NVIDIA Doubles Up GeForce Now Subscription Cost to $10 Per Month

Discussion in 'Frontpage news' started by Hilbert Hagedoorn, Mar 19, 2021.

  1. Fox2232

    Fox2232 Ancient Guru

    Messages:
    11,810
    Likes Received:
    3,363
    GPU:
    6900XT+AW@240Hz
    Steam => Android/iOS/Windows/Linux

    And point is that in long run, you can as well keep 720p capable system which will use DLSS to 1080p. And I wrote it pretty plainly.
    No matter how I dislike IQ degradation from DLSS, it still looks better than video stream compression artifacts on 1080p.
    And that home system has much lower input to photon delay too.
     
  2. undorich

    undorich Member

    Messages:
    35
    Likes Received:
    6
    GPU:
    Geforce Palit 1080
    so what will you all do when so called flat rates dissapear ? how much will the traffic cost? what about the countries with no flat rates at all ? what about the places without cable or fibre otpic connection? do you want to play games with rtx etc on a 6mbit german dsl line ? you are joking right ? also it will be controllable like in china and elsewhere, where some goverment entity deicide's when people can play and for how long and what? how long will it cost 10€ what can/will we do when it will cost 150€ ? stop gaming ?
    imho people here promoting this can only be on the payroll of such goverment/ideologie agenda. lets see, how are the wow restrictions in china for example and how do they take care of it? is gaming linked to the social credit system ?
    what about the 2 strike system in new zealand ? can it be implemented into this tec and used against us? well, for me it simply looks like another tool of controll, push onto the people for many reasons, but not gaming ^^

    lets see-->

    If anyone wants to open a Blizzard account in Mainland China server , they have to give their Chinese ID national card number in the registration form. This is unchangeable and the birthday information in the ID will determine the birthday information of the account. So if anyone opens an account with the birthdate that shows the person is under 18 , then he/she have to face some restrictions for playing WOW. For each working day they can not play more than 3 hours straight. They have to take a 5 hours break. Then this 3 hours restriction will be reset . So in 16 hours time an under age player can play 6 hours. With a break of 5 hours between each 3 hours. 3 hours playing + 5 hours rest + 3 hours playing + 5 hours rest ...

    • If anyone play less than 3 hours and exit . the more time they are log out the will be resetting by itself . Example someone played 1 hour and log out then he come back after suppose 3 hours . He/she can play more than 2 hours by the rest time approximation reset .

    • In weekend ( Saturday & Sunday ) have no play time restrictions. Under age players can play as long as they want. Edit : when the player will turn 18 . All the restrictions will be withdrawn . It's only for teens under 18 .
     
  3. Stormyandcold

    Stormyandcold Ancient Guru

    Messages:
    5,641
    Likes Received:
    340
    GPU:
    MSI GTX1070 GamingX
    It's not the same thing at all though. I wasn't asking for personal preference, I was asking for an equivalent service for less than $10. As far as I know, there isn't one. With Steam, you provide the hardware. With Geforce Now, Nvidia provides the hardware. This is a significant difference.

    Notice also that I haven't given my personal opinion of streaming.
     
  4. metagamer

    metagamer Ancient Guru

    Messages:
    1,980
    Likes Received:
    790
    GPU:
    Palit GameRock 2080
    Still very reasonable. People pay more for an iRacing sub and about the same for WoW sub. To play one game.
     
    TheDeeGee likes this.

  5. Fox2232

    Fox2232 Ancient Guru

    Messages:
    11,810
    Likes Received:
    3,363
    GPU:
    6900XT+AW@240Hz
    Sore they provide HW. But you can as well use your own. As I wrote. nVidia's HW capable to game at 720p with DLSS to 1080p will deliver better IQ at home than streamed 1080p service.
    And that basically puts as low bar on HW ownership as one can. And when it gets to competitive gaming, that in-home HW will get you 120fps+ as those games are usually not demanding.

    Which is another downside. I would not play competitive game on 60fps even if someone paid me for playing.
     
