This magazine is from a federated server and may be incomplete. Browse more on the original instance.

MrModule, in Memes on c/Games - yes or no?

No. R/gaming was a clownshow of the same low effort garbage posts. Have a day of the week or push it to another sub.

SmarfDurden, avatar

Look at this hidden gem! -posts picture of Witcher 3-


OMG, this game is so buggy, when are they going to fix it?! GIF of Skyrim being Skyrim

genoxidedev1 avatar

Hot take: GTA IV on PC is a badly optimized port

SuiXi3D avatar

DAE think Cyberpunk is the worst thing ever?!?!?!

BiggestBulb avatar

Why is this game always so blue?

Anyway, Battlefield 3 is pretty good so far

tiwenty, avatar

Exactly, I wholeheartedly agree

discodoubloon avatar

Yeah I’m a fan of the subs that do allow it one day a week. Sometimes you’ll see stuff custom made for the sub based on some comment or post that made the rounds.

But yeah for now I’d say no memes. As everything expands I’m sure we can get enough people to get gaming meme subs going.

MossBear, in Unity adding a fee for devs for each time a game is installed, after certain thresholds





Some more context: Godot established the “Godot Development Fund” to accept donations directly (

colonial, avatar

Every other engine is smelling blood in the water it seems


Their tagline is on point.

HeyThisIsntTheYMCA, avatar

I only code in Guffman

KnoxR, in Thoughts on BattleBit Remastered?

It gets a super heavy recommendation from me. The game is absolutely excellent. It’s everything the Battlefield community has wanted from Battlefield for what feels like a decade now.

Do not let the graphics fool you. The game has solid performance, great gunplay, great progression akin to BF4, the class system feels excellent, they can do very large scale due to not having excessive graphics performance will be fully and solid, destruction is also fantastic its just got it all.

As someone who’s felt let down by Battlefield for a while now and put thousands of hours into it back in the day, this scratches that itch like you wouldn’t believe.

CMGX78, avatar

You’ve convinced me.

I’m going to give this game a try tonight.


Convinced me too, downloading now.

A_Toasty_Strudel, avatar

Y’all won’t regret it, I promise.


It’s for sure worth it, I’d recommend you start on 32 v 32 or 64v64 just to not get overwhelmed by the chaos of 124v124 out the gate lol


I’d say to jump right into the 124v124. At that level, one player is not going to change the tide too much. (Its more akin to the battles in Planetside 2 than your standard Battlefield due to the sheer scope.)


Just got a tip this might work on Linux....

But yeah... now I won't

128v128 it is for me 🤪

stevecrox, in What's up with Epic Games?
stevecrox avatar

Basically Epic like every other publisher has created their own launcher/store.

They aren't trying to compete on features and instead using profits from their franchise to buy market share (e.g. buying store exclusives).

The tone and strategy often comes off as aggressive and hostile.

For example Valve was concerned Microsoft were going to leverage their store to kill Steam. Valve has invested alot in adding windows operability to Linux and ensuring Linux is a good gaming platform. To them this is the hedge against agressive Microsoft business practices.

The Epic CEO thinks Windows is the only operating system and actively prevents Linux support and revoked Linux support from properties they bought.

As a linux user, Valve will keep getting my money and I literally can't give it to Epic because they don't want it.


Yeah, what is up with that? What’s wrong with Epic and Linux?

I remember reading that they bought Rocket League and then removed Linux support. Really dumb strategy.

Kata1yst avatar

The owner is a piece of shit who's convinced he's smarter than everyone else and has been hostile to Linux for decades.

Deestan, in Unity issue an apology on Twitter for "confusion and angst" over the runtime fee policy.

While we were very reasonable, we understand that you just didn’t get it, which made you sad. We understand it feels bad to be sad. To remedy this, we will try again using different words.


Yep. What they should have written:

“We recognize that our recent runtime fee policy announcement wasn’t well-received. We genuinely apologize for the oversight and any confusion or concern it caused. Your feedback is invaluable to us. We are actively discussing the policy with our teams and the community and will be revising it based on your inputs. Please bear with us as we work through this, and expect an update soon.”

PR is hard, let’s go shopping!


