There's only this one brief moment in the trailer where you see the beard lengths, and I gotta say I was disappointed because the way they do it, the longer beards get chopped off by the number underneath, so you don't get to see the full glory of a long-bearded wizard. Really, they gotta do something about that; if it's a game about beard envy, you have to see what you're envying.

Spoiler, click me

Even though it's a silly, jokey criticism I do actually mean it. If you're going to have a schtick, you gotta run with it--there's no entertainment value in being half-hearted.

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Well I dunno what it's like to play, but I gotta say in the trailer the flavour text sure looked interesting.

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Quoting: mphuZ

Quoting: rustybroomhandle

Quoting: mphuZThis is for SteamOS, not for Deckard.

And what flavour of Linux do you think Deckard will run in standalone mode?

Of course, but what does that have to do with this?
Because of some trifle, intrigues are woven. The development of SteamOS as a whole is much more important for Linux than the focus on a single device.

I'm not convinced that's true. There are plenty of good distros, SteamOS in itself is just one more.
What makes it significant is high sales (or in Deckard's case at least high profile) hardware running it preinstalled.
Mind you, that doesn't make you wrong about the significance of this particular event--might have nothing to do with Deckard. Or at least, have Deckard as only a secondary consideration . . . I mean, I find it hard to imagine doing a thing that makes VR on Linux work better, without having somewhere in your mind the thought that it might be good for your upcoming VR hardware that runs Linux.

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Quoting: Mal

Quoting: Liam DaweThe Pangolin is making a return

I'm... not exactly sure about how we should feel about this. :dizzy:

Pangolins are cute ambulatory pine cones. What's not to like?

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Quoting: jonahhw

Quoting: Guest

Quoting: jonahhwI'm disappointed as always at the number of people who just don't care about how toxic the HP series is and how willing many are to give it extra publicity. Is it really worth indirectly donating to anti-lgbt hate groups just so that you can play a game where you quell a rebellion that seeks freedom for the goblins, one group of intelligent magical creatures whose oppression is consistently celebrated by the books and series as a whole?

uhhh, what?

There's a video [External Link] that's pretty relevant here (it goes over a lot of the problems with Harry Potter, and there's a good chance that, if you watch it, you'll never be able to think about HP the same way again). However, a few examples of the terrible ways that the HP series treats non-humans follows:

• House elves are said to enjoy being enslaved, and Hermione (the only character to ever question this) is mocked for thinking that enslaving them is bad.

Hang on, hang on!!!! I've read only part of the series, but I've read that bit. She isn't mocked by, as it were, the author's voice. She's mocked by many other characters (much as every sort of halfway serious progressive activist is mocked in real life, anti-slavery ones having certainly been no exception), but she perseveres despite adversity and in the end does manage to free the house elf character, who, after taking some time to assimilate the notion due to a very traditionalist outlook (and, hard to be sure, perhaps censoring himself because he knows it would be unwise not to), comes round to valuing freedom. I believe in later books that I haven't read, a movement has begun to try to free house elves.
So no, what you're saying is totally the opposite of what is going on in the book. It's presenting the difficulty of doing the right thing--but it's definitely presenting it as the right thing.

As to the giants . . . It's pretty clear that there are many ways the existing dispensation in the Potter books is seen as far from perfect and even pretty bad. Just, not as bad as bleedin' Voldemort. I don't think having some group so upset at being discriminated against by the current government that they join the definitive bad guy just to change the situation, can be considered the book saying it's good to discriminate against people. And it's the kind of thing that definitely happens in real life--how many people with real problems and grievances have been taken in by vile charlatans giving them false promises, in just the last few years of world politics?

Rowling has a very bad thing about her politics. Maybe she's got others. But I think it's wrong to go around inventing ones because of course everything else about her has to be bad now.

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Quoting: ljrk

Quoting: Purple Library Guycould have nasty real world consequences for a fair number of decent people just trying to live their lives. So that's serious.

I think we can say "do have" instead of "could have" ;-)

Currently various US states are in the process of banning gender-inclusive terminology, forcefully medically detransitioning trans people, banning drag shows, ...

I don't think we can put all that down to Rowling's influence, though. I think US states can manage their own bigotry without really listening much to some British woman that most of the more Christian US bigots think is one of Satan's minions.

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Tangled.
Soooo . . . I don't like the stuff Rowling has been saying. And it does seem like she's been doing more than just mentioning if asked, she's been like using her fame as a platform to amplify these views. And those views, if adopted by people she successfully persuades, could have nasty real world consequences for a fair number of decent people just trying to live their lives. So that's serious.

