For me it's Humankind Opendev (closed pre alpha, but they're still taking applications).
Civ VI is getting serious competition if you ask me!
Opendev is Windows only, but the scenarios work perfectly with Proton.

View this comment - View article - View full comments

It's Battlestar Galactica Deadlock on Proton.
With the latest Glorious Eggroll Proton release it now runs perfectly out of the box, with videos and all.
And man, it's the best space fleet strategy game I know!

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Quoting: omicron-bFinally finishing Pillars of Eternity. Switched to "Easy", this is clearly not my genre.

With the release of OpenMW 0.46, started my second playthrough of TES III: Morrowind with just about 7 mods. It looks gorgeous!

I was tempted to switch PoE to "easy" too, just to get faster through all those fights. Too much of always the same rock paper scissors patterned weakness/immunity, buff/debuff game. I stopped playing it altogether instead.. and theat although I do consider CRPGs my genre.

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Oh, yes, and of course there's a testrun of Attentat 1942 native Linux version planned! It's an important documentary game to make sure we never forget history.

View this comment - View article - View full comments

After a lot of Civ6 and quite some Cold Waters (Proton), I finally began to play Divinity Original Sin 2, which seems to work perfectly ootb with custom Proton-5.8-GE-2-MF.
Have to be ready before Baldurs Gate 3 arrives! :)

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Quoting: BestiaSoftware center already displays only the snap version.

Also the software center doesn't inform users about pretty much anything besides the installation progres. You don't know what additional packages are installed but ordinary users don't care. They just want the program.

True! And now Mint will tell them to inform themselves about different types of packages.

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Quoting: Bestia

Quoting: NeverthelessTo install a snap with the apt tools is like sneaking that snap and the snap tools into your system without telling you.

But the apt will tell you about installation of snapd and that it installs snap package.

$ sudo apt install chromium-browser
Zostaną zainstalowane następujące NOWE pakiety:
  chromium-browser
0 aktualizowanych, 1 nowo instalowanych, 0 usuwanych i 2 nieaktualizowanych.
Konieczne pobranie 48,4 kB archiwów.
Po tej operacji zostanie dodatkowo użyte 164 kB miejsca na dysku.
Pobieranie:1 http://ftp.agh.edu.pl/ubuntu focal-updates/universe amd64 chromium-browser amd64 81.0.4044.129-0ubuntu0.20.04.1 [48,4 kB]
Pobrano 48,4 kB w 0s (174 kB/s)               
Prekonfiguracja pakietów ...
Wybieranie wcześniej niewybranego pakietu chromium-browser.
(Odczytywanie bazy danych ... 374287 plików i katalogów obecnie zainstalowanych.)

Przygotowywanie do rozpakowania pakietu .../chromium-browser_81.0.4044.129-0ubuntu0.20.04.1_amd64.deb ...
=> Installing the chromium snap
==> Checking connectivity with the snap store
==> Installing the chromium snap
snap "chromium" is already installed, see 'snap help refresh'
=> Snap installation complete

I have snapd on my system if I didn't have it apt would list it as a package that will be installed.

What about installations from the software center (GUI)?

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Quoting: CatKiller

Quoting: Neverthelesswho think they just installed an apt package

You really should read the link that Liam gave. There is exactly one package that does that, which was widely publicised, and the reason for picking that package for dogfooding snaps is

In summary: there are several factors that make Chromium a good candidate to be transitioned to a snap:

• It’s not the default browser in Ubuntu so has lower impact by virtue of having a smaller user-base


• Snaps are explicitly designed to support a high frequency of stable updates


• The upstream project has three release channels (stable, beta, dev) that map nicely to snapd’s default channels (stable, beta, edge). This enables users to easily switch release of Chromium, or indeed have multiple versions installed in parallel


• Having the application strictly confined is an added security layer on top of the browser’s already-robust sand-boxing mechanism

as given in Liam's link.