Yep, that has a better tone. There’s a limit to how good a statement you can make when at the core you really plan to do enshittification one way or another, but they could have thrown in a smidgeon of accepting blame also. E.g. “We were unable to provide clear and unambiguous answers to questions that came up” costs them nothing.

dingus182, in remaster when?

I'll let Dave explain:


And here's the blog from the other guy -


Hey, Dave!


If only I could be as cool as that Dave.

Blakerboy777 avatar

Best comment here, please remember to boost this post so people can see it!

hydroxide, in Sweet Baby Inc. employees harass steam group admin for listing their games to avoid them
  • group offers diversity inclusion consulting, whatever that means
  • steam user curates list to tell people to avoid games solely because a diversity consulting group was onboard.
  • I go to curated list and click on games to check on reviews
  • People review bomb random games with shred of involvement with said company, including smaller devs
  • Many reviews say the game is too ‘woke’. These people’s profiles are inflammatory or bigoted

i fucking hate gaming magazines


i fucking hate gaming magazines

kbin sweating nervously

Carighan, (edited ) avatar

group offers diversity inclusion consulting, whatever that means

It usually means ensuring a lot of small details. For example if you have a native american character, they’d make sure you do not randomly pick a culture that doesn’t fit what the character does or their background, that you don’t show some non-native stereotypes, that you don’t idolize them like in stories unless your specific story calls for that, etc etc.

You’re supposed to work with consulting companies like these when you don’t have people who can judge this on your own team, because it’s so easy to get so many details wrong. Of course it’d be easier if your team already knows how to do it, sure. But if you can’t, then it’s the right step to get someone external who can help you not make a joke out of a character. Again, unless they’re suppsoed to be a joke.


thank you for clarifying


This reminds me of Star Trek Voyager's Chakotay(?) and total fraud that "helped" with the native background.

beaxingu, avatar

this only exists because companies can benefit from it by getting there ISG score higher because they can say they put diversity in a game. normally consultants where for a specific topic like for guns or history or a culture but sweet baby only does superficial things and represent themselves as experts when there just in marketing no expert in anything to do with the game.

iAmTheTot, in What games do you recommend for my girlfriend?
iAmTheTot avatar

she likes organizing/keeping track of stuff.

Stardew Valley.

meatand2veg, in Star Wars: Knights Of The Old Republic Remake Is No Longer In Development - Report

Nice. They DMCA’d the remake fan project so they could do this.


Group announces fan remake. Group get cease and desist. Internet tells them they should have just dropped it one day out of the blue. A tale as old as time. Im sympathetic. But its idiotic to announce a fan remake of anything unless you have the written consent of the owners. (and even then its risky because they can always revoke those permissions at random)


Unless you’re remaking a Valve title apparently. Black Mesa is fantastic.


According to Wikipedia it started out as a mod, Valve asked them not to give it a name too similar to their own Half-Life Source, then later Valve approached them and suggested a commercial release!

setsneedtofeed, (edited ) avatar

In Valve’s case it’s just a smart move both for PR and business. Black Mesa isn’t competing with any of their products since I’m sure not many younger people are super interested in the original. In fact the remake might drum up interest by some people to play the original. And it’s sold on Valve’s platform, giving them a cut. Win win.


The announcements of fan works are always to drum up more fans to contribute to the work. And honestly 99/100 it doesn’t result in legal threats, it makes sense to do. Fan works don’t get made in secret, in secret they get to version 0.01 and sit on one person’s hard drive for a decade


Sometimes it’s for personal advertising/resume padding.

guyrocket, in GTA 6’s Publisher Says Video Games Should Theoretically Be Priced At Dollars Per Hour
guyrocket avatar

He didn't say it but he wants you to RENT software not OWN it. Make no mistake, this would be BAD for consumers.

HubertManne avatar

thats what mmos are. its been done.


That’s not software. That’s a service. If you can’t pay, you can’t expect them to be maintaining servers.

HubertManne avatar

well yup and thats what they want the games to be. a service. multiplayer diablo2 was much like an mmo but no servers needed. You could run the server and play with your friends or even open it up but everyone needed to have a copy of the game. so it has been done and they want to do it more and more.


While I’m super into self hosting instances, that usually defeats the point of MMOs. The unfortunate truth of the matter is that the publishers of MMOs often defeat the point of their game after long enough anyhow.

