Latest 30 Comments

Quoting: keturiduSame. I don't get logic, why stubbornly not to include Steam games import to Heroic.

Heroic prides itself to replace official launchers and code their own app from the ground up.
Their backend tools speak directly to the servers of Amazon, Epic and GoG.
This is quite an unnecessary task and a hard one to do for Steam, as it is both complex and natively available on all platforms.
It serves as a counterpart for non-steam games.

View this comment - View article - View full comments - Report this comment

Quoting: F.UltraAFAIK this have only been rumoured by Epic. But if you have any links with data then provide them.

There are quotes buried in court files - I'll have to look for it myself.

Quoting: F.UltraYet when I google it I get back that Apple takes 30% (and 15% for small publishers) and Sony takes 30%...

Fortnite & the App Store ring any bells? Maybe search for EU DSA?

View this comment - View article - View full comments - Report this comment

@Mountain Man

It means blindly accepting direction and/or the status quo without giving it any consideration of your own. From what I've read, this does not seem to apply to you.

You are entitled to your opinion, even if others do not agree with it.

View this comment - View article - View full comments - Report this comment

I have started testing out Heroic recently. I find that it is not as feature-rich as Lutris but somewhat more stable. What features they do have, work and are well implemented. For example, custom categories. In Lutris, you can assign them but they are pointless. In Heroic, you can filter by them.

The only thing I like about Lutris, that I haven't figured out how to do in Heroic so far, is that I can create an "empty" wine prefix and I can do it without having to be online. I haven't tried this to create an UMU-based empty prefix in either launcher, however. Not sure it would work. UMU only seems to create the prefix once you run the installer.

I also like the idea behind Steam integration in Lutris, even if I don't use it. The idea of being able to track total gameplay time while offline is appealing. Having two launchers (Steam & Lutris) running in the background to do so, is not so appealing. If only Valve would enable tracking game time in offline mode ...

View this comment - View article - View full comments - Report this comment

Where I can avoid it, I prefer not to use a retail store launcher for game installation if I can avoid it. I have never used GOG Galaxy and probably never will -- even if they make a Native Linux version. I like the offline installers, play offline anyway, and could not care less about achievements or other social media features.

Frankly, I still think the best move on GOG's part would be to work with the existing third-party tools (which I do value and use) rather than compete with them. If you ask me, cooperation is the future ...

View this comment - View article - View full comments - Report this comment

This is not at all my kind of game, but I am continually blown away be the graphics quality, lighting and shading in the pictures GoL puts up.

View this comment - View article - View full comments - Report this comment

I liked the article not because I agree with the lawsuit (I don't) but because I appreciate Liam's reporting of it.

Quoting: TheSHEEEPI've always said that Valve's cut is undeniably too large. I just don't see any legal grounds to lower it - but hey, who knows.

Speaking from long experience in the retail industry, 30% is pretty much standard fair unless you are targeting wholesale business levels (mega corps with big box storefronts like Walmart, Home Depot, Office Depot, Best Buy, etc.). Computer hardware and livestock feed are two areas that I am aware of that operate on wholesale pricing margins. As such, I have absolutely no objections to Valve's commission structure and see no reason why they should be expected to target wholesale margins like the big box mega corps.

We have a consignment programme where I presently work. There are two takeaway points about it. While we are occasionally negotiable depending on the product, the default commission is 30% of retail (we provide shelf space, handle merchandising, collect and remit sales taxes, etc.). We also include a clause encouraging consignors to have the same retail price wherever they sell their products (we don't legally enforce it but we have reserved the option to cancel a consignment contract on these grounds). It simply benefits no one if the consignor is undercutting their own prices (it impacts their sales through us and makes it pointless to provide shelf space for their products).

Like you, I see no legal grounds to force any retailer to change their margin/commission structure. That would be tantamount to price fixing -- which is, AFAIK, illegal in most nations. If you don't like Valve's commission structure, you are free to take your business elsewhere. If you lose sales because you went with a retailer with less exposure but lower commission, the blame rests on your shoulders, not Valve's.

