I will be honest... I'm very tempted to subscribe to this.
Has anyone subscribed? Is it a good value for a Linux gamer? (I have no issue playing through WINE, but do prefer native)

View this comment - View article - View full comments

I'm actually playing a little Elder Scrolls 3 Morrowind via TES3MP (openMW multiplayer).

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Quoting: TermyI really don't get why not more people are buying there. Especially when most of the games include a steam-key, so missing features of the client don't really count...i ALWAYS look if a game is availiabe on itch...

I love Itch.io! I've participated in a few game jams and plan to do joining more when time permits. I have downloaded and played a number of games from the store (and I love browsing the 'tools' and 'assets' sections, as well)... but... Itch.io is kinda the 'Dollar Store' game store. I only barely heard of Itch.io before joining THIS site and even then, it wasn't until a good year or so later that I said "I keep hearing GOL mention this place, and I trust GOL, so let's take a look at it".

From the Average Joe/Jane Gamer's perspective... Itch.io is an unknown. If Steam was getting shiz for their lack of curation, Itch.io has none at all (as far as I know). There are virtually no AAA games (which is still a major draw, regardless of how shiz the industry has been over the last decade or so). The solid Indie games we love that may also be on Itch.io are buried with all of the graphic novel, dating sim, NES rom, fetish, and (often incomplete) game jam games.

There is ALOT of AMAZING things that can be found on Itch.io... but, I think it'll remain a relative unknown until the AAA industry crashes completely, bringing down Steam, Epic, and all of the other major launchers. Until that time, the only people who will ever know about Itch.io will be small game developers and the odd gamer really looking for something off the beaten path.

That's my opinion, anyway.

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Quoting: liamdawe

Quoting: EhvisCalling this a "Total conversion for Doom 2" is a bit silly. There is not a single thing in this game that can be rendered by the original Doom 2 engine.

Yeah, I think developers need to work out a new way to describe such things. What would you suggest exactly?

I think, technically, GZDoom is more a FPS-focused game engine. As such, this would be more of a "Game built on a retro-fps inspired engine"? Or... "Game using a modernized Doom 2 engine"?

I'm actually curious... is GZDoom free of the original Doom engine source restrictions? That is, could someone make a full game using GZDoom and legally attempt to sell it? I mean, there's Ion Maiden being sold that's based on the old Build engine (Duke 3D), so, there's no reason to think that a game on an old engine isn't a viable sell these days.

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Quoting: appetrosyanI think you shouldn't be outraged over the fact - they pulled the game, as much as why they pulled the game. Essentially, they had a dev. team consisting of one person. One person to write the code, one person to test, one person to debug and one person to maintain. You complain about a people not wearing safety glasses when picking uranium. Don't you see the massive leap here?

One person or one thousand... doesn't matter. They go public, they're promising they can support what they release. If the one guy they have couldn't handle it, they should not have tried. In this case... it seems "they changed their minds" so the argument for this game, for now, is moot.

Quoting: appetrosyan

QuoteI give developers who pull stunts like this no quarter.

Then don't buy games from small studios. Don't buy games with proprietary source code, and actively tell game developers that you expect them to have done their research, before buying the game.

Or... you know, you call studios out for any crap they pull (whether the studio is large, small, one person, or one thousand plus). They're trying to make money on their products, and we're spending money on these products. I'm not saying we should be calling the devs names, or sending them death threats... but I feel we really need to stop this "well, at least they tried" crap.

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Quoting: liamdaweUpdate: They changed their minds on this, they've put the native version back up. See here.

Glad to hear it. Let's hope they don't flake out again.

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Quoting: appetrosyan

Quoting: ObsidianBlk

Quoting: Whitewolfe80The decision makes sense if for example they do not have in the inhouse ability to fix the issues, and do not deem it financially viable to hire in those skills. Or two they looked at the game sales on linux and looked at the cost of support and just said its cheaper and easier to let it run via wine that way we dont even have to support it. As long as they dont dramatically change the windows code the wine version will just keep on trucking.

The decision is lazy, cowardly, and destroys trust.
They should have done their research on Linux and their engine's history with the platform before ever adding Linux as a target platform. Given that they released a Linux binary, I'm going to assume they actually did their research... so their sales numbers on the platform be damned, honestly.

