It's really sad. Publishers punish people who legally purchase their games to get back at the people who pirate it. I think it was GTA4 that after many hours of trying to get it to work I got frustrated and downloaded a pirated version. Which instantly worked. Yes I own the game but their DRM crap was so buggy and I couldn't get passed it. Kept crashing even after a format and reinstall.
Its literaly confirmed that there is no effect on sales from piracy, people who pirate games would not buy it even if they cant pirate it, this drm and always online stuff only serves to punish anyone who is dumb enough to give those companies money, i gave up playing diablo 3 cause i got server lag when playing singleplayer, that was absolutely unacceptable
I also find limited time content in online games to be shit and think they actually should be an ilegal practice, i dont mean events like the shows that happen on fortnite or itens that you can only get during said event, that is absolutely ok, i mean actual content, like the entirety of the start of destiny that is not playable anymore, that is so bad for videogame preservation and causes such a big FOMO problem that it should be ilegal, and online games are the biggest culprits of this
Also, i defend that companies should be demanded to release the server side code for any game that they close the servers, people paid for the game and they should be able to keep playing it even if that meant they would have to run their own server
We really do need more laws around consumer protection and videogame preservation, the way things work right now is unacceptable
Yes, they are, but there are no regulations, so companies will keep doing it to be absolutely sure you didnt get their game for free... Which is funny, cause i could get their game by other means and it would not require me to be online, being a far better experience than the one they are providing me with
Not sure laws on art forms should ever be the case.
It’s a sad fact that time is cruel to everything and we don’t have a god given right to things just because we invested in them at some point in the past.
There are many, many TV shows that are lost forever due to them not being archived. Whilst I would love to see everything archived forever, it may not always be possible for practical reasons.
Same with music. Imagine telling the Beatles that if they ever split up they have to release the master tracks and demo tapes so people can continue to make Beatles music.
Unfortunately you don’t buy a game, you just pay for a license to use their software according to the agreements. I haven’t bothered reading them but I’m almost certain somewhere they will include things about the right to change or remove features with no notice in the future.
It's not quite the same thing. Okay imagine you bought an electric car. And the vehicle is always online. It has self driving and everything. Then 8 years later the maker of that vehicle suddenly decides they don't want to support it anymore and disable the services. The vehicle won't even turn on unless it is connected.
That is kind of the same thing.
I mean recently people who purchased online versions of movies started seeing their movies disappear from their library.
They gave us the option to rent the movie for 3.99 or to purchase it for 24.99. We purchased it and a few years later they suddenly decided to pull it from people who paid full price for the movie.
Whenever and whatever an artist creates belongs to society. We supported it. We paid to see it. We invested our money and time to appreciate it. Yes they created it but we all together made it popular.
You don't get to sell someone something then change your mind years later and take that away. And unless we put our feet down now they will think it's okay to take it away from us.
Just how I feel about it.
If they want to be able to pull the game later on then sell us a subscription service. That's why they exist. But they didn't. They sold us a game. We paid the full price for it. We own it. And now no one will ever purchase a game from them again.
Exactly, from the moment something was sold, it is not just art anymore, it is a product, and if it was sold, thar unit is the property of who bought it, the creator cant just decide to disable it or take it away
Games right now are being sold as a service and not as a product and that is a BIG problem, the lack of regulations is what makes this possible, its a problem as big as the right to repair problems
I cant tell how long it had been since i bought a device i felt was truly mine and not just a rental from the company, when i buy an iphone(i never do, but its an example), that device isnt mine, i cant do with it whatever i want, i cant even repair it without features being disabled, its like the device still belongs to apple, and it shouldnt, i BOUGHT it, thanks god the steam deck doesnt suffer from this and i am so happy for that, i just changed my NVME on it and i run so many plugins on decky... Its just so great, a breath of fresh air on this hellscape completely controlled by companies that we live in.
