Dum_Gen

TLD is removed from GeForce Now

Recommended Posts

20 hours ago, kristaok said:

get it?

Even I got that .... :D 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Let’s keep this discussion respectful and avoid personal attacks. We would like to allow those who wish to discuss this issue the space to do so, but please remain within our community guidelines.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Admin said:

Let’s keep this discussion respectful and avoid personal attacks. We would like to allow those who wish to discuss this issue the space to do so, but please remain within our community guidelines.

Btw, will Hinterland Studio make an official statement on the issue or Raphael's tweet is the only statement that we will get?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 3/12/2020 at 6:27 AM, kristaok said:

It all boils down to this... it doesn't matter what anyone thinks, Raph and the Team done made their decision, AND GFN agreed to that decision. So basically no amount of anger, frustration, rage, sadness, whatever will change this situation. It just is, what it is. 

Nvidia removed it because they still have to work with developers.  Not because what they did was wrong .

 

Secondly this remains to be seen as gfn is a service not a platform.   PC is still the platform there is some other issues that need to be worked out .  Are they actually violating customer rights by removing the game being able to be streamed via gfn.  Because the customers paid to pay a pc game on steam via there pc of choice.   That choice happens to be a geforce vps .

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
38 minutes ago, Dum_Gen said:

Btw, will Hinterland Studio make an official statement on the issue or Raphael's tweet is the only statement that we will get?

This , hinderland really does need a pr person to handle these questions and twitter really is not the best way to pose your stance .

Edited by JamieLinux
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
23 minutes ago, JamieLinux said:

Not because what they did was wrong

:D I think that's an untrue statement...  If they had "done no wrong," then this wouldn't even be a situation. :D

Edited by ManicManiac

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
53 minutes ago, JamieLinux said:

hinderland

It's Hinterland, not Hinderland... <.<

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
2 hours ago, ManicManiac said:

:D I think that's an untrue statement...  If they had "done no wrong," then this wouldn't even be a situation. :D

Not necessarily.  There is no legal precedent set at the present time so everything going on is within the realm of unlawfullness.

Nvidia is trying to stay on side with devs so their policy is to remove any game that is requested, but they could just stop obliging and put the matter to the courts, who will likely take all facts into account and rule against the publishers and studio's since the only reason they are against it is because they can't double dip on profits

The Long Dark doesn't have a 3rd party EULA - if you purchase it on steam it uses steam's EULA. The steam EULA mentions that you're licensing the software but it doesn't restrict use on non-owned hardware (in fact steam supports game streaming). Just because I'm licensing software doesn't mean that the developer can add terms to the license as they see fit. If they want to add those terms going forward to people who buy it - sure - but you can't retroactively apply licensing agreements.

Edited by JamieLinux
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, kristaok said:

It's Hinterland, not Hinderland... <.<

I got tired of fighting with my Samsung's auto corrections 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, JamieLinux said:

I got tired of fighting with my Samsung's auto corrections 

I feel like you're just making fun of Hinterland... you've called them that twice.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

PS. Green Hell is on GFN, this makes me feel a tad awkward that TLD is not on GFN... it could be just my issues I have.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, kristaok said:

PS. Green Hell is on GFN, this makes me feel a tad awkward that TLD is not on GFN... it could be just my issues I have.

Strange. The Game I tested GFN with was.... Green Hell. Despite our disagreements we have some strinking commonalities :D 

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
3 hours ago, kristaok said:

PS. Green Hell is on GFN, this makes me feel a tad awkward that TLD is not on GFN... it could be just my issues I have.

Here let me put it another way .  I can stream it anywhere in the world on my xbox, xbox one x, ps4 or pro . No issues dev doesn't care. However gfn which is a service on a pc platform ....they take issue with only after 2 years of it on gfn., and only after Nvidia started a 5 dollar a month paid service for hardware access.. mind you it's still on steam nothing else changed....

 

Yeah would really love a explanation for that one .