View this comment - View article - View full comments - Report this comment

Quoting: ShabbyXSay this fine is paid, where does the money go? I highly doubt to the consumers the suit claims to protect. Does it go to the UK government? To the people filing the suit (in which case, why do they deserve this money?)?

If it's like class action lawsuits in the US, the overwhelming majority of the money is awarded to the law firm that filed the case since they're supposedly representing the injured party.

View this comment - View article - View full comments - Report this comment

Oddly most people that [confirmed the bug with 2.19](https://github.com/Heroic-Games-Launcher/HeroicGamesLauncher/issues/5220) are using Heroic flatpak...

View this comment - View article - View full comments - Report this comment

Quoting: drenThe amount of corporate bootlicking happening here is crazy. We are talking about a company that effectively has a monopoly on game sales, that promotes a skin gambling ecosystem that is available to minors ("loot boxes"), that for years resisted giving refunds, whos subscriber agreement attempts to prevent class action lawsuits, and who tried to monetize community made mods. Let's also not forget how shitty it was to force users onto a game, CS2, and mothball the better version, CSGO, who can't count to three (ignoring rumors), etc. As a linux gamer, I appreciate that they have made gaming on linux better, but lets not pretend that they aren't interested in getting people onto their own OS, SteamOS, so they can again increase their own margins via hardware and licensing. I think it is best to keep these corporations at an arms length at best. I love GOG because I can actually buy and own games, but they are still a corporation and corporate track records are pretty shitty these days.

Except ofc that this lawsuit (and zero of the others) have anything to do with this list of issues that you have with Valve/Steam. And I am quite confident that most people who write critically about this lawsuit agrees with you that what you list are valid concerns. But as I already said, the lawsuit is not about this so therefore "we" are not defending these actions by Valve when we criticize the lawsuit.

Quoting: TheSHEEEPSeems partly reasonable to me.

I've always said that Valve's cut is undeniably too large. I just don't see any legal grounds to lower it - but hey, who knows.
And that their practices especially for charging with in-game purchases are double dipping in many cases is also quite clear.

I'm not too sure about the PPO stuff, I've read too many conflicting statements here.

Still every single other shop that have taken a less cut does not provide anything comparable with the full suite that Steam offers plus that most of them are also in the red (e.g Epic is only able to afford to have their shop due to the income from Fortnite). So while 30% might be too much, no one have so far been able to actually demonstrate it in practice.

Quoting: poiuzThere are several occasions - confirmed by Valve - that they told publishers they expect the same price or prefer not to sell a game.

AFAIK this have only been rumoured by Epic. But if you have any links with data then provide them.

Quoting: LupertEverettThat's simple not correct.

Yet when I google it I get back that Apple takes 30% (and 15% for small publishers) and Sony takes 30%...

View this comment - View article - View full comments - Report this comment

Quoting: TheSHEEEP

Quoting: Mountain ManYou really can't demand that software developers not take advantage of cost saving technologies like cloud servers.

Of course you could.

But that isn't the goal - as I already wrote, those mock servers are already a reality in almost any project.
It would be work to make these more user-palatable, but not much. Paling in comparison to the dough raked in by online games that were even just a bit successful.

It is also by far not the only way to go about this, nor the cheapest.
You are drinking the publisher cool-aid already and they haven't even really started firing their propaganda - weird, dude!

You could absolutely - and reasonably! - demand that an end-of-life plan must be made before an MMO/Online-focused game is released, and that end-of-life plan MUST include a way to play in a "reasonable, minimal way" (eg. say offline only, or self-hosted, etc) past end-of-life.
Or you can't release/sell it in the EU.
Simple, really.

If those few weeks of work and minimal amount of resource cost would keep a game from being developed, then developing that game was never a viable business decision anyway.
Publishers really have no leg to stand on here.

You also can't forget: When you ignore the suits, the vast majority of developers is in favor of this.
Understandably so, as nobody wants to see years of their work just ceasing to exist.

Frankly, I have no time or patience for people who dismiss an opposing opinion as "drinking the cool-aid".

