Jump to content

PCGamingWiki will use a Single Sign On (SSO) system to bridge wiki and forum accounts which is ready for testing. You may login using the 'Login with PCGamingWiki' button on both the wiki and the forum, which will soon be the only option. If you have any issues please message Andytizer on Discord.

Expack3

Moderator
  • Content Count

    249
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    23

Reputation Activity

  1. Like
    Expack3 reacted to Andytizer in Steam 'Remote Play Together' streaming co-op beta October 21, 2019   
    Steam are releasing a new Remote Play Together streaming option. This will allow one Steam user to stream their game with another remote Steam user, and for them to play the same 'local' game together.
    The feature was announced on the Steamworks website, which is a developer area, however the announcement has been shared publicly:
    This kind of streaming online multiplayer feature has been available through other methods such as Parsec.
  2. Like
    Expack3 got a reaction from Rose in Interview questions for Gamesplanet   
    One question which comes to mind is how they handle being looked upon as the same as sites like G2A when, in fact, they aren't. My initial phrasing goes like this: How do you handle the 'shadow' cast by so-called grey-market sellers?
  3. Like
    Expack3 reacted to Aemony in Should PCGamingWiki include information on how to mod games to unlock DLC/preorder content?   
    It's a more complex discussion and one not relevant to the topic described in this thread, but the general gist, or underlying reasoning, of the policy is arguably to prevent PCGW from providing instructions to users how to bypass/circumvent/remove DRM, as such a thing might not be legal in all countries worldwide.
    In that sense, merely providing instructions on how to "copy files" etc would be in violation if those instructions were provided with the intention of knowingly and directly circumventing the DRM of a title. So it comes down to, among other things, whether the need of the disc is due to DRM or if it is due to some form of requirement at the time (e.g. needing the disc to offload some data from the HDD to keep storage requirements low).
    Beyond that, No-CD patches and the like have usually been ignored (as in, PCGW "looks the other way") when they've been bundled with other fixes if the overall fix itself if beneficial to users. A balancing act, basically.
    The vagueness of the current policy is both to our benefit and our detriment, both because of its current nature where it allows for flexibility and difference in interpretations.
     
    Take my two comments on that Star Wars: Dark Forces section as an example. My previous 4 months old comment was made when focusing on the initial sentence of the policy, and took a hard line judgement based on that. However this time around, I instead focus more overall on what the policy is actually intended for, and especially on the third restriction: "Finally, do not give details on how to install/use the patch/application and how to fix any issues that come up while using said patch/application." In this case, I'd interpret the "install/use" portion to mean that providing detailed instructions in the way that the Star Wars: Dark Forces section does might have it violate the policy as well.
    This is all sorta moot though, since I haven't (intentionally) actually bothered to fully contemplate and look into the matter with Star Wars: Dark Forces since that section involves DOSBox, and I am uncertain of how that changes things around (I am not a user of DOSBox, so I am not familiar with its limitations or restrictions that might be relevant or affect the matter).
  4. Like
    Expack3 got a reaction from fayaine in Should PCGamingWiki include information on how to mod games to unlock DLC/preorder content?   
    That's pretty close to the strictest publicly-available definition of abandonware - as created by pirates, might I add.
    Regardless, such actions are still illegal. While I don't agree with the legality behind such things, I don't think PCGW should be getting involved with politics. The site is here to fix games, not - and I'm speaking my own personal opinion here - as a base for political issues individual staff members, myself included, perceive as needing 'fixing'.
  5. Like
    Expack3 got a reaction from fayaine in Should PCGamingWiki include information on how to mod games to unlock DLC/preorder content?   
    That's pretty close to the strictest publicly-available definition of abandonware - as created by pirates, might I add.
    Regardless, such actions are still illegal. While I don't agree with the legality behind such things, I don't think PCGW should be getting involved with politics. The site is here to fix games, not - and I'm speaking my own personal opinion here - as a base for political issues individual staff members, myself included, perceive as needing 'fixing'.
  6. Like
    Expack3 got a reaction from AnotherGills in Should PCGamingWiki include information on how to mod games to unlock DLC/preorder content?   
    While it is truly ironic that copyright law, both in the US and globally, is such that illegal actions like piracy are what it takes to preserve video gaming history, I don't feel PCGW is equipped to 'fix' this aspect of gaming.
    Therein lies the tricky part. If we allow exceptions on a game-by-game basis, who decides? What are the criteria involved? How does PCGW legally back up such a decision should the copyright holders come knocking?
    Not allowing info on how to unlock DLC or preorder content at all is the simplest, least-complicated option I see.
  7. Like
    Expack3 got a reaction from AnotherGills in Should PCGamingWiki include information on how to mod games to unlock DLC/preorder content?   
    While it is truly ironic that copyright law, both in the US and globally, is such that illegal actions like piracy are what it takes to preserve video gaming history, I don't feel PCGW is equipped to 'fix' this aspect of gaming.
    Therein lies the tricky part. If we allow exceptions on a game-by-game basis, who decides? What are the criteria involved? How does PCGW legally back up such a decision should the copyright holders come knocking?
    Not allowing info on how to unlock DLC or preorder content at all is the simplest, least-complicated option I see.
  8. Like
    Expack3 reacted to fayaine in Should PCGamingWiki include information on how to mod games to unlock DLC/preorder content?   
    i agree with Aemony here.
    Stuff that is on Disc/about to be released at a future time on the disk or not should not be included imo. (Outfits, Weapons, other cosmetic stuff, Future upcoming DLC (Whole new Levels, Maps, Singleplayer DLC and content))
    Stuff that is just not officially unlocked due to licensing like in FF XIII-2 or Lightning Returns (Couple Outfits missing due to licensing) i am fine with including these since they would never get released or are planned to.
    In the case of Man of Medan i am torn between both due to the Curators cut being on disk and already being downloaded aswell just needing the DLC on Steam with no additional download does unlock it and was in this case preorder only. That one is hard for me since it's supposed to be a free dlc later this year anyways and also is technicly the way a second playthrough should be played as. 
     
