Quoting: Mountain Man"I hear you like launchers, so here's a launcher for your launchers!"

Has it really come to this?

But wait, what if I like both Gamehub and Lutris? And there could be others in the future!
Clearly I'll need a launcher for my launchers for my launchers!

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Quoting: Guesti am willing to bet this thing never sees the light of day,i feel bad for anyone that backed this.

You're quite likely right. On the other hand, a lot of people were grumbling about the chip, so if it ever does come out, this is probably better.

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Quoting: monnefI am simply stating that buyers after release are paying for time-limited exclusivity, for a new game to experience it first and for some time.

Huh. When I buy a game, I'm paying so I can play a game. I don't approve of positional goods where someone pays in the hope that other people won't be able to. Seems kind of dickish to me.
But you know, under the new Steam policy I can still read the reviews explaining why lower-income lowlives like myself shouldn't be able to afford the game yet and why it's terrible that the general guideline that the proles should be kept out for a while was violated, and I can click a setting to see what the rating of the game would be with those complaints factored in. And if I'm persuaded I can then refrain from buying the game, or at least wait a decent while for the upper middle class to enjoy the snob value of the product before I muddy the waters with my economically unworthy feet. So worry not, the new policy still allows that sort of review bomb all the influence it deserves.

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Quoting: monnef

Quoting: einherjar

Quoting: monnef

Quoting: stuffAnother example being Shadow of the Tomb Raider because it got a sale soon after release.

Price and value of the game is definitely part of my ratings and reviews. This is IMO deserved, they should have not cut price so soon after release ....

Hmm, but every one looking at the game a few month after release, will see a negative rating. And this does not help these customers. They want to know if the game is good if it is fun to play. They do not care, if someone thinks, the game was lowered in price to early.
So it is a point of view. If I want to inform me, if the game is fun to play - what does the reviews help me, that rate the game down, just because it was going cheap to early (and this is just a feeling of the ones, who bought it at a higher price).

The act of lowering prematurely is still present. People who bought it early were paying for a service they didn't get (exclusivity in exchange for money, they lack money and exclusivity, theft?). This is not some subjective metric, you can compare all AAA games in last several years and look at how long it should remain at the top price. Weren't last Battlefield and Fallout just weeks after release hugely discounted? Right there, that is anti-consumer and in my opinion should reflect rating of a game, because if they pulled such scam once, people should expect to pull it again and this (rating and reviews) can warn new customers against scummy practices.

I am for everything being on-topic, because seeing how Valve is incompetent - saying DRM and EULA are OFF-TOPIC and not part of a game (WTF? DRM is literally part of a game and EULA must be accepted before playing, so, in my view, part as well). I don't trust them to not **** up, because they have several times already.

This strikes me as a massive overreaction. You sound like the game publishers were conspiring with the later buyers against the initial buyers like some kind of backwards pump-and-dump stock scheme, which seems kind of unlikely since both groups are random assortments of individuals, and if there were people they really wanted to have the game cheap, they could just give those people keys individually. The game publishers have no reason to prefer any one group of random individuals over another group. Presumably they dropped the price because it seemed like they weren't selling enough at the original price.
Also, precisely because it's a matter of one group getting a lower price than another group, it can hardly be considered "anti-consumer" in general. It favours one group of consumers over another. But there are inevitably going to be sales and price drops in the end, and the people who buy for cheap inevitably get a better deal than people who buy at full price. Sales starting soon after release just mean fewer people had to pay full price. But those few early buyers would still have paid full price if the sales started a year later--they just would have had more company. So essentially, they're complaining not because they got a bad deal, but because someone else is getting a good deal.
Given all that, I don't see why consumers coming along later to decide whether they should take the good deal, should want to be influenced by people who specifically would prefer they be getting a worse deal. Really, how persuasive is "I want you to have to pay more for this game, so don't buy it cheap!" What's my incentive to want those people's reviews included in the game's score?

View this comment - View article - View full comments

The approach seems like a pretty fair compromise. The reviews don't disappear, nothing's being censored. And, if you're the kind of person who thinks review bombing is often justified/relevant, you can turn the feature off.

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Quoting: Boldos

Quoting: bingus

Quoting: sub

Quoting: Whitewolfe80

EPIC store does not support Linux.

The other day on Twitter someone asked them about Proton on the Epic store, they said they couldn't because of the tech they used. But then went on to say they were hiring Linux people... I guess that doesn't necessarily mean they will be working on a client but its something.

Here it goes:
https://www.forbes.com/sites/jasonevangelho/2019/03/14/epic-games-store-linux/#44d9bcd95b3b [External Link]

Pretty vague. Seems less like "they're hiring Linux people" than like "They're open in theory to the concept of hiring Linux people".

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Awesome! Really seems to be upgrading at high speed.
Definitely looking forward to Vulkan support.
Anyone have any idea just how competitive Godot is at this point with other engines?

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Quoting: Gobo

Quoting: Shmerl

Quoting: liamdawe

Quoting: rea987That's odd, BattlEye previously supported Arma III which was an eON port. It looks like VP's ports are compatible with BattlEye than Proton.

This is because VP used the native BattlEye.

Can't the same be done with Wine? I.e. create some library which interfaces with native one through Windows shim? Their answer doesn't make sense. If it works natively on Linux, it should be able to work in Wine as well in theory, as long as they implement what's needed.

Well, I guess the main point about BattleEye and other cheat protections is spotting and prohibiting the tinkering with the software. And running the software through a layer that does not want to be called emulation but essentially is doing exactly that is a whole lot of hackery that sets off a lot of alarms in BattleEye to flag your PC as an unsafe and compromised environment.

I think Shmerl meant the other way around. I was wondering the same thing. There's a Linux native version of BattlEye, right? Sooo, what if Proton included that, and then the Windows version of the game could talk to the native Linux BattlEye which in turn talked to the Linux you're running, with nothing unusual between it and the OS, and probably not much unusual between it and the game.

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Sounds boring. Wasn't going to school bad enough, now we gotta simulate it?

View this comment - View article - View full comments

I wonder also if there's anything out there to do similar compatibility tricks with old Linux sound stuff, you know like OSS and Alsa and whatever.

View this comment - View article - View full comments