All that has generally pushed me towards round based games where the only advantages are my own personal skill.

AlmightySnoo, in Unity issue an apology on Twitter for "confusion and angst" over the runtime fee policy. avatar

Too late, they already communicated their greed to every gamedev out there and no one can ignore the potential of Unity fucking them over again anymore. Overall the whole shitshow was good advertisement for Godot.


It’s truly the year of mask-off corporate reveals. WotC, Reddit, Unity, Twitter. Probably more I’m forgetting or unaware of. So many big moves to capitalize on long time stability that, quite predictably, result not in amazing increase in profits but the irrevocable tarnishing of public trust that they relied on. It’s kinda wild to watch, honestly.


microsoft making ux worse, google fighting adblock with drm, not to mention all sorts of non-tech catastrophe

somebody is gonna make a ‘we didnt start the fire’ about 2023 called ‘we started the fire’

AlmightySnoo, (edited ) avatar

It’s IMO a sign that the current financial bubble is about to burst and it’s going to do so in a very violent way despite greedy bulls still pushing the “it’s different this time, we have AI now” bullshit.

Investors have their money trapped in these companies, and when they see what riskless treasury bills yield, they naturally start losing their minds because their money is instead in companies that fail to make significantly more than that riskless benchmark. So those investors then pressure those companies to do whatever they can to produce a good enough return on investment in a short period of time as they run out of patience and they themselves know that hell is coming in the financial markets so their shares might lose an even more significant amount soon.

The end result of CEOs and executives under pressure by investors, and engineers stressing out because they understand the financial situation and that they have to either be yes-men and agree with whatever changes the executives propose or be laid off (because another way to reach the target set by investors is to reduce costs by firing people), is obviously the enshittification that we witness today.


The conventional wisdow is that in time of economic turmoil, companies should lower their profit margins and weather out the storm.

However, in today’s capitalism, this is not not acceptable. Shareholders demand ever increasing profits and anything short of that is considered a failure. If you don’t keep your margin, you are to be scolded and discarded.

Now, the loans that many of the companies have cost a lot more money than 2 years ago. So the enshittification is used to enable the continued growth to keep the profits growings.


That’s how it is once the free money dries up. The profits must rise, no matter the long-term damage this causes - so they try to bleed the existing customer base dry to keep things rising for one or two more quarters. What does it matter to them if all the employees who have worked hard for years will lose their jobs due to their mismanagement?

hogunner, in Saints Row developer Volition permanently shuts down

As someone who loved their older games, this sucks; but as someone who has played their newer games, this was expected.


The remake was so boring that I uninstalled the game before I even finished the first mission.


I lasted a little longer but not much. It really was bad. I reinstalled it after their giant patch that was supposed to fix it and gave it a second chance: the shooting was better but the main issues with everything else were still there.

It was like they asked ChatGPT to create a Saints game.


City Unleashed: Crime Revolt

Default (GPT-3.5)

User Create the plot for a game similar to the first four Saints Row games

ChatGPT Title: “City Unleashed”

Plot: In the sprawling metropolis of Havencross, crime syndicates have taken control, leaving the city in chaos. You play as a street-smart vigilante who rises to power in order to reclaim the city from the clutches of these criminal organizations. As you build your own crew and establish dominance, you’ll face off against rival gangs, corrupt officials, and powerful crime lords.

Starting as a small-time crook with a personal vendetta, you’ll complete daring heists, engage in intense street races, and execute audacious stunts to earn respect and resources. Your actions catch the attention of an underground resistance that seeks to topple the syndicates. They offer you support, guidance, and a chance to reshape Havencross.

The game offers an open-world environment, allowing you to explore the sprawling city, engage in a variety of activities, and make choices that influence the narrative. Customization plays a significant role, not only in terms of your character’s appearance but also in building your gang’s identity, from outfits to vehicles to hideouts.

Throughout the game, you’ll encounter memorable characters, each with their own motivations and backstories. As you forge alliances and rivalries, the balance of power in the city shifts dynamically. The story takes unexpected turns as you uncover the dark secrets behind the syndicates’ rise to power and their connections to influential figures in the city.

With a blend of over-the-top action, humor, and engaging storytelling, “City Unleashed” captures the essence of the first four Saints Row games, delivering a high-octane, open-world experience filled with outrageous missions, explosive combat, and a dynamic environment that reacts to your choices.

