That’s truly surprising.
Thanks for sharing.
Some IT guy, IDK.
That’s truly surprising.
Thanks for sharing.
Honestly, I didn’t expect that Epic would be okay with this.
It’s nice to see, and bluntly, after a game has gone through all the different stages of buying and owning, why not make it free? Makes it that much easier for nostalgia nerds to have awesome LAN parties.
I don’t think this makes up for the long list of consumer hostile things that Epic has done, but it doesn’t hurt.
The next thing I’d like to see is to have games open sourced when stuff like this happens and the game is well into obsolescence. At least someone can pick up the mantle that studios don’t want to have anything to do with, when it comes to making the game compatible with newer operating systems, or alternative operating systems (like Linux, though I think UT supported Linux), or so that it can be built for new architectures like Apple’s new arm based silicon.
There’s no profit in the game anymore, so just let people have it so they can fix what you don’t care about anymore.
Indeed. I have absolutely no way of knowing anything for certain.
I’m just screaming into the void from this hellscape we call Earth.
I’d bet that channel “members” don’t get ads for that channel regardless of premium status.
IMO, Google made premium, almost nobody bought it. So they went after adblockers, hoping that people would get premium to get rid of the ads. People most just Adblock harder.
While this is happening, one exec is peering over the fence at twitch. Where they only way to get away from ads without a pretty good Adblock, is to subscribe to the individual creator.
So they make “memberships” to channels a thing.
Almost nobody buys that either. So they go… What if, even if someone is premium, we give them ads, unless they’re a channel member.
Genius.
Paying to block ads per creator/channel/whatever, is a special level of bullshit that twitch has always had.
The system is working as expected. The companies are trying to find the best way to extract the most value from you using their platform.
I chalk most of the shit that makes teams horrible, is closely related to electron and their whole web app as a desktop app bullshit.
Buckle up, because they’re doing that same enshittification to outlook next. It’s already begun. There’s a “new” Outlook. FML.
I’m not going to defend Ubisoft here.
I will make a comment about NFCs. Basically, if you’re trying to validate a set number of items in a digital market, NFTs are not the worst way to do it. In the context of a video game, it would be that you have the NFT for, let’s say, a limited character skin, associated to your game profile/account/whatever. As long as that token is attached to your account, you get access to that skin. If you trade it out, you lose access to that skin in the game… As an example.
NFTs would accomplish that goal, while being (at least in theory) decentralized, and in theory it’s immune to errors and exploitation.
All of that being said: there are much better ways to accomplish the same with less. Any blockchain, by its very nature, will eventually become a slow, unmanageable mess because anything written to the ledger is immutable. So the ledger will continue to grow and grow and grow until it’s so large that it’s unmanageable, slow as shit, and just garbage to try to use/work with.
For shit like digital art or whatever, NFTs make even less sense. All you’re actually buying is essentially a receipt that you paid money to someone for the receipt. It’s a lot like going to a store to buy air. You pay for it, get your receipt and now you “own” some air. The only thing that proves you “own” air, is the receipt. If you lose the receipt, oh well, you can’t prove you “own” the air anymore, but you’re still 100% able to use the air, to fill your lungs, and breathe for another day, whether you “own” it or not.
The only difference with a “web3” game is that owning the NFT may give you access to stuff inside the game that you otherwise wouldn’t have.
Great in concept, horrible in practice.
I think they open sourced that recently… I should take a look.
Yep. With my dad teaching computers, we always had one in the house. I started on DOS, and I’ve used most versions of Microsoft operating systems since then.
I’ve built computers, upgraded, modified, tweaked and nerded out over low level settings and optimizations…
At this point, I can do all of that. I choose to simply buy something off a shelf because I can’t be bothered to do everything that’s needed to get my system working perfectly. Someone else has done the engineering to make their PC’s operate efficiently, so I’ll just let them do the hard work, and pay slightly more for my system so I don’t have to think about it.
Once the warranty is up, and something goes wrong, I’ll be in there with a multimeter and soldering iron to fix it if I have to…
The old RTFM technique, classic.
I’ve used most versions of Windows since 3.11 I didn’t bother going backwards because as far as I’m concerned, before 3.11, it was better to use DOS. Since then I’ve used 95, 98, ME, 2000, XP, Vista, 7, 8, 10, and of course 11.
About the only one I “missed” was NT, and I’m not unhappy about that. My notes are: 3.11 was basically just an application running on DOS, which was fine, but it’s not really improving much. Few applications supported Windows at that point, so there was little reason to have/use it. 95 was hot garbage at launch, and did not improve much over time, however it was such a drastic change from DOS/3.11 that it was the best we could have hoped for at the time. 98 was forgettable, very little improvement over 95; at least until 98 SE came out, adding USB support, which changed a lot of things. ME was fine for the most part, they put to much emphasis on making it look better without making significant improvements beyond that; however, ME was fine and stable after a few service packs.
XP was the favorite for most, I saw it as Windows 2000 with makeup. That said, the biggest improvement here was the change over to the NT kernel, something we still use today. Windows 2000 was a favorite of mine, it was visually simpler than ME/XP, but all the functionality you needed was there. It was fairly barebones but that allowed for Windows to take a back seat to whatever you were actually using the computer for.
Vista was hated, but not because it was actually bad. The problem with Vista was that the system requirements to run Windows shot up significantly with Aero. At the same time, Microsoft introduced driver updates for security, so many older devices, built for XP, that were more or less abandoned, never got drivers that met the security constraints added in Vista. Vista also launched around the netbook era, when “a computer for every child” was a thing. The hardware was trending towards less powerful, cheaper chips, while Vista was requiring much more from the hardware, creating a perfect storm of people buying Celeron systems pre-installed with Vista and having a very bad time. Anyone using a Core/Core2/first gen Core I* chip had a lot fewer problems.
