Are you seriously asking how a piece of computer software might fail to operate correctly? As much as DRM sucks, it isn't the only thing that can cause something to not work.
blind3rdeye
joined 2 years ago
It's pretty hard for GOG. Many of the things people don't like about GOG are not really GOG's fault, they are just a result of small market share. Steam is the bigger platform, and so naturally it gets priority for basically everything.
You game doesn't work on Steam? Then you'd better fix it immediately, because that's where the bulk of players are. But if your game doesn't work on GOG... well.. maybe fix it when you get some spare time. (Or maybe don't have a GOG version, because you don't want to have to keep multiple platforms up-to-date.)
So publishers and developers are generally less cooperative with GOG. And GOG themselves obviously have much more limited resources to do stuff themselves.
Steam's recent work with Linux has been great. And I do wish GOG would have something like that. But again, Valve has vast resources for that kind of thing - and they've been working on it ever since the Windows 8 appstore threatened to wipe them out. (That threat fizzled out; but nevertheless, that was what got the Linux ball rolling for Valve.) I'm in two minds about whether GOG should try to boost their Linux support. On the one hand, GOG is all about preservation and compatibility... and so it makes sense to have better Linux compatibility. On the other hand, it would be leaning further into a niche; and working on a problem that is kind of solved already. i.e. We can already run GOG games on Linux with or without a native linux version... it just could be nicer... Maybe it's not a good use of GOG's resources to go for that.
(That said, when I look at their linux start.sh scripts and see
cd "${CURRENT_DIR}/game" chmod +x *
it makes me think they could probably put at least a bit more effort into their linux support.)
Note, if you actually look at that list you'll see it's a very loose interpretation of DRM. All of the games on that list work without any kind of phone-home security check, or unlock code, or anything like that. The list is stuff like "getting the DLC requires a third party account". It's definitely a list of things people don't like, but whether it is or isn't 'DRM' is not so clear cut.
GOG's official position is that the store doesn't allow DRM at all. They describe what they mean by DRM on that same page, and it sounds fairly reasonable; but its certainly understandable that some people would prefer a stricter set of rules.
Fair enough. Just be sure that the wipes really are "flushable". I mean, you can flush basically anything - but most things are bad for your plumbing and for the wider sewage system. My understanding is that if the wipe doesn't break apart easily when it is wet, then it is not suitable for flushing.
In Australia, I noticed a heap of different 'flushable' wipe products vanished after new regulations were introduced. Actually, I don't recall see any such products at all recently.
Bidet is the way, for sure. Butt if you don't have access to that, and you are unfortunately enough to have a messy shit, I suggest spitting on the toilet paper (and give it an extra fold so that it doesn't tear).
I don't speak for the person you are asking, but for me the reason is that google is evil, and huge. They don't need my money, and I wouldn't pay them for any reason.
I expect that if the workplace officially needed to use YouTube, then that workplace would be paying for that subscription. But if its just that sometimes someone wants to include video from YouTube in a presentation or something - then probably not.
Yes. The GamingOnLinux Forum is shutting The forum.
I don't use it. At all. But nevertheless I still have to deal with people constantly telling me that I need to use their 'app', and or only giving information in the form of a QR code. I still have to navigate around zombie-people staring at their phones while they walk around. I still have to deal with the fall-out of bad online interactions that kids have had. and so on. The attention-span issue that the green-text mentions results in a dumbing-down of news and media and basically all kinds of information sharing...
This stuff negatively affects me in obvious and measurable ways, even though I don't use any of the features of this 'tool'.
I don't like it when something is only available on Epic either. I also don't like it when someone is only available on Steam - which happens far more often.
I'm still using Windows 10 on my personal work laptop, and I've got to say that what you've described sounds pretty appealing. Windows 10 with most of the crapware removed, and extended support. That sounds like a good deal...
But on the flip side, I think it's a bad idea to get an OS from a piracy site. Maybe it's all genuine and tickety-boo, but being a reputable 3rd party source is a fairly high bar. I certainly wouldn't trust a site I've never heard of to give me a legitimate copy of a better-than-standard version of Windows. Their offer to verify their own files is less than convincing. I think I'd need to be an active part of the scene to be able to trust something like that - because it certainly smells like an easy way to get back-doored.
I don't think so. On my screen I see that post I responded to said this:
The game will be removed on 13. December?
So in my post I tried to explain that the games will still be available to download from GOG, but it will no longer be purchasable. Different people mean different things when they say "removed from GOG", so I thought this was good to clarify.
You've pretty much got it. It's bad, but it's not horrible. Trying to execute some random file such as a texture basically just doesn't work.. but only by luck. It's possible, but unlikely that the data might look enough like an actual program to run and do something unpredictable.
I'm not aware of any major reasons why its a problem to make everything as executable (and I know that when I open an NTFS drive from linux, all the files are executable by default - because NTFS doesn't have that flag). From my point of view I just think its sloppy. I figure it can't be hard for GOG to just correctly identify which files are meant to be executable. For most games its just a single executable file - the same one that GOG's script is launching. And presumably the files that developers provided GOG have the correct flags in the first place.
Anyway, not really a big deal. Like I said, I just think it's a bit low-effort.