Quoting: eldakingSure we probably should use a more accurate term for each category, for clarity, but letting our categories be decided solely based on the terminology being used is not a step in the right direction. The meaning of "indie" has evolved, and going back to dictionary definitions to make it linguistically consistent comes at a cost of being a good category for games.

Then maybe "indie" isn't a good category name for games. The minute we start shifting the definition of a word like "independent" we create confusion in the language and semantics do matter a lot. Yes, language changes over time, but that only works when the definition changes holistically, not when it changes definition for just one sub-area of concern. It also creates issues where now "indie" means different things depending on if you're talking about movies, shows, music, books, games, board games, etc. That is too much to expect people to keep track of.

All that said, a studio making a low budget game for their publicly traded company is obviously NOT "indie". By the same token, I don't think Larian, ConcernedApe, EgoSoft, etc can be anything BUT "indie".... being successful doesn't mean someone loses their "indie" or "independent" status. That implies that only failed studios that make something people like can be "indie".

View this comment - View article - View full comments

I, personally, like to stick to the meaning of the word "indie" or "Independent". As such, studios like Larian and EgoSoft are fully independent studios, desire to stay that way, and even have some level of requirements when working on IP not owned by them that give them more control on the direction they take it.

I'm not sure I'd classify Baldur's Gate III as an Indie game itself, but it was developed by an indie studio. That said, the Divinity series, the X Series, etc are all indie games despite looking mostly like AA or AAA games. Larian hasn't been published by a 3rd party for Divinity since Divinity II and even then they eventually re-published those games under themselves.

Trying to define "indie" as games that either aren't "profitable" (Which is dumb as that implies you want the studio to go under) or that are made by a less well known studio make no sense or aren't successful. If they are truly independent, then it is still "indie".

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Quoting: scaine

Quoting: JarmerFunny enough, it was Paradox's predatory scam dlc behavior

What what? Predatory how? A scam??

Paradox are one of the few publisher's with a well established, regular, value add DLC regime. They support their games YEARS after release. Stellaris, for example, released over 7 years ago, but some of the DLC modules released are just £9 yet add swathes of content.

I wish other publishers would take note instead of trying monetise micro-transactions.

I'll take properly thought out DLC any day over cosmetic shite, Battle passes and "Seasons".

That doesn't even count that, similar to how Egosoft operates with the X series, they offer core game updates with content and features in addition to the DLC. DLC which usually only focuses on the new content tied to the DLC.

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Leave it to the gaming industry to create their own "classifications" of Network Address Translation instead of just sticking to the spec. The NAT spec has no such designation as Type 1/2/3 or Open/Moderate/Strict. These are strictly consoles/gaming thing.

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Quoting: Liam DaweFNA is more a replication of XNA, to keep compatibility.

MonoGame is more like the next-generation XNA.

In addition to this, some games were built with FNA for most of their platforms, then used MonoGame for specific ports. IIRC - at one point XBox started supporting MonoGame, but not FNA.

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Quoting: xoagrayI'm not familiar at all with FaceIT Anticheat. (I don't play a lot of competitive FPS) But if EAC is already working I wonder why they're bothering to change it?

FaceIT is used for highly competitive games. I haven't seen it integrated by developers, usually used by private servers and eSports events. But not a fan of FaceIT though. Not only is it a kernel level AC, they also require you to disable certain admin level Windows OS features just to use it because those features tend to block FaceIT.

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Quoting: itscalledreality

Quoting: tohur

Quoting: scaine

Quoting: EagleDeltaTL;DR - WINE IS native by the actual technical definition of what an API does. If WINE isn't native, then no APIs are.

Appreciate what you're trying to say here, but I doubt anyone, at all, ever, will agree that "Wine is native". I certainly don't. Call it emulation, call it translation, whatever. But I'm not calling it native.

On the other hand, these days... I don't really care. But a lot of people out there do.

By the very definition of what WINE is it is native.. its not a emulator by any means what so ever.. thus anything that runs through WINE is running natively . emulators are not native due to them emulating actual hardware .. where as wine translates it all to Linux api calls. tbh people need to get over themselves and just admit running windows games on Linux is far more superior to running crappy half a** linux binary ports. hardly any of the actual Linux binary ports I own run out the box without issue due to software upgrades on Linux.. alot of those same games run Out the box no issue under proton

It is not about native linux ports and definitions of what is and what isn’t. It is entirely because they lied about the Linux port until after release. And people do not need to get over it. Taking a stand and not buying their game now or in the future is the right thing to do if you’re upset by the lie.

