of any distributed material rather than handing that over to the distributor/platform. You can see exactly the same conflict over rights for Spotify, Apple Music etc and it’s clearly a driving force behind both Netflix and Amazon’s desire to produce their own programming rather than pay others to do that for them.
If I were running a game development studio I would be looking to safeguard my IP and revenue too, while if I ran one of many game streaming services I’d be wanting to drive down payments to content creators as that might damage my subscriber base. Clearly GeForce and some studios disagree on the value of the game content.
That would be the case, had the analysis not been way off target. With GeForce Now, players need to previously own the games or have valid access to them, i.e. it works on your existing game library. This is very different from Stadia, that provides access to a catalogue of games as part of the streaming service itself. As I see it, Activision Blizzard and Bethesda Softworks appear to be trying to double dip by getting the game price (as well as in-game purchases) AND part of the GeForce Now subscription.
I owned a pc copy of the game, to play on GeForce I had to buy a copy on steam.
you were unable to link your pc copy of the game through steam? I havent done that in a long time but i was sure that you could still link your steam account to your bethesda account and play the game through steam.... maybe it hasnt always been the case? is it still the case?After careful consideration (and oh! so much deliberation) we have concluded that you circumstance sounds too much like a l2p issue for it to be just a mere coincidence.0 -
Nanfoodle✭✭✭✭✭thissocalledflower wrote: »sekou_trayvond wrote: »It's early, but this is my nomination for "Most Adult and Level-headed Response to a Comment on ESO Forums" for 2020.darthgummibear_ESO wrote: »witchdoctor wrote: »It is not just Bethesda. Activision was the first to leave GeForce Now. Possibly more leaving soon.
https://www.pcgamer.com/au/bethesda-softworks-games-have-been-removed-from-geforce-now/
So far it's just those two, the main reason being they are greedy as hell and wanted a bigger piece of the pie. CDPR is certainly onboard with Nvidia, and that's huge.
It’s not unreasonable for content creators (movie makers, music makers, game developers) to want the lions share of any distributed material rather than handing that over to the distributor/platform. You can see exactly the same conflict over rights for Spotify, Apple Music etc and it’s clearly a driving force behind both Netflix and Amazon’s desire to produce their own programming rather than pay others to do that for them.
If I were running a game development studio I would be looking to safeguard my IP and revenue too, while if I ran one of many game streaming services I’d be wanting to drive down payments to content creators as that might damage my subscriber base. Clearly GeForce and some studios disagree on the value of the game content.
That would be the case, had the analysis not been way off target. With GeForce Now, players need to previously own the games or have valid access to them, i.e. it works on your existing game library. This is very different from Stadia, that provides access to a catalogue of games as part of the streaming service itself. As I see it, Activision Blizzard and Bethesda Softworks appear to be trying to double dip by getting the game price (as well as in-game purchases) AND part of the GeForce Now subscription.
I owned a pc copy of the game, to play on GeForce I had to buy a copy on steam.
you were unable to link your pc copy of the game through steam? I havent done that in a long time but i was sure that you could still link your steam account to your bethesda account and play the game through steam.... maybe it hasnt always been the case? is it still the case?
There are some ways to port games into steam and there are other ways to stream games to the shield from your PC if you have a Nivida GPU. But that does not give full functionality of GeForce Now. Like if I want to play ESO on my phone. I loved crafting, questing or doing events on my phone while I watch TV. Im ticked I'm about $500 bucks in and it's gone. This is really turning me off game streaming.1 -
Lady_Linux✭✭✭✭✭thissocalledflower wrote: »sekou_trayvond wrote: »It's early, but this is my nomination for "Most Adult and Level-headed Response to a Comment on ESO Forums" for 2020.darthgummibear_ESO wrote: »witchdoctor wrote: »It is not just Bethesda. Activision was the first to leave GeForce Now. Possibly more leaving soon.
https://www.pcgamer.com/au/bethesda-softworks-games-have-been-removed-from-geforce-now/
So far it's just those two, the main reason being they are greedy as hell and wanted a bigger piece of the pie. CDPR is certainly onboard with Nvidia, and that's huge.