Edited by JamieLinux
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
18 hours ago, JamieLinux said:

There is no legal precedent

:D I really can't recommend to you enough to stop making assumptions, especially when you don't know for sure. :D

One prominent case has many parallels especially in how the service is described, true it's not verbatim but that's not how citing precedence works (it's about drawing parallels with other rulings to help support one's case).

I'm not interested in doing home work for you... so I will only give you one example (that was pointed out to me by an acquaintance of mine), and that being the Supreme Court ruling against Aereo Inc.  The way they define the public in that case includes subscribers to a service, there is a ton of other parallels one can draw as well between the their business model and the way Nvidida has tried to fashion theirs for GFN.


:coffee::fire:
Please don't try to pass off your assumptions as facts... especially when it can be demonstrated that they're not.
Again I can respect your opinion about the situation, but I can't abide folks trying to make declarative statements and trying to sound factual... when in truth it's just their point of view.

Edited by ManicManiac
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
1 hour ago, ManicManiac said:

:D I really can't recommend to you enough to stop making assumptions, especially when you don't know for sure. :D

One prominent case has many parallels especially in how the service is described, true it's not verbatim but that's not how citing precedence works (it's about drawing parallels with other rulings to help support one's case).

I'm not interested in doing home work for you... so I will only give you one example (that was pointed out to me by an acquaintance of mine), and that being the Supreme Court ruling against Aereo Inc.  The way they define the public in that case includes subscribers to a service, there is a ton of other parallels one can draw as well between the their business model and the way Nvidida has tried to fashion theirs for GFN.


:coffee::fire:
Please don't try to pass off your assumptions as facts... especially when it can be demonstrated that they're not.
Again I can respect your opinion about the situation, but I can't abide folks trying to make declarative statements and trying to sound factual... when in truth it's just their point of view.

I never said it was fact , I said there has not been legal precedent,  there is not .  I remember that case however unlike Aereo who was giving them content that they had no right to give to there subscribers Geforce Now does not.  Seriously you want to talk about doing homework , why don't you do some research on VPS, and virtual desktops then comeback with a different prescriptive.  As I said I respect there rights to control what PLATFORM there game is on, if Nviida or any other company was just giving away free copies with there service, and or making the PC version and Steam work on Xbox or Playstaion , or the other way around I would be defending the Dev's to no end.

However, GFN is a VPS, same as Shadow or VirualBox or, any other ESXI server , Nvidia just charges you for the hardware access, if you own 0 steam, 0 Ubisoft games and or Epic store guess what you can play.  Care to take a guess?  The answer is a round number and starts with a 0 , that's right NONE.  Nvidia does not try to be a distributor, they are at best in a legal grey area as I said there has been no precedent before this.  Honestly it has not been until recently virtual machine software has not been really good at delivering day to day software at decent performance, excluding your typical browsing and word aspects.   

Also they really do need to actually come out with a statement, a dev's twitter tweet should not really be welp that's it.   You want to come off as some snide entitled person  whatever that is your right however it does not change the facts , you can link that supreme court case all you want however Nvidia is not distributing content freely that there subscribers can access.  You own nothing you get nothing. 

 

Do yourself a favor do some homework yourself on what is actually the issue, it comes down to the end Customer Rights over there owned digital content.  It seems that the only reason Dev's have issue with it is they cannot double dip and charge you twice.  That is just not TLD that also includes Act-Blizzard and whoever else pulled.  Cause while it was in BETA for years they took no issue of it then.   Explain that one I'll wait. 


Here I did your homework for you. 

VPS = Virtual Private Server it runs whatever os and or software you need it configured for. 

           Example : Windows and Windows programs

                              Linux and Linux programs. 

 

Distributor = an agent who supplies goods to stores and other businesses that sell to consumers. 

                        Example : Valve / Steam are Distributors they sell you games that run on windows.

 

Service = a system supplying a public need .

                       Example : Geforce Now  they rent you hardware so you can run games.   