  6. TimmyP

    TimmyP Master Guru

    Messages:
    621
    Likes Received:
    34
    GPU:
    RTX 3070
    Works great on an old (2013) Surface Pro with a side attaching controller.
     
  7. Stormyandcold

    Stormyandcold Ancient Guru

    Messages:
    5,641
    Likes Received:
    340
    GPU:
    MSI GTX1070 GamingX
    I don't think you understand the kind of people who would/do use it and also the financial pros of not needing a PC to play PC games. When you understand that for many; it's purely about being able to play in the first place with minimal cost of entry. There's no cheaper way to play PC games. Especially when gpus are currently scarce, so suggesting hardware that is almost non-existent isn't really an option.

    What is an option for many is a mobile phone, a modern essential piece of tech. With that paired with a controller it's possible to play without dealing with PC hardware at all. For those with old systems that aren't worth upgrading, it's a viable option.

    No-one is really talking about streaming vs native, that's been discussed to death. The reality is right now it's not as good as native. Long-term there'd need to be significant enhancements in streaming latency to take it to the next level. The idea of streaming itself however is sound and it's been available for years already on consoles like PS3/4 + PS Vita and various (failed) startups on PC like Stadia. It's an idea that's really waiting for technology to catch-up.
     
  8. Fox2232

    Fox2232 Ancient Guru

    Messages:
    11,810
    Likes Received:
    3,363
    GPU:
    6900XT+AW@240Hz
    I see your points.

    Yet, playing PC games on cellphone's screen is kind of waste and one can as well play native games made for such cellphone. Maybe on tablets, visual details may be worth it.
    Screen mirroring from phone to TV is kind of out of question for low budget phones. And if someone can afford appropriate phone for streaming, they can get PC/gaming laptop.

    If we sit down and started to draw logic tree diagram with intent to see who can use streaming and is better off using streaming, we would likely find quite a few good and bad surprises.
    Like that in most of the world, mobile data plans are very bad for streaming games due to data limits, extra latency, and poor upload.
    And it should be no surprise that even many land connections which are just enough for streaming are not exactly cheap either. So, total monthly cost of being able to play streamed games without issue may not be as small as it looks at 1st.

    And I know we left out important part which is electricity cost. Someone who plays a lot would pay a lot for electricity too. And so, cloud gaming may be cheaper than local gaming.
    Yet, that brings other issues/situationality. Like having electric heating. Then one can say that in winter, electricity used by computer is converted to heat and therefore has no additional cost since electric heating would eat that energy anyway.
    Or that sad issue where "poor" person who plays a lot may have been better off improving and doing something productive. (Which may or may not be an option.)

    It is definitely complex thing to say where/when game streaming is worth it. But I have "feeling" that perfect conditions/world for game streaming services is world where we get screwed badly.
     
  9. The Reeferman

    The Reeferman Member Guru

    Messages:
    100
    Likes Received:
    28
    GPU:
    GTX 970 @ 1400 MHz
    A friend of me used to play Fortnite on his home system until the GeForce GT 640 GFX card I lent him broke. And since his PC is an old Hewlett Packard office machine he has no PEG 6+2 pin power kabel and the case is so thin that a full size card would not fit. On top of that the GFX card prices skyrocketed and his intel i5 2500 onboard GPU is not fast enough. So I told him to check out GFN and he is very pleased with it, he can game again and with slightly higher image quality settings. Although I think the image quality settings that still give good performance are somewhat disappointing. I would have expected to be able to play Fortnite on GFN with all image quality settings set to max high at @1080p but that doesn't always seem to be the case. He plays at 1600x900 and he can't even max out settings. Could be that he gets the slower GFN servers because of his low resolution in combination with the game he runs.

