You can now easily run the Epic Store on Linux with Lutris, Epic suggests applying for a grant

Quoting: tonR

Quoting: GuestOh, and Valve can still within that limited time say you're abusing the system and stop offering refunds. I can't go buying 100 random windows-only games and then ask for a refund on all of them. So there are conditions that apply.

So at the end of the day, we as consumers should read the super long wall of texts named EULA/T&C.

But I know, not many people normally read those texts... Unless if you're a lawyer.. :D

Seems to to have no consequences right? :)

Quoting: Purple Library GuyYou're making an unwarranted assumption: That words have no effect. Ask the multi-billion dollar advertising industry about how true that is. [...] So if there is a corporation, and it does things I dislike, so I speak ill of it, and some people agree with me and refrain from doing business with it, that was not pointless. The extreme case is the boycott, but negative buzz has hurt plenty of companies in the past. So you're quite wrong, it's not pointless at all.

I could've been more clear, so you don't get that impression, but there's a difference between speaking ill and constructive criticism. I prefer the latter, because speaking ill not only doesn't guarantee a positive reaction, but it can alienate people, like we've seen CD Project Red and The Witcher 3. Criticism should be done tactful and mindful, at least so we don't burn our bridges.

Quoting: Purple Library Guy[...] it's always possible that you have bad motivations, but I have no particular evidence of it being so, and even given some I would give some benefit of doubt if the evidence wasn't good. I explain this because despite getting on the high moral horse, you don't seem to be doing that, you are instead getting personal and I don't appreciate it. So no, I don't forgive your sarcasm and would appreciate an apology for it, especially since your sarcasm seems to be the result of working hard to negatively misconstrue what I was saying.

I don't have bad motivations and there's no reason to assume I worked in any way to misconstrue said things. Maybe you will also clarify some of the thoughts that you feel I misinterpreted.

Quoting: CybolicI've been running Linux as my main OS since 2000 and I don't remember Valve ever being bad-mouthed in the Linux community.

It's too old to easily find links to the forum/reddit posts I had in mind, but many Linux users wanted Steam on Linux and the topic raised different points of view, eventually leading to Richard Stallman saying that (paraphrasing) it's not good, but still better than running the games on Windows. But of course what RMS says doesn't prevent purists to bad-mouth closed-source software and its creators, which is what I referred to.

Quoting: CybolicI don't see anyone's bashing Epic for "a" business decision or is targeting their lack of Linux support, but looking at the company's practices in general, there's certainly enough to criticize - just like a large part of the general, non-Linux gaming community is already doing.

There's shaming (22 likes so far) for the client not being released for Linux. And there's also negativity around EPIC's invitation to Lutris for financial support - which I assumed, in the context of the news, that it wouldn't be interpreted as any other kind of support.

Quoting: CybolicSure, but there's a difference between wanting money and actively acting against the consumer.

True, but then where's the criticism for Valve's poor maintenance of sold games? There are plenty that won't run at all, or properly on newer versions on Windows without tweaks that the users post in the Steam community. GOG is much better than that. But GOG still has DRM games on a platform they claim is focused on DRM-free games. This is indeed a place for the EPIC news, but some of the posters here behave like others don't do anti-consumer stuff.

Quoting: CybolicThey aren't. Lutris added support for them, not the other way around.

By support I meant EPIC's invitation to Lutris for a grant. That's pretty much being open to support the community in the effort of making the EGS client work on Linux. And whatever anti-consumer stuff they do, being open to support the community early on is still a good sign that things can improve. That's why I'd rather like to see constructive criticism, acknowledgement of the positive news and maybe a courteous encouragement towards EPIC to be more consumer friendly than the kind of drama we see here.

Quoting: orochi_kyoI dont recall anyone on Valve saying "Linux is not good". Now not even Epic is being bad with Linux, they just dont care.

I mentioned above what I referred to, in my reply to Cybolic.

Quoting: orochi_kyoThose people there steal, so I steal, those people there murder so I am a murder, these kind of arguments are just too old.

Even in this era of radical capitalism, some companies respect the environment, some pay good money to their employees and left them go to home at 5:00PM, it seems that you rely on your "everyone else do it, so" argument, to justify how shitty Epic is.

I didn't say nor imply that. I don't like anti-consumer practices but I pointed out that every store deserves its share of criticism. But it helps if we do it politely.