 

The target platform does not change, it is still PC, Nvidia does not sell you any games, you access them by signing into Steam, so you still are bound to the Steam EULA.  

Edited by JamieLinux
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
20 minutes ago, JamieLinux said:

it comes down to the end Customer Rights over there owned digital content.

:D It seems like you're making assumptions again... I don't think it's even a useful conversation anymore.  I think there is more to it that the simplified assumptions you're making.  Considering you've seemingly already closed your mind on the subject, I see no further positives to even discussing it with you.  

You seem to believe it's such a simple matter... but I don't think it is, and clearly other's don't think so either (for if it was so starkly simple, then I doubt it would be the issue that its).


:coffee::fire:

On 3/9/2020 at 11:12 PM, Admin said:

Please avoid making factual claims that you do not know to be true, but feel to be true. Instead phrase your arguments more about what you think.

Thank you.

Edited by ManicManiac

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
1 hour ago, ManicManiac said:

:D It seems like you're making assumptions again... I don't think it's even a useful conversation anymore.  There is more to it that the simplified assumption you're making, but I considering you've seemingly already closed your mind on the subject; I see no further positives to even discussing it with you.  

You seem to believe it's such a simple matter... but I don't think it is, and clearly other's don't think so either (for if it was so starkly simple, then I doubt it would be the issue that its).


:coffee::fire:

You are right there is no point in trying to show you the other side of the coin,  you can ASSUME I am claiming it as fact , and or do not fully understand how the service works., you  also you seem to close your mind that they could be wrong.  We are just going to agree to disagree and leave it at that.  Thank you for your time and your input. 

 

Just like you ASSUME the developers are right.  You also assumed that I was saying it was fact.  When I did not. 

Edited by JamieLinux
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think this topic is like beating a dead horse. :/ 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
12 minutes ago, JamieLinux said:

Just like you ASSUME the developers are right. 

No... I'm very clear that it's my opinion.
That's the difference.

:D it seems you're trying to personally insult and make assumptions about me now... that's not going to get you the response you seem to be looking for. :D

Edited by ManicManiac

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, kristaok said:

I think this topic is like beating a dead horse. :/ 

Honestly you are right, there will be a few outcomes we get an official statement,  on the stance, sometime down the road every dev opens up there owns streaming service and it becomes Netflix and launcher gate all over again , or it eventually goes to court and the court decides. 

 

Not saying TLD or Nvida is going so sue,  do not assume I mean that.  I am just saying some time down the road there maybe a lawsuit and then the courts decide what is legal and not when it comes down to it. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
1 hour ago, ManicManiac said:

No... I'm very clear that it's my opinion.
That's the difference.

Yeah it is your opinion you assume they are right.  Just like you offered your opinion that you assumed that court case was like this and it's not.   As I said we can agree to disagree and leave it at that. Good day to you sir / madam.

 

Please do not Assume I am personally attacking you when I was not.  I was just pointing out it can work both ways.  I would not personally attack anyone for there view point.  I respect your view point and leave it at that. 

Edited by JamieLinux
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

@JamieLinux
Good day to you as well.

Though I don't see the need you seem to have for being antagonistic whilst trying to bow out.
I'm not going to engage with it, but I will point it out.

Edited by ManicManiac
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This discussion has been going around in circles for a week now, and keeps sliding into antagonistic posting. If it doesn't make some forward momentum we will close it. If you've made your view known in here consider not posting it again and then again.

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
24 minutes ago, Admin said:

This discussion has been going around in circles for a week now, and keeps sliding into antagonistic posting. If it doesn't make some forward momentum we will close it. If you've made your view known in here consider not posting it again and then again.

 

I think people are just passionate ,  everyone just wants them to enjoy there game with the most amount of people .  I personally am not hostel to anyone and respect others view points even if we do not agree and cannot see eye to eye.   If it seems that way by my posts I just want to re assure you I am not .

Edited by JamieLinux

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.