Live data from Hacker News

GeForce Now: A Review

whatever.scalzi.com

41–50 of 198 posts

Re: GeForce Now: A Review

#41
post #30

Rather offtopic, but would anyone recommend one of Scalzi's books if I enjoyed Old Man's War?

Rest of the series is pretty decent up to last book which is a collection of stories. My favourite though is the independent novella God Engines.

I'll try them, thanks!

Re: GeForce Now: A Review

#42
post #30

Rather offtopic, but would anyone recommend one of Scalzi's books if I enjoyed Old Man's War?

Lock In and the sequel Head On are both fun reads with his same humorous style that you'll probably read in two or three sittings

Excellent, thank you!

Re: GeForce Now: A Review

#44
> It gives me access to 88 out of my over 400 purchased games, with the emphasis being on more recent and/or more popular games.

Jesus Christ, how can it be that bad? Their servers are running Windows, right? I don't see how Nvidia's coverage can be that bad unless they're encumbered by licensing quirks. Even Valve's Proton manages to cover ~75-77% of the Steam store's titles...

Re: GeForce Now: A Review

#45
I tried it over the end-of-year holiday break with my 3 boys to play Guild Wars 2 from our Macs. It sucked down over our 1.2 TB of Xfinity bandwidth within maybe just a day's worth of playing. If we would have continued, I would have easily hit the $100 additional bandwidth fee and decided we had better stop before I broke the bank.

I couldn't figure out how to reduce the video stream bandwidth with any of the settings. It worked really well technically, but without some improvements in this regard, I don't know how I can use it. I guess folks with unlimited bandwidth can make it work, but that's about it.

I paid for the full service and then promptly had to cancel all of our accounts, since it wasn't going to be viable for us.

Re: GeForce Now: A Review

#46

> It gives me access to 88 out of my over 400 purchased games, with the emphasis being on more recent and/or more popular games. Jesus Christ, how can it be that bad? Their servers are running Windows, right? I don't see how Nvidia's coverage can be that bad unless they're encumbered by licensing quirks. Even Valve's Proton manages to cover ~75-77% of the Steam store's titles...

There are apparently a lot of licensing issues.

Re: GeForce Now: A Review

#47
I might be a bit too hardcore for this product. I play FPS like Quake casually but somewhat competitively. Ever millisecond matters to me.

It's probably quite compelling for games where latency is not as important.

Re: GeForce Now: A Review

#48
>> While GeForce Now supports a large number of my games on Steam, it doesn’t support them all. It gives me access to 88 out of my over 400 purchased games, with the emphasis being on more recent and/or more popular games.

This is going to be what ends up hamstringing the service in the long run. When GeForce Now first came out, you could play a much larger catalog of titles; publishers then caught wind of this and started pulling their games off of it, in case they wanted to launch their own streaming service in the future.

For this reason, I think Microsoft has the pole position with their XBox Cloud Gaming service. They have been running it as an extension of their Game Pass Ultimate service, and are rumored to allow you to play games you bought and own through the service sometime later this year. There's a future where a Microsoft game you own can be played on PC, XBox consoles, or streamed to an iPad or Chromebook, syncing progress between them.

Re: GeForce Now: A Review

#49
post #27

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I've unfortunately played way too many twitch shooters on PC and latency is really noticeable to me. To the point where I can't stand using my work-supplied laptop because of slight mouse lag (I think the mouse travels maybe 30-40ms behind my hand) and 60hz screens. This is somewhat annoying coming from 165Hz, gaming peripherals. Then I have to connect to a VM to do development. Absolute hell.

Yeah, it won't match the requirements for very high end competitive gamers. I was just talking empirical results found by Digital Foundry matching consoles. > mouse travels maybe 30-40ms behind my hand That sounds awful. But it reminds me that the chart I posted is tested using a very exacting tool and even the 3090 has a 30ms latency on 120hz and that's about as good as it gets. So you shouldn't take these numbers i…

given GFN is running the same software as you'd run locally (the game), and using the same local hardware (keyboard, mouse, etc) to send the inputs, and then the same local hardware to display the server rendered output (your monitor/TV)... how can be true that GFN doesn't add at least the same input latency as running it locally?

unless there's some trick I'm missing it's going to be at least the same (plus the network latency)

Re: GeForce Now: A Review

#50
post #27

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I've unfortunately played way too many twitch shooters on PC and latency is really noticeable to me. To the point where I can't stand using my work-supplied laptop because of slight mouse lag (I think the mouse travels maybe 30-40ms behind my hand) and 60hz screens. This is somewhat annoying coming from 165Hz, gaming peripherals. Then I have to connect to a VM to do development. Absolute hell.

Yeah, it won't match the requirements for very high end competitive gamers. I was just talking empirical results found by Digital Foundry matching consoles. > mouse travels maybe 30-40ms behind my hand That sounds awful. But it reminds me that the chart I posted is tested using a very exacting tool and even the 3090 has a 30ms latency on 120hz and that's about as good as it gets. So you shouldn't take these numbers i…

You're both right. As some SLI/Crossfire enthusiasts found, high fps don't mean much when they're late. Latency is king
Post reply on HN