You don’t own anything you purchase on Steam
Games sold on Steam are not required to use Steam’s DRM. There are lots of DRM free games on Steam. Steam is only required to be installed to purchase/download them but not to run them. After download, the game files can be copied and ran on any computer without any verification.
…on what?
It’s crazy that they released it. They had early access and preorders and those only attracted something like 1,000 players. This is a game that had a $100 million budget. So few players during the early stages should have told the studio to cancel it while it was still in production. Apparently they thought they’d release it and would just jump from 1,000 players to 100,000 overnight with no changes.
In the “other references” they link to the bulbapedia article for Pokemon box so I figured thats what the whole thing was about, but yeah it does read like accessing data on a server
My guess is the “Pokemon Box Storage” system since palworld stores pals in a palbox.
Hello,promitheas
Welcome to Linux Community.
It sounds like you are experiencing some quality issues using Microsoft forums, could you please provide some details to let us assist you better:
1->General System Information: Could you provide some details about your PC’s hardware specifications? Specifically, the processor, amount of RAM, and the graphics card you are using.
2->System File Check: When you say you automatically checked system files, did you use the built-in System File Checker (SFC) tool? Did it report any issues, or did it indicate that everything was fine?
3->Event Viewer: In the Event Manager, can you provide more specific details about the critical errors you see? For example, the exact error messages and any associated error codes.
Have you researched the specific error messages you found in the Event Manager (e.g., Application Error, Application Hang, Windows Error Reporting, DbxSvc, DistributedCOM, nvlddmkm)? Understanding these errors can often provide clues about the root cause of the problem. In the meantime, are you getting a blue screen on your device, and if it’s convenient, try to see if a small dump file has been generated in the corresponding path, which you can upload and share with me-<Read small memory dump files - Windows Client | Microsoft Learn>
4->Cooling and Hardware Issues: Have you noticed any unusual temperature increases while running games or any other hardware-related issues like unusual fan noises or system freezes?
5->Rollback to Previous Windows Version: If the issue started immediately after switching to Windows 11, have you considered rolling back to your previous Windows version temporarily to see if the crashes persist?
The five points of detail above are intended to give me a better understanding of the situation so that I can give potential advice and solutions.
Best regards,
ImplyingImplications |Microsoft Community Support Specialist
What is the benefit of forcing developers to provide access to old games that require online functionality indefinitely, instead of just hard limiting them to say 10 years wich is essentially indefinite in terms of non-live service games.
In a choice between “you can play online until 2035” and “you can play online forever”, the answer is pretty obvious. All things being equal, the indefinite option is better. I think the problem is that all things are not equal, and making it a legal requirement that all games with online features come with a guarantee those features work indefinitely is incredibly vague and can lead to situations that outright hurt developers.
If the devs need to provide a server binary for players to host a server, how do they ensure these servers only allow players who have purchased the game to play? If they can’t ensure it, then the law is forcing companies to allow pirate servers to exist
How do they ensure people running these community servers aren’t charging money for people to play? If they can’t ensure it, then the law is allowing people to use a company’s IP to generate money without a licence.
If the original version had an in-game shop where you can unlock things with real life money but the offline version doesn’t have a shop, thus making parts of the game forever unobtainable, did they follow the law? If not, then devs would have to give out paid features for free.
Unless these kinds of details are accounted for, this vague idea is doomed to fail because no government is going to force a company to give up their copyright/IP for free. I know a lot of people have also said “fuck these giant corporations” but this also affects indie developers as well. Copyright protects small creators as much as it does large ones.
Idk if he even codes
He was a hacker for the US government and has won 3 competitions at DEFCON. Before that he was a programmer for Blizzard and Amazon Games.
They’re doing this because they’ve lost so much money investors are angry and the executives want to win people back. They aren’t worried about law changes, they’re worried about their stock price and reputation.
In the 12 years since European Citizens Initiatives have existed, there have been few successful campaigns even fewer actual law changes. If I were a greedy company, I wouldn’t be worried about this in the slightest.