Mate, that's the exact attitude why we still don't have the Witcher 3. Itis lazy, and it does show incompetence in the port, however, if you have a game engine with native support, what you end-up doing, is delegating an entire Feral Interactive's worth of work to just one person. The real issue isn't the cop-out, but the fact that Windows binaries are developed and tested with way more resources. Don't be angry at the developer, at least they had the decency to admit, that they can't do it, instead of having a broken game on the storefront, or so they say.
-

Quoting: ObsidianBlkThey should have the pride and self respect to maintain that binary and take ownership when issues arise. What decisions like this tell me is when the code gets tough, they bail. If this were a bug on the Windows side, you bet your bottom dollar they'd be trying to get to the bottom of it. If it's Unity, they'd be hounding Unity for a fix (or fix it themselves if they have direct source access... not sure if Unity gives that option). Even if they put out a "we're sorry, we're working with the Unity team, but for now Linux users are stuck on an older version", fine... but no... they pulled their work as if it never existed and washed their hands.

Would you maintain a binary by hand, without pay, when an automatic tool ddoes that job better.

I do, however disagree that maintaining and delegating are the only two options. Make it open-source, have the guy who found a fix be able to fix it, and take credit.

What's the reason they haven't ported Witcher 3? CDPR didn't promise a Linux version. They didn't release a Linux version then pull it, sighting some lame excuse. I assume they did their research and concluded that Linux wasn't a viable option. Oh well. They never lied or reneged, so... I'm not seeing where you were going with that.

Proton doesn't maintain or fix the binary for you. It's a wrapper around Windows... it's glorified WINE. On top of that, the company is not obligated to confirm their Windows binary remains functional via Proton. So even if the game works for most at the point of whitelisting, if the developers make a change that breaks with Proton, "oh well".

And where are you getting "without pay" from? The game was for sale. Linux users were paying them for their game. This game was not a charity, it was a product. Again, I don't care what the Linux demographic size is compared to Windows. That goes back to my last statement about the developers doing their damn research before committing to Linux in the first place. If they didn't like the size of the demographic, then don't release for the platform.

Does it suck that not as many developers release for Linux as I'd like? Hell yes. What hurts Linux more, though, is when someone new to Linux comes in, sees a game they want, then has that game pulled from them. How could anyone trust our platform for gaming if game developers treat it like that?

I give developers who pull stunts like this no quarter.

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Quoting: Whitewolfe80The decision makes sense if for example they do not have in the inhouse ability to fix the issues, and do not deem it financially viable to hire in those skills. Or two they looked at the game sales on linux and looked at the cost of support and just said its cheaper and easier to let it run via wine that way we dont even have to support it. As long as they dont dramatically change the windows code the wine version will just keep on trucking.

The decision is lazy, cowardly, and destroys trust.
They should have done their research on Linux and their engine's history with the platform before ever adding Linux as a target platform. Given that they released a Linux binary, I'm going to assume they actually did their research... so their sales numbers on the platform be damned, honestly.

They should have the pride and self respect to maintain that binary and take ownership when issues arise. What decisions like this tell me is when the code gets tough, they bail. If this were a bug on the Windows side, you bet your bottom dollar they'd be trying to get to the bottom of it. If it's Unity, they'd be hounding Unity for a fix (or fix it themselves if they have direct source access... not sure if Unity gives that option). Even if they put out a "we're sorry, we're working with the Unity team, but for now Linux users are stuck on an older version", fine... but no... they pulled their work as if it never existed and washed their hands.

These developers need more pride in their work. Make a decision and stick with it, come what may.

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Quoting: iiariI have zero problem with this at all. If it results in more playable, more reliable titles for Linux players, I'm fine with that. Even better, if word spreads among devs that this is a good approach, hopefully they'll bring over titles they wouldn't have otherwise. Look at Everspace. They almost dropped the Linux version because of platform specific development difficulties. Maybe in the future, such decisions won't need to exist...

I strongly wonder how many of those "platform specific development difficulties" have more to due with Linux being a secondary (or tertiary) thought in the development process than an issue from the get go.

If these developers focus on Windows first, then port their code, the work load is significantly higher than building for all platforms at once.

Forgive me if I'm wrong, but most of these games that drop Linux (either before or after release) are games that weren't developing for both platforms in tandem.

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Just curious if it's the Linux build, or just me but...
1) While I can press buttons in the menu at start up, I cannot do so with the pop-up menu in the game itself. To actually quit the game, I had to actually bring up the console (ahhh, the tilde key... joy!) and enter "quit" to exit the game without killing it.
2) Whenever I left-clicked with the mouse (whether on an intractable element or not), my character would turn ~90 degrees suddenly (kinda like how one might turn in a VR game). To be able to interact with anything, I had to left-click-hold (which jumped the camera 90 degrees) then look back at what I want to interact with, then let go of the mouse button.

Is this just me?

View this comment - View article - View full comments