Quoting: geckofish52

Quoting: dibz

Quoting: vic-bay

Quoting: ShmerlI think it's good — looks like they made GOG private so they can pursue their own vision and not be pressured by shareholders of CDPR.

I.e. may be they can spend on Linux now more, while before shareholders could tell them not to prioritize Linux support. Just my guess. In the end, it's really up to what they want.

yeah, looking at valve and other game companies, private company is a better model for company-customer relationships. it allows for following long term strategies without being pressed by shareholders.

In my experience it really depends. Private is great but usually only when a company starts. Not speaking about GOG specifically, but in general, when a public company "goes private" the $$$ often comes from private equity firms which in turn is typically absolutely terrible for everyone - meaning both consumers AND employees, especially employees - other than the top-most leadership themselves. When you work for a public company that announces going private, it's frankly a good idea to start brushing up the resume and looking ahead to your next career move, even getting a jump on it, before you get surprised.

Anyway, at least with GOG it sounds like it's probably fine or even a good thing. Reads to me like this move is just saving GOG's existence before future changes occur; Which is great.

Yes. I'm a big fan of everything that Valve has done versus other game distributors, of course, but the weird veneration of non publicly traded companies who are probably have a lot of private investor relationships every time this comes up in gaming forums rubs me the wrong way.

On one hand, I do think it's true that Valve can get away with being a better company than most companies because they are not publicly traded, since stock market investors are quite accurately known for being very impatient and short-termist in their outlook and, these days, usually downright viciously resistant to the very idea of any profits being reinvested in the company rather than simply handed over to them.

But that definitely does not mean that not being publicly traded is going to make a company good. Very often it just means exchanging one style of horrible investor for another, and private equity firms often go past "short termist" into "deliberately destructive and fraudulent". Even if it's an owner/CEO thing like Gabe (I know, he doesn't own the whole thing, but he has enough control to set the tone), that won't help if the person at the top is someone like Sweeney, or a Koch brother. Companies of any size are just very rarely good, no matter how they're financed. I do think that publicly traded takes the chances down from "slim" to "none" though.

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Quoting: chrBut that is my taste, we may well disagree in our likes. Discussion about perceived text and subtext very welcome.

Not sure the trailer really gives us enough to judge. It could be played basically straight, and implicitly authoritarian. Or, it could be satirical, along the lines of a Starship Troopers kind of thing, but played a bit quieter.

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Go have fun, Liam! You're supposed to be on break! 😁

View this comment - View article - View full comments

. . . Have I actually played ANY games this year that were released this year? Even stuff I bought this year was all older, I think. Um . . . I played the demo of that card combat game where the "cards" are different sizes and you have to fit them into a tiled space and it's kind of moon themed and stuff. That was fairly good.

Still, the GOTYs these days are never as Goaty as good ol' Goat Simulator. Now there's a game that's very Goaty.

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Happy Christmas and thanks for all the games!

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Quoting: PhlebiacDon't they just keep coming back if you feed them?

I suppose . . . still better than being dead. Of course once you get the recipe right it would be routine, which would be boring, so presumably the game kind of skips that.

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Quoting: Shmerl

Quoting: Purple Library GuyI'm not sure that is a better question, at least for what I was wondering about. You can run 32-bit Windows on 64-bit hardware, can you not? And quite a lot of the 32-bit Windows out there may be that case, and for that case my surmise applies.

Point is that if anyone has 64-bit hardware, all the above is a non issue. They were sitting under some rock if they were running 32-bit OS on it until today.

Does it matter if they were sitting under some rock? As long as they were fine with their setup, they could make documents, browse the web, play their games, they probably had no reason to care. This could well be a rock with plenty of people contentedly under it. The point is, now they'll be sitting under some rock without their games. That will push them to take some kind of action.

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Quoting: Shmerl

Quoting: Purple Library GuyI don't know how old Windows has to be to be 32-bit.

A better question is how old hardware has to be (x86) to be 32-bit only.

I'm not sure that is a better question, at least for what I was wondering about. You can run 32-bit Windows on 64-bit hardware, can you not? And quite a lot of the 32-bit Windows out there may be that case, and for that case my surmise applies.

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Quoting: Jarmerhuh I didn't even know Cinnamon was doing wayland at all. That's great to hear.

Yeah, a year or so ago I started hearing talk about Mint working on Wayland support. I don't think it can be considered ready yet in general though. I expect there will be bigger developments in 23.

View this comment - View article - View full comments

. . . Do you get to assassinate the landlord at the end?

View this comment - View article - View full comments