Latest 30 Comments

Quoting: LoudTechie

Quoting: F.Ultra

Quoting: LoudTechie

Quoting: F.Ultra

Quoting: LoudTechie

Quoting: F.Ultra

Quoting: CatKiller

Quoting: F.UltraPayment was never the issue though and AMD is and have been for years a HDMI licensee. There is nothing with these patches that would or could make HDMI Forum not get payed exactly what they where payed before.

I think the logic (from an artificial scarcity hoarding viewpoint) was that if they didn't keep the spec super secret, companies could just make stuff without giving them money. Which they didn't like the sound of. But, as you say, you still need to give them money (and AMD did) for the compliance tests and the sticker, and that's where the prestige is. "Proper" hardware companies will still give them money to remain "proper," and fly-by-night won't-conform-to-the-spec companies weren't going to give them money either way.

But companies making stuff without giving them money would be breaking trademark law and thus open to be sued by HDMI Forum, aka the reason that you pay for the specs is not to get access to the specs but to be allowed to sell products labelled with HDMI. And the fee for the specs are minuscule, only $10k per year (or $5k for low volume manufacturers), the real money is the per sold item royalty (up to $0.2 for high volume and flat $1 for low volume) since that times millions of devices per year adds up quite significantly.

And fly-by-night would not be affected by open drivers since they already have the specs (they are ofc widely spread in China for free). But I guess that some of the members where afraid of that and others have now countered, we simply don't know who it was since all 80+ companies have voting rights (and their votes are not made public).

Trademark law is weak compared to what the HDMI forum wields to keep others from releasing HDMI compatible stuff.
I'm talking copyright, contract law and patent.

No it is only trademark, there is nothing to copyright (aka you releasing a HDMI product that is not licensed cannot breach copyright) and the patents in HDMI only covers things like how cables and connectors are constructed not the things that the driver implements. And trademark is not weak here since if you want to sell a cable the end user wants to know that it is HDMI compatible so you have to mark it as HDMI somewhere and the second you do without a license then you are breaching trademark.

If its based on existing HDMI work it can break copyright and patents can still be wielded.
Trademark is weak, because its legal coverage much more limited and its punishments are much less bad.
For trademark the infringed party needs to proof the trademark infringement is misleading to consumers and you can't use it to get an existing product from the market, just its marketing.
Also dodging trademark can sometimes be as easy as not describing your product as "HDMI", but "HDMI compatible" or simply using the same shape as HDMI for your port.

There are no patents covering the parts that the driver is implementing, but pretending that there are I don't see the reason for your argument since that would still make open vs closed drivers a non issue for HDMI Forum since had it been covered by a patent then they would have even less to worry about.

Trademark is much stronger than what you believe, since they have registered HDMI as a trademark that will cover every single rewrite in that you cannot write "HDMI compatible" without using the words "HDMI". Also the "misleading" term will apply to every single item sold for video and audio usage since that is the very market where HDMI is registered.

Aka the "it did not mislead" only applies when you have Apple the Phone/Computer/Music company vs Grannies Apples that sells apples. The moment Granny tries to sell Cellphones, maskOS computers or music then she it cooked and will get sued out of oblivion.

E.g Microsoft is routinely using trademark to win over domains from scam companies and cybersquatters.

Many believe trademark to be weak because you can loose your trademark if you #1 don't protect it vigilantly (as compared with patents and copyright that you never can loose due to being passive) and #2 that you can loose it if the term becomes generic (which HDMI have no risk of since no one uses the term HDMI to refer to anything other than the actual HDMI connector).

[There're totally FDR patents.](https://patentimages.storage.googleapis.com/e2/25/09/5065fa9a3d32b3/US11570489.pdf)
[Also there's a generic HDMI patent.](https://patentimages.storage.googleapis.com/e2/25/09/5065fa9a3d32b3/US11570489.pdf)
[DSC is also patented.](https://patents.google.com/patent/WO2021155869A1/en)

I would actually argue that one's ability to maintain it is trademark's strength.
Trademarks are legit for as long the general public has a certain association with it, which is theoretically infinite. Copyright and patent both have temporal limitations as LEGO and Disney can attest.

Also you can totally lose patent rights, due to passiveness. You have to actively apply for patents and [patent term extensions](https://www.uspto.gov/patents/laws/patent-terms-extended) and contrary to both copyright and trademark this costs a pretty dime.