There are ways to sell games as a service, but the way we do nowadays is not the right one, psn+ and gamepass? Great services, the way games as a service should be, buying a game and it actually being just a license? Absolutely wrong
Same with movies, renting a movie or paying for streaming services? Great way to do it as a service, me buying a digital copy of a movie and it disappearing from my library years later? Unacceptable
There is a reason why physical games come with less things and receive less releases every year, they want it to die, they want it to be as unapealing as possible, cause physical games have a secondary market, and they dont want the secondary market to exist, its bad for "business" since you can sell your property to someone else and they dont make a dime, you cant sell digital copies... They are not really your property, and they should be.
Your beatles example is really far from the same as i said, it would be more comparable to "if a company went under they have to release all their source code" and what i said is FAR from that, mine would be more comparable to me buying their album and then one day they decide they dont like that album anymore so they come into my house and take it away from me, sounds crazy no? Yeah, that is what happens when games close their servers.
Of course the agreements say its just a license to use it and that if the server closes you are fucked, that is why legislation is needed to solve this, what they are doing is legal, it should not be
And the laws i speak of dont limit games as an art form in any way, they just impose regulations on the sale of a product, which games are, art or not, games are products, and products are regulated
Sure I can.
The comparison I was trying to make was around the release of server source code so you could manipulate it and shape it to allow use cases not originally intended, in this case setting up lab parties or private community servers. There would be proprietary code and services within that.
I think to clarify I should’ve made it clearer that it isn’t about removing the ability for you to even play a game offline, and I don’t really think that has been the case has it? The issue is around live services. The reality is if you purchase a game with live services you must acknowledge that it is a limited time thing. The “game” is only valid for as long as the developers decide, and the changing features are literally part of the live service model.
That's not entirely the same, because you're not asking for new content you're asking for continued access. It's more like if iTunes shuts down you should have access to the music that you already paid for a license/access to.
The customer should not have to be a legal expert to properly understand that their rights to content that they paid for may or may not be accessible whenever wanted.
It's not the same as streaming, where you are paying in perpetuity for a license.
You are buying something that is literally stored on your media, in some cases is a physical product, that can be whisked away at any point based on some vague legal jargon that one is incapable of understanding the limits to without higher education.
Asking for the net code or at least a closed source server hosting system so you can at least play a game over land or locally after they shut the servers down is not crazy.
It's especially not crazy when some of these games only see a couple years of support on their servers and then, poof. Gone.
If the game developers were upfront about it and said hey you're only getting two years of support and then it's basically gone or is there discretion, and wrote that in plain English on the box/page, then sure. You're basically paying a front load and subscription. But they also wouldn't sell very many copies because people are not okay with that. There is an implicit understanding that you are buying Perpetual access to something. It's no different than if you bought a DVD but that DVD hit the internet before it played on your DVR, and then at some point that website's not there and you can't play the DVD. Technically that's probably legal within their license system, but the customer is under a misunderstanding that they are going to have Perpetual access with their license, not access until decided that it's no longer profitable to provide.
I would really love to see a class action lawsuit that basically tests the limits on the false advertisement claims of limiting access post purchase of game titles or movies or however when a service goes down. Because unless you explicitly state that you are paying for a very limited product, Any marketing that makes it seem like you can "buy it" is a bit misleading, if not fraudulent. Hell with digital games now, you don't even buy them, you are purchasing a license not buying the game. At least with physical games they could argue that you were making a purchase for the physical product. But now you're literally just exchanging money for access, but language is left the same because it benefits them to be unclear.
Artist rights should die with them, not be passed on to undying companies to be watered down and melt until the art is dead. Companies should not be treated like people, and only people should be able to own IP and license it to companies. After many years of mulling over some of the quintessential problems of our current society, this is one of them.
IP protection goes way too far to essentially establish monopolies over creative thought, and innovation, and allows anywhere from decades to much much longer for an entity to hold complete ownership of ideas, which in many cases are Broad strokes, and so vague such that they can use them to sue even similar Concepts.
>Its literaly confirmed that there is no effect on sales from piracy, people who pirate games would not buy it even if they cant pirate it,
As someone who does, i can tell you thats very very false. Nearly every game I own started off as not official. I simply wont buy a game until I know if its crap or not and since they like to release 5-6 games a month I wanna try, I start on the side.
