Quoting: muadib1988Star Citizen has also promised linux support. everything on the official website has been removed

I don't know if theyr evere had in on page. They said it on video and nevere seen it on page. The promis has been after they do Vulkan renderer and it's not done yet, but every monthly report contains info what has been rewrited for Vulkan, so they doing it.
Other side is if they do linux support, but what i heard only showstoper for linux is renderer because most of other things are already linux compatible because their servers...

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Quoting: gradyvuckovic

We're very sorry to announce that we won't be porting Backbone to Linux in the near future.

'Near future'... Just say it, you're not going to do it 'ever'.

We did our best to do it in-house, but it took immeasurable amount of time and effort,

Your game is made in Unreal Engine 4... was there really no one in your entire team who possesses the ability to handle installing Linux on a PC, downloading and compiling UE4 for Linux following a youtube tutorial to do so, then building your game on it?

and making it work properly would require creating a dev environment to work in

... Yes.. that's generally how game development works.. ?...

which we don't have the resources for because we're deep in production for our next game.

You don't have the resources to dual boot a PC you already own with a free OS?

We are not in the financial position to hire another party to do the porting for us.

Not sure why you wouldn't be in a financial position to do so given you ran a kickstarter specifically to raise funding to do exactly what you're saying you don't have the finances to do.

We absolutely understand the frustration these news might bring, and we're ready to offer you these solutions:

HA-HA-HA.

In summary: "We promised a Linux version just to get a bunch more folks to support our kickstarter to effectively use those people as an interest free loan. Now we've made the game and sold enough copies to repay that loan, we're willing to offer refunds."

Seriously, people, stop funding kickstarters. Just stop doing it. It's even worse than pre ordering a game. There have been maybe a handful of game kickstarter projects that haven't ended up producing a completely rubbish outcome.

For kickstarter, you still can use history of studio as source of trust. If they delivered linux game before, i think we can trust them because they know what they need to do. This is case of Everspace 2 for example.

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Quoting: superboybotGood on itch.io.

Folding Ideas' video sums up my thoughts pretty well. IMO NFTs are basically a scourge, and as far as I'm concerned smart contracts taint the Ethereum (and Bitcoin soon I guess) blockchains irrevocably. I still haven't heard a legitimate use case for NFTs that isn't already a solved problem (digital ownership via licenses tied to user accounts) or predicated on a completely unrealistic scenario.

I'm relatively bullish on Bitcoin becoming a kind of digital gold, and monero looks slightly promising as an actual viable currency, but other than that I've pretty much made up my mind to wash my hands of this whole crypto thing.

I feel no ill will towards anyone, and I'm open to having my mind changed, but it's really incredible how infinitely bad crypto is unless you own a 400k ape NFT or you're the 0.1% who manage to sell the bag.

Bitcoin already has primitive form of smart contracts there - you can do timelocks and multisig transaction with it (it's used for LN for example), but there are no plans for implement turing complete ethereum like smart contracts into bitcoin itself (Not sure, but they suposedly has been in bitcoin long time ago, but Satoshi removed them for security reasons before bitcoin going public).

Only option for NFTs with bitcoin are second layers build on btc blockchain (RGB on development), or sidechain (Liquid).

For general purpose turing complete smart contracts have another usecase - stablecoins like tether. You can create USD, Eur,... on blockchain of Ethereum/solana/... blockchain (or on RGB layer), so you get monetary property of fiat money and transferability of crypto, which is one of good thin you want if you live in 3. world with hight inflation but without access to banking services with foreign currency. It has been used in Venesuela alogside bitcoin what I know by citizens.

For monero case, i like it, but there are problems with scalability because privacy model. Cryprography is to hard.
- Transactins are too big, so blockchain for same number of transaction need more diskspace and nodes need more power to verify it.
- Another problems are hardware wallets (ok, smartpohones don't have it). They have problems to sign transaction (Trezor model T can sign it, Trezor One does not, because insufficient system resources, there is suposedly way how do it, but they did not have time to implement it yet).

Because of this, Bitcoin with LN is by my opponion better suited also for curency usage, you have privacy (you send money via TOR like network with opened channels to target wallet without direct conection, everybody in path know only the previous node and the next node. However, it does not know the first or end node of the payment path.), LN transaction are also quick, comparable to credit card (you don't need wait to block by mined, into blockchain are writen only open and close transaction, with opened channel which you have opened for monts or years you can do milions of transaction to every other node conected to same network)

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Quoting: GuestNFTs are nothing but really really really bad non-standardized fiat currency created for free by scammers.

itch.io is exactly right, anyone or any company trying to push it is a scammer and should be boycotted at the very least.

