That you have to decide for yourself, and it probably also depends on what the bonus is. Functionally they are bribing you to choose the worse choice for you. The bribe might be worth it. If the game turns out payable and stable, it’s all good. If it’s a buggy mess, unfinished or you need to wait for like 5 patches anyway, was it still worth it?

To me there are also very few games that I need to play the moment they come out. I probably can’t finish my backlog of games in my life time as it is, so a few days or even months wouldn’t change much for me. Is rather wait and not fall into the marketing trap of “but free stuff”.

They actually so this quite often

For me personally an ad is when I’m being sold something. I can’t be sold something that is free and open. So someone showcasing their paid (but self hosted) service is an ad. Someone telling me about their (open) project is not.

And when someone wants to use either and asks for help, is also (obviously) not an ad. Unless we see a flood of accounts posting trivial questions about a paid service to draw attention to it, but I kinda doubt it.

While I’m fine with people wanting to self-host stuff with closed software (this includes Windows and Plex, btw), I personally am not interested in having ads of any kind in the community.

To me self hosting is about controlling your data. While I wouldn’t use proprietary software myself for this, I just want to make it clear that I’m fine with people asking for help it advice about it. Just not ads, of any kind.

As always “it depends”. Especially with frequent and deep sales it highly depends on the title. But given that it has to exist on both platforms for this to even be an option to begin with, it might be true more often than not.

This might also be an additional consideration, that selling titles is an option for physical PS5 titles. Assuming the discs can always be sold and copies aren’t tied to your digital account anyway once you play them.

I use arch (kinda), and has zero issues. It was a problem if you used unmaintained packages from arch, as adopting them and contaminating then was the attack vector. Using someone that’s unmaintained is always kinda questionable, so instead I’d just manually install that instead (it shouldn’t change if it isn’t maintained anyway).

Anyone who pre-orders a digital product that can’t actually run out of stock is a true mystery to me. Just wait and see. If you’re I’ve of those eager to pay this, you’ve already waited literally years. Add a few days, see if it’s actually playable and not a buggy mess.

Also very unlikely, as (unmounted) network shares are accessed very differently from Windows and from Linux.

But maybe the right developer was working in that area of the code for a small fix or something, and happened to see what the issue was on Windows and knew how to fix it.

Can’t be, since it’s labeled as a Windows bug and the Linux challenge is obviously not on Windows.

I do appreciate the ability to download a fully offline installer from gog and the requirement that games be drm free. But people keep making statements similar to yours as if steam games have to include some form of drm. There is no such requirement. Steam can simply act as a downloader and patcher. Integrating stream services and failing to start if there is no steam or the active account doesn’t own the game is completely up to the developer.

So if they have a drm free build on gog, but the steam hype includes drm, that’s cause the developer actively decided it should be like that.

Popular game examples that do not include any drm in the steam version are Factorio and (the original) Kerbal Space Program. Once downloaded, you can freely copy the installation around, and just start the exe. These games start just fine.

The service part only applies to copies sold that include steam keys and therefore use the steam-API related things (workshop, cloud saves). I haven’t read about this specific case in detail, but as long as that use of steam for copies sold is part of what they wanted to leverage but essentially not pay for, that’s obviously bull.

This honestly is somewhat unexpected and I had to re-read the comment I replied to to understand it correctly, hence my misunderstanding of that aspect. It’s unexpected cause ubisoft in particular for the longest time had their own “store” and games required at least their own launcher. I haven’t played Ubisoft games in at least a decade, so I don’t know/remember if the games reuired your own ubi-account, or if the games relied on Steams systems (workshop/cloud saves/…). I would’ve assumed no, and that they only use it as a downloader cause players essentially wouldn’t buy it outside of steam (or at least not enough).

Top be clear: if steam allows copies of a game listed on steam to be sold at an arbitrary price as long as that doesn’t include a steam key, this is perfectly fine. Actively thinking about it now I would assume it does, as I’m pretty sure I bought games without steam keys for less than the listing on steam was.

if you have a separate non-steam version you can charge whatever you want.

This is the part that was unclear from the original comment. If that’s in fact the case, that’s obviously fine (and different from the Amazon case).

why wouldn’t they?

it’s called “competetive pricing”. If I’m a customer and have a steam account holding most of my games (like most PC gamers), why would I even consider buying it anywhere else if it isn’t even cheaper and now I got games in like 3-5 stores with at least 2-3 launcher/downloaders/apps. No, this most likely won’t make them more money but much much less with fewer people buying it there.

Amazon got slapped with a substantial fine (in the EU) for having basically the same “rule” in their contracts, that forbid cheaper listings elsewhere. So yes, in the EU hanging that rule is illegal. But if it applies to digital licensing is another matter.

You do know you’re only renting access to the game with a one-time fee, not buying it, right?

Edit: the original comment left it unclear if the price rule only applies to copies sold that include a steam key, or if copies that work completely without steam can be arbitrarily priced. If the latter is the case, it’s obviously fine. If it includes any game version, it isn’t OK.

What would be the point in this PC parts economy? There would be like 7 people buying it.

The specification reaches is 1.0 release. It can now be implemented. Until this can actually be used and I’m a consumer friendly easy will be years. Not to mention when hardware acceleration will be available. We only relatively recently got that for AV1.

Any reason it’s not using zellij but still tmux? I thought this use case was basically what zellij was made for.

To be clear, I’m seriously asking, I don’t really use the terminal to host fully fledged applications/screens

Captain of industry

Genre: Factory automation

Absolutely fantastic game

Predecessor also works (3rd person moba, free to play).

It uses easy anti chat, but the existing Linux compatibility in that is clearly turned on, which isn’t to common unfortunately.

Didn’t pebble release a smart ring? I don’t know the price, but from what I understand their newer stuff (since the relaunch) is either fully or mostly open source.

I don’t know if it includes the sensors you want though.

I sure haven’t, and won’t. If that’s what their leadership wants, I won’t touch it with a 10 foot pole. There are many other games, I don’t need to play this particular one that badly.