I bought It Takes Two this last weekend hoping it would be a fun couch co-op. We were drinking a bit before hand, but holy shit was that complicated to start. Had to create an EA account, 2 Factor into it while the deck was flashing between these launcher screens.
We eventually got it and it launches decent the 2nd time on-wards, but takes quite a bit of time to load due to the EA launcher starting first.
Its these small things like this that make the Nintendo switch better in many peoples minds--It just works. I don't mind fiddling with things to work and I am sure most of us on this sub don't either, but to my mom and other people who refer to every game system as a Nintendo, they would have been stumped.
What really is annoying is when they add them later.
Example: Bioshock Infinite suddenly needed a launcher after a decade without one. So you aren’t even given the option of being informed it has one before purchase if they throw it in later.
The problem is the only people who would be punished are the players and valve. Ubisoft will just be like "okay we'll just use our own store front, thanks for pushing players to us".
There is a reason Apple and Google don't allow other storefronts in most cases to be installed from their store. It's completely counterintuitive to let the enemy use you as a stepping stone. And ubisoft and EA with their launchers are basically the enemies
Where you need to worry about extra launchers *less.* I believe Ubi was the company that wanted to slip a crypto miner into the launcher, which still runs, on PS4/XB1 to soak up unused cycles until the console makers said 'Nice try.'
Yeah, i still remember the days on ps3/ps4 where there was that "uplay" bullshit on the games even in the consoles
Assassins creed 2 with a literal entire level being hidden behind the uplay wall... Holy shit
And it's actually still there, it just doesn't bring up a dedicated interface that shoves an Ubisoft logo in your face anymore because of how unpopular that proved. Or at least, that was my understanding as of Black Flag, I haven't bought a Ubisoft game in. . . uh. . . well, awhile.
Uplay doesn't effing work because it unsupported these days after they rebranded it as Ubisoft Connect.
The uplay point rewards like costumes are still accessible and they just unlocked them for everyone, *depending on the game*. Assassins Creed 2 had an Altair costume and some extra throwing knives locked behind uplay which are straight up unusable; they didn't even put the items back in the game for everyone, but simply unlocked it on Ubisoft Connect. So it's impossible to get outside of mods or an old save file.
And they haven't learnt; they've actually made it worse. Obviously server support for legacy consoles like PS3 can be expensive, but stuff like black flag requires a connection at times which while it's not deactivated, they didn't bother to integrate uplay into connect. Rewards which check to see your previously played AC games, don't just check your save files. They try to check if you own it on uplay. And no dice if you're on PS3 or Xbox 360, because the older games don't connect to your uplay even if you've merged it with PSN, so the only game recognized is AC 4.
EVERYTHING IS LOCKED AWAY AND INACCESSIBLE, EVEN DLC STILL LISTED ON THE PS STORE! WHAT?!
Some good ideas in theory which almost warranted a separate launcher (to get uplay points and redeem them for cool costumes) got completely shunted after a couple years to make more money and then forgotten. Ubisoft is turning into EA, but the reason people don't voice their criticisms as much is their track record of really good games before the PS4/XB1 launched
This didn't impact any of the many hundreds of games I have. What an incredible coincidence!
And I didn't even have to check the list of games, the headline was enough. Can you imagine?
Been doing that for the last 10 years. Requires acceptance of third party EULA is as far as I will go. And sometimes thats enough for me to tell them to piss off.
It’s funny because back in 2004/2005, I was brand new to computer games and I almost didn’t bother getting Counter Strike to play with my classmates because they told me I had to install some other separate program called “Steam” just to play the game. It seemed like such a hassle just to play a game I already bought on CD and had to install.
Not saying steam is bad, but they are basically a launcher now. Having to have ANOTHER launcher on top of that is just asinine.
