Quoting: pbMy library right now:
VERIFIED: 131 games
PLAYABLE: 100 games
UNSUPPORTED: 30 games

These proportions are looking good. :wub:

[edit] you can check your numbers here: https://checkmydeck.herokuapp.com/ [External Link] (found on r/SteamDeck [External Link]

I don't have unsupported at all. Lot of unknown though.

With my library I would have 33 verified games and 22 playable games. Not bad result as such as in theoretical situation that I would justify for myself why I would need Steam Deck, I would have something to play for a while. And plenty to buy from store.

I would think as long as every niche has something playable available, there should be plenty of happy Steam Deck users. Unhappy ones might be those that don't have another device to play the popular multiplayer game that hasn't enabled anti-cheat for Linux.

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Quoting: anewsonI gave up on Valheim. I really enjoyed some parts of it but I feel like it's two games rolled into one. The first game is an introspective crafting and exploration game with a beautiful, dreamlike visual aesthetic.

The second game is an action RPG with a death mechanic more punishing than Dark Souls. When you die you lose your gear and you lose experience, and there are enemies that will appear and oneshot you with very little warning in midgame (Deathsquito vs bronze armour, anyone?). Enemies that kill you will then stay aggro and camp your corpse.

Why make such brutal death mechanics in a game where exploration is so fun? You want to hop on a boat and sail out on an adventure, but if you die (which again, you can die randomly) then you're all the way back home without your boat and without any gear. So you have to build another boat (the second time making the same journey to collect your body the sea isn't as majestic) and take a back-up set of gear (double the grind) to collect your body. God help you if you die the second time.

The better way to explore is to stop every five minutes to build a teleport or a bed so you're never too far from your body. But that kind of ruins the experience and feels very gamey. Don't get me wrong I love the combat when I was prepared for it, and I like tough games, but getting completely screwed over again and again when I wanted to explore rather than fight was too much for me.

If I remember correctly, the reasoning was that death mechanic forces you to build multiple bases. Not being able to teleport ores enforces that even more.

My last run stopped when I died to fall damage in mountain biome. I was bit too sure of myself and didn't create forward base and I don't think I have much spare items as I had endgame gear from my previous playthrough. Only thing holding me back was food as I was missing ingredients for the good stuff.

Might still start totally fresh game though once mist biome cames. I know it's bit grindy, but on the other hand exploring and building is pretty fun.

View this comment - View article - View full comments

It has been over a year since I have played the game. Lot of things definitely have changed. And now there's some more changes. Electricity for example had bit of a learning curve, but this latest update should make things easier.

For that reason I have separate collection in Steam for games that have had major update to gameplay since I have played them.

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Quoting: Beamboom

Quoting: dpanterThe horror aspect is lessened yes. As much more of the gameplay is focused on nighttime, Techland aimed to make the night more accessible for all players.

Really? That's great news for me, because I found the first game to be way too bloody scary. The missions I were forced to do at nighttime made me quit playing!

For me they were just right amount of scary. I don't play horror games that much, but I guess it helps that Dying Light has enough gameplay in the daytime. Also having incentives to go out during the nighttime gives things a purpose. So on the other hand you don't want to go out during the night, but then again you should as the risk is totally worth it.

With other horror games I might have less patience as it's all horror and the scarier ones are almost entirely walking simulators with some running mixed in.

I guess games should have possible to tone down horror in same way that there's possibility to adjust difficulty. It's hard to have one level suitable for all.

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Quoting: F.UltraSo did a quick google (since Fortnite is not a game that I have ever played, and since I don't use cheats) and the first response was to (link removed just in case) which have a long list of cheats for Fortnite, that works on Windows 10 and Windows 11.

The cheats are sold for money so there are monetary incentives to break EAC which points back to my earlier post that Windows is open source if you are a hacker. Not only does the closed source of Windows help it in any way possible, we can also see that Epic is lying out their teeth, there is no need for cheaters to force Fortnite to work on the Steam Deck in order to cheat, they can cheat right now using Windows (and they also carry cheats for consoles).