Quoting: orochi_kyoPragmatism is not a word that describes you. I dont know why you almost write a wall of text when you could only resume your reasoning in the old argument that "one just have to follow the trend, the status quo"
There are people who goes according the status(you) and others who try to change it with little things as not installing or buying games from companies like Epic. Maybe things will not change today, but it will change eventually, [...] but Im not installing this and when Valve or Gog or anyone else does shitty things, I go to their social media and tell them directly, not wasting time playing the pragmatic guy who thinks everything is shit and nothing can be done about it.

You attribute me things that I didn't convey in any form. The fact that some people are ranting about EPIC's bad consumer practices doesn't take away from the fact that I dislike the very same things but I just use a different tone. Besides, I didn't even encourage anyone to get anything from them - even for free.

My take on this is that criticism is important and it's better when it's done well. Letting them know why, even on a regular basis, is something we should do. Buying from them is everyone's choice, although nothing sends a clearer message when the sales are low as long as the criticism goes on. But it's still in our best interest to do it in a civilized manner.

Quoting: Purple Library Guy

Quoting: orochi_kyo

Quoting: kneekooMaybe some people don't know or have forgotten that Valve was bad-mouthed in the Linux community before they worked on a Linux client.

Any source of this, because I dont recall anyone on Valve saying "Linux is not good". Now not even Epic is being bad with Linux, they just dont care.

No, the other way around. kneekoo is saying we used to badmouth Valve back before they made a Linux client;

No, what I said is clear. Maybe read it again.

Quoting: kneekoo

Quoting: CybolicI don't see anyone's bashing Epic for "a" business decision or is targeting their lack of Linux support, but looking at the company's practices in general, there's certainly enough to criticize - just like a large part of the general, non-Linux gaming community is already doing.

There's shaming (22 likes so far) for the client not being released for Linux. And there's also negativity around EPIC's invitation to Lutris for financial support - which I assumed, in the context of the news, that it wouldn't be interpreted as any other kind of support.

No one is "shaming" Epic for not releasing the client on Linux. Where are you getting that from?

But I'd happily shame them for their exclusives. Or for throwing peanuts at the Lutris devs for doing their "Linux support" for them. I sincerely hope that the Lutris grant is to the tune of the $2M they threw at the Phoenix Point devs... but I doubt it.

They deserve a bit of shame in my opinion. But you're doing your best to defend them, which is odd, because you keep claiming to understand that they're bad.

There's other pieces in your latest mega-reply I disagree with, but I'm tired, and this discussion has run its course, I think. I do my honest best not to reply if it continues!

Quoting: kneekoo

Quoting: Purple Library Guyit's always possible that you have bad motivations, but I have no particular evidence of it being so, and even given some I would give some benefit of doubt if the evidence wasn't good. I explain this because despite getting on the high moral horse, you don't seem to be doing that, you are instead getting personal and I don't appreciate it. So no, I don't forgive your sarcasm and would appreciate an apology for it, especially since your sarcasm seems to be the result of working hard to negatively misconstrue what I was saying.

I don't have bad motivations and there's no reason to assume I worked in any way to misconstrue said things. Maybe you will also clarify some of the thoughts that you feel I misinterpreted.

That I feel you misinterpreted? Gee, you seem pretty sure when you tell other people they got what you said wrong ("I didn't say nor imply that", and certain that what you said was clear ("No, what I said is clear. Maybe read it again"). But if it's the other way around, we only feel you misinterpreted it. Glad to see we're all on a level playing field here.

So OK, I gave you a paragraph explaining how I feel there's a duty to be nice to people, as opposed to the lack of such a duty towards companies. Your response of

QuoteNot to speak too ill of normal fellow human beings? Wow, you must be popular with people who don't aim to please you. Forgive my sarcasm

Was basically accusing me of being nasty to people, precisely the opposite of my point, which was, to show the same confidence in my statements you do in yours, perfectly clear. Since I feel it was perfectly clear, of course I'm going to feel that if you're acting like I said the opposite of what I did, in a way which allows you to be sarcastic at my expense, that must have been from some effort on your part--from you wanting to be able to interpret it in a negative way.
But perhaps I wasn't being as clear as I believed. If so, your misinterpretation was perhaps not as unwarranted as I thought. But it was one, and your misinterpretation led you to go ad hominem, which I haven't done with you.
It was an unpleasant thing to say. I would be happy if you retracted it. And doing so would be consistent with your repeated claims to niceness and constructiveness.

