• 0 Posts
  • 50 Comments
Joined 9 months ago
cake
Cake day: September 27th, 2023

help-circle



  • I hope you’re right because this article says they used a spray can.

    Which brings me back to the last point in my comment.

    I also hope I’m right. The two times I looked into it (right after the attack and before writing my comment) both came up with that result. Also it seems that English Heritage came out today saying there was “No visible damage”.

    As I said, I’m not writing to defend the action, just pointing out that the OP article is, willfully or not, omitting certain aspects that could make JSO look a little bit better.

    Edit: Formatting


  • but we did damage a 5000-year-old monument

    As far as I could find out, they used orange cornflour that will just wash off the next time it rains. The most amount of damage anyone could seriously bring up was that it could harm/displace the lichen on the henge.

    That’s not to say that I specifically condone the action, but it’s a lot less bad than this article makes it sound. It’s the same with the soup attack on one of van Gogh’s painting, which had protective glass on it. So far all the JSO actions targeting cultural/historical things (at least the ones that made it to the big news) have been done in a way that makes them sound awful at first hearing, but intentionally did not actually damage the targeted cultural/historical thing.

    I think the biases of the journalist/news outlet/etc. are somewhat exposed by which parts they focus on and which they downplay or omit entirely.


  • I can only speak for myself. For me it felt really great being able to explore the world having absolutely zero idea of what is what, how much game is left, etc. It is reminiscent of a time when I was a kid and playing a game was exactly like that.

    I even got quite sad when my friend “accidentally” told me

    spoiler

    That a certain action I did locked me into a specific ending unless I did something I probably wouldn’t be able to figure out. Rationally I understand that this is as inconsequential as it gets, but I didn’t even know for sure if there were multiple endings until that point.








  • I’d argue that with their definition of bots as “a software application that runs automated tasks over the internet” and later their definition of download bots as “Download bots are automated programs that can be used to automatically download software or mobile apps.”, automated software updates could absolutely be counted as bot activity by them.

    Of course, if they count it as such, the traffic generated that way would fall into the 17.3% “good bot” traffic and not in the 30.2% “bad bot” traffic.

    Looking at their report, without digging too deep into it, I also find it concerning that they seem to use “internet traffic” and “website traffic” interchangeably.



  • There are quite a few other roguelike (or roguelike adjacient) games that do beat it handily. To give a few examples:

    DF started development in October 2002 (according to their own website, scroll all the way down.)

    UnReal World’s first release was in 1992 and is also still getting regular updates.

    NetHack has gotten new versions ever since 1987. The latest big change was 3.6.0 in 2015, 3.6.7 came out in early 2023 but there’s no reason to believe there won’t be a next version. If we count that in 1987 it started as a fork of Hack, we could even add another 3 years in the front as Hack was published in 1984.

    Edit: I just realized: In the world of MMORPGs we also have a few examples: Everquest which came out in 2000 and is still getting expansions. Even WoW isn’t too far behind with a 2004 release date, which probably means development began before DF’s development too.


  • I definitely paid with some time investment, but you bet I wrote a short script to automate toggling that rule on/off. It’s also not like I had to run that script every time I wanted to play a game. Only to play a game in my brother’s library while he was playing something else or when I wanted to play one of my games and he was already in one.

    Summing up the time investment vs. the cost of games, and using a time-money conversion rate that assumes I had a well paying job in my field and wasn’t still a student, it was definitely profitable.

    You’re definitely right on the frustration front though: I bought many games just to not have to deal with this. It was mostly used for games one of us was on the fence about. Or (like in the Outlast case) only one of us really wanting to play a game and the other just playing along because playing together is fun no matter the game.
    Now, in the former case, it might be back to sailing the seas.


  • Mirodir@discuss.tchncs.detoGames@lemmy.worldSteam :: Introducing Steam Families
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    2
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    3 months ago

    I think people are more negative than positive about this change. The old system allowed for far more freedom at the cost of being more annoying to set up.
    This change cracks down on anyone who used the old system in unintended ways, i.e. to share games with family members not living in the same household. For now that check only compares store region/country, but I wouldn’t be surprised if they tighten the requirements further in the future.

    It’s also a negative compared to the old system if one of your (adult) family members throws a huge tantrum, allowing them to cause a lot more damage and inconvenience than before.

    Edit: I just wanna mention, I am saying this as someone who is usually “RiDiNg sTeAm’S DiCK”.


  • Simply blocking steam in your local firewall was enough with the old system, if the last thing the account saw was the library being open to play on or being the owner of the game.

    There are a lot of weird, convoluted tricks you could do with the old system to get around most of the issues. For example: I’ve recently managed to play Outlast: Trials with my brother despite only one of us owning it by turning on the firewall between sending the invite and accepting it and then accepting the invite and launching the game before the invite receiving account (who has to be the owner of the game) sees the invite sending account as offline.

    We’ve discovered this firewall trick relatively soon after Valve fixed the offline mode “exploit”, but we never shared it publically so it wouldn’t get fixed too. I have seen a few people talk about it over the years though.


  • Assuming it is store country that is checked: Simply VPN-ing doesn’t change that. Instead you have to make a purchase in the new place with “a payment method from the region you have moved to”. From experience this locks your account to the new region for 3 months. What would be interesting to know is if you can be in a family and then change regions afterwards without getting auto-kicked.

    Needless to say, my experiments ended at trying to see if they have any kinds of restrictions in place (unlike for the original family share) and I don’t wanna buy a throwaway game and lock an account into a different region for 3 months just for shits and giggles.