It’s not unreasonable for content creators (movie makers, music makers, game developers) to want the lions share of any distributed material rather than handing that over to the distributor/platform. You can see exactly the same conflict over rights for Spotify, Apple Music etc and it’s clearly a driving force behind both Netflix and Amazon’s desire to produce their own programming rather than pay others to do that for them.
If I were running a game development studio I would be looking to safeguard my IP and revenue too, while if I ran one of many game streaming services I’d be wanting to drive down payments to content creators as that might damage my subscriber base. Clearly GeForce and some studios disagree on the value of the game content.
That would be the case, had the analysis not been way off target. With GeForce Now, players need to previously own the games or have valid access to them, i.e. it works on your existing game library. This is very different from Stadia, that provides access to a catalogue of games as part of the streaming service itself. As I see it, Activision Blizzard and Bethesda Softworks appear to be trying to double dip by getting the game price (as well as in-game purchases) AND part of the GeForce Now subscription.
I owned a pc copy of the game, to play on GeForce I had to buy a copy on steam.
you were unable to link your pc copy of the game through steam? I havent done that in a long time but i was sure that you could still link your steam account to your bethesda account and play the game through steam.... maybe it hasnt always been the case? is it still the case?
There are some ways to port games into steam and there are other ways to stream games to the shield from your PC if you have a Nivida GPU. But that does not give full functionality of GeForce Now. Like if I want to play ESO on my phone. I loved crafting, questing or doing events on my phone while I watch TV. Im ticked I'm about $500 bucks in and it's gone. This is really turning me off game streaming.
probably for the best. if this can happen here it can happen on any streaming service. caveat emptor.I simply must protest. There are no Penguin avatars for me to use in the forums.
BTW, I use arch too2 -
daemonios✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭✭✭sekou_trayvond wrote: »It's early, but this is my nomination for "Most Adult and Level-headed Response to a Comment on ESO Forums" for 2020.darthgummibear_ESO wrote: »witchdoctor wrote: »It is not just Bethesda. Activision was the first to leave GeForce Now. Possibly more leaving soon.
https://www.pcgamer.com/au/bethesda-softworks-games-have-been-removed-from-geforce-now/
So far it's just those two, the main reason being they are greedy as hell and wanted a bigger piece of the pie. CDPR is certainly onboard with Nvidia, and that's huge.
It’s not unreasonable for content creators (movie makers, music makers, game developers) to want the lions share of any distributed material rather than handing that over to the distributor/platform. You can see exactly the same conflict over rights for Spotify, Apple Music etc and it’s clearly a driving force behind both Netflix and Amazon’s desire to produce their own programming rather than pay others to do that for them.
If I were running a game development studio I would be looking to safeguard my IP and revenue too, while if I ran one of many game streaming services I’d be wanting to drive down payments to content creators as that might damage my subscriber base. Clearly GeForce and some studios disagree on the value of the game content.
That would be the case, had the analysis not been way off target. With GeForce Now, players need to previously own the games or have valid access to them, i.e. it works on your existing game library. This is very different from Stadia, that provides access to a catalogue of games as part of the streaming service itself. As I see it, Activision Blizzard and Bethesda Softworks appear to be trying to double dip by getting the game price (as well as in-game purchases) AND part of the GeForce Now subscription.
I owned a pc copy of the game, to play on GeForce I had to buy a copy on steam.
