By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close
Zippy6 on 28 April 2023
Edit Thread
the-pi-guy said:
Ryuu96 said:

This is how GeForce Now and all other Cloud providers already work, no?

GeForce isn't selling the consumer content, none of these Cloud Gaming Providers are. The transactions are made via the relevant stores (E.g. Microsoft Store/Steam) and they are the ones who get the 30% cut. If you want to play a game via GeForce Now then you have to buy it on a storefront (I.E. Steam) who take a 30% cut, the publisher gets the rest and Nvidia gets nothing.

So I don't think this would or even could apply to PS Plus? Because you'd still be playing the PlayStation version of the game and any transactions made would be via the PlayStation store where Microsoft has no way of taking 100%. Nvidia, Boosteroid, Ubitus, etc, are simply using your Steam library and all content purchased there so they aren't entitled to a cut.

Their business model is Subscriptions to their Cloud service, not transactions via a store, because they have no store.

Good point.

Seems like a strange point for CMA to bring up in that case. 

Yes the bigger question than the boosteroid/gfn deals etc is if the 100% revenue deal was for cloud streaming services like PS+ or if they made a deal with someone like Luna and it was still 100%.

Considering "the third party" was likely PlayStation? Then it would seem they wanted 100% from in-app purchases on PS+. E.G Someone cloud streaming warzone. But perhaps not.