Quoting: 1xokWith Insurgency being unsupported. Shame.

What's the matter with Insurgency?
I started it up, it's native... what is not working?

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Quoting: pbMy library right now:
VERIFIED: 131 games
PLAYABLE: 100 games
UNSUPPORTED: 30 games

These proportions are looking good. :wub:

[edit] you can check your numbers here: https://checkmydeck.herokuapp.com/ [External Link] (found on r/SteamDeck [External Link]

I wonder why so much of your library already has got a tag.
These are my numbers:
VERIFIED: 12 games (3.41%)
PLAYABLE: 8 games (2.27%)
UNSUPPORTED: 1 games (0.28%) (That's Insurgency.)
UNKNOWN: 331 games (94.03%)

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Quoting: GuestThis is something I see quite a fair bit of: not keeping things alive during development, porting at the end. I have to keep wondering why that's so much the case. Surely it can't always be something like not have a spare machine about, and it seems reasonable to expect at least firing up a GNU/Linux distro if a game is going to try be released on the platform, but why isn't it a part of the normal workflow from the get-go?

I guess there are enough Windows developers too afraid of even installing Linux. Or the triple described lately, the story teller, the graphics and the sound person, that just don't feel computer literate enough. Of course, those shouldn't make such promises. Or just the developers too inexperienced to expect problems arising later. "I'll just press the magic button!" Yeah, just guesswork.

Quoting: GuestMaybe it is for many, but engine problems or GNU/Linux specific issues outside of their range of expertise make them drop it and think they can just dedicate more time to the platform once the core game is sorted. Don't know. I think there are the occasional questionnaire sent out, but can't think of any to look up right now.

I would understand this one. (And I'd also understand if/why they wouldn't want to tell that in public.) You expect the engine to do it, it doesn't, you report an error, nothing happens - that would make it (too) hard to fulfill the promise.

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Quoting: GuestYeah, entirely aware of how things started and that a prologue did exist. Maybe they thought changes later wouldn't impact much, or maybe there are a lot of issues with the prologue that they know about but couldn't iron out. Not really the point - they couldn't get a release done, offering refunds, what more could they really do?

Afterwards? Offering refunds and an apology and maybe an actual explanation. I don't expect them to put all their money and lives into the port.

Before? Keeping the working state alive during the whole development process. If you don't test it, it ain't gonna work.

Quoting: GuestThere is risk that what is being backed will simply not turn out - and that's something which absolutely people can be unhappy and disgruntled about, but some of the vitriol I've been reading is a little excessive and I don't think paints a good image.

I might have overlooked stuff. Worst I saw is people wanting to avoid the developers in future, which is ok in my book. (I don't the devs will make the same mistake again - probably by not promising Linux versions again, so it's not a big thing for both sides I guess.)

Quoting: GuestHowever, as you say, what has gone wrong here? I really hope that could be focused on. GNU/Linux gaming is small, and there's a lot of areas that desperately need improvement. I'm always hopeful more information is forthcoming from developers about why they had to drop part of any plan to support GNU/Linux, but equally I can understand why they might want to refrain from doing so.

Twice yes, that would be nice to read, and I could understand why they wouldn't write it.

Quoting: GuestEh, maybe it's just me and I should be the one to walk away entirely from any community areas.

I don't think so. And I still want to believe that this corner is among the nice ones in the net.

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Quoting: GuestI think you're kind of proving my point: seems I'm not allowed to have an opinion on what I perceive as toxicity, and what kind of community do you think that creates? If this is the responses seen to anything less than perfect, what developer would bother with that community to begin with?

Developers aren't some mystical, magical being. They're ordinary people. And I know of many who have simply walked away from GNU/Linux not because of any technical reason, but because of the stress they're put under for any perceived slight - even when the perceived slight is just entirely made up.

And I'm actually a little curious, coincidentally (but actually unintentionally) leading on from the last sentence: where did Eggnut complain about 3rd party packages not having GNU/Linux support?

I'm always taking side with developers regarding toxic behaviour. (I'm not sure if that's partly because I'm a developer, too. I don't really think so, decent behaviour is always good.) But I don't think this is such a case.

You're aware that Linux support has been part of the Kickstarter [External Link]? People have been giving money based on this promise. This story does not start with people being unhappy and expressing their unhappiness, this story starts with a working Linux prologue, with the developers promising a Linux version, people giving money due to the promise and actually seeing a working Linux prologue - and the developers breaking their promise. So, as long as people keep it civil, people are totally entitled to be unhappy and express their unhappiness.



Yes, developers are humans, too, and I don't get tired to say so, but when humans make such mistakes, they totally should be aware that they disappoint people and be able to cope with disappointment being expressed.

And no, I don't think this will turn away developers from supporting Linux. It might turn away developers from promising more than they are able or willing to deliver - which is a good thing, not a bad one in my eyes.

What has gone wrong here? Either the developers changed much of their system (like, the engine) without caring for Linux support or they didn't watch Linux runnability during the whole development. Both something I'm not happy about. Something to learn from.

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Quoting: GuestDo you suggets to play XCOM1 or XCOM2 to someone with not much free time?
Thanks!

Well, it does take time to get through the whole game, but it might be nice if you could say spare half an hour every now and then to get through one fight and put it down again. Not sure.

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Quoting: Philadelphus

although, it does look perhaps a bit overly business-like.

That's a feature, not a bug. :wink: How else to disguise bringing one's Deck along to boring business functions? :grin:

Isn't that what home office was invented for?!? :D

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Quoting: GuestThen it happens that you make a detailed bug report to them and you see how they are having an hard time understanding what you're trying to say, as if developer and user have swapped places.

:grin:

View this comment - View article - View full comments

I'd never buy such a thing (though it does look nicely soft!), but I guess it's good to have an ecosystem around the Steam Deck, and companies that are optimistic about it.

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Quoting: KimyrielleIt happens way too often, that's for sure. Reasons seem to be the same in most cases, too. Devs that never touched an OS other than Windows thinking that they can develop a game on Windows for Windows using Windows middle-ware and Windows tools, and then press the magic "Export to Linux" button in their engine of choice when all is said and done, to make their Windows game run on Linux.

Unfortunately, there's Linux gamers who are propagating the very same, like "Just press the f***ing export button!!!!1!11!eleven!"

View this comment - View article - View full comments