In its nature trademark only protects naming rights. The AMD team could name this patch jaoiewnainuewhiufhiuew and let people be happy jaoiewnainuewhiufhiuew worked with HDMI, since Linux HDMI FSR support isn't something you place in your advertisement. You say HDMI FSR, which you're allowed to do, because you're licensed on Windows.

On your reaction to @phebliac the answer is simple [patent.](https://patents.google.com/patent/US20220140543A1/en)

Quoting: LoudTechie

Quoting: F.Ultra

Quoting: LoudTechie

Quoting: F.Ultra

Quoting: LoudTechie

Quoting: F.Ultra

Quoting: CatKiller

Quoting: F.UltraPayment was never the issue though and AMD is and have been for years a HDMI licensee. There is nothing with these patches that would or could make HDMI Forum not get payed exactly what they where payed before.

I think the logic (from an artificial scarcity hoarding viewpoint) was that if they didn't keep the spec super secret, companies could just make stuff without giving them money. Which they didn't like the sound of. But, as you say, you still need to give them money (and AMD did) for the compliance tests and the sticker, and that's where the prestige is. "Proper" hardware companies will still give them money to remain "proper," and fly-by-night won't-conform-to-the-spec companies weren't going to give them money either way.

But companies making stuff without giving them money would be breaking trademark law and thus open to be sued by HDMI Forum, aka the reason that you pay for the specs is not to get access to the specs but to be allowed to sell products labelled with HDMI. And the fee for the specs are minuscule, only $10k per year (or $5k for low volume manufacturers), the real money is the per sold item royalty (up to $0.2 for high volume and flat $1 for low volume) since that times millions of devices per year adds up quite significantly.

And fly-by-night would not be affected by open drivers since they already have the specs (they are ofc widely spread in China for free). But I guess that some of the members where afraid of that and others have now countered, we simply don't know who it was since all 80+ companies have voting rights (and their votes are not made public).

Trademark law is weak compared to what the HDMI forum wields to keep others from releasing HDMI compatible stuff.
I'm talking copyright, contract law and patent.

No it is only trademark, there is nothing to copyright (aka you releasing a HDMI product that is not licensed cannot breach copyright) and the patents in HDMI only covers things like how cables and connectors are constructed not the things that the driver implements. And trademark is not weak here since if you want to sell a cable the end user wants to know that it is HDMI compatible so you have to mark it as HDMI somewhere and the second you do without a license then you are breaching trademark.

If its based on existing HDMI work it can break copyright and patents can still be wielded.
Trademark is weak, because its legal coverage much more limited and its punishments are much less bad.
For trademark the infringed party needs to proof the trademark infringement is misleading to consumers and you can't use it to get an existing product from the market, just its marketing.
Also dodging trademark can sometimes be as easy as not describing your product as "HDMI", but "HDMI compatible" or simply using the same shape as HDMI for your port.

There are no patents covering the parts that the driver is implementing, but pretending that there are I don't see the reason for your argument since that would still make open vs closed drivers a non issue for HDMI Forum since had it been covered by a patent then they would have even less to worry about.

Trademark is much stronger than what you believe, since they have registered HDMI as a trademark that will cover every single rewrite in that you cannot write "HDMI compatible" without using the words "HDMI". Also the "misleading" term will apply to every single item sold for video and audio usage since that is the very market where HDMI is registered.

Aka the "it did not mislead" only applies when you have Apple the Phone/Computer/Music company vs Grannies Apples that sells apples. The moment Granny tries to sell Cellphones, maskOS computers or music then she it cooked and will get sued out of oblivion.

E.g Microsoft is routinely using trademark to win over domains from scam companies and cybersquatters.

Many believe trademark to be weak because you can loose your trademark if you #1 don't protect it vigilantly (as compared with patents and copyright that you never can loose due to being passive) and #2 that you can loose it if the term becomes generic (which HDMI have no risk of since no one uses the term HDMI to refer to anything other than the actual HDMI connector).

[There're totally FDR patents.](https://patentimages.storage.googleapis.com/e2/25/09/5065fa9a3d32b3/US11570489.pdf)
[Also there's a generic HDMI patent.](https://patentimages.storage.googleapis.com/e2/25/09/5065fa9a3d32b3/US11570489.pdf)
[DSC is also patented.](https://patents.google.com/patent/WO2021155869A1/en)

I would actually argue that one's ability to maintain it is trademark's strength.
Trademarks are legit for as long the general public has a certain association with it, which is theoretically infinite. Copyright and patent both have temporal limitations as LEGO and Disney can attest.

