Half of anti-cheat is making sure the environment hasn't been tampered with, and this is extremely hard on Linux by design

Ah, it's the old problem of Linux not being fascist enough

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Quoting: pete910They've never sated it will be out in a few weeks to be fair, Original release got moved due to added content that the backers wanted.

The trouble is it's taken longer than both backers and the devs initially thought!

I'm talking about Squadron 42 just to make that clear.

The release of this game was multiple times announced and then delayed again. First it was end of 2014 then beginning of 2015, then end of 2015. In October of 2015 they even had a trailer announcing the release of the campaign in 2016...

Maybe you are new to that game, so it's understandable that you don't know the full history. I was there from the very start over 13 years ago. Please stop making excuses for them.

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Yeah, I believe it when it is actually released.

We already had such episodes where they told us they where weeks from release and it will be out before end of the year. That was years ago, can't even remember how long. How can someone be so wrong? It boggles my mind.

View this comment - View article - View full comments

It's almost like the maintainers who curate a distribution repository have an important role preventing such a thing...

Repositories where anyone can release packages to the end-users may be convenient for developers who want more control over what the user gets, but it has a host of negative consequences for the user. It always ends in malware and anti-features getting distributed eventually.

View this comment - View article - View full comments

One of the foundational Diablo lore books I hear

View this comment - View article - View full comments

What happens to all the google-negative-latency-AI-super-tech now?

View this comment - View article - View full comments

I don't get the convenience argument. I own ESO on Steam. Push install, wait a little, push play. Works perfectly without any issues.

I also don't get the constant call for native clients. Do you really think they would do a good job and properly support it? There is zero downsides to using Proton here. We will get enough native games when Linux is actually competitive as a market for selling games.

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Quoting: ObsidianBlkWhy shouldn't my 20 year old disks count? I have several dozen optical disks, and, as said, I have yet to see a single one as unreadable and decades.

Also, let's assume for a moment we really have a physical storage medium that hardly has any wear. I don't know, maybe some holographic wireless storage that can't corrupt and has no contacts that can corrode.

Would anyone argue, that just because the physical product you bought doesn't get destroyed with time you should not have the right to sell it?

I think the issue we are discussing here is one of ownership. I can't understand why people are so willing to play along and just completely accept that things you buy and are by all means presented as if you buy them are not your property.

And sure, this will cause some headache for the game industry, but in the end they will adapt and hopefully not in the bad way in that they try again with such tricks to prevent us from owning the products they sell us.

Also, coming back to physical copies. They don't just deteriorate and are gone. Some of those products even gain in value over time. If you have even a semi old collection of games, it will not be hard to find at least one product people will pay vastly more for than you actually payed originally. You don't get that with digital copies, and that is a pretty good compensation for the fact that it doesn't deteriorates. Still, it should be something we own if we payed for this product.

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Quoting: g000hMy point isn't that a subscription model would be leveraged onto current games (although it isn't impossible). My point is that it will push game publishers/developers to adopt a subscription model (e.g. rent per hour) for all their new and future titles. This is something which is perfectly fine from a legal perspective, and it would allow them to get around the resale problem entirely (and not lose any profits to resale).

Valve already says that what they currently sell is only a subscription. They explicitly did this to try to circumvent the customer rights an actual license would give us. The court in france now checked this and basically ruled that what they are doing is equivalent to a license and therefor the normal customer rights apply, which means you can sell the license.

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Quoting: einherjarYes, so the reselling can not be treated the same. It is not a minor detail. If you can sell something millions of times, without it getting worn down, it is not a minor detail.
The developer must get the money for his job with a significantly lower amount of sales.

They can also create those copies at zero cost while the physical game has the biggest part of the money you pay in the actual distribution. And yet they still sell those AAA titles for 60 bucks like back then.

I'm not particularly concerned about a billion dollar industry so much that I think it ok for them to break the law and ignore consumer rights. We wouldn't accept that in any other industry either.

Quoting: einherjarBut regulating them in the same way as physical goods (that can only be sold a limited time) is also not the best idea.
Of course a lot of things can be made better - but in a smart way. And this seems not to be a smart way.
It leeds us to even more "software as a service" and monopolism.

The law already exists there is nothing really new here. You are allowed to resell a license even if you got it via digital download in the EU. Stores like Steam and all the others probably too just ignore it because they think they will get away with it. And sorry, but do you really think if we just look the other way and let them break the law they will stop pushing the other way and abandon their plans for even more control via streaming and "software as a service" they are already implementing anyway? They will do that anyway!

In the end people will not have more or less money to spend on games and if they can sell one and instead buy something else that money is right back in the system and benefits another game developer.

View this comment - View article - View full comments