Nvidia Sets 100-Hour Monthly Cap on Cloud Gaming Service (nvidia.com)
- Reference: 0175425079
- News link: https://tech.slashdot.org/story/24/11/07/1442231/nvidia-sets-100-hour-monthly-cap-on-cloud-gaming-service
- Source link: https://blogs.nvidia.com/blog/geforce-now-thursday-performance-membership/
The gaming giant aims to maintain current subscription prices by implementing the cap, which affects roughly 6% of users. Members can purchase additional 15-hour blocks for $2.99 on Performance tier or $5.99 for Ultimate tier once they exceed the limit.
The service, which allows users to stream games from remote servers, will also rebrand its Priority membership to Performance tier, adding 1440p streaming and ultrawide resolution support. Subscribers can carry over 15 unused hours monthly or switch to basic servers after reaching the cap, Nvidia said.
[1] https://blogs.nvidia.com/blog/geforce-now-thursday-performance-membership/
I love (Score:5, Insightful)
How the thin client/fat server model keeps getting rediscovered.
3.5 trillion company (Score:2)
Yet they can't afford a mere 100 hours of server time. Nvidia's true margins will be exposed soon when the inevitable AI winter sets in.
Re:3.5 trillion company (Score:4, Insightful)
It's not can't afford, it's making an acceptable profit margin on. It's a business after all.
The old bait and switch. (Score:2)
Get people to use your "service" where they own and control nothing. Wait for them to get used to it. Dramatically increase the price. Profit.
Don't think so (Score:2)
I tested this service a bit years ago, and from what I remember you are literally just paying for the service. You bring your own games by linking in your Steam account (and whatever else they support). There's no bait and switch. You're not "buying" games that will disappear when they shut down. I mean, you could argue that's what Steam is, but that's not what Nvidia are selling here so it's not relevant.
Fair (Score:5, Informative)
Just like other shared services like gyms, people who are using it sparingly are what makes the service profitable. So it makes sense to put limits on the heavy users, but the question is whether or the limit is reasonable. At 100 hours that's about 3 hours a day, then $10/$20 a month is still already a stellar deal. Nvidia gives average gaming for an RTX 4080 at 250 Watts, that's 25 kWh just in power costs, in a high cost power state that's ~$8 is just power alone let alone the amortized cost of the card.
If you're starting to get too far past that mark and the extra costs make it so the economics match the fair price of just owning/running the hardware, then why aren't you just buying your own card anyways rather than needing to wait in queues and have screen lag from internet connection.
Steam (Score:2)
FWIW I recently discovered that Steam will let you stream from one PC to another. I haven't tried it yet, just saw the option. Presumably, I would turn on my PC, give dome remote permissions there, and then play from (say) my laptop.
Re: (Score:2)
Maybe you could rent it out as a service...
Re: (Score:1)
It works pretty well, and you can play from your phone or tablet or laptop or whatever.
GEforce experience also comes with this kind of functionality, so if you have an nvidia card and run Windows, you can stream the vast majority of games to another device.
Re: Steam (Score:2)
Parsec is better than the steam solution and also free (for now anywayâ¦)
Ah the good ol days of AOL (Score:2)
100 hours! [1]https://imgur.com/a/UVYEwSD [imgur.com]
[1] https://imgur.com/a/UVYEwSD
NVidia GPUs (Score:3)
Designed for training neural networks.
Bought to mine crypto.
Subsidized by gamers.
Ok, mum. (Score:2)
Feels like a parent imposing a curfew on a child. Won't work with adults. But then, who on earth would like to stream laggy games in the first place? There's no better experience than bare metal.
Just over 3 hours a day (Score:2)
Is not that much, considering they are introducing it for the paid tiers.
Re: (Score:3)
While the cap is reasonable (anyone paying more than 3h/day likely has their own gaming GPU), the simple fact that there is a cap makes this service less attractive.
Re: (Score:3)
Yeah. Two things are always bad for services: caps and meters.
Both make it feel like every hour spent is removing a resource. If its a cap you're using up your allotted usage, and you feel compelled to not use it unless needed. If its metered, then every amount of time you're using it money is trickling away. If its a fixed cost the money is already spend an you're good with that.
Most people who only spend 30 hours per month on the service will dislike a 200 hour cap being there. And most people who mig
Re:Just over 3 hours a day (Score:4, Interesting)
As probably the target audience (I was a happy Stadia customer) it seems pretty reasonable to me.
If I was playing that much I'd probably have a gaming PC anyway.
I probably would have joined, but I got a Steam Deck and it's working well enough for me at the moment.