The closest to sexuallity the character I’m playing at the moment can get is necrophilia (gay, straight, group sex - up to the player really) and I need to abuse the engine a bit and use my imagination.
Granted, in single player Project Zomboid there aren’t any other living humans.
Over three decades of gaming and almost as much of software engineering means I’m pretty weary of things with unecessary dependencies on an external 3rd party, because they’re bound to stop working when that external 3rd party decides to stop supporting it and/or goes bankrupt.
In my experience this is not a “might happen” thing, it’s an “it always happens” one.
(This was actually a well discussed subject around Steam back in the day when it first came out: all games with DRM that depend on a server on the Internet maintained by a 3rd party will sooner or later stop working when that company doesn’t feel like supporting it anymore, and this is inherent to that DRM architecture rather than Steam specific)
I would hardly call “dying on a hill” to prefer to not be dependent on some external company’s mid-level manager’s decisions about what’s “outdated” for stuff I would like or need to keep on working.
So far it’s just a warning from Steam that it will happen on the 1st of January 2024, and it’s definitelly not an issue with Windows: Valve is chosing that the Steam launcher will not be supported in a specific Windows version anymore, and because most games bought via Steam check with Steam on startup in order to start - even when that’s not at all required by the game itself - it might mean (depending of how they do it) that games will simply refuse to start even though the game itself was and still is 100% compatible with that version of Windows.
I am waiting to see what happens, since we’re not yet at the 1st of January (it’s for 2024, not 2023 - sorry for forgetting to point it out)
This is about games that check with Steam when they start to see if you’re authorized to launch them, even though it’s not the game itself that needs anything from Steam, and Steam is just the DRM layer.
Steam says they will stop supporting the Steam Launcher for Windows 7, so does that mean only the application frontend stuff (the store, downloading of games you bought and so on) or does it also include the components used by games with Steam as DRM to check if you’re authorized to run them?
I suspect it’s the latter (since Windows 7 is now all of 5% or so of the installed base and the legislation about digital purchases is crap so they’re not forced to refund your for removing your access to the games you bought, so they could get away with it), but hope it’s only the former.
It would be hilarious (in a near insane wierdly laughing kind of way) if I had to use a pirate hacked steam DLL to play my own games from Steam.
You don’t even need one for GOG - GOG Galaxy is totally optional and you can download absolutelly run of the mill offline installers for all games on GOG which do not require the installer or any network access, and you even keep the forever and ever (so all your old games are still installable and run on an old gaming computer with the old OS, so long as the hardware hasn’t died).
Steam will stop working in Windows 7 from the 1st of January.
So decades of games that run perfectly fine on older computers (some lauched as little ago as a couple of years) will stop working if you got them on Steam.
Meanwhile in GOG you can get offline installers which will keep on working forever and ever in the hardware and software the game is compatible with.
Have Steam = be forced periodically to update your computer to keep on playing something you’ve had for ages. (Mind you, the workaround is to use Linux to play steam games, but people should not be forced to install it and deal with it just to play games from the previous generation - which are still fine as games go, since the gameplay is great and the additional eyecandy for more recent hardware does little to improve gameplaying fun - and in fact are not forced to if they got the games from GOG).
You most definitelly traded something quite big for the moderate convenience from Steam, it’s just that you pay it in a delayed way and think “this is great” all the way till then.
The launcher (GOG Galaxy) is entirelly optional, so I don’t use it at all and just download the installers for my games (and keep local copies in an external HD in my NAS).
It’s one thing to bet “$50” on “it’s going to be fine” like lots of gamers did after what EA did with this guy at the helm, it’s a whole different thing to bet “my company and livelihood” on “it’s going to be fine” after what Unity did with this guy at the helm.
Unity is in B2B, not B2C, so the stakes are way higher for customers and so are the guarantees that customers require to keep on doing business with Unity after such an outrageous attempt at screwing them.
The incompetence level of the Board of Unity must be trully world-beating given that they’re still acting as if the stakes for their customers in trusting Unity again were anywhere near the same as the stakes for teenage gamers to keep on buying games from EA after being basically scammed.
There’s going to have to be some ironclad legal guarantees that this will never happen again and a purge of the Unity Board before at least those customers with the most to loose (i.e. the ones with successful games, either paying Unity directly or indirectly by using their Ad network) walk back from their decision of protecting their businesses from future similar actions by the management of Unity (such protection being mainly ditching Unity for future or early-stage projects).
Or taking advantage of that happenning with the competition, to enhance profitability.
Make money is the point of pretty much all companies, and financially there are only 2 thinks stopping them from upping their prices:
If there is competition it will lead to losing customers (though thinks like branding subvert this quite a bit) which means the money they make with higher prices might actually be less.
If prices get too high people will choose the “do without” option.
Anyways, the point being that if there is a broader shift in pricing in the market, even companies that are not under the same financial pressures to up prices will still do it as the 1st of those price limitation is relaxed so they can make more money.
You’re presuming the contributors to Lemmy are just the same in their choices of gaming as the broader market.
It doesn’t take that much reading of posts in Lemmy to conclude that it’s heavilly biased towards adults, techies and lefties.
In Statistics you can only make presumptions about a subset of subjects from statistical distribution data from the whole universe of subjects if the subset has been randomly selected, which this one most definitelly hasn’t - if only because of the “Reddit migration” Lemmy is filled with people with a certain kind of mindset (the ones for whom the actions of the Reddit CEO were displeasing enough to make them want to move and who actually had the will to do so) which isn’t at all the average person’s behaviour (the “average” just stayed there) plus even the Reddit population was already not representative of gamers generally (older in general).
The general market share of GOG might give you a hint that here too it’s likely going to have fewer customers than something like Steam, but judging by comments I’ve read here it’s probably more than 2%, at least amongst commenters (no idea about lurkers).