    So it's kind of a game by game basis or simply not allowing it at all. Allowing it for all of them would be clearly wrong imo and not just hurt the reputation of the site but also make us not any better than other shady websites unlocking DLC and paid content in their pirated games.
  9. Like
    Expack3 reacted to Aemony in Should PCGamingWiki include information on how to mod games to unlock DLC/preorder content?   
    I'd argue that no, PCGW shouldn't list these sorts of things for current and "active" games (as in the developer still actively works on it and releases content for it).
    This is in essence similar to the controversy/discussion around Mass Effect 3 and its "on-disc DLC" that were technically "on the disc", but not accessible without forking over some additional cash.
    In this particular case (Control), we're talking about an outfit available only for pre-orders for now (meant as a pre-order incentive) as well as another outfit limited to console platforms only.
    We have no idea the developer/publishers future intentions of this content, and it is very likely that this content will later down the line be sold separately to players, or used as another incentive (e.g. when the game hits Steam). I don't think it would sit well with developers/publishers if PCGW flagrantly included instructions on how to access content locked behind a paywall for free, and it could be argued as actively encouraging piracy as well.
    In this particular case I don't really agree on the "harms the average PC gamer" perspective either, as the average player isn't harmed by not having access to the two outfits in question (or e.g. the on-disc DLC of Mass Effect 3 that were mentioned previously).
     
    I think an exception can be made and allowed for cut content that was never intended to be finalized and released. I can also see how stuff like pre-order DLCs exclusive to a certain vendor or platform might be seen as acceptable if enough time has past since the release of the game in question (but it would basically involve years as compilation editions that includes previously exclusive content can be released even years later).
  10. Like
    Expack3 got a reaction from AnotherGills in The preservation of classic Flash-based games becoming a reality through Leaning Technologies latest project, CheerpX   
    TBF, this is more useful for things like Strong Bad Flash episodes and Homestuck. This sort of thing is meant to be viewed in the browser as part of an interactive experience. Games, yeah - they don't strictly need this since, as long as they aren't DRM-hindered, just download the SWF file and play!
  11. Like
    Expack3 reacted to Aemony in Unfold Games, developer of DARQ, openly challenges the Epic Games Store's policy of launch exclusivity   
    It's pretty simple, in a way: They're doing whatever they can to further build their brand and platform.
    Allowing triple-A titles to simultaneous ship on their platform and others is part of that. As is ensuring timed exclusivity of anticipated or seemingly well-developed indie titles.
  12. Like
    Expack3 reacted to TachiFoxy in Unfold Games, developer of DARQ, openly challenges the Epic Games Store's policy of launch exclusivity   
    Actually, they can, because Cyberpunk 2077 can be pre-ordered on EGS with CDPR saying they want to make it available on as many storefronts as possible. This does mean that Cyberpunk 2077 is currently available almost everywhere; GOG, Steam, EGS for instance.