View this comment - View article - View full comments - Report this comment

I'm fine with lawsuits if it's a legitimate one. My suspicion however is this is just a money grab and Valve are a lucrative target.

View this comment - View article - View full comments - Report this comment

Quoting: LupertEverett

1: Steam "price parity clause"

This is only for Steam keys that are sold OUTSIDE Steam.

There are several occasions - confirmed by Valve - that they told publishers they expect the same price or prefer not to sell a game.

Quoting: LupertEverett

2: In-game purchases yadda yadda

"Hey Sony, so I have this DLC for a game I bought from GOG, can I play this on PlayStation?", said nobody ever.

Whataboutism! If you think anyone else should be sued, then take legal actions! Besides: Apple & Google are being scrutinized, too.

Quoting: LupertEverett

3: Commissions commissions

The fee, that is... 30%...

You know... the same amount Sony and Apple also gets, yet somehow it is only Steam who is constantly put on target for it.

That's simple not correct.

View this comment - View article - View full comments - Report this comment

Fedora based ... no thanks

View this comment - View article - View full comments - Report this comment

Now I fear steam will get blocked in UK like what happened with imgur

View this comment - View article - View full comments - Report this comment

I definitely used GOG Galaxy when I was using Windows, but at this point Heroic does everything Galaxy did but better on Linux, especially with the compatability tools. I almost feel like it would be more productive if they chose to contribute to Heroic instead. Maybe they could create a fork of Heroic specifically tied to GOG and would contribute back to Heroic.

View this comment - View article - View full comments - Report this comment

Quoting: beko

Quoting: LoftyInteresting they work with Xreal glasses ? I thought they were just two screens made to look like one big one. How is it working as VR ?

Can't compare that to VR but I use my XR glasses a lot: https://makertube.net/w/tq6uNTgnFM2aEYXZjM5Wx1 (Demo: Breezy Desktop now with virtual desktops 😎)

This also allows me to experience Stereoscopic 3D with almost any game thanks to ReShade. Add OpenTrack to the mix and I get a very VR-like experience without the motion sickness on top. Works best with native support, of course. Demo footage with Elite Dangerous: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zfR6vpO7UFs (and unlike VR this even works "on foot" in ED)

YMMV.

thx for the links it looks great. Im firmly in the camp of VR headsets are for standing and XR (AR?) glasses are for couch, PC desk, Bed situations (along side traveling i guess, but i prefer to remain situationally aware)

When you say you use ReShade is this on Linux ? Why is is needed for this, i get that OpenTrack is needed for head movements. What is handling the 3D'ification of the XR glasses for games.

thanks again.

View this comment - View article - View full comments - Report this comment

I remember back in 2004/2005 how a PR company was hired by certain companies (microsoft) to act as if they were a grassroots movement of software developers that demanded patents on software, while practically all software developers were out on the streets in Brussels to protest against the ridiculous patents on software.
They got found out. This has lead to major restrictions in ways you are allowed to lobby in the EU.

But since the UK isn't part of the EU anymore, they can ignore that of course and lobbyists are free again to make those "grassroots" websites...

Do not ever think that a single steam customer is behind that site... It's paid for by multinationals.

View this comment - View article - View full comments - Report this comment

Quoting: ArehandoroWhile I agree with you, in this case the person that did the estimate is the same that did the work in one day 😅

" Hey look boss the thing i said would take 8 months took one day ! ,
Am i a good boy now, do i get a promotion ? Ohh OK, then maybe just another new project i guess.
... wait , you don't need me as much for the next 8 months ... wait you don't need me as much at all now, what's going on .. " 😆

At least extend the job a few months, jeez. There's always more work to do, and a company will typical NOT value something like this as much as you would like to think in terms of employee relations. And i know this is going to sound bad to some, but it kind of puts a lot of strain on the rest of a team to do the same, making the demands on everyone much higher & leading to everyone now having to rely on Ai more than critical thinking to pump out projects as fast as the previous bar was set. Playing right into the management / CEO's hands. At some point this 'extra efficiency' leads to a nice game of roulette as to which Dev gets to tell their family there not economically viable anymore. I mean, don't shirk your responsibilities but you have to work out a good work life balance within your role.