On the other hand . . . those views are not in the Harry Potter books, whose ethos is generally anti-discriminatory on class, race, gender and sexual orientation. Reading Potter, one would not expect the author to suddenly turn around and discriminate against one particular group. So reading and liking Potter, or presumably playing Potter games, doesn't make anyone bad, y'know? It's not like Ayn Rand or something--reading and liking Ayn Rand books probably means you're bad, or at least badly need to grow up.

And I don't think there's any reasonable chance at this point that Rowling is going to get much more famous than she already is. Buying the games is not going to grow Rowling's platform in any noticeable way. So I find it hard to worry about too much. If she was sinking every dollar she received into an anti-trans campaign, then indirectly giving her your dollar would be a problem, but she just mouths off about it some, she's not running an organized campaign. I'm not gonna buy it, but just because it's not the kind of game I buy.

Finally, I do think there's a philosophical tension between strong feminism and the way trans is thought of, that is not just about old fashioned feminism being old fashioned, and that the trans-supportive community might want to think about. It's a pity some feminists have been so dang aggressive and absolutist about it, that's gone bad all around. But the thing is, feminism has been to a fair degree about the idea that gender roles and similar social baggage surrounding gender are arbitrary, social constructs that shouldn't really have much to do with what genitalia you're sporting. And consciously and intellectually, I'm sure many trans people and the community around them would agree. But trans identity tends to revolve around the idea of changing physical things and the gender roles associated with them, as a linked process. Implicitly that makes gender roles essential rather than arbitrary--becoming a gender with (hormones, surgery etc) involves taking on that gender's roles, or looked at the other way, taking on a gender's roles requires making physical changes to become that gender. Functionally, that approach supports the idea that men are supposed to be a certain way and women are supposed to be a certain way. And feminists, used to thinking about the roles rather than the sheer physicality, would reasonably worry about what seems from that perspective to be saying that the solution if you can't hack the roles assigned to you is not to rebel against the socially enforced roles themselves but to switch teams so you can conform to a set you're more comfortable with. So I can see some feminists being wary. At the same time, they need to accept that fundamentally trans isn't about that--it seems to be about the actual body. Although . . . people's body self-image is also socially mediated . . . it's all really complicated, but I do think that there's a need for tackling the relationship between trans issues and some of the deeper feminist thought about gender roles, rather than letting them just slide past each other as if they're unconnected, or either dismissing the other.

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Quoting: MayeulC

Quoting: slaapliedje

Quoting: KlaasI only like the first four books. The rest is rather ridiculous since she thinks that randomly executing characters and a racist teacher employing physical torture on a child equals mature story.

Huh, I've never read the books. Recently bought the movie pack in 4k... and got about 2.5 movies into it and then paused for a while. Not that they aren't watchable (pretty sure I've seen up to 5 at one point), I just have more things to do that I'd rather spend my time on... Eventually I'll get to all of them.

I really liked the Harry Potter and the Methods of Rationality [External Link] fanfic. Not sure I can enjoy vanilla HP (such as this) after reading that.

I started reading that. Ehhhhh . . . I wasn't as impressed with it as it was with itself.

View this comment - View article - View full comments

It has a cheerful feel.

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Quoting: tohur

Quoting: Eike

Quoting: tohurUltimately this is where SteamOS will lead us.. Proper fully supported Linux ports that are not half baked and not handed off to porting houses but developed for Linux from get go. still going be some years before this is the norm but if Valve pushes SteamOS to the same heights of Steam itself thats where we are going. For now Proton is just a means to an end which is pushing SteamOS/Linux growth to the point there won't be the excuse that Linux is not a big enough market

I'm not sure about this. I'm into point and click, and I cannot remember running out of good games running natively on Linux in the last years. I think the experience is differently for other genres (like non-indie action games?) - and might stay that way?

If Valve grows SteamOS properly it get to the point of proper ports of everything just about. AAA publishers follow the money and if there is money to be had you best bet they will move to that point.. Indie devs mostly make games out of passion and typically push their games to as many platforms as they can not for the money but for as many people as possible to be able to play their games.. money is just a side effect of their passion projects

As usual, the question ultimately comes down to: How many Steam Decks sold?
If it's enough, the good scenario happens. If it's not, it's just a step in the right direction.

View this comment - View article - View full comments