Neverball was awesome, never did play Marble Blast.

Have you, or are you going to do an article on Myth II? I fould that with it you can make GURPS stuff (from GURPS Myth).

Anyhow, love this series, makes me want to try on one of the old PCs I built recently.

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Quoting: Guest

Quoting: slaapliedje

Quoting: Guest

Quoting: slaapliedje

Quoting: GuestI really dislike these flats/snaps/etc for software i want to use daily. Even for one offs like games i tend to like containers you can roll on your own better. Mainly because they they don't want to solve "linux packaging".

I don't think of this as 'solving linux packaging' it's 'solving distribution of applications'. If you've ever talked to a developer and asked 'why is there no Linux version!?' they'll either respond with 'what's linux?' or they've looked into it, saw that they'd have to either distribute their package as rpm (various versions because not all rpm based distributions are created equal), a deb (these work better in different debian based distros, but can still run into dependency crap), a tar ball, or... a bunch of others that use their own packaging standard. By the time they've looked into it this far, they're head is spinning and they're like 'why can't I just release it as an exe?' Well that option is there too... but Linux users generally don't like .run files, or generic blobs either, especially if they require root to install (which even on windows most ask for permission to install crap outside the user's dir).

Flatpak, Snap, Appimage all are different attempts to solve this issue.

My biggest issue currently with flatpak? Gnome-Software has a higher preference for flatpaks over the native package manager! I found a bug report / feature request to be able to change this, but it doesn't look like there has been much movement on it. There is supposedly an option in dconf for it, but i couldn't seem to find it the other day when I went looking.

Which developers? I reckon blob devs won't support much more than Ubuntu and SteamOS in any case, and then the whole thing about generic blobs is mute. (stuff like games etc.) And the blobs that matter for computer operation either get replaced or seem to be moving in a direction where the hardware manufacturers want to produce working solutions for linux distros. It's not really effected by flatpak & co. either.

My uneducated guess is that the ones that can't figure out tarballs don't really want to support the distros either.
Money is better spent on your favourite distro or the FSF imo.

These things supposed to be "secure" but they have some idiotic configuration. My aunt needs Adobe Reader because in 2022 EU and local govt. systems still mandate proprietary programs, so it was installed on her main computer (a snap package). It got infected by a trojan and I only found it by chance, as I ran a virus scan/upgrade for her some point later.

'Which Developers' Well that's the point, we don't know how many developers have looked at trying to develop software for the Linux Desktop, saw the mess that is distributing their software, and gave up. Steam came along and is a great way for commercial software to be distributed, but I'm sure most don't want to give up that large of a cut.

By the way, I've seen alternatives to Acrobat Reader that fulfills all of it's functions, damned if I can remember what it was called though.

Now I'm curious though how you got a trojan in the snap package of Acrobat Reader???

Look, my whole point is, people developing free software have the choice to deal with the "mess" ie. work with maintainers/packagers, do it themselves or just drop their code wherever if they want to release it at all. These new and shiny package formats only cater to blob devs imo., and that shouldn't be the goal of any free software projects.

Additionally, i don't think anyone can convince me that any developer that's making a tantrum about this is not just lazy - the practice has been the same for years - dump it on ubuntu with "support" and the rest will figure it out, and the users understood it perfectly.

I am NOT talking about opensource / free software. I'm talking about commercial software that require their own support infrastructure. The free software stuff is pretty much always 'provided as is, and if I feel like I can fix your issue with it, then likely will in my own time.' So if you want it packaged for your own distro / ease of use, most times it's up to you, or someone in the distribution to package it. Discoverability of such things is very minimal though. Like most of the time I look for software, I just use 'apt search $thing' instead of going to DuckDuckGo and looking for one. Flatpak just adds more stuff I can search for without having to download off some random site.

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Thinking about it... I think they'll release an Index 2 or Steam Controller 2 next. It actually makes sense to do an SC2 first, to bring it up to par with the new features on the Steam Deck. I certainly hope their release cadence is more in line for game consoles than computers as far as the Steam Deck goes. A 5 year release cycle makes a lot more sense than people wanting a 2 in a year or two.

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Quoting: Guest

Quoting: slaapliedje

Quoting: GuestI really dislike these flats/snaps/etc for software i want to use daily. Even for one offs like games i tend to like containers you can roll on your own better. Mainly because they they don't want to solve "linux packaging".

I don't think of this as 'solving linux packaging' it's 'solving distribution of applications'. If you've ever talked to a developer and asked 'why is there no Linux version!?' they'll either respond with 'what's linux?' or they've looked into it, saw that they'd have to either distribute their package as rpm (various versions because not all rpm based distributions are created equal), a deb (these work better in different debian based distros, but can still run into dependency crap), a tar ball, or... a bunch of others that use their own packaging standard. By the time they've looked into it this far, they're head is spinning and they're like 'why can't I just release it as an exe?' Well that option is there too... but Linux users generally don't like .run files, or generic blobs either, especially if they require root to install (which even on windows most ask for permission to install crap outside the user's dir).

Flatpak, Snap, Appimage all are different attempts to solve this issue.