EAC only keeps out the amateurs, and the amateurs wouldn't know where to begin to create Linux kernel drivers in the first place either so this is all moot.

With bit of money it's possible to build that close to impossible to detect. Basically if you can feed the screen output to another computer where the hacks run, that another computer can send input back to computer where game runs via USB.

I would assume hardest part is to train the visual recognition model. I don't know where you can get that stuff if you don't want to build it from scratch. But apparently that stuff is out there.

PS: you should remove the direct link just in case and let the interested people just Google for it, direct link is bit too close to promoting hacks

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Quoting: slaapliedje

Quoting: GuestI wonder if the Steam Deck is going to be a great success if Mr. Sweeny would change his mind. Just give it some time Linux is the future of gaming, we are seeing the change, keep in mind android (while heavy modified) is still Linux.

Just question yourself this:

Why can't tripple A studio's make things work on Linux with a 100+ employers studio's, while an single indie developer can make there game enjoyable and perfectly work with either Proton or even Native.

Example: Splitgate the "equ8" AC isn't build for linux but they managed to get it working for Linux without issues. And there are more examples, instead of investing is "Epic Exclusives" they should put there money in evolution.

In all honesty... it seems to me that there is a potential of MS getting a sniff of some companies considering releasing ports to Linux (and even macs) and decide to pay to make them Windows Exclusive. It literally happens everywhere for consoles and has since their inception. Why not in the PC realm?

Microsoft has been buying big studios, so they do already control big chunk of the market. Wikipedia has some kind of list of acquired studios, though list is missing Activision: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Xbox_Game_Studios#Subsidiaries_and_divisions [External Link]

Few of the listed ones have done Linux ports in the past. They totally can shut down Linux porting efforts if they want to.

Luckily they don't own the whole market. They would have to spend lot more and there are other big groups making big purchases.

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Quoting: Guest

Quoting: Anza

Quoting: GuestI wonder if the Steam Deck is going to be a great success if Mr. Sweeny would change his mind. Just give it some time Linux is the future of gaming, we are seeing the change, keep in mind android (while heavy modified) is still Linux.

Just question yourself this:

Why can't tripple A studio's make things work on Linux with a 100+ employers studio's, while an single indie developer can make there game enjoyable and perfectly work with either Proton or even Native.

Example: Splitgate the "equ8" AC isn't build for linux but they managed to get it working for Linux without issues. And there are more examples, instead of investing is "Epic Exclusives" they should put there money in evolution.

I think this was discussed under some other article already. I guess short answer is: bureaucracy, custom engines and libraries. Which in turn means that if Linux doesn't make enough money, it won't happen unless somebody high up wants to have a Linux port. When experienced developers are allowed to spend time doing things like porting engine to have Vulkan renderer, things will happen. For example that's what happened when Google was distributing some Stadia money. Stadia just happens to be closed system, so there's no need to worry about multiple Linux distributions and support costs. Which in turn means that native Linux port might never leave Stadia. Even there doing some cost saving by just during the bare necessity means that profits are higher.

Smaller studios have more to gain. Article on GamingOnLinux (and maybe on few other Linux sites) can generate enough sales that Linux numbers are inflated. Extra publicity could totally be worth it. Indie studios are also more idealistic, so they might do Linux port just because they can.

I can remember reading an article where a game developer said that Linux users are more likely to give helpful feedback and sometimes even fixes, so I don't get why Big Corps. aren't seeing this.

But I Personally believe that the Steam Deck is going to change Linux Gaming for the better in the long run, just look at how far we already are, new games are playable from launch 80% of the time. Maybe not perfect but playable none the less.

In big corporations support and developer are not the same person. Developer might never see the support request. As for big corporations at least have to be lot more careful with copyright. There's possibility that they have prepared for user submissions if it's mentioned the EULA. My impression is that fan fixes usually live their own separate life, though I have vague memory that there are some exceptions.

It's interesting to see sure how much impact Steam Deck actually has. Now it's bit hard to see if developer actually support Proton. Valve will patch things for sure, but there's going to be bit of delay after each update in the game.