So do your work well. Efficiently but learn how to play the game at least a little bit. Remember the management already learned how to play the game hence why they have so many 'strategic meetings' and paid for business trips to fancy hotels in foreign countries.

View this comment - View article - View full comments - Report this comment

Now Heroic has a nifty feature of asking you what exe to actually use. That way i can easily start the expansions in MOHAA for example.

The 2.19 version was buggy with non working Epic games, but they very quickly pushed out an update 2.19.1 to fix the issue.

I like more of the simplistic Heroic compared to Lutris which is riddled with funky installers that sometimes work and sometimes not. For example GOG version of Cyberpunk was a pain to install in Lutris where with Heroic it was just clicks to install.

View this comment - View article - View full comments - Report this comment

The amount of corporate bootlicking happening here is crazy. We are talking about a company that effectively has a monopoly on game sales, that promotes a skin gambling ecosystem that is available to minors ("loot boxes"), that for years resisted giving refunds, whos subscriber agreement attempts to prevent class action lawsuits, and who tried to monetize community made mods. Let's also not forget how shitty it was to force users onto a game, CS2, and mothball the better version, CSGO, who can't count to three (ignoring rumors), etc. As a linux gamer, I appreciate that they have made gaming on linux better, but lets not pretend that they aren't interested in getting people onto their own OS, SteamOS, so they can again increase their own margins via hardware and licensing. I think it is best to keep these corporations at an arms length at best. I love GOG because I can actually buy and own games, but they are still a corporation and corporate track records are pretty shitty these days.

View this comment - View article - View full comments - Report this comment

I could not care less for any galaxy. Never been a prerequisite for buying games from GOG.
Never been into "achievements", never used a game launcher for "connecting" with friends (it's been always a third-party app for that).
It was their attitude that pissed me off. Their shortsightedness of treating a whole community like %^$#
because a bunch of toxic reviewers gave em once a hard time.

View this comment - View article - View full comments - Report this comment

Quoting: Purple Library Guy

Quoting: Mountain ManYou really can't demand that software developers not take advantage of cost saving technologies like cloud servers.

Sure you can. Just like the Chinese were able to demand that milk producers not take advantage of cost saving technologies like watering it way down and thickening it with malamine. We demand that people not take advantage of cost savings all the time, if taking advantage of them would cause some disadvantage to their customers or the common good. We demand that factories spend money on scrubber thingies in their smokestacks so we don't get acid rain; that's why there is still maple syrup.

Watering down milk and adding thickeners without disclosing this to the consumer is fraudulent, so of course it's illegal. That's not at all the same as a developer using existing cloud services rather than expending the resources to create their own online infrastructure. As long as they disclose the fact upfront that future functionality is not guaranteed, then there is no fraud. And I think that's ultimately where this is going, that any product that depends on servers will be required to carry a prominent disclaimer that necessary online services could be discontinued at any time without warning.

View this comment - View article - View full comments - Report this comment

Quoting: Mountain ManYou really can't demand that software developers not take advantage of cost saving technologies like cloud servers.

Of course you could.

But that isn't the goal - as I already wrote, those mock servers are already a reality in almost any project.
It would be work to make these more user-palatable, but not much. Paling in comparison to the dough raked in by online games that were even just a bit successful.

It is also by far not the only way to go about this, nor the cheapest.
You are drinking the publisher cool-aid already and they haven't even really started firing their propaganda - weird, dude!

You could absolutely - and reasonably! - demand that an end-of-life plan must be made before an MMO/Online-focused game is released, and that end-of-life plan MUST include a way to play in a "reasonable, minimal way" (eg. say offline only, or self-hosted, etc) past end-of-life.
Or you can't release/sell it in the EU.
Simple, really.

If those few weeks of work and minimal amount of resource cost would keep a game from being developed, then developing that game was never a viable business decision anyway.
Publishers really have no leg to stand on here.

You also can't forget: When you ignore the suits, the vast majority of developers is in favor of this.
Understandably so, as nobody wants to see years of their work just ceasing to exist.

