Quoting: ArehandoroTo play Steam games offline, even if we were to have ALL games on our HDDs, we would need Goldberg Emulator, which to me is nothing more than another crack to bypass the online features of Steam.

Therefore, saving the difference in features, and not counting all the things Valve have done for the gaming community, etc, requiring Steam to play a game is not different as requiring GfWL.

Maybe I have all the wrong Steam games? Every time I've tried to play a Steam game when I didn't have internet access, it popped up a thing bitching about not being able to contact Steam and asked me if I wanted to play in offline mode; I said yes and played the game. I didn't need a crack or an emulator or whatever. So as far as I can tell, what you're saying just isn't the case.

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Quoting: KohlyKohl

Quoting: CFWhitman

Quoting: KohlyKohlThe mere fact that one is even allowed to install Windows on the Steam Deck negates this argument.

How so? Do you know what "negates this argument" means? It implies a significant logical flaw that makes the argument invalid. Even if what I said turns out not to be the case, it would not be logically flawed; it would merely be incorrect.

Quoting: KohlyKohlI hope most people keep Linux on the Steam Deck. However, I've known enough Windows gamer's over the years to know that many of them will be more than willing to install Windows on the Steam Deck even if it is something they normally wouldn't do.

We'll see I suppose. I don't see a high percentage of people moving it to Windows unless Valve "drops the ball" somehow. The most likely way I could see would be if this is too soon for the whole Proton/Steam OS approach to be truly ready (or, conceivably, that the Proton/Steam OS approach could never be ready enough).

Your argument was that Valve wanted SteamOS VIA Linux to succeed. By allowing Windows to be installed on Steam Deck, it negates that argument as SteamOS 3.0 will also be on Windows.

By allowing other ecosystem, such as different manufacturers or different operating systems, it shows that they are fine with whatever happens. They only care about Steam succeeding and they are hoping that Steam Deck furthers that goal.

You asserting that doesn't make it so. Is there some argument you're not making because you think it's self-evident? 'Cause, my previous post explains why I don't think it's self-evident.

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Quoting: KohlyKohlThe mere fact that one is even allowed to install Windows on the Steam Deck negates this argument.

I don't think it does. Aside from it being fundamentally hard to claim you're advocating for open systems while peddling a closed machine, there's a gamble there.
The question is, can Valve get more sales to people who wouldn't buy if the safety, ahem, valve of Windows as an option weren't there, than the number of people who end up actually exercising that option? If they can get the SteamOS Steam Deck and Proton working smooth enough, arguably few people will feel the need to go to the trouble of installing for themselves a not-actively-supported OS on the device.

So like, say they sell three million units to people who would buy the thing no matter what OS was running or available on it. That by itself would be three million Linux installs they would get with a locked down machine.
And say they sell another one million to people who are skeptical of SteamOS/Linux but figure if it's a problem they can always load Windows on it. But only 200,000 of those actually do so. Then they have 3.8 million Linux installs instead of 3 million--a net gain. Even if a couple hundred thousand of the original three million end up ripping out Linux, they're still ahead on the open platform vs the closed.

And they'll probably get some sales, though not in huge numbers, to people who have no intention of putting Windows on it but are interested in the idea of having a Switch-like thing that isn't crippleware, that they can tinker with in different ways. Those people are also often influencers, so they could boost broader sales by talking the thing up. So leaving it open has that benefit.

It's still a gamble. If SteamOS and Proton don't deliver and users get frustrated, and so lots of people who started out platform agnostic end up ripping SteamOS out and putting on Windows, they could end up with less net Linux installs than if they'd sold a locked down device. But if it's that bad it'll be a failure anyway so whether it's locked down becomes kind of moot.

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Quoting: Ehvis

Quoting: crt0mega

Quoting: EikeHeard bad things about this. Everybody who ingested it died sooner or later...!

Have you ever heard of anyone who ate bread and did not die later? Me neither! It's a huge conspiracy, bro!

Me! I have eaten bread. I even drank water! And see, I didn't die later!

Ah, but I bet the telltale signs have already started to manifest. Thinning hair, more trouble maintaining muscle tone, skin deteriorating . . . the list of symptoms are nearly endless. That bread and water will get you in the end!

