I never understood this one. All of those platforms, be it steam, epic,. Ubisofts defunct thing or EAs even more defunct thing, are embedded browsers with a more or less obnoxious skin we all use almost exclusively to click "buy now". All of them are overloaded with crappy, half-baked "features" nobody gives a flying toss about.
So why the heck do so many people spend the limited energy they have available to live their lives on "boycotts" and endless rants about how a game not on steam is basically unplayable for some reason.
If this game would bring you joy (which I doubt since it's Ubisoft we are talking about, but that's another matter), why deny yourself that joy because the launcher you interact with for literally less than a minute is shittier than your usual one?
If the launcher itself was of any importance to you, you'd use playnite or something and just be done with it all.
Don't whip this up to some exclusivity debate. It's not. Imagine if this was some tangible product. Would you really not buy the thing you'd really like to have just because it's sold at a store where the shelves are crap? Because that's essentially what you're doing.
This “debate” has been going on for ages now. They don’t actually mind exclusivity. They’re just mad it’s not on the launcher they use. None of them care when it’s exclusively on Steam.
Why the fuck should I care about the damn launcher?
DRM-heavy launchers have a history of spying on PC user activity, and of leading to malware infections. All well-known launchers, today, are DRM-heavy. (I would love tips on exceptions to this!)
DRM tries to control your PC remotely. There isn’t, and never will be, a safe way to do that without increasing the risks of outside malware attacks succeeding against you and your PC. In most cases, the risk increase is quite high.
Game launchers provide a trade-off between:
ease of installation and networking Vs
risk of malware infections
Each additional launcher brings a lot more risk, and slightly less convenience.
If it was just about the convenience, I agree - who cares.
Many of us have lost entire digital game catalogs, or had to rebuild our gaming rig, or both, due to a remotely hacked game installer/service/launcher. So many of us are incredibly bullish against adding one more installer/service/launcher to our gaming rig.
So then…you’re just admitting that you’re fine with exclusivity once Steam is where it’s exclusive to.
Nobody’s forcing any developers to be on any platform, and let’s not pretend you actually care about a platform offering a deal to devs for exclusivity. Those same devs are free to say no. But in that same line, Steam gets exclusive games for free. You’re fine with Valve exclusivity that doesn’t pay the devs but hate anyone else getting exclusivity although it does pay them? Interesting.
Lol. That’s a lot of words you’re putting in my mouth.
Steam offers no incentives for exclusivity. Others do. Devs choose to launch on steam and there’s nothing stopping them from launching elsewhere. Look at palworld: gamepass and steam and you know they got paid for gamepass.
Devs use steam because it’s where the people are. Steam has done nothing to try to be anticompetitive to other stores. Unlike said stores.
I put nothing in your mouth. Actually, quote the words I’m putting in your mouth and explain how. I merely showed the reality of words you typed. If Palworld was available exclusively on Steam would you care? If any other game you care about and wanted to play was exclusively on Steam, would there be a post or comment complaining about it?
Offering financial incentives isn’t the forcing anyone. You’re fine with Steam getting exclusives, so this has absolutely nothing to do with the concept of exclusives. Devs aren’t forced to take any incentives if they don’t want it.
But now that you mentioned it:
Devs use steam because it’s where the people are.
This is an incentive. Steam doesn’t offer money because they have pretty much a monopoly. And you guys will only buy from Steam, reinforcing it. You know you all of these stores are essentially just where you buy it right? I don’t even use EGS to launch games. It’s not some “you only get to pick one” kinda bullshit.
Look at palworld: gamepass and steam and you know they got paid for gamepass.
Yeah, because Game Pass isn’t looking to take on Steam. Game pass is a subscription service.
If Palworld was available exclusively on Steam would you care?
No, because that would be the dev’s choice. It’s also the dev’s choice to take a bribe from Epic and such, but Valve does nothing extra to encourage exclusivity.
If any other game you care about and wanted to play was exclusively on Steam, would there be a post or comment complaining about it?
People have and still do complain when games aren’t on GoG. Not as much anymore but it happened.
Offering financial incentives isn’t the forcing anyone
OK, we’re done. You don’t understand or acknowledge financial coercion so this is going nowhere. Byyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyye.