When Windows 7 launched, most people had abandoned Celeron as a product, and most hardware manufacturers were distributing drivers with the extra security needed for Vista (which was also required for 7), so everything went smoothly and 7 became the next favorite. I don’t have any complaints with 7, and I would be happy to keep using Windows 7 if it wasn’t for the fact that it’s abandonware.
Windows 8 was a solution looking for a problem. This was the era of Android honeycomb, the odd version of Android made exclusively for tablets. Microsoft seemed to think it was a good idea to do the same, however, sales of tablet windows systems are fairly paltry overall, so forcing everyone into a tablet optimized interface proved to be a bad idea, they “fixed” it with 8.1, and nobody cared. I had purchased a Microsoft surface pro 3 at the time, which was pre-installed with Windows 8, and I found that it was fine, but it was both a lackluster tablet, and a fairly bad laptop, it was an inbetween hybrid that was (again) a solution looking for a problem. Despite having one of the “more powerful” pro 3 units (I think I had the second from the top SKU, core i5), it frequently overheated, making it uncomfortable to use as a tablet, and due to thermal throttling, it was not performant as a laptop. It was a nice idea, executed poorly, solving a problem that nobody had.
10, in my opinion, is the gold standard. At least, until they started loading windows up with spyware. Any tracking, advertising ID garbage, or similar, was basically the worst part of Windows 10, and everything else was essentially a return to form and function for many things. To me it was like an evolution of Windows 2000. Not many frills, and windows mostly fades into the background so you can focus on what you’re trying to accomplish.
11 is trying to overhaul your experience, and doing so badly. Control panel, apps, and even your right-click menu is being done differently… They’re pushing you to do it the “new” Microsoft way, and so far, I haven’t met anyone that prefers anything that way.
IMO, 11 is a lot of Microsoft shoving terrible options in your face by default and whispering in your ear “you know you like it like that”
No, we don’t. Fuck off with your bullshit, fuck “new” teams, fuck “new” Outlook, fuck everything you’re slapping a “new” label on. We don’t want this.
Windows 11 is the best advertisement for Linux and Mac products so far.
They probably never will.
I don’t think that’s a bad thing. We made it easier, and they’re reaping the benefits of our work.
The only issue I see is that when it breaks, nobody will know how to fix it, since we’ve abstracted all the complexity away from the users, so they don’t understand the underlying processes that need to work for the thing to function.
Other than that, it just works.
“your sound card works perfectly”
I think when the hype dies down in a few years, we’ll settle into a couple of useful applications for ML/AI, and a lot will be just thrown out.
I have no idea what will be kept and what will be tossed but I’m betting there will be more tossed than kept.
I work in tech.
My dad was a teacher, his subject was computers, at that time “computers” class was heavily programming. Basic stuff.
It seems that kids from gen x, and the millennial generation had the timing to learn the tech before it “just works”, so we’re used to figuring it out as we go, because there was no way to look it up on the internet, so we had to.
The zoomers and younger generations are largely “it just works” users, where all the basics of getting things to just plug and play was a thing. If it didn’t work it was either “incompatible” or broken. So don’t try to make it work, or you’ll be sued for DMCA related violations.
IMO, there’s a sweet spot, somewhere in the late 70’s or early 80’s to about the early-mid 2000’s when people had to know something about tech to operate it. Anyone with the aptitude for tech, who was born during this time is generally working in tech.
People born before that are generally the old school pen and paper types, and anyone younger is generally the plug and play digital era.
If course, everyone is different, so the dates are probably liable to be different depending on the area, and each person may have different motivations, etc.
My generation (early millennials) are generally known for being the “tech” person to friends/family, and ADHD; at least, as far as I can see, from my little bubble of friends who mostly work in/with tech.
I’m Canadian and can’t vote in any American election.
I hear more about Trump than I hear about all of our politicians combined.
I just don’t understand how people can get so excited all the time about this stuff. Like, being so invested in some rich assholes life that you’ll commit treason and break into Congress to wander around aimlessly?
Why are you like this? Make politics boring again.
Hey, I was going to say that.
How dare you!
I don’t mean to, I wasn’t exactly looking at a comprehensive list of steam features when I wrote that. I’m sure I missed several of steam’s very good features from what I listed.
My main point was, and still is, that the core thing that made steam stand out, has more or less stayed the same throughout its existence. You log in, buy, download, and launch games right from one really easy to use program, it manages all the particulars about product keys and saves, etc. So you can focus on playing the game rather than trying to get the game running.
There’s a ton of other really good features that steam and valve in general have introduced, and I’m not trying to diminish the impact of those things.
While other games stores are pulling crap like exclusives to their platform, and requiring dumb shit like invasive spyware “anti-cheating” rootkits, steam has kept the basic formula the same, and doesn’t restrict any major publisher from deploying something on their platform. Other developers will still delay making their games available on steam for one reason or another, but steam has been fairly neutral in what’s published.
I am aware of some exceptions, so I’m not going to say it’s entirely universal that anyone can publish anything to steam, but it’s fairly rare that steam is preventing a game from being available on the platform.
That core purpose of steam has always been good. All the other stuff is almost always also good, but the core purpose of having steam installed is the same, or better then, when steam was first released.
They were perfect “influencers” as far as I’m concerned. Not that what you said isn’t true, but I still consider them the embodiment of influencers.