Funcom was also behind The Secret World, a MMORPG that had you interact with "out of the game" elements, such as internet "fake" websites, or installing an app on your smartphone to try to decode a morse code inside the game... Clever and fun :)

However, they kind of ruined it with its sequel, Secret World Legends... but that is another story :(

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Happy holidays to you GoL community ! :smile:

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Is that the return of Microsoft Strategic Commander [External Link] ?

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Quoting: WMan22

Quoting: Mountain ManIf you want to play Nintendo games, then buy a Nintendo console. It's as simple as that.

I HAVE been buying Nintendo Consoles all the way back starting with the Nintendo 64. I am even one of the 5 people who bought a WiiU.

But they don't really make TVs with composite slots anymore, everything's HDMI now. So it doesn't matter if I have physical hardware (Which I DO by the way), CRTs are dying one by one, I won't be able to play the games I grew up with forever unless emulators are allowed to exist. A future without emulation is horrifying. Entire generations of culture lost because of hardware that is not compatible with modern TVs.

There is no good argument in favor of removing emulators from existence. If you approve of this, I literally see you as no better than people who burned books under fascist regimes.

Additionally, let's say in a completely hypothetical scenario (which isn't our reality, let's be crystal clear) that all games were still readily available and that I didn't need an emulator to play Geist on modern TVs because N-Space is currently defunct and therefore cannot sell their game on virtual consoles while receiving money for the game. There's still a strong argument in favor of emulation due to being able to remaster games yourself. For example: On a WiiU emulator, you can play Breath of the Wild at 8k 240fps given powerful enough hardware. On a switch, it barely hits 720p 30.

Just wanted to mention, there are hardware solutions like OSSC [External Link] ; I have one myself, so that I can still enjoy my Megadrive on a 32 inch HDMI monitor :smile:

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Please keep up the good work :smile:

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Happy birthday ! :smile:

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Insta wish-listed :smile:

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Another instabuy for me, no question asked.
One day I will find the time to play it again, I only made a few runs since The Bad Seed was out... but Dead Cells will still be one of my favorite games of all time :smile:

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Quoting: dziadulewiczPlease read this response from a developer to understand this decision better. It makes perfect sense and no need to raise pitchforks yet again: https://discourse.ubuntu.com/t/ubuntu-flavor-packaging-defaults/34061/9 [External Link]

"As a developer, it might help to see a bit of the standpoint I have on this issue, as I actually agree with the decision to not include Flatpak by default. I may simply be reiterating what @kewisch has already said, but I don’t have to talk in “official language” so it might be a bit easier to swallow.

It may be easily overlooked, but one of the core features of Ubuntu is that package versions change very, very rarely. If at all possible, bug fixes are taken from the (openly viewable) source code of an application, carefully tweaked to make them compatible with an older version of the software, patched in, tested, and only then deployed. There are a few packages where this is impractical (Firefox for instance), and there are some closed-source packages in the Restricted repo that we can’t backport patches into since we don’t have the code. But for the most part, if you install an app into Ubuntu, that’s the app you get, and that will be the app you continue to use for the rest of that release’s lifespan.

This is a powerful feature since it makes Ubuntu unlikely to randomly break your important data as often as that other OS that you hear get a lot of grief from Linux geeks, but it also requires that Canonical and the Ubuntu community have near-total control over the software repository.

That’s only possible if Canonical actually has the necessary control.

Canonical does have total and complete control over the Ubuntu archive that apt uses. And Canonical has total and complete control over the Snap repository. If something goes wrong and Canonical must step it, they can.

But Canonical has zero control over the Flatpak repositories. They do not host a Flatpak repo of their own (Snap does the near-equivalent job), nor do they control Flathub or any of the other Flatpak repos (at least as far as I know). This means that if something goes awry with a Flatpak, the user is pretty much left to figure it out for themselves.

What’s worse, most of the Ubuntu flavors (and Ubuntu itself) provide free technical support via forums and IRC channels. Most of our users are using software from the Ubuntu repos or Snap Store and we are equipped to help them. We know what to expect from the software our users run and can give targeted and efficient advice on how to resolve issues. Some of us can even kick things into shape in the archives if there’s a legitimate problem with our packages, or we know who to talk to.

With Flatpaks, the situation is much more dismal from a technical support perspective. We have little-to-no clue what quirks the software vendor(s) will have introduced since we don’t work closely with them. We have no way to reach in and fix legitimate bugs aside from filing bug reports and hoping that they will be answered. We’re going to end up with frustrated support staff and even more frustrated users. And all because they didn’t know that if they clicked a particular button in their flavor’s app store, they would be downloading unsupported software.

Yuck. No thanks.

Ubuntu provides plenty enough software for most people in the apt archives and in the Snap Store. In the rare instances that someone needs a Flatpak, they have to go out of their way to enable Flatpak support, which gives them a clue that what they’re doing might not end well. If they enable Flatpak, install an app, it fails, and then they come ask for help, they’ll at least expect it when we say “sorry, we don’t support Flatpaks, that’s why they require extra steps to enable”. They’re exactly like PPAs from an Ubuntu support perspective. And I’m sure we can agree that providing official support for arbitrary PPAs is a bad idea.

That, in a nutshell, is why Canonical and the Ubuntu flavors have gone ahead and agreed to not include Flatpak on the default ISOs, at least as I understand it. As a regular supporter in the IRC channels and many of the Ubuntu-related forums, I heartily agree with this decision.

(For the record, I don’t hate Flatpaks, just like I don’t hate PPAs. In fact I have Flatpak enabled on my personal system and have nn app installed from Flathub that I use. I just don’t expect that the official Ubuntu support venues are going to help me if that app goes berzerk.)"

Not sure about all this, but would this mean that Canonical may want to get rid of PPAs as well, one day, because they don't have near-total control over it ? :huh:

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Quoting: ExpandingMan[...]
This does raise an interesting point though: developers probably won't care about games on linux that are too much for the steam deck to handle. It'll be interesting to see whether valve acts like they care about them.

Good point, I think it may also depend wether the developers will see sales as "Generic Linux" vs "SteamDeck" ?

View this comment - View article - View full comments