Quoting: tfkI wonder whether they will keep the original versions available too for those who still have original hardware.

For what it's worth, in older adventure games where they use ScummVM (as opposed to say, Dosbox) they eventually removed original versions but not at first. They originally did include the executables as well, and people could use them on original hardware, but as ScummVM doesn't actually need those they always had the option to not include them, and eventually did remove them.

I don't think they ever announced why, unless I missed it somewhere. I always kind of assumed it was a "support thing" in that they solved complaints that the games wouldn't start or that people would get errors because they'd try to launch the games directly (in which case the simplest solution would be to remove the problem wholesale). Just conjecture on my part, but feels like a reasonable explanation.

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Quoting: LoudTechieThe question is why does everybody use BattleEye, to actively break linux.
I mean all the other anti-cheats offer just as much support for breaking it.
This way the Wine people only have to implement the behavior BattleEye(Windows only edition) depends on.
Not that I'm complaining, but it sounds stupid.

I would assume it's the same reason things like google drive, and similar cloud storage, avoid making official linux clients. The general idea is that linux users are more savvy, and therefor, more likely to use the services to their maximum extent, and for storage using all of what you pay for is considered a bad thing.

In anti-cheat context, I can only assume they're specifically targeting "savvy".

Obviously all of that happens anyway, probably nearly immediately.

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Quoting: TechnopeasantRather than calling anyone the "bad guy", would you be able to describe what the issue with SwanStation was?

I am entirely unfamiliar with either situation, but at least with SwanStation you can fork it AGAIN if you dislike their managment.

Well, in this case, I would actually use those words. But it's fair to want to make your own opinion. Essentially the Swanstation fork was created by someone for a commercial project, they also raised a lot of money to do so via Kickstarter. Retroarch also weighed in with their opinions, and while they didn't necessarily side with either side directly, they did make a point to point out that the license technically allows it -- and cue Futurama "Technically correct is the best kind of correct". You can dig up the drama without too much effort from that occasion, although this video summarizes it fairly well:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v-iRW7BAoOU

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Quoting: DesumThis is the ReDream mistake all over again but worse for the project (Flycast has pretty much replaced ReDream as the top Dreamcast Emulator). Duckstation already has a hard fork which probably has more users called Swanstation that will remain under the GPL. So why contribute bug reports and code to Duckstation when more people are using Swanstation anyway? I'll stick to Swanstation and Mednafen, thank you very much.

This developer is far too prone to flying off the handle to put much faith in, especially with the most locked down CC license there is.

You know, Swanstation was actually the related drama-with-Retroarch in the past I was referring to. Frankly, SwanStation were "the bad guys" from that situation, not the good guys.

Honestly, the current situation sounds a LOT like that situation, almost identical really. I would not be surprised if it's still the same situation resurfaced. Last time he almost closed his own project/quit, or did rather, before coming back and resuming development. This time it sounds like he's taking a different drastic approach that doesn't involve him closing his passion project.

Really if nothing else, this shows the pitfalls of open source as opposed to the virtues.

I don't think it's fair to say the guy is too prone to flying off the handle. He was driven to flying off the handle, and the aggressors were never in the right. Could he have handled it better? Sure. Should he have been in that situation? No.

I will continue to use DuckStation, personally.

View this comment - View article - View full comments

This seems key "Packagers being collateral damage was a beneficial side-effect, considering they don't clearly mark their versions as modified (also a GPL requirement), break functionality, and expect upstream to provide support."

Which is extremely fair, IMHO. A lot of entitled people out there love to bark up the wrong tree.

Could be drama like Stenzik has had with Retroarch in the past (which is not surprising, can't speak for all contributors of that project but some of them are extremely entitled people), could just be mounting frustration over time with distro packaging and entitled users, who knows. I wouldn't be surprised if it's all of the above.

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Definitely read the manual before playing with this one. It does warn you that it moves roms and such to the folder you select, and I'm not sure if a github readme / somewhere other then the interface warns you, but personally I did not realize it was going to detect my already installed emulators and folders through them and consolidate those to it's folder too.

It's currently rsyncing my RPCS3 dev_hdd0 folder, which is decently large and a ton of inodes.

Frankly while I see the convenience I definitely wouldn't have tested EmuDeck on my desktop if I'd have realized it was going to auto-detect things I didn't enter into the interface somehow.

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Quoting: Mountain ManSo Microsoft is 100% open sourcing the code with no strings attached? No "Gotcha!" waiting to be unleashed at some point in the future? I'm naturally suspicious of anything coming out of Redmond. It's not in their nature to be altruistic.

