Yeah, I don't think the weeklong one will accomplish anything either, but I often see people talk themselves out of individual action because they can't control other people's actions. If we all stop doing that, it's called collective action, and it works.
This one did earlier this month.
The example I always found in investing literature is that the best class of investor is "dead people", since they don't time the market. Hard to say which one makes the point better.
I think there are more customers who will now not buy the game than there are those who would stop due to a few cheaters. People who don't compete at the level I do aren't going to run into cheaters in the first place, because they rise to the top so quickly.
At the skill level you're likely to see a single cheater in a fighting game, you've already learned and conquered much of what the game has to show you, and I doubt that running into a cheater a few hundred hours later is going to deter you from competing. In this genre and community, we also know that ranked doesn't count for as much as tournament results, online or off, and they'll ban cheaters if they find them, no sweat.
It takes a trained eye to detect something like the above. They'll even have toggles to adjust how often the computer cheats for them. Automating this detection will lead to false positives. But like I said, even without anti cheat, cheating is so rare.
There are still ways to cheat with legitimate inputs. You can have a cheat that auto detects when to use Baiken's parry, for instance, and never let you land a hit. That's one I've seen before. That said, it's so rare that anti cheat is going to cost you more customers than it protects.
I'm looking for a far more automated solution. Syncthing requires a lot of setup to get going, and the use case for this project is playing a lot of different games that store save files in all sorts of exotic locations.
Yeah, so far, the same as the number of games that bankrupted their studios by releasing DRM-free. Maybe the new Silent Hill this year will be the first, but the last two released on GOG just fine, so it's not looking good for your thesis.
You've already moved the goalposts so far, what does it matter? If Kingdom Come: Deliverance II just last year doesn't show that DRM-free won't just invite piracy, or Baldur's Gate 3 just two years before that, no answer will be good enough for you. Few AAA companies choose to release their games on GOG. More will choose to if that's where the money is. Indiana Jones didn't come to GOG less than a year after its initial release because they just wanted pirates to have it, finally. When Divinity, The Witcher 4, and the new Cyberpunk games come out, a few things will happen: they will sell in the tens of millions of copies and make a boatload of money; they will be available DRM-free on GOG; they will still sell most of their copies on Steam anyway; people will pirate it (but they would have even if the games were only on Steam anyway). Mina the Hollower was make or break for Yacht Club, but they put the game on GOG because they wanted to make money from those customers as well. If they were so sure that people would have just pirated it, surely they would have opted not to release it there.
Which GOG release bankrupted a company by way of piracy?
Plenty of the games people want to buy are on GOG. Definitely not all of them, but you can find GOTY winners like Clair Obscur and Baldur's Gate 3, games that should have won more awards like Kingdom Come: Deliverance II and The Alters, awesome indie games like Mina the Hollower and Escape from Ever After, plus the old stuff that GOG restores like Dino Crisis and Alpha Protocol that had pent-up demand. There's no chart to compare sales, but developers talk, and they know their own sales data. Firms like Circana buy sales data and then sell the analysis back to help companies figure out what will help them make more money, including where people are buying video games.
Also there’s just no denying it, and even trying is disingenuous - a game like GTA 6 releasing on GoG without DRM would sell significantly less than it would in a platform with DRM. It’s just the truth.
That's easy to claim and impossible to prove. Baldur's Gate 3 released day 1 without DRM and still went on to sell over 20M copies; how many people do you think pirated it? Millions and millions? There are some people who are always going to pirate, but I think most prefer the experience of just buying the damn thing and getting better service out of it, not the least of which is quick and easy patching. We also now live in a world where Denuvo is fully broken open. There's no difference in one's ability to pirate once the game has been cracked at all. Piracy is going to happen one way or another, and GTA6 is basically guaranteed to make more money than any other video game that came before it.
In the terrible state that the video game industry is in for developers, releasing a big AAA game DRM-free would be the last game they ever release.
This is demonstrably false, given the AAA games that release on GOG all the time.
Hey, folks! I had begun configuring VLANs recently, and I've got two managed switches between my firewall and my mini PC. I set up a 10 VLAN on the third octet with a /24 mask, and the idea is that anything on 10 should be able to reach the internet but not VLAN 1, while VLAN 1 should be able to access the internet and VLAN 10 services. I'm not so crazy as to try to start with that configuration though. No ports or anything are exposed yet, so my first test was just going to be full access between networks. I maybe counted my initial configuration as a success too soon, because with the mini PC on the 10 network, I can reach the gateway at 192.168.10.1 but nothing else. I can even access the OPNsense config page at the 10 gateway address. If I ping 192.168.1.1, I get "Network is unreachable". If I ping www.google.com, I get "Temporary failure in name resolution", and I also can't pull up sites like YouTube. And again, this is all with a VLAN rule that I believed to be configured to allow all traffic, as it mimics what's set up for my default LAN interface. Pinging the mini PC from the 1 VLAN also fails; it just sort of times out with 100% packet loss, so perhaps the default rule is less permissive than I thought, but it does say it allows all.
I've been following beginner guides from the Home Network Guy (a name that makes this stuff sound more approachable than how he actually presents it), but even with a video that's not even 3 years old, pieces of OPNsense have been deprecated and replaced with new components such that I can't follow along verbatim. For instance, it was an ordeal to get DHCP working now that the one he used has been replaced with Dnsmasque DNS and DHCP, and I can't even tell you what I changed that eventually got it working, but my first couple of tries did not. In one of those videos I've been following, he indicates that the default rule on the LAN interface will allow full access between all networks, but that doesn't seem to be the case, as the same settings on the other VLAN aren't allowing them to talk to one another.
Obviously, I don't intend to leave full access between the networks when it's time to go live, but this simple smoke test shows that there's a gap in my understanding if I can't get what should be the easiest test to work. Does anyone know what I'm missing or what I should do to troubleshoot from here?
EDIT: Solved! At least my easy mode version of this is solved. Thanks to @Jenseitsjens@lemmy.world for help with diagnosing the issue as DHCP-related, and thanks to @CoreLabJoe@piefed.ca for writing up a guide more current than the YouTube tutorials I had been following. The problem was that I had DHCP options set that I probably shouldn't have. Such is the problem of following multiple conflicting tutorials and trying to fill in the gaps.
Steam Machine pricing announced (from $1049-$1428 USD), reservation lists open
(store.steampowered.com)
view more:
next ›