Skip Navigation

Posts
1155
Comments
736
Joined
12 mo. ago

Mastodon: @misk@lewacki.spaceLemmy: @misk@sopuli.xyzBlocking: lemmy.world and users that are agenda posting

Opinions exclusively of my own and of voices in my head.

Autism, communism, arthitism, cannabism.

  • Measuring expenditure in nominal values rather than their percentage to GDP is silly.

  • Dude, you’re beyond help. Steam keys are a form of locking you in Steam. People are lazy, the main reason they don’t buy outside of Steam is because they like everything in one place. Valve knows this, hence their line „just resell keys” is plain malicious and you’re just doing free PR for Gabe.

    Tell me what could be the precise reason for delisting Crysis 2 from Steam? Why is developers agreement with another party any consideration at all? If Apple delisted someone because their product was cheaper on an alternative to app store would that be ok? I’m sure it would cause an outrage and they’re not even a monopoly, unlike Valve.

  • Wine is dead simple to use. On MacOS which I use on desktop there’s Whiskey, a free front-end although author of that one decided he doesn’t want to cut into Crossover sales because they contributed so much to it.

    Let Valve pretend it’s their product in their press releases but why do Linux users do this much free marketing for them is beyond me. You’re allowing PC gaming to become locked like Android/iOS for very little in return.

  • Why not filter them out? Doesn’t Lemmy have this functionality? I filter out „could” and „might”.

  • Circular logic, no? Devs have to kneecap themselves by limiting their reach to stores with 5% cumulative market share or accept everything Valve wants. Take a look at this and see what happens when a big publisher goes against them:

    https://www.gamedeveloper.com/business/-i-crysis-2-i-removed-from-steam

    EA has issued a response to the game's removal, saying that it was "not an EA decision or the result of any action by EA," saying instead that the game was removed because an agreement that developer Crytek made with "another download service" violates an unspecified rule Steam has for its distribution partners. Valve has not responded to requests by Gamasutra for clarification. An EA spokesperson provided this statement to Gamasutra: "It’s unfortunate that Steam has removed Crysis II from their service. This was not an EA decision or the result of any action by EA. Steam has imposed a set of business terms for developers hoping to sell content on that service – many of which are not imposed by other online game services. Unfortunately, Crytek has an agreement with another download service which violates the new rules from Steam and resulted in its expulsion of Crysis II from Steam. Crysis II continues to be available on several other download services including Amazon, GameStop and Origin.com."]

  • It usually means that moderates become more like authoritarians unfortunately. This particular brand will leave but their politics won’t.

  • Steam keys means everything still happens in their store, with users attached to the platform without a way out. This is not a serious answer.

    Steam is a monopoly because of their massive market share, that’s all there is to it, having irrelevant competition doesn’t matter in this case. You think monopoly = bad and therefore Steam can’t be a monopoly. That’s not how it works.

  • A third of Germans supports AFD and BSW, they probably support what’s happening in the US.

  • Go gaslight someone else.

  • If you live in a country that makes telecoms monitor traffic then those have a benefit of not requiring a VPN (because you’re not uploading anything and they usually go for those seeding).

  • You mean that people who came up with those laws, as a consequence of monopolies abusing their power, were delusional. Take a step back to think what’s more likely.

  • Unless there is a genocide going there’s little legal basis for intervention so I’m guessing NY Times is simply unsatisfied with current amounts of US interventions?

  • You’re missing the point.

    Valve can’t enforce prices across other store by mandating they can’t be cheaper because they’re a monopolist. If this part of their agreement is true then they are out of the line, in breach of law, and should be punished. Being a monopoly isn’t illegal, how Valve got there doesn’t matter. Their behaviour as a monopolist matters. It’s literally the law in most civilised countries and those laws come from the times when people didn’t simp for monopolies.

  • Scala is essentially Java so most of Java criticism applies.

  • And Valve has to remove abusive clauses from their agreements with the devs so that it can actually happen, yes.

  • If teens are banned from social media they won’t miss out connections being made there, because those will have to happen in real life. I think the takeaway here that everything is fine in moderation but having laws that monitor number of hours spent would lead to even more anti-regulatory hysteria.

  • Allegedly they can’t because confidential agreement prevents them. And they won’t move away from Steam because it’s a monopoly. Which is why this is illegal.

  • I thought only the most miserable data engineers are using it.

  • All their chips behind would likely be enough to employ thousands of Linux devs with money left to spare for a couple of megayachts still.