'tis a shame you couldn’t say what words I’d put in your mouth.
No, because that would be the dev’s choice.
That “because” isn’t actually telling the reason. You’d be fine with it, because it’s on Steam. Any kind of exclusivity is also the devs choice, and you obviously have a problem when they choose to be exclusive to a platform you don’t use.
but Valve does nothing extra to encourage exclusivity.
Apart from having the most market share, that you yourself already admitted.
People have and still do complain when games aren’t on GoG.
I never asked about anybody else. I asked about you. Or should I take it you never complained when games aren’t also on GoG?
OK, we’re done. You don’t understand or acknowledge financial coercion so this is going nowhere. Byyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyye.
Oh, damn, imagine thinking that once there’s money on the table they must take it, and then at the same time, not understanding the value of a near monopoly. Steam is literally leveraging the large amount of people that will buy the game if it’s on Steam. I even acknowledged it. Me saying that they don’t have to take it is quite literally acknowledging it. But ok, byyyyyyyyyyyyyye.
"prefering" steam is completely understandable. Boycotting a game and being disappointed and angry because it's not on steam isn't. To me at least. Regarding steam link: if you have an Nvidia graphics card, check out Moonlight!
Steam link doesn’t work for external games added into your steam library? I’m new to steam in general, but it seems weird that they’d let you add a game and not use them with link.
Steam link doesn’t work for external games added into your steam library?
Yes it does. I dunno about the hardware unit, but the android app alone works with everything you have on Steam; even the non-Steam games. Just fired up The Outer Worlds Spacer Choice edition given away on EGS some weeks back added to Steam as a non-Steam game through Steam Link on my phone.
It even straight up streams your desktop, so you can launch games not even running through Steam.
I'm on Linux and Valve and Itch are the only ones with first class Linux support. Everyone else you have to dick around with running their launchers through wine or lose features.
I don't mind that epic, etc. exist; I mind the exclusives. When Epic first launched, they didn't have payment processors in a number of countries so there was literally no way to legally play the games for people; that's super shitty.
well also you might wanna look into pirating their titles (even if you do 'own' them), as they have made it clear they dont want you to have any control over the games you buy, like access to them in the future. So say the epic steam thing goes belly up, epic closes, ubi will not see a reason to give you access on their service or steam if they move their games there.
Ja mam. Nie używałbym go jako telefonu codziennego użytku.
Generalne dzwonienie, SMSowanie itp działa.
Nie zaufałbym, że ustawiając budzik na 7 rano ten budzik naprawdę zadzwoni.
Aparat z przodu działa źle. Ten z tyłu kojarzy się bardziej z komórkami z ~2010 niż produktem współczesnym.
Soft jest bardzo często zwyczajnie niedopracowany.
Phosh działa powoli. GTK nie przejmuje się zbytnio wolniejszymi urządzeniami i to widać, chociaż GTK4 trochę się pod tym względem poprawił,
Plasma jest spoko, ale jest dość dużo ostrych krawędzi,
Najlepiej chyba sprawował się SXMO, ale czy podejście w stylu pisania SMSów w VIMie jest dla Ciebie akceptowalne to już Twoja decyzja. Jest lepiej niż brzmi (przykładowo, VIM ma małe uruchamiane gestem menu z najczęstszymi komendami, więc nie trzeba latać po klawiaturze i szukać <ESC>, :wq i <ENTER>, tylko się to w miarę komfortowo wyciąga z menu).
Szokująco dobrze sprawowało się Ubuntu Touch, ale ono również na PinePhone było niedopracowane. Nie pamiętam aktualnie, co tam nie działało, ale długo nie wytrzymałem.
Sprzętowe wykonanie jest takie, że raczej trzymam ten telefon w szufladzie a nie chodzę z nim w kieszeni. Mi się nic jeszcze nie stało, ale słyszałem od znajomych o poodklejanych wyświetlaczach itp.
Ogólnie uwielbiam ten telefon, i ani chwili nie żałuję, że go kupiłem. Ale traktuję go bardziej jako płytkę deweloperską w kształcie telefonu niż zamiennik Androida.