That may be the case, but it's beside the point. I was replying to a claim that Bethesda was arguably justified in pulling their IP from GeForce Now as a way of protecting their IP. I don't know if the service is restricted to Steam games or not, what I said is that whatever the case, you need to previously have access to a game of you want to stream it on GeForce Now, as opposed to the game being included with the service as I believe happens with Stadia. If ESO were available in both services, ZOS would only be paid by Google in the case of Stadia, but would receive the game price from the player in addition to whatever it charged Nvidia in the second case. Hence my mentioning double dipping.2 -
Onefrkncrzypope✭✭✭✭✭
✭Don't y'all remember e3 last year? The Zenimax group was working on a cloud service as well. I think it was for content creators but I don't think it would be a far stretch to assume the want to stream games as well.-Immortal Redeemer-
-Extinguisher of Flames-
-Gryphon Heart-
-Potato-
If I edited a post, it was for spelling. It is always because of spelling....1 -
Nanfoodle✭✭✭✭✭sekou_trayvond wrote: »It's early, but this is my nomination for "Most Adult and Level-headed Response to a Comment on ESO Forums" for 2020.darthgummibear_ESO wrote: »witchdoctor wrote: »It is not just Bethesda. Activision was the first to leave GeForce Now. Possibly more leaving soon.
https://www.pcgamer.com/au/bethesda-softworks-games-have-been-removed-from-geforce-now/
So far it's just those two, the main reason being they are greedy as hell and wanted a bigger piece of the pie. CDPR is certainly onboard with Nvidia, and that's huge.
It’s not unreasonable for content creators (movie makers, music makers, game developers) to want the lions share of any distributed material rather than handing that over to the distributor/platform. You can see exactly the same conflict over rights for Spotify, Apple Music etc and it’s clearly a driving force behind both Netflix and Amazon’s desire to produce their own programming rather than pay others to do that for them.
If I were running a game development studio I would be looking to safeguard my IP and revenue too, while if I ran one of many game streaming services I’d be wanting to drive down payments to content creators as that might damage my subscriber base. Clearly GeForce and some studios disagree on the value of the game content.
That would be the case, had the analysis not been way off target. With GeForce Now, players need to previously own the games or have valid access to them, i.e. it works on your existing game library. This is very different from Stadia, that provides access to a catalogue of games as part of the streaming service itself. As I see it, Activision Blizzard and Bethesda Softworks appear to be trying to double dip by getting the game price (as well as in-game purchases) AND part of the GeForce Now subscription.
I owned a pc copy of the game, to play on GeForce I had to buy a copy on steam.
That may be the case, but it's beside the point. I was replying to a claim that Bethesda was arguably justified in pulling their IP from GeForce Now as a way of protecting their IP. I don't know if the service is restricted to Steam games or not, what I said is that whatever the case, you need to previously have access to a game of you want to stream it on GeForce Now, as opposed to the game being included with the service as I believe happens with Stadia. If ESO were available in both services, ZOS would only be paid by Google in the case of Stadia, but would receive the game price from the player in addition to whatever it charged Nvidia in the second case. Hence my mentioning double dipping.
I don't agree, I'm all for paying for the products I play. Game Studios more and more are finding ways to get people to rebuy content they have already bought. In this case just for the ability to stream it. ESO was pulled by the studio with no thought that their customers would need to rebuy the game again to get the same service they have already paid for.
Here is the slippery slope we as gamers need to start speaking out about now. No longer do we own anything or the rights to anything. This type of practice can become common as studios get better offers from different streaming services. Or as streaming services decide to put things behind pay walls. Won't be long before we get the short end of the stick in many ways. Studios need to be held responsible for how their decisions effect this customers wallet in this kind of matter. And this should outrage gamers. If we don't, we are not gonna like where this will end up. Zen needs to do something, anything to show these customers they matter.Edited by Nanfoodle on February 22, 2020 8:08PM5 -
Brandathorbel✭✭✭✭✭nafensoriel wrote: »Little upset here, I bought the game a second time on steam just to be able to play ESO on my PC or on my Shield in the living room. Also love doing things like crafting on my phone while I watch TV. I bought a Shield just for this option. Pls don't do this
Maybe Nvidia should stop being predatory jerks and trying to force everyone else to do whatever they think everyone else should do.
People are dropping them like the turd they are because they can't seem to understand that they are not allowed to tell other businesses what to do.
how is this nvidia telling them what to do?4
