Quoting: fenglengshunOh, yeah, I tried that when I was trying out MX Linux, but for some reason it kept failing to pull from the repo, `sudo apt update` would just keep saying error for those repo but the other repos are fine.

That happens if you use "testing" for Debian. It only works with named ones like bullseye.

View this comment - View article - View full comments

That's good. But I'd still take quality over quantity. You can ask this question like this - are there more Linux games coming out that you want to actually play than before? In my personal experience - it's less. But I also get that this point can be pretty subjective.

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Looks like availability is starting to improve:

https://www.newegg.com/sapphire-radeon-rx-7900-xtx-11322-02-20g/p/N82E16814202429 [External Link]

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Quoting: whizseI was curious what the numbers was for GOG compared to Steam, and there was actually quite a dip for new native releases during the last year:

60 2022
85 2021
112 2020
98 2019
109 2018

Note: This only counts new game releases for a particular year, not titles newly released on GOG.

I think this reflects more on the state of GOG and their lukewarm appreciation of Linux gamers and developers rather than the state of (native) Linux gaming.

Interesting. How did you crunch the numbers for it?

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Quoting: Liam DaweMore rare based on what? SteamDB clearly shows more Native releases than ever last year.

Really? I guess meaning new games I cared about / was interested in then. Just a subjective feeling that less and less Linux games fall into that category, while there were more not so long ago.

I think last native Linux game I bought was Black Geyser: Couriers of Darkness.

UPDATE:

To be fair though I have a bunch in the wishlist like new Return to Monkey Island.

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Looks pretty cool with fluid pixel art animation. And developer caring to release it for Linux is good! This seems to become more rare these days.

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Quoting: LightkeyRead what you wrote again. Are you really not seeing the similarities with arguments told over the years on why you should not use Debian stable?

No, but I'm not going to waste time repeating the explanation.

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Quoting: LightkeyYes, by using a different repository, meaning not using Debian stable's version. Why do you do that? Because Debian stable is the problem. If they provided patch-release updates themselves, you would not need to do that.

I just explained above why. "Release" version of Wine is not more stable or useful than development version in the vast majority of cases. I'd argue it's more buggy and less useful becasue bug fixes and features all accumulate in the development one.

And sure. Debian does ship some stuff for stable like backports, but WineHQ repo works for that the best becasue it's focused on Wine and kept up to date in a timely fashion.

Not that I'd recommend anyone using Debian stable for desktop anyway, but that's besides the point.

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Nope, because Wine version doesn't need to be tied to Debian flavor, as I already explained above. You can run same latest Wine on all types of Debian if you are using WineHQ repo for it. That's the main point. Using one from Debian itself is pretty impractical in stable, and often delayed even in testing. WineHQ in contrast update their repo as soon as new versions come out.

View this comment - View article - View full comments

I'd argue that most of the time it's pointless to use Wine "release" version, not Debian stable (or any other flavor of it), unless you have some rare use case. Wine's "development" version is a more practical tool to use generally.

View this comment - View article - View full comments