redeven

joined 2 years ago
[–] [email protected] 4 points 1 month ago (1 children)

Saying full source code leaked is a little wrong.

Plugin was always open source, and all plugins for that framework are required to be open source by the framework's licensing.

Doesn't change the fact that once one person did it, the code was available for anyone, though, you're right.

[–] [email protected] 74 points 11 months ago

StS2 was being developed in Unity iirc, and they moved to Godot for that new game (and possibly also future games?).

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago

That's a transfer within the platform, very different from the scenarios I described. There is no method supported by GOG or Steam to transfer a game to a competing platform.

You can't open a support case and tell them "sorry I actually wanted this game on GOG, can you transfer it to my account there?". At best you could ask for a refund, obviously if you've played the game enough you wouldn't even be able to ask for that.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago

But that wouldn't give you a Steam copy, which is the scenario I was describing, along with the inverse mentioned in the original comment. There is no method supported by GOG or Steam to transfer a game to a competing platform.

Also in your case, the receiver would only have that one offline installer, the game wouldn't be in their GOG library, and they wouldn't get future updates.

[–] [email protected] 54 points 1 year ago (6 children)

There is none in the way of a transfer. Neither Steam nor GOG will give you a copy of the game in exchange for another platform's copy, nor give you a copy on a competing platform in exchange for theirs.

provided the technical protections measures used by the Game support such transfer

This boils down to if your method of ownership supports it, you can do it. Neither Steam nor GOG support it. A physical disk copy would support it, for instance, so you'd be entirely allowed to transfer ownership of your physical disk copy of the game.

[–] [email protected] 10 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

Also missing Steams regional pricing, which would be very hard to guesstimate but for reference in the LATAM/MENA regions, it's like $13.

They still made a shitton of money mind you but yeah, a bit lower than estimated here.

EDIT: Also in some countries, the Xbox/MS price was like $1 so again, numbers could be lower.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 1 year ago (4 children)

You can never truly know about almost any online service, you kinda just have to take their word for it, do some research, and pick the option that best matches both the performance and philosophy you're looking for.

[–] [email protected] 21 points 1 year ago (1 children)

That's exactly what this is. It's ARK meets BotW plus pokemon, but the pokemon actively help around your base, you don't lose them permanently when they die, and you carry them in their pokeballs. And it doesn't run as dogshit as ARK proper, so that's something?

[–] [email protected] 3 points 1 year ago

That would require the VPN service to keep track of users' usage and be able to match traffic to user, which most (or most of the big ones at least) very specifically, very on purpose, explicitly say they don't do, which would be really bad for them if it turned out to be false.

[–] [email protected] 6 points 1 year ago

Yeah I sure hope they've learned from NMS and specifically underpromise and overdeliver, but most nervousness can be explained by him just being an introverted dork. I can relate.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 1 year ago

Steam's price settings page already has a very convenient Recommended Prices button that sets your game's price to what Valve estimates would be okay for that region. For most devs, that's perfectly adequate. Valve already did the homework so devs don't have to.

Publishers that would want to charge more would likely just set the USA price anyway and forgo regional pricing.

And if you want to charge less than the recommended price, while appreciated, why?

[–] [email protected] 16 points 1 year ago

That's exactly the why. Whenever a peronist presidency fails (which is... all of them for the most part), people will vote for the "whatever's not peronism". It's akin to people in the US voting "not rep". You can't think of this as right/left, it's "populists you know that never fix things, vs someone else that might be a nuclear bomb on the economy and everything else but current status quo is already a guaranteed death sentence albeit slower so might as well try something new". That's the pendulum swinging hard in the opposite direction, people don't vote for the status quo when in desperation and crisis. This time it's just more extreme than usual. It doesn't help that there's not a single actually good option that you'd say "yeah, I can live with this" available.

view more: next ›