Quoting: MarlockPPS: How do you folks get Civ2 to play nice on Linux with the City Advisors? Anyone has a foolproof recipe? I dearly miss Elvis!!! (and can you honestly say the cosplay film bits weren't pure endearing eye candy pushing the boundaries of what the technology allowed back then?)

My solution was to run Windows 3.1 inside dosbox -- which works surprisingly well.

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Quoting: whizseOh poo a PC port! I was using this game as an excuse to save up to a new CPU for RPCS3 :(

Yeah, but you seem to be very good at inventing excuses; I'm sure you'll find something else.

View this comment - View article - View full comments

The first thing it comes to my mind is ... does it have an actual AI? As opposed to the system Civilization has had in place since 1993 (?) where computer players suffer no penalties, need no resources, & randomly produce whatever and throw it at the human player, while the handicaps on the human player grow exponentially on each 'difficulty level'.

View this comment - View article - View full comments

I've been out of the loop; so this is very amusing to me; I'll now go & check if PS fans have been rioting in the streets.

(By the way, I briefly owned a PS4; during which period I did play this game. It's a good game, though in its heyday it's had its share of ridiculous hype. One recommendation I might have is to play it on difficult (not the hardest, but one level below that) & turn off 'detective vision' [what did you expect? It's the most fundamental obligation for games to fulfill]; otherwise it might get a bit repetitive.)

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Quoting: Purple Library Guy

Quoting: samurro

Quoting: wvstolzing

Quoting: samurro

Quoting: wvstolzing

Quoting: samurroThe obvious answer is Arch. Not even joking. If you are pleb like me, go with Manjaro. But everything apart from Arch for gaming is not "best".

Valve agrees.

Valve agreed that it was the best for them to base their own distro on, not the best to use at home as regular users.

Curious, whats wrong with Arch-based distros for home users?

The use case in question is 'looking to move one's everyday stuff, including gaming, over to linux as a non-enthusiast, as someone not particularly keen to 'look under the hud' occasionally'.

I dont understand, where is this coming from? Neither the title nor the article says anything about that? Title explicitly says best linux distribution for gaming.

So you're saying the majority of gamers are techies? The best distribution for gaming would be the best distribution for gamers to game on.

One doesn't even need to make an assumption about what gamers as a group of people are like; anyone in the *role* of a gamer (even the techiest techie) looking for a device/OS *for gaming*, would prefer something that lets him/her focus on the gaming, & not the most recent packaging f*ckup on Arch.

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Quoting: samurro

Quoting: wvstolzing

Quoting: samurroThe obvious answer is Arch. Not even joking. If you are pleb like me, go with Manjaro. But everything apart from Arch for gaming is not "best".

Valve agrees.

Valve agreed that it was the best for them to base their own distro on, not the best to use at home as regular users.

Curious, whats wrong with Arch-based distros for home users?

Put like that without qualification, there's nothing wrong, of course; but that's not what I said. I said, 'not the best for home users (given a specific purpose/use case)'; I didn't say 'it’s wrong for home users (in general)'.

The use case in question is 'looking to move one's everyday stuff, including gaming, over to linux as a non-enthusiast, as someone not particularly keen to 'look under the hud' occasionally'.

... and by the way, Arch is way too high level for it to have all that 'learning benefit' that it's touted for. It's no LFS. The latter has the benefit of providing some insight into how packages hang together, why x needs to be built like that before y so that z can work, etc. etc. Installing & maintaining Arch doesn't exercise one's judgment with respect to such questions; things are too 'ready for consumption' -- follow the recipes on the wiki, which you need not even understand, & things might start working.

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Quoting: dibz

Quoting: Guest

Quoting: Renzatic Gear

Quoting: dibzFor some reason I always find the layouts of GTK3 apps to be confusing. This looks like no exception, unfortunately.

I usually find them cleaner and easier to navigate, but I have been goofing around with Gnome for awhile now, and have gotten used to the ebb and flow of their stuff.

Though they could have done a better job of labeling things in the app. "Installed Tools" should be "Install Tools," showing that's the button you click to download a new version of Proton. The entries below that should be labeled as the currently installed tools per the launcher listed above.

The layout isn't final at all. I've just updated to make it more usable. I know user experience is important, but right now I'm more focused on the backend rather then the frontend. I'll make sure to keep that in my mind for a future update tho. Thanks you for your feedback :)

My issue with GTK3 in general isn't really your app, your app looks fine in the GTK3 sense to me. My issue is really with GTK3 in particular, the weird centered tabs in the title bar; menus in strange places, visual elements that aren't necessarily obvious. It's a symptom of all GTK3 stuff. Some apps are cleaner and easier to understand then others, but pretty much none of them are ever "immediately obvious look I know how to use it without having to learn how to use it". The designers of GTK3 really seem to have uh, let's call them "modern" ideas on what good UX is.

The one in the screenshot is a GTK4/libadwaita app; but your point still stands. These 'simpler' interfaces don't make apps simpler to use. All across the 'industry' they took the principle that 'ui shouldn't stand in your way' *literally*; & they started making elements that HIDE their functionality unless you hover over them, or poke at them with your finger.

The mythical 'everyday user' might be a little confused by a busy looking interface; but if it's well laid-out, they'll make an effort to understand how it works. These supposedly simple interfaces make people go 'the fuck do I press now?!'.

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Quoting: samurroThe obvious answer is Arch. Not even joking. If you are pleb like me, go with Manjaro. But everything apart from Arch for gaming is not "best".

Valve agrees.

Valve agreed that it was the best for them to base their own distro on, not the best to use at home as regular users.

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Quoting: BlackBloodRum

Quoting: jensYeah, my personal preference is still to always enable the firewall (also in a home setup) and I still recommend to do so, but I guess it is no longer a sin to not do so.

There's nothing wrong with that :grin:

In fact, I do the same. I was merely explaining why some may or may not use a firewall. My biggest complaint is that ssh is activated by default on new installs with password authentication and some distros then open up port 22. It's basically asking for trouble.

(If there's one thing everyone absolutely should do is disable ssh password authentication and if using ssh, switch to key based authentication :tongue:. If not using it, disable the service.)

-- and to cut down the noise in your logs, use a port other than 22 on interfaces connected to the outside world. People are quick to point out that this is not a security measure; & that's true, but it's not meant as such. You just don't want to see 10000 failed attempts per day from probes all over the world on your little home computer.

(Same with opening :80 or :443 to the outside world, regardless whether you're exposing anything of importance. There are a billion probes poking at those ports, no matter what the address might be.)

View this comment - View article - View full comments

I think the verdict is right & there really isn't much room for controversy.

... for a bit of off-topic fun, though -- regarding selinux, have you guys seen this? https://developers.redhat.com/e-books/selinux-coloring-book [External Link]

It's a cheeky little book that covers the basics of labelling in selinux, as if to say, 'stop complaining; it's so simple it can be described in a coloring book'. Which is true -- though it's no surprise that with proper documentation, the 'basics' should be easy to get. What can get difficult isn't even diagnosing the little errors that can creep up in desktop use (the diagnosis tools are pretty good); it's deciding how to resolve them (do I set an ad hoc policy? adjust a system wide boolean? is it ok if I allow this process access to this port/socket/whatever, or should I stick with the officially sanctioned ones?).

View this comment - View article - View full comments