Quoting: slaapliedje

Quoting: elmapulLOL that name... is this institution an serious one? because with a name like that
[update] never mind its the bundle name

I know Deadpool, who occasionally plays Ryan Reynolds, supports Fuck Cancer.

I threw 100 bucks in, as I don't care about the games (pretty sure I own them all already), but really. FUCK Cancer!

i dont care who support, i want to know if they are trust worth, if they really invest in fighting against cancer

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Quoting: dubigrasu

Quoting: elmapulthey also should give some assurance that you could access your games elsewhere in case they discontinue the service,

I'm not sure how would they go about this, they're not the usual desktop games that we can use. From people that had access to them we know that they can be (somewhat) easily modified to run on consumer hardware, but even so, that implies some extra serious work for the whole library, from a company that might not be able to bleed extrafunds at that point.
Or, maybe they just have rights to the Windows version of the respective games and make those available for download? IDK.

at least for multiplatform games that are already avaliable for windows, it should be feasible

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Quoting: dubigrasuThey're not doing much also in terms of expanding the service (and its quality) to other countries. GFN somehow managed to open new centers in East-Europe, dramatically decreasing the latency. Google did not, and this is mind boggling considering who they are.

so, it seems its better to be a big fish in a small pound, than on a larger one.

google killed orkut because it only had 67 millions of users, they got envious of facebook and end up with nothing instead.
they killed many projects as if they were nothing, then people remember and didnt gave stadia a chance.
i`m not saying that was the only factor of course.

the issue is, if stadia was an product of an smaller company maybe they would value more whetever profit it made, but they didnt.

microsoft purchasing activision/blizzard/king didnt seem to help.
if it was google, then people would stop saying things like "google isnt taking it serious" "google gonna kill stadia", but google didnt had the balls, i wont say they should even if they could, microsoft first purchase with Rare was an disaster, and while amazon were dumping hundreds of millions on flop games, google strategy was smarther:
make some low budget games to gain know how in the market, then grow then slowly over time, but that didnt worked, because people saw their games as cheap and that coming from an big company didnt send an good signal.

google should have said something like:
"big games take time to do, we are doing this <show an promissing AAA quality game> meanwhile we gonna make smaller games to have more exclusive content on the platform while people wait for the big relases"
instead they let people think the product didnt had any ambitions, and killed stadia devlopment division.

they also should give some assurance that you could access your games elsewhere in case they discontinue the service, and if one game currently was only possible with the cloud, because it had some exclusive tech that was only possible on stronger hardware, give some assurance that they would make it avaliable to download as soon as the desktop hardware catch up with the requirments.

nope, they let people think their plan was to sell you the right to own nothing, sell you an game they fully control and can shut down it at any moment.

View this comment - View article - View full comments

LOL that name... is this institution an serious one? because with a name like that
[update] never mind its the bundle name

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Quoting: Philadelphus. Pretty much anyone who buys a Deck is going to have games in their library they can play, even if they can't play all the games in their library*. So the question becomes, what fraction of players are going to motivated enough by a specific unplayable game

that is a double edge sword, if they dont care about it, then valve will have less incentive to care thenselves, so people like me who never got the opportunity to play, cant play.

some people may already have played most of those games, because they purchased at launch since it worked day 1 on windows, but for people who waited 10 years to play it on linux, missing this oportunity is not an option.

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Quoting: PhiladelphusI'd bet anything the number of players/owners of games looks like an exponentially decaying distribution.

long tail, google it.

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Quoting: CatKiller

Quoting: elmapulits impressive when compared to other console launchs, but its not when compared to 90.000 games avaliable on steam for windows, and even more than that avaliable for windows in general.

It's about 64,000 games on Steam (today - there are about 28 new games added each day). It's including DLC and non-game software that gets you the higher number.

speaking of it, there is any way to buy Resident Evil 2 and 3 classic edition (aka, not the remakes) for pc?
i couldnt find so i tried to pirate it, but couldnt figure out how to install the cracked version on linux.

i'm not trying to advocate for piracy but, come on! i couldnt afford this game when i was an kid, then it flew out of my radar as an adult (forgot about it existence) and now that i want to pay to play it again for nostalgic reasons+finishing the things i never did as an kid, now that i can afford, now that the game run on linux... its not for sale anymore.
sigh, if i knew i would have purchased when it was on steam but i was trying to prioritize games avaliable for linux...

View this comment - View article - View full comments

its impressive when compared to other console launchs, but its not when compared to 90.000 games avaliable on steam for windows, and even more than that avaliable for windows in general.

i hope console gamers buy this thing like hotdogs, and pc gamers dont get too inclined to install windows on it, not until most games (be it steam games or not) work on it.
then it would be too late to reverse the trend.

View this comment - View article - View full comments

the art direction seems great but...
the video is too edgy, i mean, oh no, some one blew up the white house!
it would be an great premisse if i didnt saw it 1000 times before, now i cant take it serious.

and so on...

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Quoting: Purple Library Guy

Quoting: elmapulhell, even microsoft is doing some nice inovative stuff, directX 12 came before vulkan was a thing.

I don't remember it being quite like that. Didn't they kind of get developed/specified around the same time? DX12 might have been officially released before Vulkan was quite finalized, but it was all happening about the same time and basically drawing on the same ideas, which were being developed mostly in public.

the ideas are the same, because the hardware is the same, and its about being low level, not about building a lot of libraries on top of the hardware, so i think its natural to come to the same conclusions, but i dont know much about low level programing, nor about the development being public.
i dont know if the khronos group is something akin to w3c with public proposals that get adopted by the browser vendors in different speeds or what, what i do know is that the gaming market try to squeze every little bit of performance from the hardware and microsoft was the first to offer an solution in that regard, wich gave then a big advantage, or maybe their product was adopted by more companies due to the windows marketshare.
maybe mobile games use vulkan and it can be argueed that more developers chose vulkan than dx12, but while mobile gamers are an bigger and more profitable market, they suck in general (almost all are pay to win gacha games) so i dont count then really as gaming...

View this comment - View article - View full comments