As for the topic itself, I guess Epic backup plan could be that if things go south with Microsoft, they could just pick up everything that Valve has done and bootstrap their Linux store that way. Valve doesn't have the same luxury as if they drop Linux, that's going to be quite big blow to the market and their backup plan will not be as viable. Sure Wine won't go away, but it wouldn't stay as good as its now.

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Quoting: GuestI wonder if the Steam Deck is going to be a great success if Mr. Sweeny would change his mind. Just give it some time Linux is the future of gaming, we are seeing the change, keep in mind android (while heavy modified) is still Linux.

Just question yourself this:

Why can't tripple A studio's make things work on Linux with a 100+ employers studio's, while an single indie developer can make there game enjoyable and perfectly work with either Proton or even Native.

Example: Splitgate the "equ8" AC isn't build for linux but they managed to get it working for Linux without issues. And there are more examples, instead of investing is "Epic Exclusives" they should put there money in evolution.

I think this was discussed under some other article already. I guess short answer is: bureaucracy, custom engines and libraries. Which in turn means that if Linux doesn't make enough money, it won't happen unless somebody high up wants to have a Linux port. When experienced developers are allowed to spend time doing things like porting engine to have Vulkan renderer, things will happen. For example that's what happened when Google was distributing some Stadia money. Stadia just happens to be closed system, so there's no need to worry about multiple Linux distributions and support costs. Which in turn means that native Linux port might never leave Stadia. Even there doing some cost saving by just doing the bare necessity means that profits are higher.

Smaller studios have more to gain. Article on GamingOnLinux (and maybe on few other Linux sites) can generate enough sales that Linux numbers are inflated. Extra publicity could totally be worth it. Indie studios are also more idealistic, so they might do Linux port just because they can.

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Quoting: Nocifer

Quoting: Doc Angelo

Quoting: NociferThat's not correct. Some holes can indeed lead to privilege escalation and thus provide full access to the whole machine, while other holes are more or less limited in what they can do. It's not a given that a bug/exploit will lead to total foobar. It's as you say at the end: it really depends.

Exactly. I said it depends. You're essentially agreeing with what I said, yet you're stating that what I said is incorrect.

No, I'm disagreeing with you because you contradicted yourself. "It really depends" agrees with "the malware capabilities will be limited by the size of the hole", a statement with which you disagreed in the rest of your comment. If it does depend on the "size of the hole", then it also does make sense in the digital world to talk about holes and sizes.

Maybe the confusion here is coming from the fact that with vulnerabilities, size is not used as a term. What is probably actually meant is severity. Severity is roughly based on risk. Remotely exploited vulnerability that gives full access to the system is high on the vulnerability scale.

Security hole is used as a term, but speaking about sizes can be bit awkward. Logically bigger exploit would need bigger hole in order to fit in...

What we were actually talking about? Oh! Anti-Cheat. From security perspective they're awful. I'm not sure I need to elaborate. Gamers might not have lot of options here though.

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Quoting: slaapliedje

Quoting: NanobangFlashy, fast, and flexible. Yeah, I can see why Valve might've chosen it for the Steam deck.

I'm strangely thrilled that the Discover upgrade will be including version dates.

I think knowing a version number may be helpful, but knowing the age of that version is immediately useful when I'm considering a bit of software.

Kudos KDE!

Yeah, I think more and more developers are realizing that arbitrary numbers for their software is kind of pointless. I think that the trend toward YY.MM.patch_level is quite useful. On the other hand, you have people who misinterpret what CentOS was doing with their 7.9.2009... as that's Major.Minor.YYMM. Someone tried to explain to me that they don't have point releases anymore and just use the year/month... Doesn't help that RHEL doesn't follow that versioning... Anyhow, just a bit of a rant as I've ran into this...

I would think most of the software uses something sensible one as that's easier than to invent something new. There are quite odd ones though. TeX for example adds digits to π. Also can't even assume that version number increases. Wikipedia mentions SmartEiffel that has decreasing version number.

FreeBSD has actually mechanism that can be used when the whole scheme changes

No wonder we need a dialog that displays also date :tongue:

View this comment - View article - View full comments