Quoting: GuestMicrosoft is actually pretty good at documentation and developer help too. It's not really a problem for them to release something new and have developers pick it up - indeed, it's often a selling point. So it's not too difficult for them to introduce a Windows-only bit of middleware, or a subtle change to DirectX, and games no longer work through wine.

The middleware, sure. But it takes time for something like that to achieve market penetration and start turning up in actual finished games. During that time, people may well be able to get it working in Wine.
The subtle change in DirectX . . . how do they do it in such a way that games no longer work in Wine, but existing games still work on DirectX itself? And how long will it take for the DXVK people to introduce a fix? Too much of that kind of stuff, and pretty soon you'll find a bunch of games work under DXVK in Proton, but don't actually run on Windows any more.

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Quoting: BielFPs

Quoting: EhvisOr they release DX13 and we can start all over again. I'm with mirv on this one. Going for DX on proton as the basis for Linux gaming is just keeping Microsoft in control of the pc gaming ecosystem.

It's not so simple to release so this would take some time to happen, and if MS release a brand new version of DirectX with too much changes from their old ones, this could have the opposite effect for them since developers might be afraid of using it.

My point is something like Proton is worse for Microsoft than for Linux gaming, and what I think it really need to happen is Vulkan to become more mature and easier to develop, in a way that developers can rely on without the fear of causing problems they don't know how to fix.

The question on this comes down to who can move faster. Traditionally in the old just-Wine days, it always seemed pretty fair to say that chasing taillights was not viable, that MS could always change things faster than the likes of Wine could catch up. If that's the case, a Proton-style strategy is, as mirv and Ehvis say, fundamentally not viable.

But I always did kind of wonder if that was perhaps just an artifact of how much each side could throw at the project. And there are constraints on how fast Microsoft can move, both in terms of viable development speed and in terms of how much change they can get customers to swallow. Since Proton and DXVK, it has been looking rather more like with more effort (and money) and more efficient approaches, chasing the taillights is pretty dashed viable, and the Wine/Proton/DXVK/stuff ecosystem can actually move faster than Microsoft can. I am increasingly of the opinion that now, the (not-)emulators can in fact change aim faster than Microsoft can move the target. If that's the case, Proton etc. is a viable strategy (although NOT a long term goal, obviously).

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Quoting: GuestNot wanting to add any fuel to the fire, but this is a great example to point at why "Proton" is not a good future for gaming. Microsoft will still be dictating the terms of game development, and this kind of scenario is what will happen.

As for crowd funding, I agree that there should be consequences. It looks like the idea was sold under false pretenses: I'm not saying it was, but the appearance is that way, and even for a donation that's unacceptable.

That's a point. I mean, if I donate $100 to a charity which says they will give most of it to feed hungry children, and it turns out someone dropped one buck on a hungry child and the rest went to booze and blow, I'll be upset, and might expect repercussions to be possible.
This isn't quite the same, admittedly. But the basic fact of misrepresentation could be.

View this comment - View article - View full comments

I remember when I first started using Linux, it was for the freedom, and in spite of it being a pain in the ass. Although Windows was too in a different way. I was dual-booting with Windows 98 and Mandrake . . . actually, think I briefly started with Red Hat, then heard Mandrake was supposed to be more user friendly, which it was. In both cases, I actually went into a shop and bought them!
But anyway, Win98 kept going weird, and when it started going weird there was very little I could do about it. On the other hand Mandrake was a pain from the get-go but at least there was usually something I could do about it. Arduous, frustrating, time-wasting something, but something. Still, I have to admit that if it weren't for my political ideas I wouldn't have stuck with it. There were always flaky little things in the UI not working quite right. Every time I upgraded I'd have to spend a bunch of time tweaking things to be the way I'd set them up again. The whole Linux software ecosystem was immature; all the programs I used in Linux were crap compared to the Windows equivalents. I would be desperately grabbing the latest RPMs and mucking about installing them and their dependencies, hoping that the latest version of whatever would finally have a couple of the features I wanted. There were times I pretty much stopped using the Linux side and just stuck to Windows. And of course games was mostly on Windows. But I hung in there because I had a strong belief in "Free as in Freedom" and a strong dislike for predatory monopolistic corporations run by sociopaths. Still do.

