Quoting: Hamish

Quoting: elmapuldrm can be broken later on, windows users dont have an issue with that, because there are enough hackers on the windows comunity to break any drm they might have.
meanwhile we dont have neither all the games nor the cracked games.
we would have both if we had an better marketshare.

Let's be honest, if running a game with a crack to get around DRM is considered an acceptable user experience, so is running a Windows game through WINE with no support. We can do better on both platforms.

that is, if the game RUNS.
a lot of games dont, or run without a lot of features.

like sound effects (eg: track mania from steam)
full screen (eg: disgaea)
cutscene playback (eg: guilty gear, melty blood)

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Quoting: Hamish

Quoting: elmapuli think we should let the fight against drm with the windows users, while we fight for linux marketshare, we can join they in their fight later on, but we dont have enough people/resources to fight in both fronts at the same time run today, live to fight tomorrow.

The thing is, if I was of the mindset that was okay with DRM solutions, I would not be using Linux in the first place. Whoever fights monsters should see to it that in the process he does not become a monster. And if you gaze long enough into an abyss, the abyss will gaze back into you.

drm can be broken later on, windows users dont have an issue with that, because there are enough hackers on the windows comunity to break any drm they might have.
meanwhile we dont have neither all the games nor the cracked games.
we would have both if we had an better marketshare.

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Quoting: Marlockopensource software that is developed primarily to work with Gnome or KDE doesn't qualify as "exclusives"... because it is opensource to begin with

first off, who said open source?
some softwares like davince resolve do a lot of things that no open source software do, and only support redhat or something like that.

second:
even if its open source, it dont matter if there is no one willing to port it to other distros and it dont load on then it still is an exclusive.
the key issue is that distro mantainers should try to reduce the costs of supporting their distros and others (by cost i'm including time) instead of trying to make it harder to make sure no one would want to have this much trouble on their backs.
sure if an bunch of people join efforts, they would port it, but the fact that no one is willing to do that, proves that this fragmentation strategy works.

Quoting: Marlockbut this isn't a blodshed cutthroat market competition like with competing closed-source software or the way Steve Balmer made MS treat Linux

hell i saw a lot of people installing the windows version of an program on wine instead of the native linux version due to that shit, imagine if we didnt had windows.

not to mention that magic thing called "android" ya know, that thing that is incompatible with every other distro, and that every other distro is incompatible with.
hell the windows emulators for android are better than what we have on linux, that is ridiculuous for an thing that runs the same kernel.

and before anyone blames google for making android incompatible with the desktop linux, well...
the linux desktop is not compatible with linux desktop, how can we blame google for making their own thing while we were fighting each other to make ours instead of cooperating?

if we keep fighting each others like this, at the best case scenario is microsoft keep their domination, and the worst is:
linux dominates but its an "android 2", except that this time there isnt enough of an argument to try to convince anyone to use anything else.

X-Apps? never heard of it before, and honestly, its too litle too late.
first it need to support windows too, otherwise there wouldnt be enough of a market for most developers to use it.
second: its it any better than visual studio/ vscode?
thirdy: it support all the features? eg: tabs, buttons etc, because the last time i found an IDE that supported all the DE , it lacked some features, or when it didnt the IDE only supported visual basic as the programing lang...

and forth, honestly, now i'm just using godot all the way, it has all the features that i could possibly want+ more, the only issue is that it didnt supported qt+gtk, instead it makes it own toolkit, but that is an small price to pay compared to what it offer.

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Quoting: noderunnerGame developers are notoriously awful at anti-cheat. The solution should be to architect the game server to perform anti-cheating checks and generally to avoid trusting the client (see VACNET). Instead we have the lazy way, which is installing invasive software to prevent the game client from being tampered with. I don't want native Linux anti-cheat, I especially don't want an invasive Denuvo kernel module. Just let us play single player and local multiplayer in peace.

i dont see why denuvo being avaliable for linux/working on linux would magically make every company adopt it as anti cheat for their offline games

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Quoting: Shmerl

Quoting: elmapulvalve did an talk about this topic, you should take a look at it.

