Me too. And I even purchased the official proprietary dongle from Microsoft and play it wireless. Why not Bluetooth? I don't like Bluetooth, as I have bad experience with it in the past and would need a dongle for it anyway. Otherwise, the controller works very well with Steam and with non Steam emulators. Microsoft knows how to make good controllers, I give them that.
But on the other hand, I wonder how it is to have a PS5 controller. First, Sony has open source drivers for it and they are included in the Kernel I think (tag me wrong, if it's not true). Plus it has some features, which the Xbox controllers do not have. I'm very curious, but the prices for new controllers are so expensive!
Cities: Skylines II is a next-gen title, and naturally, it demands certain hardware requirements. With that said, while our team has worked tirelessly to deliver the best experience possible, we have not achieved the benchmark we targeted.
Then why the hell do you release the game? So it's another rushed game and that is you can blame the devs for. That is what upsets me personally the most from all those drama.
It's even worse if you look further down on the other unofficial figures list at Marvel's Avengers. It nearly costed as much as Red Dead Redemption 2 (also unofficial numbers). My assumption is, that the license is in these costs included and why it balooned it.
In the past I have used Lutris for itch.io and Humble Bundle (and GOG), plus the additional games provided through Lutris scripts itself. So I would use Lutris over Heroic, as it supports itch.io and Humble and for the familiarity I already have with the software.
I know about Heroic, but I refuse to support a company that is so much against Linux. They purchased Rocket League and took away the perfectly functioning Linux version back then (and made it unplayable for a while for me). Why would I pay Epic Games money, if they don't support Linux, while Valve actively pays developers to program and help the Linux world of sides?
I'm not interested into Heroic Game Launcher. It does not address the problems I have with Epic and does not support everything Steam has, when I purchase it on Epic Games.
And yet the games on EGS are not cheaper, even if they are exclusive, taking the exclusivity deal and have less to pay to Epic Games. They still cost as much as on other platforms. So no, publishers would not sell the games for less, even if they could, even if it's a viable option. So exclusives does not solve this issue with pricing at all. The thing people "hate" is, that Epic forces exclusivity, taking the option to buy on their favorite platform/store, without giving the player anything in return. It's the same price. These deals incentives the publisher, not the player to sell/buy the games on the Epic Games store.
In example Epic does not even support Linux. Why would I pay money on their store then? On the other hand Valve actively developed and improves gaming on Linux; improving the situation against he Windows gaming monopoly. I would have supported Epic Games to build an alternative, but if the alternative they provide is like this, then I am not interested into it. I want to buy and play on Steam, because it is better. From my perspective, another game goes exclusive to Epic and I have to wait. If the game does not come to Steam, well, there is plenty other to buy and play for me. My money and time is limited anyway.
Amazing that they even write an entire article, because a Wii U was sold. I had to check the date if this is April Fool's day. It's a retro console and maybe they wanted save it. Or want to download roms to play for free on it (as the shop is not supported anymore) for authentic experience, instead emulating it. It was probably very cheap too.
The Anti-Lag software from AMD seems to get flagged as some sort of cheating from the Anti Cheat software by Valve, as it tempers the Counter Strike code. In other words, its not compatible. AMD should have tested and worked together with Valve, before shipping the update. It's not to blame Valve, because the Anti Cheat software works as intended, but AMD, because they did not work with Valve before launching their software.
I didn't consider this to be intentional. But given that part and context (Valve loves to make jokes), this could be it. Either it is a typo or an intentional joke, which is also likely.
My first instinct was it might be a function on the server that calculcates the years passed dynamically from today. A quick look with Wayback Machine showed this number 22 is hardcored into the webpage. So the question is, what that means. Obviously it cannot be 22 years ago from the time of writing the article. Valve didn't exist in 1987. Quake came out in 1996 and then someone did the Team Fortress mod for that game. Which Valve created the standalone game Team Fortress Classic a few years later. And Team Fortress 2 came out 2007 (it wasn't Free to Play back then).
Or do he refer to some ideas written on paper, but was not able to create a game with it back in the 80s? Or it's just a typo and I over analyze this. I need help. Medic!
An individual review does not matter too much (unless it has good text), but an overall score can give a hint. In example if a game gets a lot of flag from the users of recent reviews, than something is going on. It's always good to have a way of user reviews alongside the media outlets. You can even see if the game got for free (on paid games) and how long the guy played it at the time of writing the review. And it should incentivize developers to work on the game. Better than having nothing, like on Epic Games. User/Player opinions are not welcome there at all.