Quoting: elgatil

Quoting: mphuZ

Quoting: Liam DaweI made a prediction / hope on a Valve streaming service back in 2018.

Sure. After all, streaming is the future.

New players like Google and Amazon have already entered here. Microsoft is also pulling up.

If Valve doesn't launch its streaming service in the next year or two, they may lose everything. And no Linux will save them. That's why I'm a little scared for Valve. I hope Gabe and Co know what they are doing and will not miss the moment.

Is it the future though? Some years ago I would have agreed but now I am not so sure.

My point is graphical performance is growing faster than game graphical requirements to the point of having a laptop SoC capaple of running every non-VR game through an emulation layer at 720p (Of course, I am taking of the Steam Deck). So, right now it would be arguable the need of a streaming service hardware-wise (even less in the near feature). And given steam prices I think it is actually cheaper to buy the games than to pay a monthly fee even if you have access to all games (which you don't). With almost all of videogames with 10+h of content, (a lot with 30h and a lot of replayability) you are not going to play a lot of them per month as you would with movies on Netflix.

But you could say:
1) I want VR!: well, the smallest lag in VR can make you throw up so I do not think streaming solutions are there yet.
2) I want to play 4k!: That's what FSR and DLSS are for. It makes more sense to use these technologies than to spend hundreds of euros in a beefed up graphic card when your old laptop can manage almost the same quality with the same performance.

I have been thinking about this for a time now and I wanted to share to see what you people hought about it.

TL;DR: At this rate in the near future every laptop will be able to play any game and upscale it to any desired resolution so the biggest boon for streaming services would be irrelevant. Also, steam is cheap. Any thoughts?

Agree with this but companies only see profit. So if your experience is worse quality but they can spin it to look cheaper and give the illusion of more choice then we will see it take off.
The instant attention span might increase the adoption as people don't want to wait 2 - 4 days to download another 100gb game.. On the plus side for downloading enormous games to your local machine most AAA titles are just recycled buggy propaganda filled crap anyway, kick-started, indie / AA games are where the fun is to be had and they are typically less than 10-15gb usually much less.

Some of The biggest games of the last few years in terms of player base have been able to run on an potato and are small in size. As you said with FSR / DLSS increasing in adoption the hardware window of opportunity to play a decent looking game is widening and i think with the whole Stadia debacle a lot of people became informed as to the negatives of cloud gaming.

edit*
put a small wall of text below ..

Spoiler, click me

i forgot to add, that hardware although expensive at the moment for a PC GPU is actually not that extreme. Your typical phone can cost more than a GPU and people have no problem upgrading that every year or two years, and yet an xbox one s is just £/ $ 250 and game pass is around 7 buckaroos a month ( or squids if your in the UK) which gives you access to a ton of decent games at 1440p-60/1080p-120 (with HDR, which Linux hasn't got there yet) and the steam deck is relative to it's hardware not expensive and will last years and years. Gaming Laptops are now more powerful than a top end desktop PC of a few years ago also. So the only benefit to cloud streaming is instant access to games, but even then the load times i have seen on Stadia were actually much slower than my locally stored games running off an NVME. So it just comes down to download times and the chicken and egg here is that the faster the internet the less need for cloud streaming.

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Quoting: elmapuli think discussing anti cheat is a bit of a null point.

sure we shouldnt sacrifice freedom, but we can avoid DRM and anti cheat systems by geting informed on what games are using those techs and avoiding any game that use then.
the issue is: what about everyone else?

think about it: what do you prefer, everybody using linux, most of then not caring about issues like DRM and anti cheat systems running on their machines.or everybody using windows most of then not caring about issues like DRM and anti cheat systems running on their machines?

Even then my answer is still Linux.
We have a better chance to inform people. Free software also encourages the application of free speech it isn't just about games but communication platforms themselves. Informing people on a closed platform could eventually become hard to impossible and outside of the 'terms and agreements'. It would suck having to be careful about what you type out on your licensed copy of their software.

at least on linux privacy is an option, you are free to not install those games that spy on you or do other malicious behaviors, on windows even that isnt an option, the OS itself spy on you.