View this comment - View article - View full comments - Report this comment

Quoting: MinoscerebI like the look of Heroic, it's a lot better designed visually than Lutris and feels more user friendly, but since Lutris can run all the stores Heroic can, and at least for GoG has access to lots of useful scripts for things like mods or just actual playability, I don't see a use case for Heroic for myself. I'm curious where other people fall on this though. Have I missed something about Heroic?

This is so curios. For me one of the most annoying thing about Heroic is… it's UI. It uses custom "webby" stuff instead of using native OS controlls like Lutris and it makes it's Look&Feel utterly annoying… Also Lutris just works better overall

View this comment - View article - View full comments - Report this comment

Quoting: LupertEverett

2: In-game purchases yadda yadda

"Hey Sony, so I have this DLC for a game I bought from GOG, can I play this on PlayStation?", said nobody ever.

True - it is also not even remotely the point made in the lawsuit.
But tearing that strawman down sure must've felt great.

Quoting: LupertEverett

3: Commissions commissions

The fee, that is... 30%...

You know... the same amount Sony and Apple also gets, yet somehow it is only Steam who is constantly put on target for it.

Lol, lmao even.

Hmmm....
You mean only Steam as in:
https://www.gamesindustry.biz/legal-claim-filed-against-sony-over-30-store-cut (Sony)
https://www.flatpanelshd.com/news.php?subaction=showfull&id=1751446916 (also Sony, but other country)
https://www.npr.org/2021/09/10/1023834758/apple-app-store-epic-games-fortnite-verdict
I'm quite certain there were more, but I can't be bothered to do more digging.

What was that common sense rule again, about not talking about a topic you know nothing about?
I can't quite remember.
Oh, well.

But I guess it is really surprising that we hear more about Valve on this Linux-focused website.

View this comment - View article - View full comments - Report this comment

Quoting: Mountain ManYou really can't demand that software developers not take advantage of cost saving technologies like cloud servers.

Sure you can. Just like the Chinese were able to demand that milk producers not take advantage of cost saving technologies like watering it way down and thickening it with malamine. We demand that people not take advantage of cost savings all the time, if taking advantage of them would cause some disadvantage to their customers or the common good. We demand that factories spend money on scrubber thingies in their smokestacks so we don't get acid rain; that's why there is still maple syrup.

View this comment - View article - View full comments - Report this comment

Quoting: soulsource

Quoting: Mountain ManHow broad do we expect this law to be?

The original introduction video to the campaign talked about this. They also mentioned that in an ideal world, all of what you mentioned would be regulated in a way that allows people to keep accessing the content they bought a license for. However, the initiators were aware that it would never happen if it was that broad, so they picked games as a smaller target. That's not perfect, but it's a start.

I think that will ultimately kill any chance of this becoming a reality, especially since most lawmakers consider video games to be nothing more than childish amusement. Game developers could also make a good case that they are being unfairly singled out when even by this groups own admission, there are many other consumer products that depend on network services.

View this comment - View article - View full comments - Report this comment

I wonder how many times these same arguments have been made at this point.

Someone needs to tell them what the definition of insanity is.

1: Steam "price parity clause"

This is only for Steam keys that are sold OUTSIDE Steam.

2: In-game purchases yadda yadda

"Hey Sony, so I have this DLC for a game I bought from GOG, can I play this on PlayStation?", said nobody ever.

3: Commissions commissions

The fee, that is... 30%...

You know... the same amount Sony and Apple also gets, yet somehow it is only Steam who is constantly put on target for it.

Lol, lmao even.

Just like someone else said above, I wouldn't be surprised if Epic was behind this, as the speaking points are more or less the same as what Timboi keeps saying.

View this comment - View article - View full comments - Report this comment

Quoting: Mountain ManHow broad do we expect this law to be?

The original introduction video to the campaign talked about this. They also mentioned that in an ideal world, all of what you mentioned would be regulated in a way that allows people to keep accessing the content they bought a license for. However, the initiators were aware that it would never happen if it was that broad, so they picked games as a smaller target. That's not perfect, but it's a start.

View this comment - View article - View full comments - Report this comment