Bethesda removes games from game stream service GeForce Now

Luc

2020-02-24 17:15

Reardan:

We aren't slaves to markets. Stating how things are has no bearing on how things ought to be. I also disagree that it should require an agreement between Bethesda and Nvidia; I think a government consumer protection agency somewhere should step in and stamp this concept out. Legally, they should have no say whatsoever where I install or play the copies of my games that I purchased, be that Windows or Linux, AMD or Nvidia or Intel, VM or physical PC. A decent government would disabuse them of that notion quickly, unfortunately ours is abdicating its responsibility.

If I remember correctly, international intelectual property laws specify that the legal owner of the IP can ask the intermediary for a compensation, or to take the product off from the market, if the intermediary is doing profits with their products. If Nvidia can prove that they aren't making money, they could settle without giving them nothing, but I think that isn't the best solution. Final user rights are the same, but we can't legally demand a solution for those "problems". I'm not trying to convince anyone that it's nice or perfect, I only try to explain how it usually works.

Reardan:

How is Nvidia selling a platform on which to play games any different from a company like Alienware that sells you a PC on which to play games? Do you think it would be acceptable for Bethesda to say "Our software can no longer be installed on Alienware PCs"? How is that different?

Is about laws. Are they acceptable? Thats something totally different. Maybe you are right, but I prefere to not talk about politics here. :) [Edit] As users/consumers, the only thing we can do is to put pressure over companys and not buying their products.

#5763184

kendoka15

2020-02-25 04:46

Streaming services are a nice idea, but they never end well. This feels a lot like Netflix, which previously had a lot of stuff but then everyone started rolling out their own service and now we're going back to the issue we had with cable TV packages.

#5763389

Crazy Serb

2020-02-25 19:02

Luc:

If Nvidia can prove that they aren't making money, they could settle without giving them nothing, but I think that isn't the best solution.

I think this is the actual issue. nvidia is not making money of their IPs, not directly at least, and if nvidia is not making money of their IPs, they can't make money. With Stadia, publishers did not had issue because Stadia is also a game store, GeforceNOW is not. Greedy publishers are pulling out because all they can think about is to sell us 2 copies or double subs (WoW etc)...

#5764525

HeavyHemi

2020-02-28 23:33

LIGuitar77:

What the hell kinda nonsense is this? I own all the games I have and I didn't even pay for one of them. lol You sound like a tv commercial or one of those "don't copy that floppy" comedy skits. lol 🙂

So then, since you OWN it, you can freely copy all of your games and sell them right? You sound like a 12 year old who believes milk comes from cartons and the tooth fairy.

#5764538

pharma

2020-02-29 00:31

DocStr4ngelove:

To be fair you never owned any game you've bought. You just aquired a licence to install & use the game on a specific system. You were also not allowed to change or alter (hack) any parts of it.

Actually that is wrong. Based on a December 2019 ruling against Steam it seems people do own the games and can sell them. I would not be surprised to see more challenges regarding consumer rights to games they own.

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.

https://www.ccn.com/landmark-steam-ruling-opens-door-to-used-digital-games-market/

#5764558

Astyanax

2020-02-29 02:24

Nobody in the real world cares what the french ruled.

#5764560

pharma

2020-02-29 02:36

Apparently the EU does, and I imagine Steam does. This isn't the first time the EU clashed with Steam ... in another case Steam was ordered to stop geo-blocking games. So it's pretty simple to see how the ownership of digital game/right to resell games case will end up.

#5764561

HeavyHemi

2020-02-29 02:37

Astyanax:

Nobody in the real world cares what the french ruled.

Even less so, your opinions. o_O 1st world nation state rulings can create a precedent followed by others. Durrrrrr.

#5764562

HeavyHemi

2020-02-29 02:38

pharma:

Apparently the EU does, and I imagine Steam does. This isn't the first time the EU clashed with Steam ... in another case Steam was ordered to stop geo-blocking games.

That's his version of 'edgy ' I guess. I'm thinking it's a good time for a phat bong hit. 😎 It seems to me the simple and logical reason, that Bethesda is starting their own service, is the reasoning.

#5764573

Astyanax

2020-02-29 03:18

HeavyHemi:

Even less so, your opinions. o_O 1st world nation state rulings can create a precedent followed by others. Durrrrrr.