    The problem is that the DARQ-developer, Unfold Games, also mentions that it's weird how such a hotly anticipated title can "simship" (simultaneous shipping; releasing at the same time) on EGS as well as other platforms just fine while Epic, after expressly going "Oh, you made a Steam store page. Come to us exclusively or don't come at all", deny this to other developers based on "careful curation" and "current plans".
    I'm not buying their reasoning for it. It seems more like Epic just want to buy up small, good-looking projects with a planned release on Steam to expand their own store quick while preventing any small development studio from exposing sales-numbers. Sales-numbers would hold tremendous value if Epic ever agreed to a "simship" of a title like DARQ. With games like Cyberpunk 2077 they just accept the fact that:
    - Either it happens anyway, or
    - CDPR acts, like Epic expects, professionally to not reveal such numbers.
    Epic are more than likely afraid to have a comparable set of sales-numbers held against the EGS while they still throw around Fortnite-money.
  13. Like
    Expack3 reacted to Andytizer in Steam 0-day vulnerability potentially affects over 100 million users   
    That's quite interesting, it seems like quite a huge vulnerability with LOCALSYSTEM privileges. I can't see why it was rejected as being out of scope by Valve. It could've been used to cause some real mayhem.
  14. Like
    Expack3 reacted to Antrad in CD audio tracks   
    1) This Wiki lists a lot of technical aspects of games like DRM, graphics and sound API, physics middleware, etc... so listing that the game uses CD audio tracks for music and/or sound effects would make sense.
    2) Some older games can have issues playing CD tracks on modern Windows, so you need to use a custom winmm.dll, then rip them to OGG format and then put everything in the game installation folder (some old games are re-realeased like this on digital platforms, for example Extreme G-2). This info would be useful on pages of games with that problem.
  15. Like
    Expack3 reacted to Rose in Epic Games Store exclusive Tetris Effect VR mode requires SteamVR   
    What's newsworthy about this? There are games on Steam built on Unreal Engine, protected by Easy Anti Cheat. There is DualShock support in games released for Windows.
    Valve were involved in the development of Vive, so it's natural that it relies on their component. Oculus devices do not require SteamVR, and no devices require the Steam client itself.
  16. Like
    Expack3 reacted to Aemony in Time limit between edits   
    Click on "X changes" on your watchlist to see a combined diff from all the latest changes made.
    In this case the user basically didn't use the Preview option properly, and was new to the wiki, and experimented to see what worked until finally giving up.
    There actually are edit limits configured already, and the time difference between each tiny edit (approx. one minute for each) shows that they most likely hit those as well.
  17. Like
    Expack3 reacted to Antrad in MobyGames   
    I disagree that Wikipedia is more useful, since I already wrote in the first post that many games or game developers don't have a Wikipedia article, but Moby Games does. Try finding any information about Brilliant Digital Entertainment and their games like Cyberswine and all you get is what is on Moby Games (probably one of the reason Telltale gets credit for innovation in adventure game genre and online episodic content while BDE did exactly the same things already back in 1997, people completely forgot about BDE).
    Not only does Moby Games have covers that most people here use when making articles, but they also have system requirements listed which I use when these obscure games don't even have them in readme.
    In the end it doesn't matter now, since they don't want to cooperate.
  18. Like
    Expack3 reacted to Andytizer in MobyGames   
    MobyGames have declined my proposal of mutual linking - not citing any reasons.
    I don't really see much value in linking to them, they don't really provide any useful information for PC gamers - Wikipedia has much more useful information. I would prefer to dedicate resources to more compatible websites, e.g. I was looking at ProtonDB.
  19. Like
    Expack3 reacted to AnotherGills in Crystal Crisis coming to Steam on July 31   
    Black Jack is the only reason I'm down to play this
  20. Like
    Expack3 got a reaction from SirYodaJedi in Publisher tinyBuild won't patch or update GOG games "because games are continuously torrented through DRM free builds"   
    tinyBuild's stance on this is so backwards it's obvious they DNDTR (Did Not Do The Research).
