Blizzard/Activision, how far will they fall?

Still doesn't make sense. What's the "cut" on 100% of zero?
Twitch is monetized via advertising and subscription fees (explained here). It is too big of a platform to be doing for free. So there's a bunch to possibly ask a cut of.

But if we are specifically asking about GeForce, it's explained right on their page itself. The free version of GeForce streaming only allows 1 hour sessions. The Paid/Founders version is $4.99 to start and offers a bit of upgrades that makes the idea of using the free version a hassle. So, yeah there's a cut that can be asked for.

GeForce_NOW_Memberships-672x412.png


That... Explains everything.
 
Latest news on the Activision/Blizzard pull of the games off of Nvidia. As per Nvidia themselves, they weren't supposed to be there. It's a "misunderstanding" of the deal on Nvidia's part.

The article:

Nvidia says a 'misunderstanding' led to Activision's departure from GeForce Now

By Andy Chalk 4 hours ago

The games actually weren't supposed to be there in the first place.

Nvidia's game streaming service GeForce Now got off to a strong start, but ran into an unexpected headache earlier this week when Activision Blizzard removed its games from the platform. That meant big hitters including Call of Duty: Modern Warfare, Overwatch, and Diablo 3 were suddenly no longer available, and for no stated reason. Nvidia said only that "per their request, please be advised Activision Blizzard games will be removed from the service."

As it turns out, the whole thing was a "misunderstanding." An Nvidia rep told Bloomberg that Activision wanted a commercial agreement in place before it agreed to participate in the platform, but Nvidia thought that the deal covering its participation in the GeForce Now beta test included the 90-day trial period for "founders" that began when the service launched.

Apparently it did not.

"Activision Blizzard has been a fantastic partner during the GeForce Now beta, which we took to include the free trial period for our founders membership," Nvidia said. "Recognizing the misunderstanding, we removed their games from our service, with hope we can work with them to re-enable these, and more, in the future."

The sticking point for Activision-Blizzard may be the fact that you don't need to purchase games on GeForce Now if you already own them on other supported stores—so if, for example, you already own Metro Exodus, you can play it over GeForce Now without having to lay out any more cash. The circumstances for wanting to do that might be pretty specific—maybe you don't feel like re-downloading a multi-gigabyte game when a short-term urge to dick around with it strikes—but even so, Activision might be reluctant to surrender control over its games in that manner without some sort of formal agreement in place.

Hopefully, such an agreement can be reached quickly, and Activision-Blizzard's games will be back on GeForce Now soon. I've reached out to Nvidia for more information and will update if I receive a reply.

So.... It was over money.
 
Twitch is monetized via advertising and subscription fees (explained here). It is too big of a platform to be doing for free. So there's a bunch to possibly ask a cut of.

His question i believe dealt more with; why are Blizzard stopping a revenue stream when something they themselves arent working on.
 
pretty much. but my point was how blizz marketed diablow reaper to the console retards and it seemed to do well. i guess the dumbed down mechanics work ok with a controller, though - it makes me wonder if that was the intent, all along.

poe is on the xbox and about to be on the ps4, i guess. and i can't fathom why. it can't possibly be any good to play on a controller, outside of a few skills (and recent ones, which were clearly designed after they knew they'd be making console ports).
I wish those types of games would just enable WASD movement. Obviously using a mouse to aim abilities is a staple part of the genre, but click to move is lame.
 
His question i believe dealt more with; why are Blizzard stopping a revenue stream when something they themselves arent working on.
Which I believe I addressed with the rest of the post that you did not include in youw quote and in the post following that.

No matter either way. It looks like Nvidia thought they would have access to those games during the initial 90 days after the beta. It does not look like that was actually put into writing with Activision/Blizzard or any of the other publishers who took away access to their games through Geforce.
 
What's the deal with big companies turning into assholes? Maybe it's best to be like Valve and not bother with making games anymore.
 
Overwatch League is down 40% average viewers in week 5(55K) than what they had in week 1(90K). Something major is about to happen.
 
Overwatch League is down 40% average viewers in week 5(55K) than what they had in week 1(90K). Something major is about to happen.
I didn't even know their league was going again.
 
This explains why Overwatch is getting a 2.0 release:



Just repeating what they did in trying to spark growth in HoTS.
 
They better live till I can play Diablo 4.
 
So wait, are people mad that Overwatch had a esport? Are they mad that blizzard is making money? Are they mad that blizzard fucked up with diablo? I just would like some clairty on what people are mad about that effects them in any way?
 
So wait, are people mad that Overwatch had a esport? Are they mad that blizzard is making money? Are they mad that blizzard fucked up with diablo? I just would like some clairty on what people are mad about that effects them in any way?

They are mad because they are losers.

Anybody that gets mad cuz they don't like a video game is a loser, sorry. It has to be said.
 
Back
Top