Well, in a way you could say it's actually less common than in real life. I mean, 14,000 times sounds like a lot. But the Great Schism has been healed 220,000 times and in real life that hasn't happened even once, so . . .

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Can't figure out if I'm finding this very Zen or really depressing.

View this comment - View article - View full comments

OK, a bit of horror in the trailer I wasn't expecting--when it gets captured by that huge monster that puts it in a jar!

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Quoting: BeamboomOh man that video is such a good example of why I largely prefer written content. To skip through that long monologue to try and find interesting content is just... Exhausting.

I am so with you on that. I can read looong articles, but if I see a link to a half hour or hour video . . . forget it.

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Quoting: dubigrasuWill I dream of electric sheep if I buy this?

No, if you buy a phone (non-Apple).

View this comment - View article - View full comments

I'm not fond of Netflix in a broad sense, and I don't subscribe. But I hear they arrange for some pretty good TV shows, so it's plausible they would also arrange for good games. There's a knack to fostering creative talent rather than killing it; some outfits seem to take over studios solely for the purpose of smothering them. But Netflix seems to have the knack with TV, so perhaps it will work out with games as well.

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Quoting: Beamboom

Quoting: Purple Library GuyI'm almost leaning the other way: Making it opt-in means people will feel that, if they decide to do the opt in, that means they'll have to in some way take responsibility for it, and that may discourage them from doing so.

I do see your perspective, and you may indeed be right in that we might miss out on more now. But principally I think it's the right way to do it. It *does* imply embedding support for a second platform, and that should be an option and not "forced".
We don't like forced stuff in the Linux world. So we should apply that same moral also when it's not to our immediate benefit. :)

So if they're worried, they can opt out. How is that "forced"?

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Quoting: Beamboom

Quoting: mao_dze_dunI think their statement very clearly shows why Epic (correctly) chose to make this opt-in.

That's a really good point.

I'm almost leaning the other way: Making it opt-in means people will feel that, if they decide to do the opt in, that means they'll have to in some way take responsibility for it, and that may discourage them from doing so. If you made it opt-out, so people had to actively choose not to, then enabling it wouldn't be an active decision and so wouldn't be seen as their responsibility.
And lots of those tacit non-decisions would turn out to work fine, giving us games that this way, we probably won't get.

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Quoting: PublicNuisanceGOG has their own share of blame here as they allowed a game onto their store that has DRM but what about IO Interactive ? Where is the hate for them for submitting a game with DRM onto a DRM free store ? This is why I am moving more towards FOSS games these days, the amount of publishers and developers worth my time and money for closed source games is dwindling. I would much rather spend my money donating to people and teams that share my values. What I also find funny is that all this is being talked about over a game that has no Linux version on the GOG store. Wonder why ? Ask IO and Feral. In my experience the typical response I have received was that Feral games has no plans to release DRM free versions of their games. Yet they are a Linux darling who can do no wrong in many people's eyes. There are many bad things happening in this story and much blame to go around but GOG will be the only one that Linux gamers attack.

Y'know, you make some decent points, but you could have just made them instead of in effect ragging on the whole community for not having made them before you.

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Quoting: MohandevirMmmm...

Whilst we wish it could be done in a couple of clicks, realistically we require dedicated resource, planning and QA to ensure it runs as seamlessly as possible.

This has me worried... Not for this game, but for other devs who won't want to engage with Proton in any way, because of this. They might just tell Steam Deck users to install Windows on it. That's why we will probably never see the likes of Fortnite on SteamOS 3.0.

I think that's a valid worry . . . but probably not for games as big as Fortnite. I mean, I think that the difficulty of doing this doesn't really scale much with the "size" of the game, whereas both the potential sales from doing it and the chance of Valve taking a specific interest and talking directly to the makers do.
So what I'm saying is, is it worth clicking those buttons and doing a few tests for a couple thousand dollars in Linux sales? Maybe not. Is it worth clicking those buttons and doing a few tests for a couple tens of millions in Linux sales? You'd think. Is it worth it for those millions plus making your lunch with the Valve representative more cheerful? Probably.

View this comment - View article - View full comments