Wait, wait, why it has to announce / support new games? I thought the point of Novidia NOW was to play ALL my games ( - blacklisted by devs )

Because they had previously removed it https://www.reddit.com/r/DeadOrAlive/comments/bfw7vi/doa6_no_longer_available_to_play_on_geforce_now/

sverek:

Wait, wait, why it has to announce / support new games? I thought the point of Novidia NOW was to play ALL my games ( - blacklisted by devs )

If only it was that simple.

Been play games I own on pc over moonlight can use pad or keyboard n mouse with USB otg cable no subscription and minimal lag ok so it's not powered by a farm of super computers but I can play what I want where I want and how I want, if you add your pc by ip address it works over the internet too

You can install it on a chrome book too basically turnin that into a mobile version of your rig but this only works with nvidia gpus as old as a 650gtx there are amd equivalent apps too but this, it just works

Can we not see geforce now on the front page every time they fart? Unless guru3d is getting money for that of course. Otherwise, I think gf now had enough free advertisement for now. Stop shoving it down people's throats.

RealNC:

Can we not see geforce now on the front page every time they fart? Unless guru3d is getting money for that of course. Otherwise, I think gf now had enough free advertisement for now. Stop shoving it down people's throats.

Stop dictating what a tech and gaming news site decides to share as news.

Well, 2K Games just pulled all their games out of GeForce Now. From the surface, it seems that Nvidia is adding games to their catalog without an agreement and/or permission from developers and publishers. Seems very sneaky, dirty approach.

No agreements are required by law, Only as good will against greedy studio's who like googles money more. Do yourself a favor and catch up on the situation, it seems you just saw the first post and tacked this on to the end of it.

Title should be something along the lines of... Nvidia now allow's you to play 5 of your own games again via Nvidia's rented PC streaming service.

Tim Sweeny comments on Twitter about Geforce Now ... March 6, 2020 "Epic is wholeheartedly supporting NVIDIA’s GeForce NOW service with Fortnite and with Epic Games Store titles that choose to participate (including exclusives), and we’ll be improving the integration over time." "It’s the most developer-friendly and publisher-friendly of the major streaming services, with zero tax on game revenue. Game companies who want to move the game industry towards a healthier state for everyone should be supporting this kind of service!" "Cloud streaming services will also be key players in ending the iOS and Google Play payment monopolies and their 30% taxes. Apple has decreed that these services aren’t allowed to exist on iOS, and therefore aren’t allowed to compete, which is megalomaniacal and won’t stand." "Just waiting till later this year when Google is lobbying against Apple for blocking Stadia from iOS, while Google blocks GeForce NOW, xCloud, and Fortnite from Google Play, and this whole rotten structure begins collapsing in on itself."

Astyanax:

No agreements are required by law,

Can you prove this? Every country has different laws and you're making a generalized statement. I would suspect that NVidia's willingness to remove access to games, as requested/demanded, is based on advisories from their legal department, as much as it is any other department within the company.

sykozis:

Can you prove this?

There are currently no laws either way for what nvidia is doing, the only agreements in place are for using titles in advertising, but since the developers are not chasing shadow or azure vm hostings, prior precedent is already set and this is purely money grubbing from developers who do opt out.

Astyanax:

There are currently no laws either way for what nvidia is doing, the only agreements in place are for using titles in advertising, but since the developers are not chasing shadow or azure vm hostings, prior precedent is already set and this is purely money grubbing from developers who do opt out.

Again, do you have any proof as to the laws?

Yes, read them.

Astyanax:

Yes, read them.

So, in other words, no...... Since if you did, you would have no issue linking them.

Pretty sure @Astyanax is correct @sykozis, why would there be a law when there really is no precedent for it. We have similar things, but this is unexplored territory. More likely, NVidia is playing it safe. They could ignore companies that want their games removed, but I don't think they want to bother with the inevitable court battle. A battle that I think most here would think logically NVidia would win, but with enough money a game publisher like Activision could confuse a court enough to take it. It would also be costly, and it would be them vs multiple other companies. Other companies that they have good relationships with. And they need those relationships. I doubt Bethesda would give them an ear in the future for optimizing their next game on Geforce GPU's, and I doubt the next Call of Duty from Activision would have RTX. If NVidia was a company who's only product was Geforce NOW I could see them fighting it. In fact, there are companies like that for example https://shadow.tech/usen/ which has been around for as long as Geforce NOW and offers all games from pretty much every launcher. So I think it makes sense to remove the games, keep them happy, even if it's not illegal. I don't think NVidia would have put the games on there in the first place if it was illegal. Just take them down for now, and hope they get over it eventually (or money changes hands).

Cyberdyne:

Pretty sure @Astyanax is correct @sykozis, why would there be a law when there really is no precedent for it.

Ding ding ding, we have a winrar! You can't cite legality for a subject that not been tested and no laws made. All aspects of GFN are "grey area" and nvidia could refuse to remove games where there are no TOS/Eula declarations objecting to the use on such services but are happier to maintain the grey zone because courts cost time and money and usually involve a declaration of discontinuance of the service until the situation is fleshed out. Rather this matter is going to likely be brought in front of a judge via consumers themselves in the long term.

sykozis:

So, in other words, no...... Since if you did, you would have no issue linking them.

"There are no laws governing this kind of thing" "So you should have no problem linking the laws then" Really makes you think.