Just tested this, and ran Subnautica flawlessly on Manjaro. Downloading a few other games as I type this, including that thing that's all the rage, despite me not really liking the whole "Battle Royale" genre...

Quoting: StenPettJust tested this, and ran Subnautica flawlessly on Manjaro. Downloading a few other games as I type this, including that thing that's all the rage, despite me not really liking the whole "Battle Royale" genre...

Sadly, EAC (Easy Anti-Cheat) will scupper you there, I think. Apparently Epic (who own EAC) are working with Valve's DXVK developer to see if there's a solution.

The other big anti-cheat, Battle-Eye, have already said "it can't be done", which rules out any hope for Arma 3, now that Virtual Programming have been dropped as their experimental Linux porting house.

[edit: I wrote "haven't already said", instead of "have already said"... eejit]


Last edited by scaine on 24 April 2019 at 7:35 am UTC

Quoting: scaine

Quoting: StenPettJust tested this, and ran Subnautica flawlessly on Manjaro. Downloading a few other games as I type this, including that thing that's all the rage, despite me not really liking the whole "Battle Royale" genre...

Sadly, EAC (Easy Anti-Cheat) will scupper you there, I think. Apparently Epic (who own EAC) are working with Valve's DXVK developer to see if there's a solution.

The other big anti-cheat, Battle-Eye, have already said "it can't be done", which rules out any hope for Arma 3, now that Virtual Programming have been dropped as their experimental Linux porting house.

[edit: I wrote "haven't already said", instead of "have already said"... eejit]

You were absolutely correct.

Oh well... Not really a loss for me personally, as I tend to not like PvP games

I couldn't care less about Fortnight tbh, but I'm quite keen to play Vermintide II which is in the same boat. There are probably a handle of other games I'd play if EAC was no longer an issue.

Quoting: Purple Library GuyI gave you a paragraph explaining how I feel there's a duty to be nice to people, as opposed to the lack of such a duty towards companies. Your response of

QuoteNot to speak too ill of normal fellow human beings? Wow, you must be popular with people who don't aim to please you. Forgive my sarcasm

Was basically accusing me of being nasty to people, precisely the opposite of my point, which was, to show the same confidence in my statements you do in yours, perfectly clear. [...] your misinterpretation led you to go ad hominem, which I haven't done with you.
It was an unpleasant thing to say. I would be happy if you retracted it. And doing so would be consistent with your repeated claims to niceness and constructiveness.

Have you re-read what I asked you to, to confirm that I didn't say that you (the people on this website) badmouthed Valve? Because sometimes I'm not specific enough and my words can be interpreted in various ways, but in that case I see no reason to believe that by "the Linux community" I meant this community specifically.

And I quoted you when I made that statement. Here are your words, in bold, to understand why I paraphrased (not attacked) you:

Quoting: Purple Library GuyI have some responsibility with normal fellow human beings to give them some benefit of doubts, to not speak too ill of them, to take into account their point of view and so forth. That responsibility does not extend to corporations and is seriously diminished when it comes to their executives while in an official capacity.

Your own words imply that you speak ill of people, just not too ill. How else can that be understood? Because if you don't speak ill of people, why would you even say "not too ill"?

Quoting: scaineNo one is "shaming" Epic for not releasing the client on Linux. Where are you getting that from?

I put a link on shaming, to the forum post that got a lot of likes.

Quoting: scaineBut I'd happily shame them for their exclusives. They deserve a bit of shame in my opinion. But you're doing your best to defend them, which is odd, because you keep claiming to understand that they're bad.

As much as I hate exclusives, especially when it's about sequels to games that I liked, or games that weren't exclusive up to a certain point in time, shaming feels a bit too much for me to do. I will complain about it, but I'll leave it there. So I don't and won't defend anyone making exclusives, but rather ignore those games. I just feel that we should do fair, level-headed criticism and don't fall into shaming or worse, because it can alienate people from the Linux community, something that CDPR pointed out as a problem (link) and the reason against porting The Witcher 3.

This is what we should try to avoid:

QuoteI cannot help but feel this damaged CDPR's view of the Linux platform irrevocably.

Quoting: scaineThere's other pieces in your latest mega-reply I disagree with, but I'm tired, and this discussion has run its course, I think.

It's long indeed, but I thought it would be better than separate posts to each post that I wanted to reply.