sudotstar

I think their original intent back when Proton originally launched was to just show generic Linux compatibility on any titles if it worked with Proton and was approved by Valve. I’m not sure why they stopped doing that.

My hope, though I’m keeping my expectations low, is that since these supposed live-service games will be supposedly releasing alongside remakes of the original games the IP is based on, that if the remakes sell significantly better than the live service games it might hopefully inform better decision-making around them.

While they haven’t been controversy-free in terms of their monetization practices, Sega has released a slew of back-to-back AAA games: Persona 3 Reload, Like a Dragon: Infinite Wealth, and Sonic Frontiers, that have generally been complete, single-purchase packages (with a few questionable omissions from base game moved to DLC that I’d consider “regular bad”, but not anywhere near the level of egregious monetization seen in most live-service games).

I think that’s the rub, in my theoretical scenario, Apple is not blocking the distribution or sale of iOS applications through third-party means, they’d enforce their existing restrictions on and power over building iOS applications in the first place. Developers would absolutely still be able to distribute unsigned applications - end user iOS devices would just be unable to install them.

It sounds ridiculous to me, and as I wrote earlier, it would be a clear violation of the spirit of the DMA, but I don’t see any reason why this scenario would not be technically possible for Apple to pull off.

I’m not too sure that these actions violate the letter of the law here, even though I agree that they’re 100% in violation of the spirit of the law.

It’s been some years since I’ve put the mobile development world behind me, in no small part because of Apple’s shenanigans, but the way I understand how this might work - Apple may be required to allow “iOS software” to be installed from third party stores, but software that runs on iOS must either be signed using a certificate that only allows installation in a developer or enterprise context (which require explicit and obvious user consent to that specific use case, and come with other restrictions such as the installation only lasting for a limited period of time), or through an “appstore” certificate that allows installation on any device, but the actual application package will need to go through Apple’s pipeline (where I believe it gets re-signed before final distribution on the App Store). All certificates, not just the appstore ones, are centrally managed by Apple and they do have the power to revoke, or refuse to renew, any of those certificates at-will.

If my understanding is correct (I’d appreciate if any up-to-date iOS devs could fact-check me), then Apple could introduce or maintain any restrictions they please on handling this final signing step, even if at the end of the day the resulting software is being handed back to developers to self-distribute, they can just refuse to sign the package at all, preventing installation on most consumer iOS devices, and to refuse to re-issue certificates to specific Apple developer accounts they deem in violation of their expected behavior. I haven’t read the implementation of the DMA in detail, nor am I a lawyer, so I’m not sure if there are provisions in place that would block either of these actions from Apple, but I do expect that there will be a long game of cat and mouse here as Apple and the EU continue to try and one-up the other’s actions.

My Deck and Linux desktop regularly have shader cache updates every few days, but they’re generally tiny and finish near-instantly. I’ve never seen the behavior here of needing to download multiple gigabytes of shaders daily (and I’m thankful for it, with the frustrating data cap I have from my ISP).

I can see the use case for someone who wants a single OS install on the Steam Deck that does gaming just about as well as SteamOS does, but has a more fleshed out desktop experience (or even just a different one). The linked article goes into detail on various desktop-focused developments within Bazzite that wouldn’t really make sense for Valve to prioritize in SteamOS itself.

I expect this is simply a case of “Valve Time” on that effort. Perhaps there’s a long-term path towards more “official” SteamOS on these devices, but if there’s any area where HoloISO diverges technically from SteamOS in a way that’s not reconcilable, that’ll be problematic for offering users a “seamless upgrade”.

Long-term, I think it would be slightly more harmful to Valve’s efforts if more manufacturers started standardizing around HoloISO, so I expect that this might be a motivating factor to speed up their efforts to bring official SteamOS to third-party devices.

I am very interested in the success of this device. I have, use, and love my Steam Deck, but my biggest hopes for this form factor in the future is it using generational CPU improvements to create a more diverse set of devices, rather than just chasing higher performance.

I don’t actually play many games on my Deck that toe the line on its performance limits, I prefer to play 2D and lighter 3D games on it, while leaving the “spectacle” games for a more powerful system outputting to a much larger display at a higher resolution. I would love long-term to have a more smaller, lightweight device for portable PC gaming, and I hope that increased diversity in the market, running Linux-based systems (even if it’s all just SteamOS) will help drive towards that. I think that the pipedreams of running x86 games on Linux on ARM on a really power-efficient device, even as unrealistic as they are, are far more likely to occur if there’s a healthy market of Linux based systems, than they would on Windows handhelds given the state of Windows on ARM, and on these devices in general.

If Valve is working with Ayaneo to get SteamOS shipped on these devices, then I imagine Valve would have some level of involvement on at least the software support side, even for things specific to the device. If Ayaneo is just like shipping by using one of the existing 3rd party SteamOS installers and not working with Valve at all, then yeah I expect things to be not as smooth sailing as the Deck.

This change is interesting. The process of creating parameterized blueprints looks a little tedious, but I’m pretty sure that’s just inherent to the idea in general and there isn’t much room to make it better, and I imagine the ease of using such blueprints that are e.g. downloaded from the internet is perfectly fine.

