It's funny, you know. Before Stadia I would have said the main hurdle in the way of streaming games on the internet was technological--that it would be nigh impossible to avoid major lag problems. So what does Google do? They by most accounts solve the nigh impossible technological hurdle, and then screw up the marketing and in general the business model, not to mention the commitment level required, so bad they fail anyway.

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Quoting: tuubi

Quoting: Purple Library Guy

Quoting: scaineIf that Linux version lands

Well, seems Cheeseness is involved, so I think we can be pretty confident.

I see Ethan Lee's tweet promising a Linux build, but Cheeseness is involved as well?

Sorry, I somehow got them confused. Either way, good sign.

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Quoting: scaineIf that Linux version lands

Well, seems Cheeseness is involved, so I think we can be pretty confident.

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Liam grew a beard!

Welcome to the beard brigade.

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Hrm. Not just after release, but after Early Access. It is likely that means they plan to not think about other platforms until later, when it will be too late to re-think their non-cross-platform-friendly design and library choices. I will believe the native Linux release when I see it.
Admittedly that matters less these days, I'm just saying.

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Quoting: JordanPlayz158

Quoting: M@GOid

Quoting: elmapul

Quoting: M@GOidI wish Appimage became more widespread. So many projects have a Linux port but don't provide a convenient way to use the thing. Meanwhile those same projects don't have a problem providing a Windows executable.

That just contribute to the bad look Linux have among Windows users "I don't use Linux because I don't want to compile a program to use it".

its not the developers fault if we dont have an standard on linux like windows have with .exe, we are just now making those techs that work across distros and even with then some distros chose to not support all of then or offer a crap support so we still have to solve "political problems" before we can solve "techinical" ones, not to mention is a bit hard to make those packages last time i checked.

but hey, if you think otherwise you can always package yourself once they relase the source code...

Sorry, I don't agree. If you have a app and are releasing it out there for people to use, you can do your part to easy things for the end user, just like you do with the Windows executable. Appimage is not a new thing, and way before it, some devs just released a compressed file with precompiled stuff and their dependencies. Just drop it on a folder and off you go. Mozilla does it for ages with Firefox and Thunderbird.

While it is nice, I don't think it is or should be an expectation (that's how the bolded text in the quote comes across to me, kind of like geez, the least you can do after making an app for free and releasing the source for anyone to do with as they please is to support my preferred packaging format, if I got the impression/way it came across wrong, please let me know), it is remarkable developers as they are put time and effort into open source projects with no guarantee of financial support (or possibly any support as some open source projects are largely or entirely a one man team). I think it is the job of the packaging formats to make it as easy as possible to integrate with any project to make it enticing and preferably low maintenance to implement for the developer.

I suppose, but the packaging formats are also open source, so if you're going down the "open source developers shouldn't have to make things easy for their users" road that would apply to the packaging format developers as well . . .
Obviously open source developers don't have to do anything. But whether open source or otherwise, if they want to say they've written "good" software, part of that is making it easy to use, which includes packaged in a way that makes it easy to run in the first place, or for packagers includes making it easy to package things with their system.

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Quoting: brokeassbenPlaying Slay the Spire I kept thinking how awesome it would be to play this in the physical world. Now after watching this explainer video I think I'd regularly forget to keep track of most of these mechanics.

That is definitely one of the nice things about computer games--the computer handles the fiddly stuff.
I notice one of the few real changes is a nod to that issue--the scaling down of attacks and hit points so a base attack does just 1 point of damage. I wonder if that makes poison more powerful.

View this comment - View article - View full comments

As expected, pretty dashed expensive . . . but not really that bad, considering.

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Watching that overview . . . the board game is very much the computer game. Differences are slight.

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Quoting: pleasereadthemanualI've always had some questions about ChromeOS that I've long tried to find answers for, but with little luck. Maybe someone here knows?

1. ChromeOS is known for being easy to use, stable, and secure, despite its Linux heritage. Why is that?

It has very few features. My wife has one. As long as you only want to do the very basic things it provides, you're good. Anything else, it pretty much won't do. Even making local copies of files is difficult because it wants you to keep them on Google Docs and such, in the cloud.
I would presume that extreme simplicity makes it easy to maintain.

(Luckily, my wife's computing needs are in fact very simple, so it works fine for her most of the time. When it doesn't, that's that--I have to do it on my proper Linux computer, because ChromeOS just won't.)

View this comment - View article - View full comments