    Games with DRM have their soundtracks pirated online via YouTube, with the uploaders using in-game - nowadays lossless - recordings if there's no official soundtrack. They also seem blind to the fact deluxe-edition soundtracks - even on Steam - are literally a bunch of files that anyone can upload. In other words, DRM-free upon download completion.
    Why offer DRM-free builds of a game when people know they'll never be updated for fear of enabling piracy.
    Also, they apparently are unaware of the convenience argument. For example, they can just upload their soundtracks to YouTube Music, Spotify, or whatever, so people who would otherwise pirate them can listen for free and tinyBuild would still get money.
  21. Like
    Expack3 reacted to AlexKVideos1 in tinyBuild CEO attributes anti-piracy DRM stance to improper representative training, announces updates for GOG versions of their titles   
    Definitely, but I don't like the whole notation that backlashes are needed to cause change. tinyBuild should have just updated the games on GOG to avoid this shitshow to begin with.
  22. Like
    Expack3 reacted to AlexKVideos1 in tinyBuild CEO attributes anti-piracy DRM stance to improper representative training, announces updates for GOG versions of their titles   
    This still rubs me the wrong way. We have posts from May 2019 that complain of this missing content, which probably means this content was missing even before this. Yet all of the sudden, Alex Nichiporchik cares about the GOG releases after major backlash...
    Its great that this content is coming, but it seems he is only doing it because of the backlash. If this backlash never happened, I'd imagine they would have done jack shit.
  23. Like
    Expack3 got a reaction from SirYodaJedi in Publisher tinyBuild won't patch or update GOG games "because games are continuously torrented through DRM free builds"   
    tinyBuild's stance on this is so backwards it's obvious they DNDTR (Did Not Do The Research).
    Games with DRM have their soundtracks pirated online via YouTube, with the uploaders using in-game - nowadays lossless - recordings if there's no official soundtrack. They also seem blind to the fact deluxe-edition soundtracks - even on Steam - are literally a bunch of files that anyone can upload. In other words, DRM-free upon download completion.
    Why offer DRM-free builds of a game when people know they'll never be updated for fear of enabling piracy.
    Also, they apparently are unaware of the convenience argument. For example, they can just upload their soundtracks to YouTube Music, Spotify, or whatever, so people who would otherwise pirate them can listen for free and tinyBuild would still get money.
  24. Like
    Expack3 got a reaction from SirYodaJedi in Publisher tinyBuild won't patch or update GOG games "because games are continuously torrented through DRM free builds"   
    tinyBuild's stance on this is so backwards it's obvious they DNDTR (Did Not Do The Research).
    Games with DRM have their soundtracks pirated online via YouTube, with the uploaders using in-game - nowadays lossless - recordings if there's no official soundtrack. They also seem blind to the fact deluxe-edition soundtracks - even on Steam - are literally a bunch of files that anyone can upload. In other words, DRM-free upon download completion.
    Why offer DRM-free builds of a game when people know they'll never be updated for fear of enabling piracy.
    Also, they apparently are unaware of the convenience argument. For example, they can just upload their soundtracks to YouTube Music, Spotify, or whatever, so people who would otherwise pirate them can listen for free and tinyBuild would still get money.
  25. Like
    Expack3 got a reaction from SirYodaJedi in Publisher tinyBuild won't patch or update GOG games "because games are continuously torrented through DRM free builds"   
    tinyBuild's stance on this is so backwards it's obvious they DNDTR (Did Not Do The Research).
    Games with DRM have their soundtracks pirated online via YouTube, with the uploaders using in-game - nowadays lossless - recordings if there's no official soundtrack. They also seem blind to the fact deluxe-edition soundtracks - even on Steam - are literally a bunch of files that anyone can upload. In other words, DRM-free upon download completion.
    Why offer DRM-free builds of a game when people know they'll never be updated for fear of enabling piracy.
    Also, they apparently are unaware of the convenience argument. For example, they can just upload their soundtracks to YouTube Music, Spotify, or whatever, so people who would otherwise pirate them can listen for free and tinyBuild would still get money.
×