I play a lot of Factorio in multiplayer, with a group where not everyone has the same desire to make blueprints, and we in-general resist just downloading designs off the internet and try to do everything in-house. This leads to a lot of asymmetric gameplay, where e.g. I may design a blueprint and others will use them. I think this kind of change will work well overall for that (complex train systems are now a reality) but might come with the cost of the blueprint producer spending more time faffing around with the blueprint UI.

I love the DualShock 4 and DualSense controllers’ support on Linux, but I’m not a huge fan of the controllers themselves despite exclusively using the DS4 as my PC controller. I’m perfectly okay with the layout since I grew up on the PlayStation, and in fact prefer it to the mainstream Xbox/Nintendo options due to being the only controller to have a touchpad, and both gyro and analog triggers, but the abysmal battery life on the controllers has been a frustration for my couch PC gaming setup, my fairly old DS4 controllers barely last for more than 30 minutes on battery now. The biggest thing holding me back from buying a new DualSense to replace those controllers is the fact that it, too, has terrible battery life.

I’m hopeful that Valve’s desire to make a Steam Controller 2 pans out, as I expect that such a device will also provide stellar Linux support (or perhaps already does if it ends up reusing as much of the Steam Deck’s input setup as it can), and would hopefully offer much better battery life than Sony’s attempts.

deleted by creator

Only thing I can think of is that it hides from your friends if you’ve played the game an extreme amount of time immediately after purchasing it, though if you exit the 10 day period with close to 240 hours in the game that’s gonna show that off anyways.

I’m a big fan of the series and would consider it to be my favorite JRPG series, not just for the story but because I enjoy the gameplay it offers as well.

It’s a fairly “cheap” series to try out and see if you’re into it. The entire series is a singular, continuous story, so the recommended place to start is Trails in the Sky First Chapter, which can be picked up fairly cheaply on Steam, especially during Steam sales. It’s not as long as future games in the series, and is fairly representative of the pacing and storytelling format that later games will follow (though it is considered one of the slowest-paced games in the series). Basically if you’re not a fan of Sky FC, you’re not likely to be a fan of the future games in the series either (especially given that the substantial improvements to gameplay over the series’ 20 year history likely won’t have much appeal to you).

There are also demos available for some of the newer games in the series (e.g. Trails of Cold Steel III), and while I would not recommend actually playing through those games out-of-order, they may serve as a quick/cheap way to see if the format of the games is right for you.

I will say that while the combat of the games is rarely very difficult, and the game provides difficulty modifiers to make it even easier if you’d like, that the combat system is still fairly fleshed out and quite good casually IMO, but if you’re really not into doing it even at easy difficulties, one option (PC exclusive) may be to download completed game saves and play through the games on New Game+ and completely trivialize the combat.

In this case it’s referring to the fact that the OS is built upon the same containerization technology used on cloud platforms such as Kubernetes. As a marketing tool it’s a bit buzzwordy, but it’s not about running the core OS components outside of the physical machine here.

Even if the performance is only mediocre, the gameplay will hold up. The game uses a fresh new combat system that merges action combat with turn-based gameplay, the likes of which I haven’t really seen in any other game including past Trails entries, and it’s absolutely a great time.

For the original PS4 release, Falcom released a fairly comprehensive demo that allowed you to play through the entire first chapter of the game, and carry over your save to the full release. They’ve also done something similar with Ys X which released on Switch day 1, so hopefully the Switch version gets a similar demo for both the Japanese and Western releases so you can try-before-you-buy.

I’m interested to see how the game performs on Switch. I played the Japanese PS4 version which was rough at launch but improved with post-release patches. I expect there are going to be some necessary cutbacks (no 60FPS, lowered render resolution, reduced visual effects, the standard fare) but that shouldn’t impact the quality of the game experience at all, it’s a wonderful entry and a great starting point for newcomers in a long-running series that rarely ever has those great starting points.

I think logistics management issues are a classic example of “first world problems” in Factorio, but it did feel like a pain in the butt to manually manage personal trash slots, similar logistics requests across multiple similar objects, and whatnot.

I didn’t know I needed a solution to that problem, and I didn’t expect it to be specifically in this format, but I really like what I see. I especially think the named groups will go a long way in e.g. a multiplayer Factorio session where some people but not everyone is into setting up complex logistics systems, allowing everyone else to at least understand and use the system and its benefits even if setting things up is left to the experts.

It’s unfortunate, but it’s understandable if effort needs to be focused on a single good UI widget ecosystem fully under Mozilla’s control, rather than living by the whims of the three major desktop UI toolkits they have to support, as well as the hundreds of thousands of web pages that are exclusively designed and tested against Chrome which already has been using non-native widgets across desktop platforms for a very long time. I’m not in the web dev space anymore, but I’d constantly see sites built that were incredibly dependent on the exact pixel sizes of widgets as they would render in Chrome, and would visually fall apart on Firefox, or with other zoom/text size settings.

UI design across Windows, macOS, and Linux GNOME/KDE have converged enough that it’s probably good-enough if Firefox continues down the path of just theming their own widgets with the OS/user’s color scheme where applicable, and calling it a day.

If I’m not literally touching the content I’m trying to scroll, I’ll stick to the default orientation (scrolling down moves content down). Wayland touchscreen input handling seems to handle this just fine and not couple touchscreen scroll direction to trackpad/mousewheel scroll direction.