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

  • ad_on_is@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    1 day ago

    I do agree with the part where software moves, dependencies yada, yada… I’m a developer myself.

    But… this is different. They eliminated a perfectly working game, where they didn’t have to invest a minute of labor to get it working on Linux. The only thing they had to provide was the .so-file (for EAC) when publishing to Steam… Valve did all the work to make EAC compatible on Linux, yes, on user-level… but still… it fucking worked.

    Punishing an entire userbase, because other assholes (assumably) used Linux for cheating is discrimination. Even if there were no cheaters at all… it’s still discrimination… because it used to fucking work.

    • theneverfox@pawb.social
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      17 hours ago

      Oh no, I totally agree with you that this is gross behavior - I just think your rule is too broad.

      So we need more focused rules and mechanisms. I think disclosing anti-cheat on the store is a good mechanism, I think forcing them to provide previous releases is a good rule. That obviously doesn’t cover nearly enough, but in the current gaming environment I think it’s a good start