5 ms·
The rolling upgrade cycle for software and games is running afoul of our assumptions about what you get when you pay for a product. With RL, customers have los
by dleslie 6y ago
The rolling upgrade cycle for software and games is running afoul of our assumptions about what you get when you pay for a product.
With RL, customers have lost Linux support and are now losing the ability to opt-out of the EGS.
But it's not the only example; Valve's own TF2 increased its minimum system requirements over its lifespan. They may not have stated as much, but the rolling updates eventually made the game unplayable on machines that could play it decently.
Hell, Oculus is going to require a Facebook account.
And so on, there's plenty of examples of game developers breaking a product their users paid for, and with no recourse for them.
- otachack 6y agoThe TF2 example is especially. Seems a better solution, when facing the issue of updates leading to a worse experience to lower spec machines, would be to iterate and make TF3 or keep a classic TF2 (like they did for counter strike). User base with low spec machines must not be with it, though, and people may have upgraded hardware over time. There's also the slew of new video games that complete for user attention/money. Tons of factors to think about!
- deleted 6y ago[deleted]
- alexgmcm 6y agoYep, Fall Guys just broke Proton (i.e. Linux) and Ultrawide Monitor support with the addition of Easy Anti-Cheat in the latest patch. I feel consumers need better protections against this stuff.
- matheusmoreira 6y agoWe need to get rid of invasive technology like anti-cheating software. Many of these things are actually implemented as kernel drivers that are designed to take over the machine and monitor everything users do. That's the only way they can even hope to prevent cheating and it's not even guaranteed. Lots of games will start working again on Linux if we get rid of this stuff. Online gaming with random people is just like networking with random people: you never know who is going to be a malicious actor. People should play only with those they personally know and trust.
- dleslie 6y agoSaaS games are the only proven viable alternative to anti-cheating software; if the host is the sole authority then there's less concern for peers to cheat. Wallhacks and input hacks notwithstanding.
- matheusmoreira 6y agoCheaters can still automate inputs, decision making and what not. Honestly, given how games these days are straight up designed to be addictive, I'd even say they should be automated in order to cure people of their addiction to stuff like daily rewards. There's just no way it's going to work unless there's trust between the people playing. Can't trust randoms.
- lacker 6y agoBut anti-cheat software does work pretty well. It certainly reduces the amount of cheaters. It’s an arms race against the cheaters, rather than a perfect mechanism to stop all cheating, but it helps a lot.
- hengri 6y agoOkay, but what if I want to play with strangers and NOT have to worry pervasive cheating?
- matheusmoreira 6y agoYou're gonna be disappointed. People manage to cheat even on consoles which are designed to only run software if it's been signed by the manufacturer. There's got to be a point where they ought to stop and say "okay, this is as far as we can go with this idea". That point is probably when they start making kernel drivers that own your system for the sake of trying to guarantee a video game hasn't been tampered with. Some of these things don't exactly have a friendly privacy policy either.
- 6y ago
- apacheCamel 6y agoTo be fair, the amount of cheaters has gone down a lot in my games. There has to be some middle ground. I paid for a game that I want to be fair and fun for everyone. Fall Guys with cheaters takes away 100% of the fun.
- Santosh83 6y agoAny software that depends on an Internet connection to function and/or auto-update should be regarded as SaaS, not a static program or a product that you "buy" in the conventional sense.
- CyberDildonics 6y agoModern software is full of bait and switch techniques. Get people involved with certain expectations, then require more sign ups, accounts, permissions, etc. once they are already invested.
- treis 6y ago>The rolling upgrade cycle for software and games is running afoul of our assumptions about what you get when you pay for a product. >With RL, customers have lost Linux support and are now losing the ability to opt-out of the EGS. What should people assume when they buy a game that is more or less entirely multiplayer online? As an example, I paid $20 for Rocket League 2 years ago. Does that mean I get to play it online, in perpetuity, without anything changing? Probably not.