ChatGPT did way better.

Carighan, avatar

I’ll be honest, that is kinda how the new Saints Row was probably pitched in the design docs.

The problem is in the details. They failed to:

  • Create other games worth mention.
  • Have memorable characters.
  • Implement motivating vendettas or any personal motivation.
  • Make the city feel alive, which invalidates the whole open-world environment (a criticism I’d level against CP2077 too, it feels way too sterile).
  • Have any meaningful way of influencing your relationship with characters or forces.
  • Have a story worth mentioning.

In a lot of ways, the pitch document probably describe a good game. Just like ChatGPT does, there. But note how your mind is filling in that all of this would end up in the actual game, and be competently done. And that’s where the actual GenZ Saints Row fell apart, too.


It was so boring I deleted my OS before the opening cutscene finished.


It was so boring I tossed my tower out a window before I even purchased it.


It was so boring I rebooted the simulation before it was even announced. Unfortunately, things don’t seem to have gone any better this time around.


I didn't even bother buying it. The trailers looked so bad and then you'd have to wait for a Steam release. No thanks. When the first gameplay videos dropped it looked like absolute trash and really just rehashed all the repetitive content from the previous games, which was plentifully criticized to be a huge weakpoint of them already, with a lame story, idiotic characters and a boring map on top of it. It was just a rehash of all the bad, but I guess that's all they could pull off.

Carighan, avatar

For me, the big “Nope” was how despite being a modern game and running like arse (and not looking all that well), the streets are mostly empty. I mean at the very least I would assume they could re-implement SR3 one-to-one in more … opulent?

But instead it looks and feels worse than the older games, even in a direct comparison, because everything is dead and empty and still stutters like crazy.


SR2 was the peak of the series for me. I played 3 and 4 but they already felt like they were being constrained by budget even back then. They were mostly copy pasted mini games with far fewer missions.

Carighan, avatar

Yeah there’s always a lot of divided audience feedback. SR2 was too serious for me still, it felt like a low-budget GTA clone and I wasn’t even a GTA fan in the first place.

But SR3 and 4? They were so ridiculously over the top, they parodied the whole genre. A genre I love to see made fun of, so they were perfect for me.


SR2 just felt like the crazy Vice City sequel that Rockstar refused to give me at the time.

San Andreas, GTA4 felt too serious. SR3 and 4 felt too silly, to the point of turning into Crackdown.

GTA5 felt back on track though, and that’s probably mostly down to Trevor. You can cause utter mayhem without breaking character.


3 struck the perfect balance for me, it was like playing an action movie that didn’t take itself too seriously while still maintaining a tenuous grasp on reality. 4 fully jumped the shark for me and was hard to enjoy.

antaymonkey, in Baldur's Gate 3 Will Feature 17,000 Ending Variations

I’m sure that, while 17k may be mathematically and technically true, they’re going to be virtually indistinguishable. I’m pretty hyped for the game but I also don’t care for the obviously clickbait claim.


Ten quintillion planets endings


In this ending Shadowheart has a ponytail…

Coelacanth, avatar

It’s nice to know the ending will touch upon your actions thoroughly, but I suspect it will be a lot like the The Witcher 3 technically having 40-something “endings” (but really it’s just 3 major outcomes with some variations on the details).


I agree and I suspect companions are carrying a lot of the weight for this calculation.

Hypothetically, if there’s 10 companions with 10 individual endings each you’d get 100 endings right there. Add in 10 main endings and you get 1000, add in 4 major side quests and 4 variations each and you’re at 16,000 ending variations.

Chailles, avatar

I’m not entirely sure why, but I don’t think that adds up. 10 companions with 10 different endings is a total 100 endings, however there are apparently 1.7x10^13^ combinations if you were to pick any 10. I don’t entirely know if I did the math right there.

So you don’t have 1000 endings from the 100 total companion endings and 10 main endings, you have 110 total endings.

Either 17,000 is a figure from the various combinations (compare that to Fallout 3’s purptorted 300 endings) or there are 17000 total ending “slides.” The former is much more likely.