    So GFN ratings will vary per user depending on what setup they are used to play with. For me coming from a system that can run Fortnite at max settings @1080p it is a step back. For him coming from that GT 640 DDR3 card it is a step up. Also the experience from my friend is based on very low latency to the GFN servers and very low latency from the GFN server to the Fortnite server.
    When connected from his own system@home to the closest Fortnite server his ping was around 30ms. Now that he plays via GeForce Now the in game Fortnite latency shows the latency from the GFN machine to the Fortnite server is below 10ms. Latency from home to GFN server is 20ms. So it seems that the GFN servers is very close to the Fortnite server. He says he doesn't notice any difference in game related to latency.
     
    Stormyandcold and Fox2232 like this.
  10. Stormyandcold

    Stormyandcold Ancient Guru

    Messages:
    5,641
    Likes Received:
    340
    GPU:
    MSI GTX1070 GamingX
    That kind of assumption isn't necessarily realistic for some. Once again it's the upfront costs that many may not want to pay. Even then you don't need a gaming system to use Geforce Now, there are plenty of videos on low-cost PC for streaming or repurposing old systems.

    Also, for the purpose of my original point, I'm assuming that a person owns a mobile and broadband and a tv. All they need to add is a controller, Geforce Now subscription and a supported game to get started. This is as low-cost as it gets for a normal person (assuming they own a suitable phone). The only way to get costs down even lower is that the tv itself supports Geforce Now, which is already happening.

    My whole point though is that I think Geforce Now is the cheapest way to play PC games with minimal upfront costs.

    That doesn't mean I would use it right now, but, with the way things are, I can't rule myself out from using it in the future. If we got to the stage where a game like Oasis from Ready Player One was only viable via streaming, I don't think I'd have a problem with it tbh.
     

  11. RavenMaster

    RavenMaster Maha Guru

    Messages:
    1,239
    Likes Received:
    150
    GPU:
    1x RTX 3080 FE
    Does anybody actually subscribe to GFN?
     
  12. Fox2232

    Fox2232 Ancient Guru

    Messages:
    11,810
    Likes Received:
    3,363
    GPU:
    6900XT+AW@240Hz
    It would be appropriate to put price tags on those TVs capable to do it. And phones capable to mirror image on TV.

    I do not disagree on usability and that there are good scenarios, like having older laptop/ultrabook which has everything needed.
    I just disagree about cost sensibility of upfront HW required, because most of phones/TVs do not have what it takes to have good experience. And that actual cost is not just $10/month.
     
  13. Stormyandcold

    Stormyandcold Ancient Guru

    Messages:
    5,641
    Likes Received:
    340
    GPU:
    MSI GTX1070 GamingX
    The tech was being sold and in place around 2014 and Android 5.0, so, I'd expect there to be many devices out there capable of doing it without needing a separate PC. The most basic of such functions would be like casting Youtube from your android phone to your android tv.

    Today, I think there are many more people capable of making use of Geforce Now. Considering that a phone and tv are 2 of the most basic things people own, I don't think that's a problem. There isn't a wide-spread incompatibility issue and getting output to a tv has long been solved. Some phones even allow hdmi output so that mirror casting isn't even a problem either.

    So, I'm looking at it from the perspective of using things people already own. For you, I think you're looking at the cost of that vs getting a gaming PC. It's actually not really comparable, except the PC becomes an immediate extra expense. I also don't think you can account properly for costs because Nvidia can and does upgrade the hardware and when that happens, the value proposition is raised once again.

    The closest things I can think of to GFN is Xbox Gamepass and PSNow which are also decent value propositions and looks to be getting better in time. I anticipate that Steam could eventually go the same way as GFN, especially as they have the games already. Steam offering streaming running on their hardware could be how GFN ends up being integrated into Steam as an optional paid extra.

    In the end, it's obvious the goal is for all these services to be available on most devices. Anytime, anywhere. That's been something they've been pushing for. Which is why analysts predicted that PS5/XSX would be the last true console generation. Why limit your market to how many consoles you sell, when you could open up your market to everyone instead.
     
    Fox2232 likes this.
  14. MaxBlade

    MaxBlade Master Guru

    Messages:
    889
    Likes Received:
    11
    GPU:
    980Ti/970/390/+ more

    same got it free but.. so far never use it..
     