No really, nothing has come of the ruling since and France can't even prove that a product has exchanged hands (it hasn't)

#5764574

jbscotchman

2020-02-29 03:31

I think it's pretty clear that Google (stadia) wants to be the top dog when it comes to game streaming. And they have the money to do it. I'm sure there's all kinds of deals going on behind the scenes we don't know about.

#5764575

HeavyHemi

2020-02-29 03:35

Astyanax:

No really, nothing has come of the ruling since and France can't even prove that a product has exchanged hands (it hasn't)

No really, your post was dumb. Even dumber to defend it. Stop digging and don't be a sora loser. 😉

#5764578

Astyanax

2020-02-29 03:51

Sorry, I can't hear you over how angry you get every time airbud writes something. 😀

#5764583

pharma

2020-02-29 04:12

Astyanax:

No really, nothing has come of the ruling since and France can't even prove that a product has exchanged hands (it hasn't)

Give it time, the ruling only happened in December and Steam will likely have to build some type of resell mechanism for the digital games. I'm pretty sure what goes for France will go for the entire EU.

#5764590

HeavyHemi

2020-02-29 05:02

Astyanax:

Sorry, I can't hear you over how angry you get every time airbud writes something. 😀

Do you really think a smiley face covers how angry you are at being clowned for being dumb? Secondarily your weird obsessing over me and what I think. Besides not commenting on airhead more than once a week or less, the feeling I have for him is much like I have for you, pity. Pity that someone is such an ignorant rube. If you could intelligently rebut the comments you would. That you instead post another stupid trolling comment....well, sora loser, you have my pity.

pharma:

Give it time, the ruling only happened in December and Steam will likely have to build some type of resell mechanism for the digital games. I'm pretty sure what goes for France will go for the entire EU.

Of course. What he is claiming is that EU law has no meaning. He's unaware the ruling claims to be following EU law. Whether that stands is a separate issue. It's a dumb claim to say this ruling means nothing. I guess some folks just like to make dumb posts for the attention.

#5764592

vbetts

Moderator

2020-02-29 05:33

Woah okay guys, let's take a step back here and be civil. No more talk of law, no more insults, no more being children. Annnnnnd go.

#5764682

Astyanax

2020-02-29 13:37

K.S.:

What once was Netflix circa etc is now Game streaming well, now; just at a more accelerated pace. The technology has already been refined by film & tv. Every big publisher will want a piece of the action.

doubt they'll have the infrastructure to truly pull it off though.

#5764720

pharma

2020-02-29 16:33

Luc:

Internet cafes could also be treated as an intermediary, and asked for an compensation if local laws allow it, but it could be a total loss of time and money for publishers.

The internet cafe is a poor example since the internet cafe is held in a public setting and does require a commercial license operate. People gathering and playing in an internet cafe are physically using depreciable assets (computers, monitors, keyboards and mice) in a commercial establishment. That's not quite the same as using a Geforce Now in a non-commercial setting to access cloud games that you have bought (not licensed) and have legal ownership over. Even though I don't use any music players, that might be a more relevant example where someone has a music library on the cloud and use different music players (local or cloud) for access. The music players may offer free or premium options for their customers.

#5764736

moo100times

2020-02-29 18:02

K.S.:

That will be really interesting to see... EA (for NA yes, Global not sure) & Activision-Blizzard yes (Bethesda will probably mess it up unless their parent company steps in which has deep pockets) Eventually we’ll see other media titans that are addicted to monetizing every last drop of everything catch wind (Disney with everything they’ve ever licensed & now acquired etc migrating their game titles with Disney+)

I thought Zenimax was basically a holding company for Bethesda, like Alphabet is to Google. The true cost of infrastructure near large chunks of their playerbase I think will limit the number of streaming providers on the scene unless they partner up with one of the big boys. My money is on amazon, as they have twitch and massive online web hosting but no game affiliation to speak of...yet. An activision-amazon partnership would be huge.

#5764776

HeavyHemi

2020-02-29 21:02

vbetts:

Woah okay guys, let's take a step back here and be civil. No more talk of law, no more insults, no more being children. Annnnnnd go.

Er what? You cannot discuss these issues without disscussing the legal issues around them. The fact that ONE PERSON, has an issue and decided to INSULT France, rather that discuss the law, should not result in the LAW as a topic being BANNED, that is absurd. IMO you should directly address the TROLL, in this thread not accuse others of being children for calling out a troll. That's your job, not ours.