Unless I’m getting the math wrong myself, for any “pick 1” combination set like this we’re dealing with just multiplying the combination sets together. Technically we’re multiplying by the factorial of the sample size, but 1!=1.

We’re not picking any 10 from within the subset of 100; you cannot pick both ending 1 and ending 4 from companion A and then no ending at all for companion C. I’m assuming each individual sub-ending is mutually exclusive with the rest of its sample space. That difference of assumptions is what led to your 1.7x10^13^ combinations.

Chailles, avatar

You’re probably more right than me here, but I’m just not following. Does it matter whether or not to pick 1 from 10 sets of 10 or to pick 10 from a single set of 100? We don’t care about what set each individual item came from, just that it’s unique and the number of possible combinations.

Edit: Probably just best to dismiss this. I clearly have no idea what I’m talking about.


Yes, it matters. If you’re picking 1 out of 10 each from 10 different sets, you get 100 combinations. This also limits the sample space to what is possible.

For simplicity’s sake so we can do math that we can intuitively figure out, look at it as picking one from binary choices, with three companions. So you have companions A, B, and C. With possible endings A1, A2, B1, B2, C1, C2.

If you pick 1 from A, 1 from B, and 1 from C you get 2*2*2 possible outcomes, or 8.
If you pick any 3 from the set of 6 (A1, A2, B1, B2, C1, C2) you get 6!/(3!*3!) possible outcomes, or 20.

With the former, you always get one ending for each companion. Every companion has an option selected, and every companion does not have multiple endings selected. With the latter, you might get 1 from each companion. Or you might get A1, A2, and B1 — with no endings for companion C, and two endings for companion A.

How can ending A1 “A lived happily ever after” and ending A2 “A died midway through the player’s journey, never having found happiness” both happen? They cannot. We need to use a system that limits the sample space to exactly 1 per companion, even if that option itself might be “doesn’t show up in the end slides.”

UlrikHD, avatar

Since it’s variations of the combined ending, each permutation would count as unique. Meaning that 10 companions with 10 endings each would total variations,

aaronstc, in Memes on c/Games - yes or no?

No, thank you.

Buffalox, in Legendary Half-Life YouTuber plans class-action lawsuit against Ubisoft for killing The Crew

The Crew’s servers, scheduled for Sunday March 31, represents a “gray area” in videogame consumer law that he would like to challenge.

I think the argument to make is that The Crew was sold under a perpetual license, not a subscription, so we were being sold a good, not a service

the seller rendered the game unusable and deprived it of all value after the point of sale.

Goddam right, that’s not a grey area IMO, that shit ought to be illegal. Maybe there should be a term, like let’s say 90 years maybe?

tsonfeir, avatar

Or, maybe don’t force online requirement, and allow p2p. Or, better yet, open source the server now that it’s shut down and release a patch to specify where to connect.

BarrierWithAshes avatar

Blacklight Retribution did this for their console version. Wish they woulda did it for the PC version but whatever.



I miss it so much.


I just expect a popup in the game which says something like “Could not connect to server, some multiplayer features will be unavailable. Continue offline?”

Wahots, avatar

Or the ability to host community servers like the olden days when a game is sunsetted.


I’d tie its length to copyright length. Maybe they would fight Disney when they try to raise it again.

circuitfarmer, avatar

Imagine buying a T-shirt, and the manufacturer, without your prior knowledge or consent, could somehow render your shirt unwearable – that’s effectively what’s happening here. The only “gray area” might be that ultimately you don’t own a copy of the game anyway (since digital copies are effectively leased – a whole other issue unto itself), but regardless: more power to this lawsuit. Seriously shady shit getting tacitly accepted lately.


“we lost our license to print this brands logo on our shirts, so you have to give it back now”



“Imagine everyone moves to electric vehicles, gas stations close down, and people start sueing Ford for releasing a gas car 30 years ago” is the better analogy.


That’s a terrible analogy.

It’s more like, imagine Fords required a connect to a server to run and they turned that server off, stopping a perfectly functional car you purchased from working.

Then you sued them to force them to make the car work without the server.


What a weird case of simping


My personal favorite is the “companies are obligated to support it forever, or open source the server software hosted by a third party, hosting paid for up front for at least a year.”

They get to keep my money forever don’t they?


