Quoting: 14The backend is not agnostic; I see your point. The distributable product is, though. After reading the entire interview, it sounds like they're making Steam for apps. As long as app publishers don't exclusively build Snaps akin to game publishers choosing Epic, I don't see much of a problem with what Ubuntu is doing. As long as we all have free choice and the choices are pretty equal, I think the Snap Store will be a good option for users that don't use computers as a hobby but are running Linux.

I see a big issue with promoting a "solution" to distributing software across all distros that doesn't try to work together with other distros at all, but rather tries to retain control over the entire thing. Feels more like a takeover than a contribution. And it relies on proprietary software, which is enough reason to prefer other alternatives and bonkers for the makers of a popular distro. It is way too closed and centralized - I absolutely don't want Linux software installation as a whole to depend on a single company and their closed service. So I feel that any software that chooses to use snap instead of other solutions is a loss.

It also promotes proprietary software and does a lot of things for the convenience of developers/maintainers at the cost of disadvantages for end-users, which is not exactly good.

I mean, it is not the end of the world, but there are too many issues for me to see it as a step forward... in particular when there are other efforts that don't have those issues.

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Quoting: 14Link to interview?

https://www.techrepublic.com/article/why-canonical-views-the-snap-ecosystem-as-a-compelling-distribution-agnostic-solution/

It is actually defending snaps and its "advantages", but I was still horrified because I didn't know about the issues in the first place. I was like "wait, Canonical wants to control distribution of snaps for all distros and calls that 'agnostic'? The backend is proprietary?"

View this comment - View article - View full comments

I too have recently switched to Manjaro for gaming (dual booted with my old Kubuntu setup for work) and it is quite ok. I'm mostly curious how I will adapt to a distro outside the Debian family tree, things like using the AUR or whether things will actually work despite Ubuntu being the usual target.

Regarding snaps/flatpaks, I was a bit out of the loop but recently read an interview by someone at Canonical talking about the advantages and... holey moley, now I get why people hate Canonical with a passion. So much that is wrong and even downright hostile to other distros or FOSS. Flatpak seems less problematic, but I'm doubling down in my support of just using distro repositories.

View this comment - View article - View full comments

This is my favorite RTS on recent years, it is really good and I can confirm it has worked on Linux for a long time now (it has a bit of inconsequential stuttering that might be due to the port or just my terrible graphics card).

I had seen some news about Conquest before, but this is the most detail so far, and I love it. The big weakness of Northgard was the lack of more single-player stuff, the campaign is just too short. It is the perfect kind of RTS for casual singleplayer, and the few campaign missions are actually quite fun, but playing standalone skirmishes (or repeating the campaign) gets old soon. This system with unique missions and a few unlockable rewards and adapting to your clan and even co-op (the kind of multiplayer I'm less likely to ignore) looks amazing, and the promise of "100+ hours of gameplay" is really enticing.

View this comment - View article - View full comments

You do not need to beat the heart, just unlock the Defect by defeating the normal boss with the Ironclad and Silent. If you have the Defect unlocked, the new character should be available (you don't need to unlock it afterwards). I started with a new save and got it already, and didn't even unlock the ability to face the heart (and didn't even start a game with the Defect post restart).

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Sadly, the Epic store feeds on controversy, so this kind of declaration is just another source of free advertisement for them.

Make people aware there is an Epic store, let them know it has so many exclusives that it is notable when a game doesn't take a deal, make people wait for the next announcement, highlight how much money they are giving developers, create the impression that this is the next big thing. Do something nice and partner with some genuinely cool indies, then do something outrageous to fuel the internet outrage and look like the victim (often at the expense of their partners, that don't have the same defences as they do).

I'd rather we not talk about Epic at all, good or bad.

View this comment - View article - View full comments

I was planning on waiting for the full release instead of jumping into the beta, but of course I couldn't resist for even a few hours.

The new character is pretty cool, got a few sick combos right on the first run (it might need some hard nerfs).

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Ah, if only my computer could run this beauty...

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Quoting: ConfuciusI think the user count is getting low because they keep changing the meta and that annoys everyone. Everytime i think i got a hang of the game, it changes. I'm playing less and less.

Of course, it's still in beta and that's expected but you can't help but feel annoyed about all the changes. The game itself is a lot of fun though.

Edit:Grammar and kb issues

I don't know if everyone feels that way. For many people, shaking up the metagame keeps the game from stagnating - they have to keep the novelty going. Like how MMOs have to release more and more content, or many games have seasonal events, or new expansions...

I am somewhere in the middle, I feel a bit intimidated by those changes (I play less for a while after patches) but so far I love the changes.

Quoting: Liam Dawe@eldaking: I get your point but it's quite rare for games to manage to actually pull people back in once they bounce off it and move on, that is true for Early Access as much as it is for Released games.

As for people taking unfinished games into "consideration", the reality is very different. People leave negative reviews all the time due to issues in unfinished games.

I should note, I hope I am wrong and that the current trend has a nice turn around. The problem is, I do have my doubts even if I greatly enjoy the gameplay. I've been trying to think on ways Valve could make players stick around more but no matter what they do, the basic gameplay will obviously stay the same and I think that's why a lot have left, since it's a very different type of strategy game.

That's true, I'm not sure if "recovering" the lost players is viable. But I expect there is quite a new crowd to draw in, if they put more effort into marketing the game (whether it will remains to be seen)... and I am actually more surprised that this many players were willing to join in the first place. The 200k peak was definitely an anomaly in my mind.

And, well, we all know of the reviews with "10000 hours played, do not recommend". I choose to believe that there are still enough sane people around, people that will be somewhat forgiving of issues in a game tagged as beta...

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Quoting: Liam Dawe

Quoting: eldakingThe game is still in beta, it is a bit too early to look at player numbers and judge its success.

Hardly. The difference between alpha, beta, Early Access and so on in reality is nothing more than a name in the age of all games turning into practically an ever changing live service. Games have flopped hard after the "release" (just look at Artifact...), so have a great many others.

It does matter for a lot of people. If the developer says "the game is unfinished", people will take that into consideration. Some people will choose to wait, some people will be more forgiving of of the issues because it wasn't advertised as "good enough" yet. And I can't imagine that the way they market the game won't change once they have an official release and monetization...

It might indeed flop hard after release - the upcoming changes might not be for the better, or not match expectations. Or it might be a huge success, or have another huge peak and then stabilize, or just not change at all. I just don't think the current trend is a good indication of the future of the game, since we know for a fact there is going to be a big change in the near future.

View this comment - View article - View full comments