True. But i don't think "discussing anti cheat is a bit of a null point." as you have said. Perhaps, on this site it is and that is not upto me. But as long as there is an outlet within which to inform people of the invasive layers that DRM/Anti-cheat goes to i will voice my opinion on it.

honestly i'm tired of this all or nothing approach, if i have to wait one more year to play certain games, then i might as well go back to windows to never look back

But you said yourself, you can choose to run anticheat or not. It's not an all or nothing approach, you just have to make a sacrifice in order to stand for the thing you believe in whatever that may be. If you believe a AAA game is more important than the issue itself then just use Windows or Dual boot.

Personally I won't encourage modern day anticheat's as they are mostly thinly veiled spyware (not all of them but a lot) .

Each to their own though.

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Quoting: TheSHEEEP

Quoting: scaineI just can't believe that they a) they didn't test b) they pushed on a Friday and then, the final nail c) they did absolutely nothing about it all weekend. Incompetent

As someone who works freelance and switches projects about 2-3 times per year, let me tell you:

I can totally believe that.
The levels of incompetence and complete breakdown of communications on multiple levels I have seen in some companies (that you'd think would be more professional given their size) would make most people revert to their pre-landfall evolutionary state just to cope if they heard it.

The longer I work in IT, the more miraculous I find it that everything around us that is software does not crash and burn 99% of the time.

Which is why im glad i left the I.T industry. Much less stress now & happier all round.

View this comment - View article - View full comments

We can talk about market share, accessibility & compatibility all day long but the fact of the matter is, most anti-cheat is becoming essentially spyware bordering on malware. It's antithetical to what Linux is all about.
Linux is the equivalent to an open break away social-society running in parallel to a walled off industrial civilization. Trying to forge the two works for a while, but as ever it's either going to be 'EEE' or just simply the last 'E'.

Quoting: elmapulas if that was not bad enough:

steam deck seemed to be the thing that may change everything, but now we have better android emulators on windows than on linux, microsoft is making windows run android games and even google is trying to do the same.
sigh.google should be spending money on chromeOS or stadia instead ihmo, but no, looks like they're giving up competing in that market and doing decisions that will backfire against the linux ecosystem again.

i mean, imagine if we start to have killer productivity apps like office, photoshop and maya, but apps that were born on mobile coming to windows, linux would suffer again, it already happened, sure it wont happen for things like image editors, but we already have new markets like youtube, substance paint etc.

it's not just about markets which is about money , it's about collusion which is about power.

View this comment - View article - View full comments

apologies for my naivety on this but i have a few question:

1. do you have to run a separate client among the Heroic launcher to play games from the EA store ? i.e Heroic downloads the game but then installs the actual client in wine?

2. How (if any) is DRM handled, is it any different to the way steam does things with EA game is there any extra layer here or does it just depend on the specific game ? do all EA games released use a DRM layer authenticated via the client ?

3. Can i download or get a key from EA account using Heroic and then add it to steam and it show up in my library as a legit copy ( i don't expect that of course )

4. Can i somehow use the Heroic client to act as a buffer for the EA games that are bought on steam where it claims a 3rd party client is needed ?

sorry for the newb questions, i don't really support EA anymore, im just more intrigued as to how it works.

edit* 5. Is it easy to get proton working with this, instead of just using wine prefixes.

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Quoting: kerossinIt seems really weird that GOG with their "FCK DRM" philosophy doesn't properly support an open OS like Linux so it's more of a choice for hardcore anti-DRM people and everyone else chooses Steam with actual Linux support.

It was just a corporate slogan all along i guess. perhaps it should of said "FCKing Hell implementing DRM is expensive, lets not bother and pretend it's a virtue" :tongue:

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Quoting: GuestWhy are you getting so defensive? I was explaining. I only had the desire to cludge up the forum because you said I said something I didn't.

If you expand my last reply to you i placed in bold your exact quote and still stand by what i said, in full exactly as you have written without any editing. Not defensive, it just seems silly to continue at this point.

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Quoting: Guest

Quoting: Lofty

Quoting: Guest

Quoting: Lofty

Quoting: Guest

Quoting: Lofty

Quoting: Guest

Quoting: Lofty

Quoting: GuestIt's all about money to all of them, There's nothing wrong with that.

