Quoting: GuestRemoved the ability to go offline? Good job, Valve, oh how sometimes I hate you.

I think it doesn't have really changed. The actual "Offline Mode", where your client doesn't need to log in to Steam online is still there. The "chat offline" mode regarding chat is just called "Invisible" now. It does the same: You are logged in to Steam, but appear offline to friends. The difference is that you can directly see what friends are doing while you are "chat offline". Before, you had to click on "Friends" to see that.

The only thing they should do is provide a "Always connect as invisible when starting Steam", which was available before. But it remembers your last status, which is okay-ish, too.

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Quoting: TheSHEEEPOnly two review possibilities have the incredible downside that something can only either be very good or very bad. For many games, that just doesn't work out.
The result is that you almost only get reviews that are super positive or super negative or leave the reviewer with a very bad feeling because the rating doesn't reflect the actual situation.

Just look at GOG (or any other service, because I think it is pretty much only Steam doing the "only good or bad" rating system) to see how well it works.
You get far more variety in reviews and a much better glance at what people think.

If you would be allowed to read only one single review, a 5 star system would be better, because this reviewer has more range of expression. But the overall rating statistic of all reviews consisting of "recommend" and "don't recommend" has the same effect, while supposedly being more correct and helpful.

I just checked the game list on GOG. Roughly 100 Games have 5 stars. roughly 1500 games have 4,5 or 4 stars (ca. 750 each). There are 2500 entries on GOG. The more you get into the lower territory, the more you get DLCs, digital goodies or sound tracks in there. So it doesn't look like there are 2500 actual games on there, but a lot of the lower rated entries is just bonus stuff.

That means the majority of the games on GOG have either 4 or 4,5 stars. For me, that's not really helpful.

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Quoting: TheSHEEEPSpeaking about reviews, I seriously hope they will remove that thumbs down/up nonsense, since many games simply aren't that clearly good or bad. A simple 5 star system would be much better.

I'm not sure about this. A while ago, I've read about rating systems, and that many professionals are saying that the 5 star system has failed. Looking at Amazon, almost anything has 4 and a half star. Most people give it 5 stars if they like it, some give 4, and people who didn't like it are giving 2 or 1 stars. Additionally to this, no one really knows where the "baseline" is. How do you rate a product you find to be neither good or bad, but sufficient? 3 stars? Or rather 4? Or 5, because you had no "problem"?

If I remember correctly, those professionals said that Thumbs Up/Down systems work better, because the emotion behind both options are stronger, and people wouldn't vote up if they didn't really like it, and people wouldn't vote down if they didn't have a substantial problem with the product or service. In the end, statistically, the result should be more fitting and useful.

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Yeah... I remember what Elop Microsoft did to Nokia. Nothing good will come out of this. I just deleted my account. I hope GitHub goes down as quick as possible.

View this comment - View article - View full comments

[quote=sub]

Quoting: Doc AngeloAre you sure?

That rather looks like the in-game UI framework delivered with the Source SDK and nothing like the Steam client.

I'm not 100% sure, but it very much sounds like it. They say "Source and Steam applications" are using it. That's worded a little bit wonky, but sounds to me like Steam is using it. It also looks visually quite a bit like it.

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Quoting: WorMzyI hope the updated user interface uses qt5, and not gtk3. That is, assuming they use a different toolkit to gtk2.

They use VGUI [External Link].

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Quoting: sbolokanovFor your information there are systems that do not have 32bit layer at all (and they don't need one, to begin with).

Are you talking about a Linux distribution? What distribution are you using?

Apart from that: I think Steam games should depend on the Steam supplied libs or provide their own. That means of course that you're using old libs when you play old games, which is a security hazard. But then again, almost all games are closed source and proprietary, so you want to run them in a tight jail anyway.

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Quoting: TheSHEEEPI call them do-gooders because their well-meaning actions (would) lead to negative results. Of course I disagree with actions that lead to negative results.

Some people think that all help organizations do good. Some people think that all help organizations do bad. Both are cases that are phrased with superlative wording and are extremely likely not true.

That means that what actually happens is somewhere in between. Some do good, some do bad. By assuming that one of the two extreme cases is true, you rob yourself of a good look at reality.

Anecdote time! In 10th grade, there was a kid in my class that got bullied hard. It was the typical small and thin kid that didn't know how to defend himself - be it physically or socially. For him, it had become normal to be bullied, so he just ate it up and waited until the bullies were done with him.

I was in his shoes for years, I knew exactly how he felt. That is why I changed the school: I just couldn't take it anymore in my former class. Because kids are weird and, well, kids... I somehow wasn't the bully target anymore in the new school. In some weird turn of the stars, I suddenly was the cool guy (took me a half year to fully realize that). So I intervened, and people stopped immediately bullying him. Sometimes it would happen again, but I stopped them quickly. After a few times, it stopped for the rest of the year. Not that it completely stopped: There was of course still some verbal fighting and other mean stuff... what kids do. But they never tried to put him into the waste bin anymore. Such kind of humiliation didn't happen anymore. In my personal opinion, this was good for him. He now knows that there are people that are there for each other and step in. He now knows that it isn't normal to be bullied like that. And he left the class without being the only victim all the time. I think this gave him a positive kind of a perspective. At least I hope.

Maybe he would have fought back and changed his personality so that he wouldn't get bullied anymore. But maybe not. Maybe what happened instead helped in different ways. There are two ways you can stop bullying: By fighting back, or by not being the easy and silent target anymore. I like the latter far better.

You may disagree. You may have thought: "He should help himself. If I help him, I'm making it worse for him!" That may be your opinion. But calling me a do-gooder is just calling me names. A well phrased disagreement and an explanation would be more helpful.

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Quoting: TheSHEEEPFor example, if I started proclaiming that everyone should start defending the poor and downtrodden Panterra people (imaginary name), I would be a hypocrite.
Because I do not truly believe in that, but know that people like it when someone proclaims that.

If I actually did go out of my way to defend the poor and downtrodden Panterra people, and believe I am doing good, I would be a do-gooder.
Because that would only lead to the Panterra people never learning to defend themselves and always require someone to do it for them, it would actually be a bad result.

That means that only those people are do-gooders that are doing things that you wouldn't do. Or people who have views you don't share. You label them do-gooders as soon as you disagree with their views or the reasoning behind their actions. If I would do the same, you would be a do-gooder from my perspective.

It really just boils down to your disagreement with their views and actions. You don't like what they say and do, and you show your dislike by calling those people names. In my opinion, that's neither useful nor helpful for you or for them.

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Quoting: EikeLanguage is not something happening to us, it's something made by us. I feel (strongly), we shouldn't perpetuate the connotation of "doing good" and something bad. (There's something similar in German with "Gutmensch" (eng: "good human".))

I hate the term "Gutmensch". It just feels wrong to paint this rather straightforward term in a bad light. "Scheingutmensch" would be more fitting.

I can understand the definition of TheSHEEEP regarding "do-gooder" and where this is coming from. I know way too many people who tell about doing good all the time, but rarely put action behind their words. I also know people who are phrasing their views in over the top language, something like "all foreigners are nice and lovely!". Some people just love to appear as (purportedly) political correct as possible. That's a problem. But it's also a problem that many people who actually do something good - because they thought about it and came to the conclusion that they want to do this - sound just the same at first glance.

I really think "Scheingutmensch" in German and something like "pseu-do-gooder" would be more fitting and not as misleading.

View this comment - View article - View full comments