Well the Linux version doesn't have Denuvo (I assume), as there is no native version of it. So for games with a native port, they generally just... remove it and release anyway. Two-Point Campus and Civilization for example have it on Windows but the Linux native doesn't. I guess with Linux being a small share, they figure it doesn't hurt.

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Sadly, AI content disclaiming doesn't actually tell you how good or bad the game in question is

I don't want to just filter "bad games" from "good games"; for that purpose there are reviews and curators and various other methods.

I want to filter games that were created by using the planet-cooking plagiarism machine, because I find it objectionable to use said machine. Even if it had really good results (instead of mediocre text and uncanny valley images, both full of inconsistencies) I don't think it would justify either cooking the planet or trying to replace people by appropriating their work from the commons, much less both.

I am not a technophobe; I work in research, creating new technologies with enormous potential benefits. I am excited about several innovations. But I am not stupid enough to think that every new technology is necessarily good and positive. Sometimes people discover a new insulating construction material that seems great, but the world would be better off if we had not adopted asbestos.

View this comment - View article - View full comments

It would be less stupid if he just said that martians will preserve games as leverage against the lizard people illuminati.

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Also, Backpack Hero (which I have, great game)... it doesn't even have cards?

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Some of those are a bit questionable in their "deckbuilder" status (Ash of Gods for example describes itself as a CCG, which is a very different beast - in CCGs you make the deck outside the matches from all the cards you collected, deckbuilding is about building the deck inside the game itself). Slay the Spire took a mechanic straight from modern boardgames, but many of the later games didn't quite understand it and just think giving you cards in a roguelite makes a game a deckbuilder. :dizzy:

Also, it is a slim selection from a huge genre. Still, three of the games are on my wishlist, so I should at least consider it.

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Hmm, I wonder if the motivation for this is simple (they do not get a cut from that money), if there is some potential liability for them (after all, they are pretty lax with those things), or if there is another reason for caution (why now).

View this comment - View article - View full comments

@Purple Library Guy: I think that is in part a matter of style (in Civ we always had the warmongers and the builders, and Civ always excelled at the latter). But it is also a matter of difficulty level: on higher difficulties, first you need a very strong military early on just to survive (in fact, surviving the early wars and barbarians is one of the biggest challenges). Second, because AIs get so many bonuses taking stuff from it can be very valuable: steal a worker from city states before they get units, or try to get some well-developed AI cities, or to capture wonders instead of building them (in higher difficulties, early wonders can be basically traps if even possible to get first). Third, it is much less viable to beat the AI on some other things like founding a religion, so fewer options. (I think high-difficulty Civ is a much worse game...) But even then, to not fall behind you need to think a lot about when you can squeeze workers or settlers and buildings into the queue; people will debate a lot about whether to build two units or three before the first city or whatever the meta is.

View this comment - View article - View full comments

I think figuring out your (relative) strength is the biggest challenge in 4X games in general (I posted something about it some time ago: https://weirder.earth/@eldaking/113290119061144136) [External Link]. Without a solid grasp of not just the mechanics, but the timing and flow of the game, it is just hard.

For The Last Federation, it really is nebulous because you just get a bunch of statistics about planets and factions, very abstract and indirect. It has been quite some time since I played, but IIRC I didn't go for much personal strength, more for strong allies (usually starting with the easy/benevolent ones and strengthening them) that could weaken or conquer others... but I had lots of scares when some enemy started getting too strong and I had to address it in a panic. I think going by how many planets you have under solid control is a good metric, though not that useful early on. I think I kind of avoided combat a bit because of how weird the "turn based bullet hell" was, instead I kept working on the planets to boost/sabotage factions) a lot.

View this comment - View article - View full comments

"Why all the negativity?
Paradox interactive is a great studio."

I am a huge fan of Paradox even as a publisher (not only their in-house development studio, that makes those great strategy games). They have published many great games and genuinely helped studios in that role, and they had many positive stances. But I dislike acquisitions in general, and not just when/because the publisher is shitty. This kind of concentration of power is not good for "the industry", it does not tend to work well either for the employees or the quality of the games, the top-down interference is not good (except of course for the very top, that can drain all value from the acquisitions).

Paradox bought the amazing Harebrained Studios, that made many hits including Battletech; their first original game had a trouble development process, lots of people were laid off, the game was declared a failure within a week of launch, and then the original owners of Harebrained bought the company back but left their brilliant back catalog and their IP (including Shadowrun and Battletech) with Paradox. Mind you, these IPs were a creation of the Harebrained founders' (as FASA), which changed hands many times before they managed to secure it back... and now after putting out one brilliant Battletech game it is gone again. Not a happy story.

Here is the thing, in the last few years (after their IPO, in fact) Paradox has been moving into becoming a "AAA", doing more of the things that the bigger publishers do, buying and opening new studios, laying off more people, trying to make more mainstream games, everything really. And whenever they act like a AAA, it is shit (like AAAs generally are). What they still do well is what they did before - publish (and make) games in their niche. So I'm not happy when they try to copy Microsoft or EA or Sony and buy a few studios that are doing fine.

View this comment - View article - View full comments

I'd be definitely be interested just for being from Arcen Games, as their games are always interesting. The games don't always click with me, but they are always novel and intriguing and worth checking out if only because they are like nothing else. My favorites are certainly AI War (everyone's favorite, the big hit) and The Last Federation, but each game is wildly different.

(The dev is also quite friendly and open about stuff, and when I needed some Linux support with AI War 2 he quickly made a Vulkan build, tested and fixed some stuff, really nice support.)

But I also saw a youtuber (DasTactic) play some of it from an early version, and it looked particularly interesting. It won't be an instant buy simply because I have an awful lot of new games to play right now, but I'll definitely be trying it.

View this comment - View article - View full comments