Also you can totally lose patent rights, due to passiveness. You have to actively apply for patents and [patent term extensions](https://www.uspto.gov/patents/laws/patent-terms-extended) and contrary to both copyright and trademark this costs a pretty dime.

In its nature trademark only protects naming rights. The AMD team could name this patch jaoiewnainuewhiufhiuew and let people be happy jaoiewnainuewhiufhiuew worked with HDMI, since Linux HDMI FSR support isn't something you place in your advertisement. You say HDMI FSR, which you're allowed to do, because you're licensed on Windows.

On your reaction to @phebliac the answer is simple [patent.](https://patents.google.com/patent/US20220140543A1/en)

It isn't just patents since HDMI only have patents on the wiring and actual connector. Still you can have a GPU with a HDMI port (where you use a port from a HDMI licensee so the patent is covered) that will be destroyed by customs if your GPU is not on the list. They do similar to things like Raybans, Rolexes and other fashion brands and I have a hard time believeing that those are covered by patents (but I could be wrong).

And btw patent extensions are for drugs only, the reason being that it can take several years to get your drug approved so to compensate your patent can be extended.

In any case we are way past what the context was which was why they where against the open drivers in the first place and why they now changed their mind ;)

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

Quoting: F.Ultra

Quoting: LoudTechie

Quoting: F.Ultra

Quoting: LoudTechie

Quoting: F.Ultra

Quoting: CatKiller

Quoting: F.UltraPayment was never the issue though and AMD is and have been for years a HDMI licensee. There is nothing with these patches that would or could make HDMI Forum not get payed exactly what they where payed before.

I think the logic (from an artificial scarcity hoarding viewpoint) was that if they didn't keep the spec super secret, companies could just make stuff without giving them money. Which they didn't like the sound of. But, as you say, you still need to give them money (and AMD did) for the compliance tests and the sticker, and that's where the prestige is. "Proper" hardware companies will still give them money to remain "proper," and fly-by-night won't-conform-to-the-spec companies weren't going to give them money either way.

But companies making stuff without giving them money would be breaking trademark law and thus open to be sued by HDMI Forum, aka the reason that you pay for the specs is not to get access to the specs but to be allowed to sell products labelled with HDMI. And the fee for the specs are minuscule, only $10k per year (or $5k for low volume manufacturers), the real money is the per sold item royalty (up to $0.2 for high volume and flat $1 for low volume) since that times millions of devices per year adds up quite significantly.

And fly-by-night would not be affected by open drivers since they already have the specs (they are ofc widely spread in China for free). But I guess that some of the members where afraid of that and others have now countered, we simply don't know who it was since all 80+ companies have voting rights (and their votes are not made public).

Trademark law is weak compared to what the HDMI forum wields to keep others from releasing HDMI compatible stuff.
I'm talking copyright, contract law and patent.

No it is only trademark, there is nothing to copyright (aka you releasing a HDMI product that is not licensed cannot breach copyright) and the patents in HDMI only covers things like how cables and connectors are constructed not the things that the driver implements. And trademark is not weak here since if you want to sell a cable the end user wants to know that it is HDMI compatible so you have to mark it as HDMI somewhere and the second you do without a license then you are breaching trademark.

If its based on existing HDMI work it can break copyright and patents can still be wielded.
Trademark is weak, because its legal coverage much more limited and its punishments are much less bad.
For trademark the infringed party needs to proof the trademark infringement is misleading to consumers and you can't use it to get an existing product from the market, just its marketing.
Also dodging trademark can sometimes be as easy as not describing your product as "HDMI", but "HDMI compatible" or simply using the same shape as HDMI for your port.

There are no patents covering the parts that the driver is implementing, but pretending that there are I don't see the reason for your argument since that would still make open vs closed drivers a non issue for HDMI Forum since had it been covered by a patent then they would have even less to worry about.

Trademark is much stronger than what you believe, since they have registered HDMI as a trademark that will cover every single rewrite in that you cannot write "HDMI compatible" without using the words "HDMI". Also the "misleading" term will apply to every single item sold for video and audio usage since that is the very market where HDMI is registered.

Aka the "it did not mislead" only applies when you have Apple the Phone/Computer/Music company vs Grannies Apples that sells apples. The moment Granny tries to sell Cellphones, maskOS computers or music then she it cooked and will get sued out of oblivion.

E.g Microsoft is routinely using trademark to win over domains from scam companies and cybersquatters.