If ECIs are to become a useful tool for civil society, campaigners would benefit from a better understanding of how to craft their demands in a way that is likely to lead the Commission to actually propose a legislative initiative. There have now been 133 ECI attempts, millions of signatures collected, a significant amount of money spent, and little to show for it.
Once again. No government intervention required. Companies listen to consumers.
A gacha game asking money for something useless? That’s the entire model!
Players that buy stuff in these games usually see it as a donation to devs making a good game. If nobody bought any of the useless stuff the game would shutdown. That’s how I treat the $10 a month I spend on Reverse 1999. Or they’re a gambling addict and can’t stop themselves from spinning the wheel.
Don’t disrespect Hatoful Boyfriend!
This is so important to you that the government must be petitioned to act but you don’t have a single example? Did you purchase Concord? Have you ever purchased a game that no longer works? Why do you think you have the right to tell the devs what they should be doing if you didn’t buy their game?
Can you give an example? Every time I ask for examples I get a list of games like Concord. A bunch of failed launches nobody has heard of.
Literally how would this change anything? Nobody played the game because it’s bad. Everyone who bought it got a refund. Why would you want a law forcing them to give people a game they don’t want?
Personally, I really liked Papers, Please. You play as a customs agent checking people’s paperwork as they seek entry into your country. The idea of the game is very simple but it’s surprisingly good at telling a story and putting you in situations that are morally difficult.
My brother has been playing for years and has a few paid accounts. Here’s how he explained it to me. All paid accounts had their prices locked in until you cancelled them. His first, and main, account had a price of $5 a month because he first bought it 15 years ago.
There are also “ironman” modes that exist in the main game. It’s an option at character creation that will restrict your account from trading with other players forcing you to obtain all items on your own instead of just buying them from the trade board. Since you need to make a new character, this is also another payment. My brother has two ironman accounts.
There are “leagues” which are new temporary servers where the rules are different and XP gain is incredibly fast. You’re given tasks to complete before the “league” ends and are awarded cosmetic items based on how much you complete. This requires its own paid account to play. My brother has one of these too.
In total he spent about $20 a month on the game for his various accounts. This change to the subscription will set every single one of his subscriptions to $14 a month raising his monthly payment to something like $56 a month which is ridiculous. He plans on ending all of his subscriptions since there is now no incentive to stay subscribed (the price is no longer locked in). So my brother, a long time and devoted customer, will play the game less and give less money because Jagex is hoping most people like him won’t go through the hassle of unsubscribing.
He, and lots of other long time players, are hoping that Jagex does what other MMOs do and allow multiple accounts for one subscription price.
Control of the server is the DRM. Radical Heights sold hats for $15. How do they ensure only players who paid for hats get them and that non-paying players couldn’t just mod them in? They control that information on the server. Which accounts have cosmetics is controlled by the server. That’s the DRM. If they had to release the server when shutting down then they’d have no way to ensure only paying customers play the game since the person who runs the sever can modify it however they want. Everyone could get the $15 hats for free! Or maybe they charge $2 for the hats. There’s no DRM that could prevent this because control of the server is itself the DRM.
So a dev is being required by law to give out their game without any DRM meaning anyone can play it for free and even give themselves the cosmetics the original devs were using to pay the salaries of the dev team. I worry very much that this would cause companies to stop producing free to play games or charge a subscription for these types of games instead (since subscription based games would be exempt). I wonder why people would risk this to “save” games like Radical Heights which, in all likelihood, would have no community. A game doesn’t shutdown after 1 month because it has a thriving community
Unfortunately, my friends play it and I’m often roped into playing it with them. My advice: The game is greatly improved if you disable all forms of interaction with other players. Chat is muted by default now, but I’d also recommend muting pings and emotes. No form of interaction is ever positive in that game.
Even then, their matchmaking algorithm seems to be designed to hand an easy win to one team and just switches up which side you’re on enough times that you won’t quit.