By the way, do we have any confirmation that Season 2 will also be ported?

I played S1 for 40h by now, and probably at least half of that time I've been doing bonus missions (both 100%'d) and challenges (still a long way to go) in Sapienza, my favourite setting.

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Is the story complete now, or are there any more DLCs planned? I bought the game + season pass but haven't played it yet, waiting for it to be complete. Besides I'm now too busy with Hitman. ;-)

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Quoting: Nor MantisI look at games much like I look at music. When I was a kid I purchased records only. Then I got a car and wanted to listen while driving, so I bought the same music on tape. Then CD's came and I bought the same music again. Then MP3 came in and I paid to download. Now records are back in and once again, I am buying the same music I love.

It's not the same as having to buy the tape again each time you switch a car. ;-)

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Quoting: liamdaweAgain, you're not reading what I wrote correctly :)

Gee, I wonder why that is.

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Quoting: liamdawe

Quoting: pbWho said I bought a Windows version? I don't need Windows games I get them in bundles but they only clutter my library. I don't care if the game is ported day-1 or day-100, I don't think it's honest by any measure to pay 100% for Windows version and 110% for Linux version, but it would be honest to pay 100% for Windows OR Linux OR Mac version and +10% for each additional OS.

Indeed, that was part of my point in the article about an upgrade option :)

Yeah, you should probably go read your article (I just did it *for the second time*) because there is no such statement in your text. You said "Even something simple like an upgrade option, that way we can still ensure the porter directly gets their due cut of the money for their work." and that implies Linux/Mac version should be an upgrade to a Windows version, I simply can't agree to that because I'm interested exclusively in the Linux version and I don't see a reason why I should pay for the main game + for the "upgrade" just for the sake of it. I can buy the "upgrade" IF I have the Windows version from some bundle etc. but if I'm a new buyer, I should be able to buy a Linux version "just like that" without giving as much as a single thought to the Windows one.

ACTUALLY it could be perfectly well executed even now and even in this specific case. Consider this:

Let's make three separate titles:
- Arma Windows
- Arma Mac
- Arma Linux

Let's say all of them are 3,99 for new purchases BUT each of them automatically has a -90% discount if I own the game for another OS. This way if I'm only interested in Linux version, I pay 3,99 and if I want to have the game for Windows AND Linux, I pay 3,99 + 0,40. And if I already have the Windows version "from the olden times" I pay 0,40 for the "upgrade" - who in their right mind would complain about that?

Values/percentages are just an example of course, but you get the idea. You could make that -75% and it would still be ok *in this specific case*, but for a $60 game it may not look that good.

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Who said I bought a Windows version? I don't need Windows games I get them in bundles but they only clutter my library. I don't care if the game is ported day-1 or day-100, I don't think it's honest by any measure to pay 100% for Windows version and 110% for Linux version, but it would be honest to pay 100% for Windows OR Linux OR Mac version and +10% for each additional OS.

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Quoting: liamdaweTo the people apparently glossing over the article, do note I specifically said this:

Quoting: meEven something simple like an upgrade option, that way we can still ensure the porter directly gets their due cut of the money for their work.

I'm not specifically advocating for paying twice if you already own it, the point is to have the ability to pay something, if the developer/publisher so chooses.

Buying an upgrade to play on more than one OS - it's not a bad idea, but under one condition: I can select my preferred OS on purchase and then I have to pay slightly more if I also want to play on another. Your idea of paying 100% for a Windows version (that I will never use anyway) and then some more for a Linux port is really wrong.

View this comment - View article - View full comments

By principle I don't see a problem with selling different OS versions separately, with a big BUT: it should be clearly stated upfront. Whenever we see the announcement that game XYZ will be ported (no matter if by the original devs, contractor or porting house), it should be stated IF the Linux version will be sold separately and if it's not clearly stated, then by default it should be free for previous purchasers.

Why? Because whatever you say, people WILL go and buy the game as soon as they hear that the port is coming. Not everyone can cope well with the excitement, some people like to have it pop up in the library as soon as it's made available for download - and that's ok! You may say they're doing bad work for Linux gaming but who are we to judge? The simple fact is that it's happening and if it was stated upfront that Linux port will be sold separately, they would - simple as that - HAVE TO wait, and that would be ok as well.

As for the game in question - I don't really care because I got it for free, and I'm not even much excited to try it out - BUT if they're thinking of doing the same with Arma 3 - now that would piss off lots of people, me included, because I bought it from Bohemia specifically for the Linux beta.

Another problem (if separate keys become a common thing) will be bundles. To this day (despite asking 4 times) I don't know if Feral gets a share from Linux purchases Sega Humble Bundles. Now imagine a future humble bundle where only Windows keys are bundled - because Linux keys are separate. Or imagine that keys for all the systems are bundled but you get the wrong ones and you only find out after redeeming (HB used to have a select button to indicate which system your purchase should represent; now the select is long gone, they either go by the old cookies or just detect the system - so what will happen if you buy a bundle on a friend's Windows laptop, or perhaps a friend gifts you a bundle?).

I agree that the current way of handling the shares is far from perfect, but separate keys should only be a thing for really old games or for the post-release ports when it's stated from the beginning (preferably at the release, like "if we ever consider a Mac/Linux port, it will be sold separately, so don't buy the game just yet"), otherwise steamplay should be implied.

View this comment - View article - View full comments

More sorting options is what I'd really like to see. For example sorting by user reviews or by achievement completion percentage.

Oh, and being able to download the soundtrack and/or extras without downloading the whole game (esp. a Windows-only game) would be awesome.

View this comment - View article - View full comments

@cprn But that's not the whole truth, is it? The real choice is: have a fraud protection on your side at the expense of turtle-slow payment processing and every-too-often declining of legitimate payments (=constant customer frustration) or have real-time payment processing and be sure that all legitimate payments go through at the expense of occasional chargebacks (=happy customers at an extra cost). *That*s why your clients choose to ignore your fraud protection and instead put their own in place (or just go full monty until they're hit hard and realise it's not worth it).

That said, I don't think paypal even offers such a choice, and at the same time their handling of fraud payments is absolute shit. They always put the blame and the cost on the receiver even though it was their security that failed in the first place. I mean come on, is it the retailer that should guess that a paypal account has been hacked? Shouldn't paypal be the ones to detect the breach and block the payment? It makes some sense with physical goods (for example when the payment is from Italy but the shipping address is in Nigeria) but is absolutely not aligned with the digital goods market. The Internet is full of stories of companies hit had by paypal's absurd policies and blatant ignorance.

View this comment - View article - View full comments