Now, I'd use Linux, probably without dual booting, even if I didn't have a political bone in my body. Upgrading everything is totally painless. The UI is better than Windows and Just Works. The software ecosystem, for my purposes, ranges from just fine to significantly better than Windows (except for editing pdfs; bloody Adobe). I have no need to game on Windows; nearly all the games I want are on Linux and there's Proton. Windows, on the other hand, is in many ways worse than it was back then. True, it's more solid, doesn't crash all the time or just sort of randomly get squirrely. But it's distinctly unclear about just who's supposed to be running things, and if you don't do things the Microsoft way it nags you about it passive-aggressively forever in hopes you'll give in and (use Edge, send them all your data, or whatever). Even aside from that, it's such massive nagware I can't handle it--all these random popups all the time telling you mysterious crap which looks like you need to do something about it but actually you're almost always best off just closing the damn box and forgetting it ever happened. Whenever I plug in a USB at work, it tells me there's something wrong with the USB and I need to fix it. Then it works fine. I made the mistake of letting Windows try to fix it once, thinking maybe there was actually something wrong. It ratfucked my USB. These days at work I'm getting multiple popups per day telling me I'm supposed to be updating software. I'm not supposed to be updating software, the IT people update the software. But evidently they are not able to get Windows (or maybe its closed source software ecosystem) to shut up, because you don't control Windows, Microsoft does. So many annoying little things, mostly stemming from that basic fact: Microsoft controls Windows, and they use it for their ends, to meet their needs, not yours.

So the politics, as it turns out, has practical implications. Now that Linux UIs and software are fairly mature, the basic fact that they are designed and controlled by and for the benefit of users makes them fundamentally better to use. I'll never go back.

View this comment - View article - View full comments

and Xbox Game Studios

the native Linux support has been delayed with no current ETA.

Hmmm . . . now what relationship could these two things possibly have?

View this comment - View article - View full comments

This just seems wrong.
On the other hand, it reminds me of an old Far Side cartoon . . . the "100 meter mosey".

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Quoting: Fredrik

Quoting: dziadulewiczNow all common users need is a snap or a flatpak to install right from a software center of a distro :happy:

Well its in aur and chaotic aur, and manjaros official repo, so 50% of distros or so its already there without having to resort to a crappy snap or flatpak.

That's nice I'm sure. But as someone in the other 50% or so, it doesn't do much for me.

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Quoting: Deleted_User

Quoting: Purple Library Guy

Quoting: Anza

Quoting: Purple Library GuyBut I play a lot of build-stuff-up games, and having what I can build determined by drawing random cards just doesn't sound fun to me, and kind of conceptually stupid. Like I'm imagining calling the work crew together and saying "OK, so I know that what the town's economy really needs right now is a marketplace, and I promise that's what I was planning. Unfortunately, everyone seems to have simultaneously forgotten how to build one. All we can remember is house, watchtower or library. Maybe we could, I dunno, build a library and people could trade their chickens there? Anyway, sorry about that, hopefully soon the marketplace concept will pop up in our brains again."
Workers: "Uh, just what drugs are you on, boss?"

I guess I'm just coming from bit different angle. As long as it's fun, it's valid design choice. Card games in general might have little trouble of being exactly realistic and might have lot of things that make sense from card game perspective, but don't have reasonable in world explanation why things work like they do. Or at least some imagination is needed.

I guess more realistic version of a town management game would be game where you spend most of your time in meetings where you go through complaints about the new building plans...

I did mention first off, did I not, that it seemed like not fun? It being counterintuitive is just the icing. I think it would be frustrating to have a building-the-place-up type game where it's random whether you're allowed to build the place up. Just let me do it.

Coming from an European Country it seems totally legit to me. It's like the mayor wants to build up a new Recycling Facility but only gets funding for public transport system.

Ha! OK, point.

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Quoting: Anza

Quoting: Purple Library GuyBut I play a lot of build-stuff-up games, and having what I can build determined by drawing random cards just doesn't sound fun to me, and kind of conceptually stupid. Like I'm imagining calling the work crew together and saying "OK, so I know that what the town's economy really needs right now is a marketplace, and I promise that's what I was planning. Unfortunately, everyone seems to have simultaneously forgotten how to build one. All we can remember is house, watchtower or library. Maybe we could, I dunno, build a library and people could trade their chickens there? Anyway, sorry about that, hopefully soon the marketplace concept will pop up in our brains again."
Workers: "Uh, just what drugs are you on, boss?"

I guess I'm just coming from bit different angle. As long as it's fun, it's valid design choice. Card games in general might have little trouble of being exactly realistic and might have lot of things that make sense from card game perspective, but don't have reasonable in world explanation why things work like they do. Or at least some imagination is needed.

I guess more realistic version of a town management game would be game where you spend most of your time in meetings where you go through complaints about the new building plans...

I did mention first off, did I not, that it seemed like not fun? It being counterintuitive is just the icing. I think it would be frustrating to have a building-the-place-up type game where it's random whether you're allowed to build the place up. Just let me do it.

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Quoting: robvvLynch and Cronenberg you say? I have just purchased this and hope to be suitably entertained :-)

Mind you, anyone can say Lynch and Cronenberg. Let us know if the reality matches up.

View this comment - View article - View full comments