For currency you need atleast some fungibility. NFT does not have it, so it's not curency. It's also not enforced by government - it's not fiat.
On "anyone or any company trying to push it is a scammer" I disagree, you can look at lightnite.io It use some form of NFT, and i don't see it like scam. It's Battle-royale game with items as NFTs. (When it's been on steam they had Linux listed i think... but i don't see linux listet in minimal requirments... )

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Quoting: Nezchan

Quoting: Purple Library Guy

Quoting: ArtenBitcoin alredy established as legitimate curency. It's legal tender in El Salvador. Another country reportedly make it legal tender this year.

Yeah, I heard about the El Salvador thing. So . . . does anyone actually use it as legal tender? Go into the supermarket and pay with crypto? Lay a smidgen of a bitcoin on a street vendor for some tacos?
A loopy president can declare anything he wants. Doesn't make the problems with trying to use Bitcoin for normal transactions disappear.

As I understand it, the crypto thing in El Salvador hasn't exactly been running smoothly [External Link]. Which seems to be par for the course, to be honest.

This source look biased for me. To be clear I don't say adoption of bitcoin in el salvador is perfect, government wallet app (chivo) is horibly buged, so most problems what I know are software bugs and probably we can blame rushed release, not bitcoin itself. chivo - chivo transaction work good, onchain transaction also, but Lightning Network payments (instant cheap transactions) has been horrible what I last heard from people who has been in Salvador in person(couple months back).
On other side, with different wallets for example Bitcoin Beach wallet(other El salvador wallet, mostly used in El Zonte), or any international wallet, like Phoenix wallet you don't have this problem (if you don't interact with chivo via LN).

Here you have video from youtuber who has been in el salvador and never used bitcoin before, so he is in similar situation as somebody who never used credit card and try use it in country with language barier for first time, he even not know about LN and paid everythink onchain (horibble idea, comparable to international bank payment from internet banking instead of credit card. On other side when we consider Chivo bug, maybe it's good choice, but they don't use chivo in El Zonte...)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=seB8nECSB10 [External Link]

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Quoting: Purple Library Guy

Quoting: ArtenBitcoin alredy established as legitimate curency. It's legal tender in El Salvador. Another country reportedly make it legal tender this year.

Yeah, I heard about the El Salvador thing. So . . . does anyone actually use it as legal tender? Go into the supermarket and pay with crypto? Lay a smidgen of a bitcoin on a street vendor for some tacos?
A loopy president can declare anything he wants. Doesn't make the problems with trying to use Bitcoin for normal transactions disappear.

Yes, they use it. Not everywhere yet, but you can go to some malls, street vendors, even McDonalds, or ride a taxi... It's batter chance to use bitcoin than credit card what i know.

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Quoting: ObsidianBlk

Quoting: ertuqueque

Quoting: ObsidianBlk

Quoting: Pendragon

Quoting: ertuquequeAt the risk of being boring or even worse, making people angry, I'll try to give my take on NFTs, what they are and how they have been exploited for bad things today…

^^This... using tokens on a cryptographic block chain has a use.. .just not a scammy money-making scheme that it seems to be used as these days.

I ask this in all seriousness... what use do NFTs have that would (at minimum) offset the negatives inherent in their creation and add tangible value to those purchasing them? A piggyback question would be, for whatever answer there exists to the first question, how has that not been utilized in over a year?

Let me start with a couple of basics…

First of all, the simplest analogy I could come up to explain NFTs to a friend is: Imagine Bitcoin or any other cryptocurrency, but with a "skin" to make it "unique" or different from the other ones".

Now, following that same over-simplified concept, an NFT is a "coin" stored in a blockchain… So the usefulness of an NFT depends more or less on 3 things:

1.- What cryptocurrency is being used to "mint" that NFT. The more reliable and decentralized the cryptocurrency, the more reliable that NFT could (I stress the word COULD) be.
2.- Who is creating, promoting and delivering that NFT. Again, the more "serious" and reliable the entity, the more reliable the NFT.
3.- What's the purpose of that said NFT… An NFT could be as useless as a monkey avatar, or as useful as a certificate of ownership for a house!

So let's assume all 3 points are good:
1.- The NFT is based on something like the Ethereum blockchain (Bitcoin still doesn't support the creation of NFTs, not yet).
2.- The entity creating those NFTs is a well known real estate company that is fully compliant with all legal duties in the jurisdictions it operates.
3.- Those NFTs are digital certificates that are legally bonded to a real life property (let's say a house in Beverly Hills!).

As you can imagine, for NFTs to be really useful in real life, there needs to be a legal framework supporting them, which is something that as far as I know, doesn't exists anywhere yet… but I'm sure we'll get there; with NFTs, another iteration of the concept or something different, but still based in an open, decentralized, borderless and censorship resistant blockchain.

Today's iteration of NFTs are just attempts of using a really cool technology… in the most idiotic and incompetent way.

The technology just need to mature and evolve for another 5 to 10 years, hopefully people will come around and accept that is the future.