Many believe trademark to be weak because you can loose your trademark if you #1 don't protect it vigilantly (as compared with patents and copyright that you never can loose due to being passive) and #2 that you can loose it if the term becomes generic (which HDMI have no risk of since no one uses the term HDMI to refer to anything other than the actual HDMI connector).

[There're totally FDR patents.](https://patentimages.storage.googleapis.com/e2/25/09/5065fa9a3d32b3/US11570489.pdf)
[Also there's a generic HDMI patent.](https://patentimages.storage.googleapis.com/e2/25/09/5065fa9a3d32b3/US11570489.pdf)
[DSC is also patented.](https://patents.google.com/patent/WO2021155869A1/en)

I would actually argue that one's ability to maintain it is trademark's strength.
Trademarks are legit for as long the general public has a certain association with it, which is theoretically infinite. Copyright and patent both have temporal limitations as LEGO and Disney can attest.

Also you can totally lose patent rights, due to passiveness. You have to actively apply for patents and [patent term extensions](https://www.uspto.gov/patents/laws/patent-terms-extended) and contrary to both copyright and trademark this costs a pretty dime.

In its nature trademark only protects naming rights. The AMD team could name this patch jaoiewnainuewhiufhiuew and let people be happy jaoiewnainuewhiufhiuew worked with HDMI, since Linux HDMI FSR support isn't something you place in your advertisement. You say HDMI FSR, which you're allowed to do, because you're licensed on Windows.

On your reaction to @phebliac the answer is simple [patent.](https://patents.google.com/patent/US20220140543A1/en)

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

Quoting: PlayingOnLinuxphone

Quoting: EikeI would say the opposite. (See e.g. "Claude Mythos"...)
We may like it or not, but AI did become good at this!

You missed my point. I did not say Claude Mythos is not finding vulnerabilities or not required, I said once a vulnerability was found with Mythos, you don't need it to find further similar vulnerabilities. The best result will probably be if one team continues using LLM while another one uses the human brain and all its experiences.

I think it's more like oposite. I do not think mythos can find really new type of vulnerability. But it can "scan" whole codebase for similar somethionk which human found in past. We do not have nought developers for checking whole codebase for it and mythos is food in finding known patterns.

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

LEGO 2K Drive was given away for free - OK, needs a Prime sub - with Amazon's Luna Gaming as recently as February this year (I already had it on Steam from a cheap bundle though, but it did come with all the Drive Passes DLC, unlike the Luna freebie) - this might be the quickest that a big title freebie has been pulled from sale: just 3 months!

This is a fun game to run on my Steam Deck and a real shame it's being pulled. I reckon they should make all its DLC free (or very cheap) now as compensation because we're not going to be able to buy any of that in a few days' time (outside of third party key stores who will either run out of keys or hike the DLC prices anyway).

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

Quoting: LachuI think there should be only putting text: „We can block to ran this game at all without reasons at any time”. That's what should be enough. People would not buy right to play this kind of game if they read this text and do not agree.

There is a review on steam currently for subnautica 2 where the reviewer outlines some over the top EULA stuff. There are 30+ pages of replies. 75% of said replies are people saying variations of "not reading all that, loser, just play the game".

As this kind of language becomes more normalized, people will become desensitized to it. I fear we are already there with most people. They not only don't want to read a EULA, but even if someone spoon feeds them the concerning parts, they simply don't care.

I know people hem and haw about "you don't own the game, you are granted a license", but I haven't seen anyone stop buying games (or any digital media) because of licensing. I think this kind of stuff will continue to become more "oppressive", but at the same time I suspect 99% of the time the end user will not have any reason to complain. Still, 1% of gamers is still a LOT of people. Will it be enough to roll back the dystopia? I'm hopeful, but pessemistic.

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

Quoting: JarmerI don't even understand this. Okay ... so the game didn't sell well so, sure, take the online servers offline, that makes sense I guess. But delist it? Make it disappear forever? WTF?

I LOVED this game on my steam deck. It was SO much fun to just randomly drive around transforming between vehicle modes and cause chaos and do random races. I have zero clue what the story was nor do I care.

To make this game gone forever for any future steam deck players is criminal ... I hate everything about that.

I've seen other games listed on Steam that have big warnings that the servers were shut down, but single player campaigns are still available. A prominent notice like that, along with a healthy price cut, seems like the best option. Unless the game was badly designed to always require a server connection... or if there is a licensing issue, as Liam suggested may be the case.

