Quoting: jens

Quoting: GuestAnyway, the point was responsiveness of bug reporting. You claimed that Mesa is superior because it's public. As i've just demonstrated, this is not necessarily true.

He wont see your point due to his unconditional love for Open Source and FOSS in general.

Let me argue that you don't see his point either just because of how you expect him to think. Just because someone has got convictions that you don't share doesn't mean he's always wrong.

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Quoting: ShmerlNo driver is bug free. Nvidia has its share of bugs, but you won't see most of them reported. The benefit of using an open driver is that bug reports are public.

Let me second that. I've been using nVidia on Linux for a pretty solid ten years now, and there's been many bugs that mostly kill the desktop experience when compared to Mesa. For example, there was that infamous repaint bug that's been driving me mad for nearly TWO YEARS.

After a year without any response from nVidia whatsoever, users were left wondering if there was only someone taking care of Linux support. After a year and a half, a ticket was filed, and I was notified by email. Six months later, they found a solution.

Now they want to push their own solution for Wayland without working on it on a regular base, so I doubt we will ever be able to run it. Come on, we barely got modesetting implemented...
And I ain't talking about the overwhelming tearing with full screen videos!

View this comment - View article - View full comments

It is Zenimax which blocks unsupported builds. That's why the "Linux doesn't pay the bill" from Carmack made me laugh at the time.

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Quoting: g000hYou mentioned Arma 3 as running on Linux, even though in the Steam Store, it is not visible as a Linux / SteamOS title. I'm quite keen to get a list of other similar titles which aren't shown as working on Linux but still work (e.g. Linux experimental betas, etc).

Quite often I buy bundles, and in some cases I'm pretty sure the game is listed as Windows-only, but there's a Linux version lurking there too, if only I knew about it! I tend not to install the Windows games in bundles, unless I really like the game or I know the game works on Linux.

A good example is Everspace, which doesn't show the Linux/SteamOS icon on Steam store, but there is a working Linux version available.

Here you are [External Link]

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Quoting: ColomboYou definitely don't, because I never claimed anything you wrote in your next paragraph.

There are many reasons why people don't trust music/film/game journalist and why the in a lot of cases, something that is bellowed by professionals is unpopular and the other way around. There is a significant reason why instead of traditional media, blogs and LP were suddenly much more popular and there was such boom.

The indisputable fact (some) journalist bended over to give game a better review (to keep publishing company on their good side) is but one of them. This is not unique to games, but to everything from music, cars, sometimes even scientific papers (since if field is small, even with double blind review, you might know who wrote the paper).

However, I never claimed that DoW III is the case.

Other causes may be that there are just too many games with similar mechanics and too little time to explore games in depth, so journalist who didn't explore game fully might have been captivated by interesting new mechanics, which might provide fun for first hour or two, but then player who plays the game more finds that said mechanics is irreversibly broken. And thus while journalist had a great fun for one or two hours, player who spend 4 might find that the game is just not worth it.

In fact, original comment about that (not mine) was about this, and you claimed that this is conspirational theory.

And yet you came in with your explanation in reaction to my comment, thus implying your point proves mine wrong.

So if you don't believe it's the case with DoW III, why would you argue at all? What is the point?

Truly yours,
The illiterate dummy.

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Quoting: Colombo

Quoting: omer666

Quoting: Colombo

Quoting: Eike"Many people talked about it." is so much more convincing...

If such magazines should exist - don't buy them. Buy quality magazines.

Because this is as old as I am.

One fast example:
http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/2017-01-18-developer-admits-we-screwed-it-after-game-website-exposes-blacklist-threat [External Link]

Or here in rather... long and bit obnoxious article:
https://www.kotaku.com.au/2012/11/why-so-many-people-dont-trust-the-gaming-press/ [External Link]

TB also talked about it.

Straight from your link:

And yet, still, a lot of people bash the games press and games critics.

"I think the desire to see conspiracies and corruption in all of the gaming press is largely based on a far wider malaise in the world, of people wishing to demolish notions of expertise or more respected opinions," John Walker of Rock Paper Shotgun said to me over email. "Where once [expertise] was desired, it's now considered arrogant oppression. So when a review disagrees with a reader's strong opinion, it's much more satisfying to conclude the discrepancy is the result of corruption.

I hope you were able to read the whole article and not just cherrypick a first sentence that seems to support your opinion? Which is furthermore just a citation of some personal communication with some other journo?

Yes, I definitely know how to read ;-)

What this quotation means is that it is not because it already happened before in some cases that it is the case for all game reviews.
Moreover, there is absolutely no evidence to back this idea for DoW III, other than people's confirmation bias.

Also if you correctly read the article, it is more about "Why gamers don't trust reviewers", than "Reviewers are all liars".

Believing positive reviews for DoW III were utter lies is a biased point of view which demonstrates a closure to other opinions of the game. It equates to "this game is so bad, you've got to be under the influence of [fill in with whatever pleases you] to write something positive about it". There is no proof to back it, because you are using a shortcut in your logic.

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Quoting: Colombo

Quoting: Eike"Many people talked about it." is so much more convincing...

If such magazines should exist - don't buy them. Buy quality magazines.

Because this is as old as I am.

One fast example:
http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/2017-01-18-developer-admits-we-screwed-it-after-game-website-exposes-blacklist-threat [External Link]

Or here in rather... long and bit obnoxious article:
https://www.kotaku.com.au/2012/11/why-so-many-people-dont-trust-the-gaming-press/ [External Link]

TB also talked about it.

Straight from your link:

And yet, still, a lot of people bash the games press and games critics.

"I think the desire to see conspiracies and corruption in all of the gaming press is largely based on a far wider malaise in the world, of people wishing to demolish notions of expertise or more respected opinions," John Walker of Rock Paper Shotgun said to me over email. "Where once [expertise] was desired, it's now considered arrogant oppression. So when a review disagrees with a reader's strong opinion, it's much more satisfying to conclude the discrepancy is the result of corruption.

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Quoting: Colombo

Yeah, good old conspiracy theories about magazines getting paid for producing free advertising.

Bullshit.

Its not a conspiracy theory, its a fact. Many people talked about it. If journalist won't write positive review, he might no longer get the pre-release copy to review. Which means that he might not be the first or one of the first to review it (since he will have to review it after release), which means that people waiting for said game will not buy that magazine for that review.

I won't try to argue with the argument "bullshit", you got me convinced.

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Quoting: TheSHEEEP

Quoting: omer666So the rampant negativity won in the end. Well, whatever...

There's no rampant negativity here.
Just a game that's all-around pretty underwhelming, developed with a mystifying lack of vision or understanding of what people actually liked about the previous games and design decisions that are borderline inane (mobile-junk-like unit unlockables in my RTS game, no thanks).

Even developers themselves are aware of that [External Link].

"Professional" journos liked the game somewhat because they never really play games for long and are mostly just amazed by pretty or pretentious things.

Yeah, good old conspiracy theories about magazines getting paid for producing free advertising. That's why in France, Le Monde disliked it so much... As I said, I don't mind people not liking it. I have the feeling that user bashing prevented the game from having a second life, because there are things done right in this game.

Also, considering I love DoW III's game mechanics and that I hate MOBAs, well I come to the conclusion that I am an E.T. Which is fine, really.

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Wow, that's impressive.

View this comment - View article - View full comments