Moim zdaniem problem leży głównie w niedorobionym sofcie. Jak to się unormuje (a postęp jest, z roku na rok widzę, że wygląda to naprawdę coraz lepiej), to będzie całkiem fajnie.
Czekam, czekam… od czasów OpenMoko. Ale też każdy kolejny taki projekt zwiększa szansę, że faktycznie powstanie konsumenckie urządzenie, nad którym kontrolę będą miały osoby, w których rękach się znajdzie…
Pamiętam OpenMoko, i mam wrażenie, że tym razem nabrało to trochę więcej rozpędu - również dzięki projektom takim, jak Droidian czy postmarketOS, które usuwają konieczność posiadania typowego linuksiarskiego telefonu, a dodają kompatybilność z ogromem gruzu, który wiele osób ma w szufladach.
Wiadomo, nie jest to tak fajne jak wsparcie dla urządzenia w mainline kernela, ale jak się nie ma, co się lubi…
It was such a great adaptation of stealth-action, but people didn’t like that it had “Metal Gear” in the name. I absolutely adored the card collecting and deck-building, and the very deep, seemingly-emergent combos you could pull off.
Lmao someone in the comments said they were sold a used one (at brand new price) straight from the manufacturer.
Then someone replied to them saying basically, “that’s on you from ordering from the manufacturer instead of a trusted store like Amazon. I had no problems with them.”
It’s very much a gimmick. I’m 45 yrs old and was able to mess around with it at a friend’s house. It takes a lot of getting used to for it to become useful and accurate in games and will make any other game you play become a struggle. So if you ONLY play Warzone and don’t do anything else with your computer then sure go for it. You’ll need to “reprogram” your brain to use this mouse for the games you currently play and it’s really only a fun gimmick for shooting games.
IMHO: It’s just more plastic garbage and while a fun gimmick it would last about a month before becoming something you stuff in a drawer and likely never use again.
ooblets and fire watch are not difficult or lengthy games, but both were so enjoyable. i think casual games often get the short end of the stick unless there’s some online element a la animal crossing.
I spent way more time than I should have playing Dice in Kingdom Come: Deliverance.
Edit: I also just remembered the hacking system in BioShock had a very mini-game feel to it. I had a lot of fun with those too.
Strategy games also tend to implicitly have it, in that you can team up the weaker player with a strong AI player.
Or sometimes there’s also fun options, like a map where you can place the strong player into the fortified center and they have to defend against three weaker players at the same time. That can serve as a handicap, but the asymmetry also just means that it’s less obvious and therefore less frustrating, who’s better.
Generally, I’m in favor of having such handicap features, of course, but I feel like it’s even better when the game’s design is just naturally less brutally competitive.
For example, in Gang Beasts, yes, you’re competing with each other, but the weirdo controls mean that it’s never entirely your own fault when you lose, and of course, everything is just less serious in general.
Ultimately, such handicap features will break competition, too, because rather than the weirdo controls or your stupid AI buddy, you can then blame the handicap. I guess, it also helps to not take games too serious in the first place…
Lastly, I’d like to throw in the objectively best handicap: Having to play cooperatively with the weak player.
Just don’t compete with each other, but rather tackle a challenge together.
Playing it now for the first time and just recently did that, and the main story priest mission, two of the more memorable missions I’ve done in a long time and has totally sold me on this game.
The mechanics are different, and may put people off, but once you settle into it I think the controls and various game mechanics are really good.
I love Steins Gate, but the choices you make are so wildly disconnected from the consequences that I don’t think it really counts. It’s such a strange system.
I usually never complete the “extreme” challenges present in some games, like path of pain and the pantheons in Hollow Knight, or the B-sides in Celeste. I try them, but when I realize that completion will require lot of time and effort, I really don’t feel bothered enough. But I’m ok with that because this kind of stuff is optional, and it’s actually cool seeing more talented gamers deal with them
Civ Beyond Earth has the neat approach that it replaces the old “build a spaceship to alpha Centauri” with three different technological endings each with different moral implications. The game is about human transcendence so any ending is going to be about changing humanity.
The problem is that the game itself is not one of the better entries in the Civ series otherwise.
bin.pol.social
Ważne