While I love the spirit of this idea, it gets complicated fast. Worlds adrift is a great example. The game’s server was created using some closed source libraries with a paid license. So when the owning company (Bossa Studios?) went under, they were unable to open source it.

A law like this would effectively kill all licensed software that isn’t a full product. I do agree though; we need a solution


I’m fine with that, wanna keep it out of public hands, nut up and sell your stuff


Still difficult in that example. Bossa can’t force the other company to do anything.

tsonfeir, avatar

When the initially licensed the library, they should’ve included distributed binary copies. That may have allowed them to release the source for their game alongside the binary of the library.


An interesting idea but it’s not possible with all languages. E.g. golang. But probably not the case with worlds adrift. I’m guessing it’s more of an incentive problem for the other company. No more revenue = why bother?

tsonfeir, avatar

Also, you could use CGo, but if you know golang, then you know why that’s not always a viable option.

tsonfeir, avatar

I think it’s like when a tv show doesn’t bother to negotiate the music rights for syndication and then they can’t air it anymore if the audio can’t be removed.

“What happens in 10 years?” Isn’t always a priority. Also, I’m sure that makes the price go up.


A law like this would effectively kill all licensed software that isn’t a full product

What I’m hearing is: this law needs to be a constitutional amendment.


Hmm I may be confused. Do you believe that software companies shouldn’t be allowed to build and sell libraries? I.e. They should only be allowed to sell full products, ready for an end user?



I am aware that this would kill SaaS overnight, that’s an intended feature.


Fair enough regarding sass, though I disagree with the opinion.

But I’m asking about builders of partial software. For example, consider a single developer that builds a really great library for handling tables. It displays a grid, displays text in cells, maybe performs some operations between cells, etc. On its own, this software is useless but is very useful for other people to build other products. Should it be illegal to sell this software?


I agree with you.

Though I would say that the grid software on its own IS useful. It’s useful to developers, otherwise they wouldn’t use it. Saying it’s useless is like saying a hammer is useless because it’s not a house, it’s only good for building a house (among other things).


Not the person you’re responding to but I definitely think that Library should be able to be made, however I don’t believe that they should be able to prevent a project from going open source in the case of company using the library going under, or if they wanted to keep it closed Source they should have to do something similar to what class action lawsuits do where anyone that is affected by it and opts into the agreement get some sort of compensation. Because it really is like a rug pull you buy a product and then the company makes the product unusable


Except that isn’t how it works, and could lead people to buy a library for a day, then opensource it.

Open source means any code used is widely available to anyone. Having a library you pay for means it cannot be widely available, or nobody would buy it. No more licensing game engines, paid libraries cease to exist since there is no incentive to make them, everything goes the “open source way” which means hard to use, opinionated, unintuitive software that is maintained by random people who rarely know what they are doing. No online banking, since you can’t certify that easily and it wouldn’t be profitable. No card with points and goodies in your supermarket for the exact same reason (points have a calculable value in real money). No online healthcare, etc etc


IIRC Bossa tried to open source it but they used a license for Spatial OS, which provided the backbone of their game. They were unable to make a stable game without it and opted to not open source it. But they were also in an early access that would probably provide an exception for a game closing down.

Bossa did leave the island creator active and has spun up Lost Skies on the same engine, which wouldn’t be possible if they open sourced WA.

Ultimately the issue should be GaaS and MMOs are offerings service while other games are goods which have an artificial expiry date. This is a good test of software judication.


The subscription model makes plenty of sense. But there are loads of games that rely on server side components. That includes basically every multiplayer game that isn’t peer-to-peer. Any very many of them aren’t on a subscription.

I would love to require all that to be open source. But I still don’t see how to do it practically.

  • All
  • Subscribed
  • Moderated
  • Favorites
  • kavyap
  • rosin
  • everett
  • DreamBathrooms
  • cisconetworking
  • magazineikmin
  • Youngstown
  • slotface
  • mdbf
  • tacticalgear
  • osvaldo12
  • thenastyranch
  • cubers
  • khanakhh
  • bokunoheroacademia
  • InstantRegret
  • ethstaker
  • Leos
  • GTA5RPClips
  • tester
  • modclub
  • normalnudes
  • Durango
  • relationshipadvice
  • anitta
  • lostlight
  • HellsKitchen
  • sketchdaily
  • All magazines