Now if only they could more clearly communicate when games are playable offline.

  • @[email protected]
    link
    fedilink
    English
    22810 hours ago

    Ooh and it’s a giant yellow banner you probably won’t miss, and not some two-shades-ligher-than-the-background nonsense.

    Good job, Valve.

    • @saltesc
      link
      English
      608 hours ago

      They do this with Early Access and people still lose their shit about empty content and unfinished graphics in a game they paid $10 for.

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      English
      -849 hours ago

      Gamers don’t care

      If Valve was against this then they would block them from their store. This is avoiding legal consequences

      • DreamButt
        link
        English
        999 hours ago

        “”“gamers”“” aren’t a monolith

        Some people clearly care bc they are currently discussing it

        • @[email protected]
          link
          fedilink
          English
          108 hours ago

          Well to be fair, we’re like 1% of all gamers. Most gamers don’t give a flying fuck and will gladly buy these products anyway. So the companies don’t really have much incentive to give a shit.

          • @pressanykeynow
            link
            English
            85 hours ago

            That’s why it’s a big disturbing banner where most gamers don’t understand the text but know that big disturbing banner is bad. Will it affect the sales? Not at all. But it will raise the problem(mostly Linux anticheat) to the higher standing people in the gaming companies than before because now they require those top level managers to make a decision is it big disturbing banner or Linux anticheat.

            • @[email protected]
              link
              fedilink
              English
              45 hours ago

              I highly doubt this will do anything at all to sales. But I’m just guessing. Maybe it will. Hopefully! But I still applaud the change by Valve. I think it’s great.

              • @pressanykeynow
                link
                English
                35 hours ago

                I don’t think the point is to do anything on sales. Valve profit from sales. It’s to raise the problem so now the managers have to decide on a scale how much they abuse the players. Before it wasn’t even a problem, now it’s Valve: “maybe you shouldn’t wink wink”

                • @[email protected]
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  34 hours ago

                  Well yea, I don’t think Valve wants to nuke their own sales, lol. I think they don’t want any devs doing any funny business and abusing anti cheat. That’s my guess.

        • @[email protected]
          link
          fedilink
          English
          1
          edit-2
          5 hours ago

          Another “to be fair” - what do y’all reckon is the proportion of gamers who could define kernel? (not rhetorical)

          Edit: maybe not as good as a question as how many have any opinion on kernel-level anticheat, since you don’t need to be able to define kernel to be against the anti-cheat if you’ve heard it slows down games

        • @[email protected]
          link
          fedilink
          English
          -318 hours ago

          “””gamers””” aren’t a monolith

          That’s why some people discussing it aren’t going to do anything to dissuade the practice

          • @kopasz7
            link
            English
            147 hours ago

            Games have been buried in negative reviews for less. We can’t tell in advance.

            But implying you know, and can speak for all people who play games is just bafflingly ignorant and conceited.

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        English
        208 hours ago

        That’s fair: most probably don’t.

        I appreciate a ‘this won’t work in Linux no matter what you do’ banner on things, though.