View this comment - View article - View full comments

This sounds quite cool and fun, but I have to say that somehow "Unite humanity and lead it to the new era of peace and prosperity!" doesn't really seem like a Punk thing to me.

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Quoting: scaine

Quoting: StenPettHopefully, this will be a GPU people can actually buy.

I just checked scan.co.uk and they're taking pre-orders at just under £530 for the 6600XT card. Which is pretty insane considering I bought my (slightly more powerful) 5700XT in February 2020 for less than that. Considering how close the 6600XT is to the 5700XT, I wonder why they're pitching it as a 1080p card, when I think the 5700XT was pitched as a 4K card two years ago. And it does do well at 4K in a lot of games, but needs FSR (or equivalent) upscaling for the big, modern 3D games, such as Cyberpunk or Horizon Zero Dawn.

But it honestly feels almost irresponsible to launch a new card in these circumstances. All it feels like is splitting an already tiny stock of silicon between an ever larger range of cards you're only to sell to scalpers. I know I'm being extremely cynical, but the last two years have been an absolute car crash for GPUs. I can't see how this is at all healthy for the PC gaming market. Looks like 4K gaming now demands at least a grand of spend on the GPU alone.

Man. I've been getting happier and happier that I bought a new PC including new AMD graphics card of some sort, not very long before all this nonsense started. Hopefully by the time I'm looking to upgrade again, it will all be long over.

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Quoting: Arehandoro

Quoting: slaapliedjeI thought this happened a long time ago (the removal of Games for Windows). Like back when that service was murdered. Think of all those old games that had integrated this garbage, and the other one that died, Gamespy... definitely made a large section of software unplayable. But I know when it happened years ago, that most things that had any sort of community had Games for Windows removed.

No different to the fact that if Steam were to go bust all our games would not work either, not downloadable.

No, I'd say it's somewhat different. If you have a game that had GfWL integrated it wouldn't matter how much warning you had, there would be nothing you could do to make your game work once GfWL went away.
If you own a Steam game and Valve goes under, unless it's amazingly sudden you can, like, download the game before they finish dying. Sure, if you have massive numbers of games that would take ridiculous amounts of storage you might have to buy a big hard drive or something. But if you purchased that many games you are not poor, so whatever. And if you bought a bunch of games with no plans to have enough storage to so much as download them, it's really on you; I'm actually kind of in that boat, but I don't tell myself it's Valve's responsibility--the decision to not fully take ownership of those games by putting a copy on my own computer was mine, not Valve's.

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Quoting: Eike

Quoting: Purple Library GuyCrypto is fake money.

I'd wager to say in effect it isn't money. Years ago, people started to sell coffee for bitcoins around here. I don't think anybody is still doing that. If you sell your coffee for x bitcoins, with which you could buy you new coffee beans and pay your rent and everything, you don't know if it's worth half next month and you cannot pay your rent - or maybe double. Same for the customer. Money with such fluctuations doesn't work. Even currencies with huge inflation are less bad - at least you know which direction it will take.

Really, it's more a vehicle for speculation. Which currently probably makes it a pretty good investment, if you're someone who can afford to be investing, because everything that's primarily a vehicle for speculation is doing well right now and will continue for as long as central banks pump money into the markets and the net worth of the very rich continues to soar (a not unrelated phenomenon). This is true whether it's crypto, high end art or antiques or other collectibles, or whatever.
Presumably there has to be a ceiling somewhere; as the guy said, "If something cannot continue forever, it will stop."

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Hmmm . . . In the play, all Ophelia would have had to do to survive was, not take it quite so hard that a dude (apparently) dumped her (well, and her dad died). So, looks like it's a bit tougher in this version of the Hamlet universe?

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Quoting: ManillaBuy bitcoin now(or start mining whatever crypto you can) unless you still think its fake money.

Crypto is fake money. So to some extent is actual money--government-backed money lasts as long as society isn't collapsing. But if that happens, nobody's gonna value crypto either; its perceived value depends on the same kind of social illusion. If anything, crypto would go down faster. If you think things are going to collapse, buy gold, and make sure you have the physical stuff in your hot little hands because again, if things start to collapse, getting some rube their gold is going to be low on the banks' priority list.

View this comment - View article - View full comments