Furthermore if you think Proton is good enough then you are very wrong. Microsoft can keep pushing the playing field back and Linux will be forced to keep catching up. This is the reason it took until the 2010’s to finally get decent graphical software on Linux because of the attitude of supporting a single platform and shrugging your shoulders when FOSS alternatives aren’t good enough.

In fact I just bought the original to give it a try but now I’m going to refund it.

I have a problem with it being called "Lying". I work as a software dev, and sometimes a promise that was supposed to be fulfilled can no longer be provided due to issues outside of the control of the "promise". That's just reality. It doesn't mean people were lied to, it means that despite best efforts, the goal could not be achieved.

I'm dealing with that process right now at work, where we are doing work to see if a project that was already decided on can be achieved the way it was laid out or if plans will have to change. Lying would be them promising it and not even trying to port it. They tried to port it, ran into problems, contacted support for the tooling they need, and were told "sorry, we're not fixing those bugs". As for starting it early, there are only so many game engines out there to choose from and all of them have technical trade-offs. Some companies have the knowledge and expertise to create their own, I highly doubt RFG has the needed experience to build their own engine and deliver the game on the timeframe they did.

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Quoting: scaine

Quoting: EagleDeltaTL;DR - WINE IS native by the actual technical definition of what an API does. If WINE isn't native, then no APIs are.

Appreciate what you're trying to say here, but I doubt anyone, at all, ever, will agree that "Wine is native". I certainly don't. Call it emulation, call it translation, whatever. But I'm not calling it native.

On the other hand, these days... I don't really care. But a lot of people out there do.

Oh, I know that many people here would not see it as "Wine is native". From a philisophical perspective that's right, from a Technical perspective, though, WINE/DXVK/vkd3d are "native" in that they are APIs that are making native calls and that's exactly the purpose of an API is to provide an interface between two or more pieces of software.

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Quoting: preludelinuxIts sad to see them not support linux native even sadder to mention still possible supporting a "native mac os port" right after mentioning no linux port and supporting proton which mac should have all the same issues right? is UE4 that badly done in linux to even support mac os better then linux for a game port? i hear that linux gaming is growing, whats mac gaming? only time i here about mac gaming was booting into windows to play games using bootcamp.

UE4 has Metal support and pretty decent support from what I understand. It's UE4's Vulkan support that is botched, hence why the Linux port was dropped.

If we want to get into technicalities, Proton is also Native. WINE doesn't emulate anything, instead it re-implements Windows APIs in the Linux land. That's a distinct difference from trying to emulate hardware or software. DOSBox is an emulator as it is wrapping an entire hardware + OS platform in software. WINE/DXVK/vkd3d/Proton are literally either translating one API into another or re-implementing APIs of another software stack entirely. This is done all the time in technology with API client libraries and the like.

TL;DR - WINE IS native by the actual technical definition of what an API does. If WINE isn't native, then no APIs are.

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Quoting: ArtenTotaly irelevant. From my point of view it's just buying without legal protection from state, so everythink is based solaly on my trust in developer. Legaly kickstarter can't call it buying, but by my internal definition it's still buying.

Not irrelevant at all. Venture funding is fundamentally different from purchasing. You aren't paying for the product, you're paying to help get the product made, whether it succeeds or not. Whether it makes it to completion or not.

Crowdfunding campaigns are laid out just like an funding pitch, just with product-based rewards instead of equity in the company. We don't get to walk into the situation and redefine what venture funding is, regardless if it's done by an Venture Capitalist firm or through crowdfunding. It's the same thing, the main difference is that crowdfunding allows companies, especially small ones, to get funding for projects a VC may not want to invest in b/c it's not the hot thing right now or the returns are relatively small. Instead, crowdfunding lets us put money into a project and hope we get our return (usually a product and/or some exclusives) while taking less risk overall.

The fact that they offered refunds is a sign that they didn't want to drop the Linux version, but felt they had no other choice since Epic was refusing to fix something that they had promised to fix. And sometimes, that's just the reality of life in software dev.

View this comment - View article - View full comments