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

I don't even understand this. Okay ... so the game didn't sell well so, sure, take the online servers offline, that makes sense I guess. But delist it? Make it disappear forever? WTF?

I LOVED this game on my steam deck. It was SO much fun to just randomly drive around transforming between vehicle modes and cause chaos and do random races. I have zero clue what the story was nor do I care.

To make this game gone forever for any future steam deck players is criminal ... I hate everything about that.

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

Honestly, as development studios (especially the big ones) don't listen to us little people these days unless we affect their bottom line...Good, I am glad they are left reeling after the review bombing. They could've read the room and figured out LLMs aren't that fetch. Sure there are some deluded, brainwashed, or hope-huffing techbros that are knee deep into them...But overall, most people can't stand gassed up LLMs. As the rich and powerful literally stole a lot of human knowledge, art, our individual words, and still couldn't make something that was smart. Instead, a brain dead LLM that is a dead end, as this scam was for a quick buck...It was never going to succeed in generating eternal profits like they were trying to manifest about NFTs, Crypto, and all the other horseshit they tried to peddle. True AI is going to take a real, collective human effort to create (hopefully by then we'll have successfully destroyed capitalism) so it doesn't go rotten on future generations. Naturally, most people that haven't been caught in the hype and hope-huffing are bitter about it and will use the tools available to them to fight back.

I don't have any sympathy for these devs, they stumbled into this idea blind, without considering the consequences, and paying the appropriate cost for that. Good, I love to see it.

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

Liam's controller was starting to do doughnuts on his desk.

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

Quoting: Chrisznix

Quoting: EikeThese posts are the first time I ever heard of this. And I have two young daughters...

DO NOT GOOGLE IT. Please. I did, and... believe them. Kinda like the german "Schnappi, das kleine Krokodil". *shudder*

Now this is reminding me of the Arrogant Worms' parody kids' song, Rippy the Gator.
"Rippy the gator went chomp, chomp, chomp
Rippy the gator went chomp, chomp, chomp!
Passing the time by ending children's lives
Down in the bottom of the swamp, swamp, swamp!"
The Arrogant Worms are a Canadian treasure.

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

This sure feels like AI Bros banding together and just *bombarding* the Internet with as many slight variations on the same vulnerability as possible.

Then they completely disregard any semblance of embargoes in responsible security reporting, so they can try to push some narrative that we "need" to use AI for all coding to avoid getting hit.

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

Quoting: ChrisznixKinda like the german "Schnappi, das kleine Krokodil". *shudder*

I wanna google that now. I know I shouldn't, but now that you've said it...

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

I'm hoping we have customized power on/off sounds like the original Steam Controller.

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

This is awesome xD

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

Quoting: Pyretic

Quoting: ScottCarammellgood, for as much as I think Steam Input is a great system it being closed-source and Steam-exclusive makes it something I'm weary about reliance on. I can't imagine why Steam Controller doesn't work with X-input out-of-the-box when all of their other hardware works with or without official Steam software...

Here's my crack theory: most PC players have Windows machines and most PC players buy games on Steam. Maybe the idea is that players will use the mouse mode of the Steam Controller to open Steam, instead of having to switch to their mouse and keyboard? That way, you can sit back on your couch or desk chair without touching anything but the Controller.

probably, but some way of getting it into X-input without any use of Steam would still be far preferable. that's probably my biggest issue with the controller so far; far from a dealbreaker, but a concern nonetheless.

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

Quoting: tmtvlInteresting, especially considering Oxygen is going to make a comeback. KDE 6.7 may turn out beautiful as well as incomparably usable.

I'm already using a combination of oxygen and breeze on my laptop, it creates a great blend of 3D design from late 2000s (Aero / Windows Vista & 7) and flatter UI from 2010s (Metro / Windows 8 & 10)
Here are my settings:
* Colors: Breeze classic
* Application Style: Oxygen
* Plasma Style: Breeze. I'd use Oxygen but it is dark theme only
* Window Style: Breeze
* Icons: Breeze
* Cursor: Oxygen White
Accent color is a bright shade of pink but shouldn't matter on the overall look

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

Quoting: Phlebiac

Quoting: F.Ultrayou cannot write "HDMI compatible" without using the words "HDMI"

That is generally protected, and not a trademark violation. "This ointment is Band-Aid compatible" isn't that different from "this cable is HDMI compatible". No one thinks the ointment is made by Band-Aid, just that they work together just fine.