Well, I will when they'll develop a server side AI like I described above. Until then, I have no interest in client side rootkits whatsoever. I don't buy the argument that it's the right way to address this problem.

i didnt said that was their solution, i cant remember wich one was, in any case, you should at least take a look at it to see if there is any techinical issue that you didnt tought about before or to call it bullshit knowing what you're talking about

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Quoting: Shmerl

Quoting: elmapulaccording to then, they would stop it, if valve reduces their cut to 12%, wich didnt happened

Well, I don't buy the argument of using anti-competitive methods by those who claim they are advancing competition. It's bunk.

like it or not, this strategy fucking works.

and we have exclusives at linux too, the difference is, we make exclusives by the lack of standards.
often you see an program that only works on ubuntu or only works on redhat because its hard to suport all those distros.
so what the distro mantainers do? they join in an effort like w3c and khronos group to create an standard that will allow you to write an program only once and run on all the distros?
pff, nope, they fragment it even more, no incentive to cooperate.
hell, the fact that we have snaps, flatpaks and appimages kinda of proves that.
and the fact that some distros like mint found excuses to not support snaps and went out of their way to make sure you cant install snaps on mint, proves it again.

sure they said it was proprietary or something like that, but guess what? steam is too, and they support it.

the distro mantainers fight each other in what package manager they use, meanwhile more and more developers start to ignoring then and distribute their softwares and games on steam instead.

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Quoting: Shmerl

Quoting: elmapulby perfect i mean "good enough", hackers will always find an way to break the anti cheat protection, its runing on your machine after all so you are in control.

I meant good enough to make the game enjoyable. If someone "breaks" it in a way that doesn't ruin the game, why should anyone care? AI on the server side can be gradually improved to catch robotic or unnatural behavior of cheaters. That's more than enough for it. But AI needs investment and a lot of work to get right. Making a rootkit on the client side is an easier no brainer and unscrupulous companies obviously choose that. I don't see any excuse for that besides basic greed.

valve did an talk about this topic, you should take a look at it.

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Quoting: Shmerl

Quoting: elmapulthere is no perfect solution for anti cheat.

That's why you don't need a perfect one. You need one that's good enough. And it should never be a privacy and security horror rootkit running on the client side.

o think you dont understand what i mean.
by perfect i mean "good enough", hackers will always find an way to break the anti cheat protection, its runing on your machine after all so you are in control.
what an anti cheat solution can do is, at best, delay the time that the hackers will take to break the anti cheat mechanism, delay it not forever, but for long enough to find another solution, so as soon as its broken, they implement the new solution, its an endless battle.
the biggest issue is that there is no decent way to do it in an non intrusive manner.

think about that:
what is anti cheat or drm after all? an software that try to stop you from doing whetever you want with the machine, eg: faking inputs etc.
what is free software trying to do? the opposite, atempting to make you have full control of the computer.
there is no way that those 2 things can walk togheter, its impossible to do an good open source drm solution or open source anti cheat solution.
and not all games can run server side only, what about those button mash mini games where the player who presses the button faster wins? its impossible to secure the input against hacking.

we cant expect companies to do something impossible.
if you think there is an silver bullet to solve all those problems at the same time, present this magic solution to the companies, if it was easy they would already have figured it out, what youre demanding is simply impossible.
the anti cheat solutions arent intrusive nowadays because companies want then to, then are because that was the only solution possible.

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Quoting: BielFPsIt's sad how anti cheat solutions are more effective to block legit Linux players instead of actual cheaters. And for anti-piracy protection, I haven't see any successfully case with Denuvo since the Chinese had their first success of crack them.

Reading the article, my thoughts are that it will be similar to EAC situation: It kinda works with Linux, but the developer has to choose if they want to support it, which the answer is no.

80% of the sales of an game used to happen in the first 2 months after its relase.
denuvo can keep an game from being pirated for more time than this.
https://crackwatch.com/ [External Link]

not to mention that the cheating industry move millions if not billions of dollars each year, that is more than the linux gaming industry (aside from android)

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Quoting: ZlopezIn case of anti-cheat, I'm not against using anti-cheat software server-side, but having it on client is actually not a good solution, especially if it prevents you to run the game in a few years or start it if you are not connected to some 3rd party server.

there is no perfect solution for anti cheat.
cloud games can solve part of the problem, but they cant fix the input faking side.
every anti cheat solution will be either useless or invasive by design.

o think the best solution is: let people make an local server if they want or connect to the official servers, if they dont want cheaters in their game, want to play with/against new players, match making etc.

View this comment - View article - View full comments