From my reading of the statement, they're not being entirely good natured here. This part being key:

QuoteMicrosoft maintains a modern fork of Mono runtime in the dotnet/runtime repo and has been progressively moving workloads to that fork. That work is now complete, and we recommend that active Mono users and maintainers of Mono-based app frameworks migrate to .NET which includes work from this fork.

Which sounds an awful lot like "use the MS fork and not this one", remembering that Microsoft has kind of a terrible Linux history on the .Net front. IMHO this all could be alright-to-good news, but I wouldn't assume it is either.

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Quoting: tpau

Quoting: dibzHonestly the Galaxy Client itself, ignoring Linux for a moment, feels mostly abandoned as it is. I believe the single person they had maintaining the integrations quit quite some time ago, and was never replaced.

The broken ones are community integrations which you can hardly blame the company for :)

They had a paid staff member that managed "Awesome-GOG-Galaxy". Once that stopped, so did any updates via the "Search for integrations" in Galaxy. People can still do it on their own, but the jank from doing it that way pretty much killed that portion of the client.

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Quoting: Purple Library Guy

Quoting: dibz

Quoting: CatKillerGOG's Linux-hostility means that I last gave them money in... 2017, and I have no intention of giving them more in the future. It's good to have tools to stop people's GOG libraries keeping them locked into Windows, though.

What do you mean by hostility? To me it's felt a lot more like they probably had one or two people wanting to support linux and they were cool with it, then it faded for whatever reason -- like the same people moved on from the company or something.

Honestly the Galaxy Client itself, ignoring Linux for a moment, feels mostly abandoned as it is. I believe the single person they had maintaining the integrations quit quite some time ago, and was never replaced. While they did promise Linux support, it's always felt like you often see with .Net apps -- especially around the time Galaxy was being made -- where MS loosely promised Linux support in .Net, then the next version of .Net, then just Nah but you can use 3rd party to implement the GUI, and naive promises were getting made by people/devs that didn't do their *homework. The client just isn't great; Heck, if you use "Surprise me" to have it "reveal" random games -- they're always the same games, chosen in the same order, every time you restart the client.

My point is Galaxy itself feels low priority, and very loosely managed. Very much feels like people "feeling like doing this or that", and the someone that felt like doing linux things is... probably not even there anymore?

*: You'd see the same exact thing with stretch goals in KS projects promising Linux support, because their game engine claimed to support it; And again, failed to do their homework only to find out later they actually had to put effort in, and likely plan and develop from day one so they make good choices. Then you'd see "Blah blah not worth the effort (we made bad decisions but this is a popular excuse right?)" and they just don't do it.

I take your point and think that was generally well put . . . but at the same time I think making a comparison with Microsoft in your argument that (thing) is not hostile to Linux is fundamentally unpersuasive.

Hah true, I didn't mean the comparison in that way but rather that particular example. MS is obviously pretty hostile towards desktop Linux.

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Quoting: CatKillerGOG's Linux-hostility means that I last gave them money in... 2017, and I have no intention of giving them more in the future. It's good to have tools to stop people's GOG libraries keeping them locked into Windows, though.

What do you mean by hostility? To me it's felt a lot more like they probably had one or two people wanting to support linux and they were cool with it, then it faded for whatever reason -- like the same people moved on from the company or something.

Honestly the Galaxy Client itself, ignoring Linux for a moment, feels mostly abandoned as it is. I believe the single person they had maintaining the integrations quit quite some time ago, and was never replaced. While they did promise Linux support, it's always felt like you often see with .Net apps -- especially around the time Galaxy was being made -- where MS loosely promised Linux support in .Net, then the next version of .Net, then just Nah but you can use 3rd party to implement the GUI, and naive promises were getting made by people/devs that didn't do their *homework. The client just isn't great; Heck, if you use "Surprise me" to have it "reveal" random games -- they're always the same games, chosen in the same order, every time you restart the client.

My point is Galaxy itself feels low priority, and very loosely managed. Very much feels like people "feeling like doing this or that", and the someone that felt like doing linux things is... probably not even there anymore?

*: You'd see the same exact thing with stretch goals in KS projects promising Linux support, because their game engine claimed to support it; And again, failed to do their homework only to find out later they actually had to put effort in, and likely plan and develop from day one so they make good choices. Then you'd see "Blah blah not worth the effort (we made bad decisions but this is a popular excuse right?)" and they just don't do it.

View this comment - View article - View full comments