Consumers generally don't care about official licensing, as long as it works correctly. Surely you are familiar with the inkjet printer racket? Less expensive ink cartridges are compatible with the brand name printers.

The fact is that both the US and EU border protection agencies have a HDMI adopters database against which they check every single electronics shipment that contain HDMI ports and if you are not on the list the entire cargo is destroyed. So while normal trademark law might not cover the "HDMI compatible" it is not a loophole for HDMI in particular. How they managed to get this special treatment I do not know but they do.

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

Quoting: LeprottoI am concerned on RDNA2 it will be just a label, more or less. Not supporting INT8 natively will make it a burden to emulate.

AFAIU all DLSS versions are supported back to the 2070 series and they don't all work super well with it, but it gives the end user a choice. I'm glad AMD is finally going to do the same.

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

Quoting: EikeThese posts are the first time I ever heard of this. And I have two young daughters...

DO NOT GOOGLE IT. Please. I did, and... believe them. Kinda like the german "Schnappi, das kleine Krokodil". *shudder*

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

Quoting: CaldathrasNeedless to say, 3G is being phased out in Canada and we are under pressure from our carrier to get a new phone.

All cool (except what I quoted). With my model I would replace the modem to a 5G one and continue using my phone. That is possible due open hardware and the hardware design with standardized M.2 modem connection. I hope more companies are producing such devices.
Anyway, this is indeed far offtopic. If you want we can continue writing on forum.

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

Quoting: ScottCarammellgood, for as much as I think Steam Input is a great system it being closed-source and Steam-exclusive makes it something I'm weary about reliance on. I can't imagine why Steam Controller doesn't work with X-input out-of-the-box when all of their other hardware works with or without official Steam software...

Here's my crack theory: most PC players have Windows machines and most PC players buy games on Steam. Maybe the idea is that players will use the mouse mode of the Steam Controller to open Steam, instead of having to switch to their mouse and keyboard? That way, you can sit back on your couch or desk chair without touching anything but the Controller.

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

Quoting: PlayingOnLinuxphoneDo I have a cellphone? Yes. But it also runs Linux on purpose to have a lifespan that exceeds any smartphones lifespan [...] There are a lot of people doing the same as me.

Kind of off topic here, but in support of your statement above, my wife and I have the same model of cellphone and we have been using them for 8 years. The phones are perfectly functional (aside from sending and receiving multimedia texts) but they don't support VoLTE, so voice is done over 3G while data uses 4G LTE. Needless to say, 3G is being phased out in Canada and we are under pressure from our carrier to get a new phone. But, you have to admit that 8 years was a good, long run in the cellphone world. Neither my wife nor I have bought into the idea of disposable equipment that both Google and Apple push so heavily in the cellular industry.

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

I love the way it starts moving around when it hits the deeper notes!

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

Quoting: tmtvlInteresting, especially considering Oxygen is going to make a comeback.

Surprised I didn't notice it was missing. Going to have to rethink some of my basic ideas about metabolism.

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

Quoting: LachuI think there should be only putting text: „We can block to ran this game at all without reasons at any time”. That's what should be enough. People would not buy right to play this kind of game if they read this text and do not agree.

I think most gamers have realized by now that devs can shut down a game for any or no reason at all, on any day they wish. They're still buying these games, among things because every single dev on the planet is doing it. I don't think the free market will fix this.

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

Quoting: PenguinThis is one of the many reasons why I love Valve! While most other gaming companies are focusing on cutting-edge technology or chasing the next golden goose, Valve is investing in their community having FUN! And fun is all that should matter when it comes to gaming. Well played!

While I totally agree with the feeling, I'm not sure Valve has much to do with this particular fun?
Or did they have to enable this somehow?

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

This is one of the many reasons why I love Valve! While most other gaming companies are focusing on cutting-edge technology or chasing the next golden goose, Valve is investing in their community having FUN! And fun is all that should matter when it comes to gaming. Well played!

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

Does it have a mic?

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

The game crashes at the splash screen on my 3090 (580 driver) but works on a different system with a 9070 XT. So I'm happy enough. I'll troubleshoot it later.

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

Before anyone ask, someone already played bad apple on it.

that is a cool feature that reminds me that wii mote had the ability to playback sounds, if i remember correct, this was used in some games like "the ring" game where you receive an phone call and put the controller at your ears to listen to the message.

well, i tried to google it but cant find any evidence of this game existing...

anyway i hope some developer take advantage of it with some unique gimmicks.

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