If Mint don't like Ubuntu's packages they can maintain their own.

I did read it. I always read that blog.
Yes it's only one package, and thats what I said.
There is nothing wrong with Ubuntu packages. Why shouldn't the Mint devs use them?
Snaps, Flatpaks, Appimages, PPAs, AUR packages, proprietary software from the internet, etc, are something you should install informed with care and trust. To install a snap with the apt tools is like sneaking that snap and the snap tools into your system without telling you.
Linux Mint do not ban snaps, they give you a little more work to install them, which gives you a chance to know what they are before you have one on your system.

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Quoting: Purple Library Guy

Quoting: GBee

Quoting: Purple Library Guy

Quoting: GBeeWhat the Mint packagers seem most concerned about is their own demise. If the world moves to Snap then there will be less opportunity for them to screw with code before it reaches the end user. This is a future I can get behind

That's ridiculous. If I choose to use a particular distribution, I want the people in charge of that distribution to have control over the packages. If I wanted the packagers of a different distribution to have control, I would have chosen that different distribution. Duh.

You seem to be misunderstanding the difference between distro level customisation and packagers silently modifying and f***ing up applications in all sorts of ways for no good reason and usually without end-users even being aware. Packages being created by _developers_ of the original application (you decided to ignore that part of my comment) would avoid a lot of instability, bugs, security flaws and provide consistency in application behaviour but would not prevent distros customising configurations, themes and generally deciding the mix of default packages to give their own spin.

But Snaps would prevent all that. They're centralized to Ubuntu and can't be modified by other distros that carry them. That's the point of Mint avoiding them and hence the point of the article. If you're talking about something different you should perhaps signal that you're shifting off topic.
But in any case, no I'm not. The thing is, you're looking at things from a packager's perspective, but I'm looking at things from an end-user perspective, and as an end-user I have no real way to judge between packagers' ideas of what's a good package and Distro maintainers' ideas of what makes a good package, but I have some notion who the distro people are and basically no idea about the packagers. I don't choose between packagers, I choose between distros. So my instinct is going to be that no, I want the people I have some ability to choose between, to have the power to make alterations. Come to that, if I'm acquiring a whole system, I want the people testing it as a whole system to be deciding what's good security, not the people creating tiny individual bits in isolation. If that upsets some package maintainers, that's a pity, but too bad.

For me it's mostly a matter of trust. Like you I choose my distributions carefully, I don't like using PPAs or the AUR, I don't like using proprietary software outside a sandbox.
When I hear that snaps are packaged by someone I don't know, put on a canonical server, which uses a proprietary snapd to deliver that software to users, who think they just installed an apt package, then I'm glad the Mint devs oppose it.
Intuitively I like flatpaks morr. I use Flatpak Steam, because it's great to have one sandboxed Steam installation for different distros that solves most possible compatibility issues, but I must admit there are open questions about Flatpak/Flathub security too. How regularly are packages updated? Who maintains packages? How transparent are package contents?

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Quoting: CatKiller

Quoting: elmapul"sidestepping the actual Windows API. "
how is that even possible?

So, again, just as I understand it from reading bug reports about a game I'm vaguely interested in rather than from any in-depth knowledge, most programs will use some kind of library when they need to make some system calls to make something happen - libc or ntdll.dll, say - but it's also possible to just make system calls directly: libc and ntdll.dll need to be able to make their own system calls, too, of course. Windows and Linux both use the same mechanism for this (I think it's a processor instruction and registers?) but they use different numbers in the registers: that is, they'll both have a system call number 12, but there's no reason for it to necessarily do the same thing. In fact, which thing gets done by each number changes between versions of Windows, so the developers doing this need to check the version of Windows and use a look-up table to generate their numbers.

That makes sense now! I was confused why Windows syscalls would go through as Linux syscalls directly..
I guess some calls of those programs are tracable by the firejail program, which is able to log the syscalls it is configured to filter.

View this comment - View article - View full comments