My biggest issue currently with flatpak? Gnome-Software has a higher preference for flatpaks over the native package manager! I found a bug report / feature request to be able to change this, but it doesn't look like there has been much movement on it. There is supposedly an option in dconf for it, but i couldn't seem to find it the other day when I went looking.

Which developers? I reckon blob devs won't support much more than Ubuntu and SteamOS in any case, and then the whole thing about generic blobs is mute. (stuff like games etc.) And the blobs that matter for computer operation either get replaced or seem to be moving in a direction where the hardware manufacturers want to produce working solutions for linux distros. It's not really effected by flatpak & co. either.

My uneducated guess is that the ones that can't figure out tarballs don't really want to support the distros either.
Money is better spent on your favourite distro or the FSF imo.

These things supposed to be "secure" but they have some idiotic configuration. My aunt needs Adobe Reader because in 2022 EU and local govt. systems still mandate proprietary programs, so it was installed on her main computer (a snap package). It got infected by a trojan and I only found it by chance, as I ran a virus scan/upgrade for her some point later.

'Which Developers' Well that's the point, we don't know how many developers have looked at trying to develop software for the Linux Desktop, saw the mess that is distributing their software, and gave up. Steam came along and is a great way for commercial software to be distributed, but I'm sure most don't want to give up that large of a cut.

By the way, I've seen alternatives to Acrobat Reader that fulfills all of it's functions, damned if I can remember what it was called though.

Now I'm curious though how you got a trojan in the snap package of Acrobat Reader???

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Quoting: StoneColdSpiderWhen I saw the news image I thought there was a new/remastered Dark Seed.......
This game looks really good...... I dont do Kickstarters but I will certainly keep an eye on it.......

Right?? I still have my original Dark Seed CD somewhere... I think I even bought the CD32 version of it.

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Quoting: Lightkey

Quoting: slaapliedje

Quoting: neolith

Quoting: pbTIL there's Faery Tale Adventure II
I've only ever played the first one.

Oh, boy – Faery Tale Adventure! That's a game I haven't seen mentioned in a long time... I played the first one quite a bit on my Amiga back in the 80s. Haven't ever played the second one either. Maybe I should give it a try.

Nice! I went looking it up to see if part II was released on the Amiga (looks like it only came out on DOS). I never played the first one, and noticed the first was released on the Genesis as well... now to decide if I should play it on the Genesis, Amiga, or ScummVM...

The Faery Tale Adventure was developed by MicroIllusions and released in 1987, a decade earlier. Halls of the Dead: Faery Tale Adventure II was developed by The Dreamers Guild, based on the SAGA engine used in their prior adventure games that ScummVM already supported. ScummVM does not support The Faery Tale Adventure.
Edit: But you can play Halls of the Dead: Faery Tale Adventure II on the Amiga [External Link] now, thanks to ScummVM.

Ah! Thanks. Makes sense. So then... one could play the first one native on the Amiga, and the second one via ScummVM. (And yes I realize ScummVM requires a fairly beefy Amiga, but I have a few).

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Quoting: neolith

Quoting: pbTIL there's Faery Tale Adventure II
I've only ever played the first one.

Oh, boy – Faery Tale Adventure! That's a game I haven't seen mentioned in a long time... I played the first one quite a bit on my Amiga back in the 80s. Haven't ever played the second one either. Maybe I should give it a try.

Nice! I went looking it up to see if part II was released on the Amiga (looks like it only came out on DOS). I never played the first one, and noticed the first was released on the Genesis as well... now to decide if I should play it on the Genesis, Amiga, or ScummVM...

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Quoting: GuestI really dislike these flats/snaps/etc for software i want to use daily. Even for one offs like games i tend to like containers you can roll on your own better. Mainly because they they don't want to solve "linux packaging".

I don't think of this as 'solving linux packaging' it's 'solving distribution of applications'. If you've ever talked to a developer and asked 'why is there no Linux version!?' they'll either respond with 'what's linux?' or they've looked into it, saw that they'd have to either distribute their package as rpm (various versions because not all rpm based distributions are created equal), a deb (these work better in different debian based distros, but can still run into dependency crap), a tar ball, or... a bunch of others that use their own packaging standard. By the time they've looked into it this far, they're head is spinning and they're like 'why can't I just release it as an exe?' Well that option is there too... but Linux users generally don't like .run files, or generic blobs either, especially if they require root to install (which even on windows most ask for permission to install crap outside the user's dir).

Flatpak, Snap, Appimage all are different attempts to solve this issue.

My biggest issue currently with flatpak? Gnome-Software has a higher preference for flatpaks over the native package manager! I found a bug report / feature request to be able to change this, but it doesn't look like there has been much movement on it. There is supposedly an option in dconf for it, but i couldn't seem to find it the other day when I went looking.

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Damnit Liam! I saw this blurb, went to Steam and was like 'where is it?' As a general rule, I don't back video games on kickstarter. Too many of them sit in development hell and never release. Maybe I should just go play Eye of the Beholder, it just released for the C64/C128 (with dual screen support if you have a C128!)...

View this comment - View article - View full comments

One of the best things about scummvm is that it allows old systems like the Amiga and Atari ST to play some games that were contemporary with the systems at the time, but were never released for the platforms. It also allows some enhancements to some of the games that did get native releases!

It is also ported to some of the most random things.

View this comment - View article - View full comments