Yes... but you are still basing NFTs usefulness to crypto currency. Crypto currency, itself, still has not gained any true functionality and that has existed for over a decade of time. The oldest crypto, (to my knowledge, Bitcoin) hasn't even established itself as a truly legitimate currency. Those few businesses that even attempted to utilize Bitcoin for it's supposed purpose have stopped leaving, for the most part, shady dealers and investors. ~Functionally~, Bitcoin is dead (and I say this as someone who has capital in the crypto)

So, I come back to the original question I posed...
what use do NFTs have that would (at minimum) offset the negatives inherent in their creation and add tangible value to those purchasing them?

From what I've been able to gather, you cannot buy NFTs without crypto (a method of obtaining an item, I may add, that's not unlike the shady practice in video games of requiring players to purchase "premium currency" to obtain a skin, booster, or other game item that developers of such games have come out and said these items "have no inherent value"). For the "average" user, this would make the process of even obtaining an NFT not worth the hassle. If as person cannot see an item and make a simple transaction to obtain it, most won't. This leaves the majority of buyers as those who already owns crypto currency to begin with, or is technologically savvy enough and willing enough to deal with the conversion process. In short, this would be like telling someone in the US looking to purchase an item from, say, Aliexpress, that they first have to go to the bank and exchange their USD to Renminbi (I hope that's right. I had to look up the name of the money in China), and only THEN can they make a purchase on Aliexpress... most people wouldn't bother.

Hypothetically, NFTs *do* allow for the purchase of some form of unique digital asset that can be transferred between (as an example I'd been given before) digital worlds such as Meta's worlds, or online games, however, this would only work if all such developers collaborated developed their games to BE inter-compatible with such content, but, seeing as that would require all participating developers to share a marketplace, I seriously doubt multiple game/world development companies will collaborate in such a manner. Instead they'd keep to their own islands, making the digital NFT useless outside of said island (much like cosmetics and boosters are already, without the need of NFTs)

Furthermore, the NFTs do not prevent digital content from being copied, or deleted. All of the digital artwork, for example, can easily be duplicated with a simple "Save Image As", for the most part... one of the biggest black eyes to NFTs, in fact, it the "minting" of such tokens against artwork not owned or copyrighted by the NFT minter and without the knowledge of such owner. This damaging much, if any legitimacy of NFTs to most.

I do not understand using NFTs as receipts for owning land, or concert tickets, given the current mechanisms do that, more or less, work just fine without the power consumptive overhead of NFT generation or their comparatively long transaction times.

So, once again... I totally understand you believe in NFTs (or, it seems you do). What use does an NFT give that has tangible value that is either not possible at present, or that NFTs do better than current systems?

Bitcoin alredy established as legitimate curency. It's legal tender in El Salvador. Another country reportedly make it legal tender this year. What you want more then country acepting bitcoin as curency?

For NFT, there are legitimate purposes for usage. For example game account for online games respecting privacy and transfeereble between servers. Right now is in development RGB, with it you can create decoupled ownership data (on BTC blockchain) and token data (in json file). You have your privkey so you can proof that you own account stored with all data on json file which you has on disk.

So with this, server get your data only when you play (your file) it and they can give you actuallisation transaction which you commit to network and also they can discard all your data when you are offline. More privacy for you. On blockchain is just 1 small transaction with hash.
Another use case is, that, you can have game with opensource server with transfer option. In this case you have offical server and also couple of unofficial servers, so you can grab youre 90lvl paladin and go to play on unoficial server. If official server trust that unofficial they can use your progress when you upload your character file or they can just use last trusted state.

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Quoting: elgatilMmm, I was wondering.. Step 2 is just placing a certain file in a certain dir so, couldn't proton take care of that? (And actually you could control which dir is it by changing the environment variable LD_LIBRARY_PATH) It would remove step 2 and 3 which are the most annoying I think.

Version of anticheat with game is compiled probably need match version of library. Don't know if there is way how proton can get version... and if some game stop updating anticheat, you need multiple libraries...

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Quoting: nullzero

Quoting: Arten

The Steam Deck is interesting, as any developer / publisher we've seen actually receive a devkit unit has been practically universally praising the device. Seeing is truly believing then.

It's called selection bias. Only developers interested in steamdeck try to get one and so they are more likely prise it. Ones who are more likely criticize it don't want it, so they don't have one.
I expect great device, but but this survey shows that our view can be influenced by the fact that we hear only positive news.

Thing here is those devs didn't buy any. The units simply poped up in their mailbox, courtesy of Valve Inc.

The bias here, is trying to figure out how many devs got it, and posted no evidence online! :cry:

They still need ask Valve for one. That is somethink only devs with interest do.

View this comment - View article - View full comments

The Steam Deck is interesting, as any developer / publisher we've seen actually receive a devkit unit has been practically universally praising the device. Seeing is truly believing then.

It's called selection bias. Only developers interested in steamdeck try to get one and so they are more likely prise it. Ones who are more likely criticize it don't want it, so they don't have one.
I expect great device, but but this survey shows that our view can be influenced by the fact that we hear only positive news.

View this comment - View article - View full comments