Xonotic is actually pretty good. It just doesn't have a very high playerbase last time I checked which is kind of essential.

As long as UT can bring in the numbers then that alone makes it worth having another fast paced shooter on Linux IMO.
and it looks like it's shaping up pretty well too.

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Quoting: valczirI don't fully understand the point of the joystick - isn't the left touchpad intended to work as that? Without a solid d-pad, fighting games will be unplayable (as anyone who ever tried to play a fighting game on any of the xbox systems would know). One of the things I was really looking forward to is the revival of indie fighting games on PC. I'd love to see another awesome fighting game like OMF 2097 show up on steam.

It really needs a d-pad for that to happen, though.

The touchpads are programmable, you could make the touchpads act as D-Pads if you want, and supposedly they are going to have some sort of feedback so you might be able to feel which direction you are pushing somehow

I guess they figured a touchpad can emulate a D-Pad better than a Joystick (even though it can do that too but maybe not as effectively)

View this comment - View article - View full comments

I prefer a D-Pad over joystick if the game was designed for it. But a joystick is good too and I think is a better choice overall because it allows more functionality for different types of games

View this comment - View article - View full comments

This all sounds great.

I pretty much love all the decisions they are making and how they are involving the community, I think the game will turn out really well.

I still cringe when I hear mention of the store, like at the end of the video they mentioned people can sell player models on their store. I'm not sure I'm completely sold on this idea yet. I really don't like anything in-game to remind me about real world money in any way, and I'd rather just pay for the game and everyone gets everything it can offer rather than having it fractured based on how much each person can pay.

But so far it looks like we can trust them to at least make that difference not too noticeable, so hopefully I'll get used to the idea eventually.

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Quoting: MetallinatusI'm not sure I understand the issue here.... since when make services that you can't get pirating is a bad thing?
I mean, it is bad for pirates, but why is it an "evil" thing?

It's not just the concept of online services in and of itself that people think is bad.

It's predicting what those services might actually be based on historical evidence.
Online services, especially when it becomes a companies primary method of making money, are almost always bad for the game and for gamers.

Who knows though, they might surprise us and make online services that completely leave the game uneffected or even change the game in a positive way. But the odds are not on their side at all.

View this comment - View article - View full comments

The sad thing is, people actually will buy those services.

When all is said and done it's not the companies that are ruining gaming with their online stores and pay to win features, it's the gamers who buy them, and there are a lot of them. Enough of them to actually earn those companies more money through online stores then they make off of game sales.

Apparently those of us who expect the full product of a game to be uneffected by their business model are a minority

(even buying everything isn't good enough because they've probably chopped the game up forcefully into pieces where it might not even make sense to do so. One example is taking a weapon that was already balanced and splitting it's features up into multiple separate weapons which are all now unbalanced just so they can put more items in their store)

Especially in online gaming. The people who can buy advantages and not be bothered by it disgust me.
As far as I can tell it's basically the exact same mindset of a person who can download a hack to win in a game.
I'm not cheap either, I'd pay $100 for a game much sooner than I would spend even a single dollar in a free to play game that gives me an advantage in any way.

View this comment - View article - View full comments

On one hand I think it's not a big deal because, as others have said they can play all steam games with windows not just the Linux ones

On the other hand, they probably aren't going to get any sales from the Linux crowd that was planning on buying a steam machine.
What if sales go badly and the SteamOS steam machines never even get a real chance because everyone looks at alienware's failure and decides it's not worth it

Quoting: AnonymousYou say that as if Linux is any more impervious to viruses than Windows is... We just have a higher proportion of tech savvy users who are less likely to run random email attachments, between that and our lower marketshare we're merely a less appealing target.

It is inherently more secure. Even if we ignore user mistakes and the fact that more secure behavior is encouraged on Linux way more than windows (like using a package manager with trusted repos).
Linux is still more secure if only for the fact that it was designed from the ground up to be a multi-user system. That greatly restricts the amount, and the kind of exploits that you would find on Linux compared to windows.
Also, windows and most of it's software pretty much relies on having its code hidden, meaning they aren't able to get a lot of outside help. Linux has only benefited from having an open kernel that programmers all over the world can submit fixes for. (despite having open code that any hacker can view to aid them in developing attacks we still see something like 90% of all servers hosted on Linux for its great security)

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Quoting: NyamiouIt is fake, but it doesn't mean this is impossible.

Was just about to say something like that.

Since manufacturing is basically up to whatever companies want to do I'd almost be surprised if something like this doesn't surface eventually.
and that's something that might attract a lot of the people who feel they just have no need for a steam machine.

I think it would even get me to start buying a larger variety of game types too

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Already had it off.

I like to disable it for sites that I visit a lot which don't have obtrusive ads.

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Quoting: HadBabitsOn the other hand, it means creative people can make a living from doing things they enjoy for people who want to see it. I fail to see how monetary incentive would reduce quality, if anything it seems like it drives creators to keep up the work. Also, please elaborate on 'fakes'.

Yes this is the other hand, and it's a good one.

But everyone is not like that.
For example, I was just looking up how much you can make from a youtube vid and apparently some guy recently made $100,000 for filming someone who was drugged up and woozy after going to the dentist.
That's of course an extreme example, but given how many crazy schemes people come up with to "get-rich-quick" I would be shocked if there aren't a bunch of people even right now trying to come up with ways to stage similar videos, instead of letting it happen naturally. (Hence the "lower quality" and "fake"s I mentioned)

I hear some streamers can make >$1,000 for playing video games for a day. I would not be surprised if some of those people would stop gaming altogether if they suddenly couldn't make money off of it, and yet they are the people with the biggest voice in the gaming community?

In an ideal world I would say sure, go ahead and pay the people who put out that content. But you can't do that without inviting unwanted company.

Take this guy for example
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hb8v2HvdMC0 [External Link]
All of his videos have the same theme, he literally expects to be able to play a game and win during a single seating and without having any prior knowledge or experience with the game.
Either he is totally new to gaming yet thinks his unexperienced opinion is something everyone needs to hear, or he intentionally does this sort of thing, unfairly criticizing games or giving unjustified bad reviews, just to generate interest because it earns him money.

But the people who really love to make that content will still do it anyway even if they aren't getting paid.

Quoting: HadBabitsOn the contrary, I think Let's Players and Youtube reviewers are strengthening a culture of criticism in gaming.

It sure is, and I would argue that that's exactly what is creating the problems of companies you listed here

Quoting: HadBabitsThe attention of gamers is no longer in the hands of the Games industry, which is presently engaging in misleading hype, pre-order culture, and walled-garden mindset. Instead a lot of it has gone to just regular gamers who put themselves on Youtube and aren't in the pockets of publishers.

The people putting out content have a lot of power to influence who buys what games, and it puts so much pressure on game companies that they have to resort to over polishing and over analyzing everything to minimize their bad reviews, rather than just focusing on what's fun.

Perhaps that's inevitable... But the point I'm trying to make is, if people are going to have that much power to influence players, it should belong to someone who loves gaming enough to make that content without having to be paid.

View this comment - View article - View full comments