  15. Stormyandcold

    Stormyandcold Ancient Guru

    Messages:
    5,641
    Likes Received:
    340
    GPU:
    MSI GTX1070 GamingX
    I've actually just spent a few hours testing it.

    Works with my Xiami mi 9T Pro paired with XSX controller (I don't own any Xbox consoles, only controllers). Also works well on my desktop, and while resolution is maxed at 1920x1200, you still get to tweak all the PC options in-game (except because I'm using free version there's no RTX.

    On desktop it works with mouse and keyboard fine. Forget the word streaming, which makes it lumped in with all other streaming apps, it's function is much more like remote desktop for gaming, but, using someone else's PC.

    I tried a few games, Ride 4, TT Isle of Man 2 and Cyberpunk. Cyberpunk tickled me the most as it runs so much better than my actual PC. If only they'd let it stream at 1440p it'd suit my needs. Latency is nowhere near native, but, it's actually surprisingly good and responsive.

    I'm going to try CSGO, which I think for me is the ultimate test and see how I get on. For free, it's actually decent. I'm intrigued now. $10 for RTX...hmm.

    At some points I had to do a mental check and remind myself it's not native. For anyone who currently can't upgrade an older rig, I highly recommend you try it, even just to see where the tech is right now.

    Oh, and Cyberpunk on my phone looked awesome haha. I'm not saying anyone would prefer to play it on a phone, but, you can play it on a phone lol.

    Edit: So CSGO didn't go well, in competitive the lag makes it unfair and not responsive enough. This basically rules out online competitive fps games for me. I think the tech suits single-player or less latency sensitive games. Also, it didn't seem to take my actual Steam profile settings, but, seemed to create a new profile dedicated for GFN?

    Metro: Exodus wasn't bad at all. Certainly able to max it out and it does look better than what my PC can run it at. Weird thing was upon start-up it moaned about the save file being corrupted, but, I just chose to carry on and it still worked.
     
    Last edited: Mar 22, 2021
    Fox2232 likes this.

  16. evak

    evak Member

    Messages:
    25
    Likes Received:
    6
    GPU:
    ASUS RTX 2060 OC
    It would be worth it if you didn't have to already own the games to play them. Don't really see the point.
     
  17. mikeysg

    mikeysg Ancient Guru

    Messages:
    2,723
    Likes Received:
    338
    GPU:
    Nitro+ RX 6900 XT
    Well, first they start out cheap and get people hooked on it, or peeps who do not have capable rigs, then slowly but surely, subscription prices go up and up. I'd mentioned slowly because from $5 to $10 is still okay'ish, anyone willing to bet that it won't go up in, say, the next 12-18 months? Typical nVidia business practice.....
     
  18. AlmondMan

    AlmondMan Master Guru

    Messages:
    728
    Likes Received:
    148
    GPU:
    5700 XT Red Devil
    Your game doesn't have to be a steam game for you to stream it via steam streaming. Just add the non-steam games to your library in steam as shortcuts. That is the easiest way to do it. You could also just minimize steam's interface and launch it from your desktop while streaming. It's literally just a sort of remote desktop.
     
  19. Dribble

    Dribble Master Guru

    Messages:
    210
    Likes Received:
    77
    GPU:
    Geforce 1070
    Actually they are better then most as you don't buy the games just for the Nvidia service - so if you don't like GFN you can just buy a PC and game on that instead - all your game purchases will work on that pc. If your gaming PC breaks or goes out of date or it's impossible to buy a gpu just buy GFN for a while and you can keep playing. I know it's cool to hate on Nvidia but GFN is actually the most open of the remote gaming services.
     
  20. metagamer

    metagamer Ancient Guru

    Messages:
    1,980
    Likes Received:
    790
    GPU:
    Palit GameRock 2080
    Netflix just upped their prices. In fact, they've upped their prices a few times since I've been a Netflix subscriber. Typical Netflix business practice...

    It's simple, if you can't afford it, you cancel your subscription.
     

Share This Page