Quoting: Ehvis

Quoting: Shmerl... and surely not going to use even more DRMed Stadia for same reason.

As I wrote above, Stadia is by its very design DRM free.

Yes, of course it is! DRM is used to limit what you can do with goods you "have", but don't own. You never even get to "have" a game you are allowed (by the owner) to stream for a time. DRM is useless in such a situation, because you cannot capture the game by streaming it. You also cannot lose what you never had. I think it's even more honest than the restricted use of a DRMed software, that you only seem to own.
If you don't like the idea playing games you don't have, then simply don't do it!

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Quoting: elmapul

Quoting: Nevertheless

Quoting: ShabbyXDisclaimer: I work at Google (though not on Stadia), previously Eidos Montreal (Shadow of the Tomb Raider).

Games running on Stadia are primarily native. Yeap, engines you never dreamed would support Linux, now do thanks to Google.

As Stadia has its own SDK, porting from Stadia to Desktop means adding SDL support and supporting the desktop swapchains. Personally, I think the biggest hurdle with desktop support would be testing and bug fixing, as with Stadia the game is really just tested on AMD. That said, as a desktop Linux gamer myself, I'm certainly hoping this would help get us more AAA games. :) If nothing, all the open source work means better mesa, faster kernel, more advanced profilers etc which are all good for our cause.

Regarding Google and data, believe me, Google is the farthest from evil.

I really don't think of Google as evil. Amongst other activities Google collects and farms data about human behaviour. They refine it with and to algorithms. Aside from advertising this can be used for all kinds of things, some of them I even think humanity really needs to save itself and the planet.
I think we are very much driven by individual or small group progress, and we tend not to care the negative effects it can have when masses of individuals follow those goals. That's why we worsen traffic jams with egoistic behaviour, that we even hate when others do it. That's why we burn our climate driving SUVs, consuming our a$$es off and so on...
I really think we could use some algorithmic control over that human problems.
There comes the "but". Those algorithms NEED to be transparent, contestable and open source. NO corporation should control them!
Google may even be of best interests, but it is a corporation consisting of human beeings, and will be controlled by other unknown humans after them (controlled by shareholders who only have their individual financial goals).
Not evil, but potential harmful now or in the future. There is only one thing Google can do to make sure it won't be harmful one day, and that would mean make all data availlable to the public.

humans CANT parse so many data, even google is not in complete control of their algorithms, they use AI for that.

If it concerns our life, we, not just Google, should be able to understand what those algorithms / AI do(es)!

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Quoting: ShabbyXDisclaimer: I work at Google (though not on Stadia), previously Eidos Montreal (Shadow of the Tomb Raider).

Games running on Stadia are primarily native. Yeap, engines you never dreamed would support Linux, now do thanks to Google.

As Stadia has its own SDK, porting from Stadia to Desktop means adding SDL support and supporting the desktop swapchains. Personally, I think the biggest hurdle with desktop support would be testing and bug fixing, as with Stadia the game is really just tested on AMD. That said, as a desktop Linux gamer myself, I'm certainly hoping this would help get us more AAA games. :) If nothing, all the open source work means better mesa, faster kernel, more advanced profilers etc which are all good for our cause.

Regarding Google and data, believe me, Google is the farthest from evil.

I really don't think of Google as evil. Amongst other activities Google collects and farms data about human behaviour. They refine it with and to algorithms. Aside from advertising this can be used for all kinds of things, some of them I even think humanity really needs to save itself and the planet.
I think we are very much driven by individual or small group progress, and we tend not to care the negative effects it can have when masses of individuals follow those goals. That's why we worsen traffic jams with egoistic behaviour, that we even hate when others do it. That's why we burn our climate driving SUVs, consuming our a$$es off and so on...
I really think we could use some algorithmic control over that human problems.
There comes the "but". Those algorithms NEED to be transparent, contestable and open source. NO corporation should control them!
Google may even be of best interests, but it is a corporation consisting of human beeings, and will be controlled by other unknown humans after them (controlled by shareholders who only have their individual financial goals).
Not evil, but potential harmful now or in the future. There is only one thing Google can do to make sure it won't be harmful one day, and that would mean make all data availlable to the public.

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Quoting: Eike

Quoting: devnullBit confused by this.. I already don't give any credit to people who have spent very little time actually playing the game. Why can't valve use that?

There's games where you can say you'll never like it in half an hour or less.

It's also easy to fake playing time.

View this comment - View article - View full comments

This is great news! For a lot of developers it might now be the question if to release on desktop Linux instead of the question if to develop for Linux at all! It will also improve Vulkan acceptance, Linux infrastructure and Linux gaming acceptance in general!
However, I'm not ready to provide more data to Google. If you hesitated to give them your browsing behaviour, you should really really think about what's all your gaming decisions to them!
Streaming might become interesting as soon as Valve gets into it.

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Quoting: stretch611

Quoting: stuffWell, before just putting out pitchforks, we should remain objective. There are instances with games being review bombed and these reviews having nothing to to with the quality of the game. For example Metro series because Metro Exodus is an Epic store exclusive. This has nothing to to with the quality of the game and should not be taken into consideration for the rating in the store. Another example being Shadow of the Tomb Raider because it got a sale soon after release. Some other games because of some Youtuber.
Because of that, this feature might be not necessarily anti-consumer, but actually pro-consumer. So, if anyone has info which games' ratings were purged, it would be nice to know. Because then we can see if this system is used in a sensible way.

While I agree, the case of Metro:Exodus had nothing to do at all about the quality of the game. (although the Denuvo DRM part does screw up player experience and lower the quality.)

It was review bombed because of the Epic Game Store exclusivity agreement. However, as we all know, exclusivity agreements are anti-consumer.

Other than a you-tuber not getting his/her narcissistic fantasies fulfilled, I would argue that review bombs are generally pro-consumer as they notify the public to anti-consumer behavior, whether that is DRM, micro-transactions in paid games, broken or horribly programmed garbage, or exclusivity agreements.

I would argue they are a matter of force, not of quality and diversity of arguments.

View this comment - View article - View full comments

I think it's a step in the right direction. Maybe there's better mechanics to differentiate between product quality and issues with licence, dev behaviour, pricing or whatever there is to have an opinion about, but please remember a review bomb is quite destructive, and who guarantees the bombers are right every time?
On the other hand, does anyone of you believe your voice, with your special weighed out mix of opinions will be recognised from within the blunt force of a review bomb?

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Quoting: monnefSo, Valve is fighting with anti-consumer Epic Games Store by ... getting more anti-consumer?

In this category Epic wins! Not only does it market user data unlike Steam. I found it rather amusing to see that Epic Steamspy seems to be unable to stop spying on Steam and its users.

https://www.pcgamer.com/valve-doesnt-sound-too-happy-about-the-epic-store-copying-steam-data/ [External Link]

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Quoting: Tchey

Quoting: NeverthelessHaha. This serves as a recommendation to me! I feel we had this conversation once... ;-)

Hehe, yes i think, about Vaporum i guess ?

Yup! :-)

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Quoting: TcheyIt's a nice game, probably too simplistic, but i like the settings.

What i dislike however, the combats. Real time, grid base.

There is an active pause, but only for the lowest difficulty level.

I really can't get into grid based game that are not turn based. Combats always feel stupid, and even with cooldown on attacks, there is almost no depth to them.

Haha. This serves as a recommendation to me! I feel we had this conversation once... ;-)

View this comment - View article - View full comments