Disagree.

Quoting: GuestIf Ubisoft really wanted to do something, they'd stop internal employee abuse. Let's not forget what they put the actual devs through to make these games, or just because they can. Ubisoft has to earn my support, starting with removal of company culture of abuse. Then they can talk about earning my support for their games.

Agree.

Doesn't matter if you disagree or not, it's fact of the matter.

In your opinion. I agree companies exist to make money, that much is obvious. I don't agree with your added assessment that there is nothing morally wrong with the endless pursuit of money over everything else.

When it comes to you playing games on an OS that isn't really important to the world. You're trying to compare charity to supporting a game on an OS. They're not at all the same thing.

I understand your perspective, Im merely pointing out that i don't agree with your statement that there is 'nothing wrong' with only existing to make money..regardless of this thread's topic. That maybe the way of the world but you made the claim (and you are free to do so) that there is nothing wrong with that, i disagree.

What I'm saying is that you're taking my comment out of context. My comment was in regards to this game being supported on Proton. You can paraphrase words and add them to what I said to make it seem like I said something I didn't. But that's just you making things up in your head about what I said.

Im just replying to what you wrote. But if i missed or took your comment out of context then my apologies.

Here is my actual quote: "It's all about money to all of them, including Valve. Valve thankfully is building out Proton the right way, but it's due to money, not simply a love of Linux. There's nothing wrong with that."

This is in direct relation to games being ported to Linux. It had nothing to do with any other industry or situation. I feel I was pretty specific about what I meant by what I said.

I still stand by what I wrote. But at this point I have no desire to cludge up the forum going round & round in circles, and as i already offered apologies for missing any other context then there's nothing more for me to add.

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Quoting: Guest

Quoting: Lofty

Quoting: Guest

Quoting: Lofty

Quoting: Guest

Quoting: Lofty

Quoting: GuestIt's all about money to all of them, There's nothing wrong with that.

Disagree.

Quoting: GuestIf Ubisoft really wanted to do something, they'd stop internal employee abuse. Let's not forget what they put the actual devs through to make these games, or just because they can. Ubisoft has to earn my support, starting with removal of company culture of abuse. Then they can talk about earning my support for their games.

Agree.

Doesn't matter if you disagree or not, it's fact of the matter.

In your opinion. I agree companies exist to make money, that much is obvious. I don't agree with your added assessment that there is nothing morally wrong with the endless pursuit of money over everything else.

When it comes to you playing games on an OS that isn't really important to the world. You're trying to compare charity to supporting a game on an OS. They're not at all the same thing.

I understand your perspective, Im merely pointing out that i don't agree with your statement that there is 'nothing wrong' with only existing to make money..regardless of this thread's topic. That maybe the way of the world but you made the claim (and you are free to do so) that there is nothing wrong with that, i disagree.

What I'm saying is that you're taking my comment out of context. My comment was in regards to this game being supported on Proton. You can paraphrase words and add them to what I said to make it seem like I said something I didn't. But that's just you making things up in your head about what I said.

Im just replying to what you wrote. But if i missed or took your comment out of context then my apologies.

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Quoting: Guest

Quoting: Lofty

Quoting: Guest

Quoting: Lofty

Quoting: GuestIt's all about money to all of them, There's nothing wrong with that.

Disagree.

Quoting: GuestIf Ubisoft really wanted to do something, they'd stop internal employee abuse. Let's not forget what they put the actual devs through to make these games, or just because they can. Ubisoft has to earn my support, starting with removal of company culture of abuse. Then they can talk about earning my support for their games.

Agree.

Doesn't matter if you disagree or not, it's fact of the matter.

In your opinion. I agree companies exist to make money, that much is obvious. I don't agree with your added assessment that there is nothing morally wrong with the endless pursuit of money over everything else.

When it comes to you playing games on an OS that isn't really important to the world. You're trying to compare charity to supporting a game on an OS. They're not at all the same thing.

I understand your perspective, Im merely pointing out that i don't agree with your statement that there is 'nothing wrong' with only existing to make money..regardless of this thread's topic. That maybe the way of the world but you made the claim (and you are free to do so) that there is nothing wrong with that, i disagree.

View this comment - View article - View full comments