This is gonna make the Steam game lists even more of a mess.

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Quoting: junibegoodThey make a colorful pixel-art game in which you play a magic blob, and the first adjective that comes to their mind about it is "immersive" ?

On hot days like these, I can very much relate to feeling like a blob.

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Quoting: kokoko3kWhere does your statement comes from?
I would not be that sure about that.

What wvstolzing said, basically.
GPU stands for graphics processing unit - it should be fairly self-explanatory what it is good at, drawing things and making calculations used in drawing things (and nowadays a bunch more like de- & encoding, raytracing, etc.).

CPUs are for general calculations. You can render with a CPU, but there's a reason you usually don't - it is pretty inefficient.
Another advantage is the rendering precision, it is very easy to spot a difference - normal CPU rendered text can be a bit "rough" especially on really large resolutions.
Finally, rendering speed is also a factor. I'm sure we've all seen applications using normal CPU rendered UI that have been minimally sluggish when redrawing entire sections/entire screen - if this is done on the GPU, I would not expect any such small delay.
One can argue if you really need the boost of performance from GPU text rendering, but one thing that cannot be denied is that it frees the CPU up for other things as well as being straight up better at the job.

I wouldn't go out of my way to create a GPU pipeline for text rendering in my own projects, but if I was using a toolkit that offered either CPU or GPU rendering, I'd always go for the GPU variant - there's just no reason not to. And then have CPU rendering as a failsafe (not all machines have a GPU, etc.).

As I said, it is an advantage and just makes sense to do, but a strict necessity it is not.

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Quoting: kokoko3kA perfect example of https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Overengineering and inefficient coding.

Need a gpu to accelerate the drawing of...text? Is it that slow?

The opposite is the case.
Making use of the GPU for drawing is vastly more efficient than using the CPU.

Is it necessary? No, of course not.
But advantageous.

View this comment - View article - View full comments

As much as I like a good Double Dragon flashback, this art style looks very generic and way too clean while past Double Dragons always brought a quite gritty/dirty futuristic feel

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Quoting: dmoonfireAs opposed to being self-hosted network services first and happen to have an instance for those who don't want to manage a hosted ve4aion themselves.

That's still paid-for, you just pay someone else for the hosting, not the editor dev.

Either way, I agree it would be nice if they gave you tools for self-hosting.

Quoting: ShadMessaMultiplayer what's a multiplayer code editor ???

Multiple people editing a file at the same time while seeing what the others are doing.

It's been a bit of a fad recently. You know, the kind of thing executives get super giddy about, but most actual developers roll their eyes when they aren't looking ;)

There are of some cases where it can be useful (say debugging an especially nasty bug or ironing out interfaces, etc.).
And it is nice to not have to deal with merge issues in case two people edited the same file at the same time.
But overall I'd say it's a nice little thing, but has the distinct taste of a solution looking for a problem. I've been doing this coding thing for 15+ years and don't think I ever thought "boy, I wish someone else could also edit this file right now".

Plus who the hell wants to have someone else (potentially) looking over their shoulder all the time while coding?

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Quoting: dmoonfireAnd, of course, the network-based services are going to be paid-for:

How could they not be paid-for?
They certainly cause network traffic. And I don't think they are running on donations.

I gave it a quick glance. Makes a nice first impression, but time will tell if it can actually replace VSCode (I'd sure love to get rid of it eventually).

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Quoting: MadWolf

Quoting: Halgari

Quoting: officerniceFeedback: stop using electron.

Well good news, it's not Electron!

I agree though, electron isn't a good choice for an application of this nature.

hi IMHO electron is never a good choice for any applications

It is when all you have is a bunch of developers who are all familiar with web technologies & NodeJS but not much else...

In the end, Electron does waste of lot resources and is just straight slower than alternatives, but I don't think it really matters for an application like this.

And hey, pressing F12 to debug an application you are using (most seem to not disable this feature) is pretty cool.
And anything cross-platform beats whatever the hell they were using for the previous app.

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Quoting: gradyvuckovicThis means, if Valve was FORCED to allow developers to sell those keys at cheaper prices elsewhere, those developers could offer say, a 5% discount by selling those keys on their own websites, gamers could go there and buy the game for slightly cheaper, then activate the game on their Steam account.

The developer walks away with more money because they paid no revenue split, gamers walk away with a cheaper game, and Valve is left holding the bag paying for the hosting of the game's files, cloud saves, screenshots, discussion forums, workshop files, matchmaking, and so on... 'forever', or at least, as long as Valve, and PC gaming, and Steam, all exist, without a cent of revenue to pay for it. How is that 'fair'?

I think it is time to leave dreamland here.

First of all, you will already be able to find developers selling games on other websites cheaper than on Steam. And I'm not talking about shady websites, but the legitimate ones.
Just go on sites like https://gg.deals/ or https://isthereanydeal.com/ and check, you won't have trouble finding sales going on where games are cheaper on platform X than on Steam.
I highly doubt that is against the contract or it wouldn't be happening to this massive degree. So Valve is clearly okay with it.

Then, of course the developer still pays a revenue split on other websites. What, you think sites like fanatical, etc. take nothing?
The cut might be lower than Steam's, but there is definitely still a cut.

Lastly, it's not like Valve isn't getting anything out of the deal, they aren't running a charity.
They allowed (and fostered!) this environment outside of their own store in order to gain user numbers. And it works, obviously. Users flood to Steam and then buy most of their games there, regardless of what happens outside of Steam.
That's more than "fair".

View this comment - View article - View full comments

I don't think this lawsuit has much of a chance.

While I agree with the last two points, I doubt one could argue any of them in court.
You cannot via court force someone to lower their platform fees, especially not if that fee is the industry standard. An industry standard that is way too high and way beyond what it should be, yes, but that's not what's being argued here.

Isn't the first point simply wrong?
I've seen games on sale plenty of times outside of Steam, while on Steam they were not on sale. Thus making the games cheaper elsewhere.
Or is there some clause that allows this, but only for selling Steam keys?

View this comment - View article - View full comments