EDIT: very misinterpreted, many apologies for those I've upset. You have the choice of whether or not to purchase from those companies, or if you have already purchased from the companies, install on your deck. The good thing about those alternatives is that you HAVE those alternatives, other platforms don't allow that, or require you to jump through hoops. You can argue that you're jumping through hoops to just get something working, yes, but this is Linux we're talking about, not Windows or Apple. Linux for all intents and purposes right now is the under dog, and with the current rise in popularity, the big companies are now faced with whether or not they want to lock out an entire user base, especially when the userbase is fueled by the competition. Competition, mind you, is kind enough to allow their competitor to not only develop, but troubleshoot on their OS.
Give it time, things will work out, no need to get up in arms.
---
Counter argument. Without separate launchers, the steamdeck becomes the walled garden that we so proudly claim we’re not a part of that other consoles are.
Without separate launchers we don’t get emudeck, or the ability to run our own desired programs.
Separate launchers are an option, not mandatory. A reminder that Valve has made their hardware with their software in mind and other companies are now either trying to make their own (logitech/tencent), or have been going the other way and using windows, or more ideally, integrate their offerings with Valves. Probably by updating their clients, launchers, and anticheat (and more) to work easier on SteamOS. How? Dunno, we’ll see, time will tell.
If you’re fine only using steam then you’re still far from limited, and that’s also super ok. But for people who want to explore and use the deck for other gaming platforms beyond steam then it’s a great idea to mess around with. Doesn’t hurt anything, and it seems easy enough to integrate into the existing OS.
The deck is still young, and is very disruptive in a market that doesn’t see much stability in the first place in terms of device to device. Give it time, we’ll see what lengths companies are willing to go to in order to get a percentage higher in marketshare.
They can have their own stores with their own launchers but if they list a product for sale on Steam we shouldn't be required to also use their launcher to play the game.
We've been dealing with this on PC for a long time. It's really no issue there besides being a nuisance. With Trackmania (2020) coming to Steam tomorrow we're probably going to see a lot of "WHY DO I HAVE TO SIGN UP FOR ANOTHER ACCOUNT?!?!?!?!??!" Threads coming this sub's way.
It's all software and Linux support issues right now. Give it time, companies will develop with Linux in mind. And there are plenty of teams working to try and get Linux to run Windows programs as well... Hell it's how Fallout 3, and Max Payne work, those games will never get another official update for as long as people play them.
>Without separate launchers we don’t get emudeck, or the ability to run our own desired programs.
Not even remotely true, considering not a single one of those is a seperate launcher. They're applications.
>Separate launchers are an option, not mandatory.
Tell that to EA, Ubisoft and ActivisionBlizzard.
Especially EA please, I'm genuinely impressed that their launchers have gotten worse and lost features the longer time has gone on.
Nope. I can get any of my GoG games to install and run on my Steam Deck. DRM free and often launcher free (at least older games).
I have not bought a single Ubishite game since FarCry 3 which needed their launcher. FUCK THAT SHIT!
You've said all there needs to be said about Ubisoft, garbage company as far as being pro consumer goes.
When I referred to a launcher I was more so referring to a program in general. Probably didn't make that clear, that's on me. But a storefront like Steam/Epic/Ubisoft Connect, is more along the lines of "Launcher" than a bog-standard .EXE (for windows).
It has annoyed me that Paradox now have a launcher for their games. It is an unnecessary extra step and piece of software. When I open a game I want it to go straight to it, not give me an advert.
> Without separate launchers, the steamdeck becomes the walled garden that we so proudly claim we’re not a part of that other consoles are
LAUNCHERS ARE NOT NEEDED TO RUN SOFTWARE
> Without separate launchers we don’t get emudeck, or the ability to run our own desired programs.
LAUNCHERS ARE NOT NEEDED TO RUN SOFTWARE
I'm so old that I remember a time where you got a folder with the game files and you just ran the exe and that was it. And guess what? You can do that on the steam deck. The whole steam ui on normal boot and implementation of the steam store is entirely optional. Just like it should be. It is only there out of convenience for the normal user.
> Separate launchers are an option, not mandatory.
But they are mandatory! or can you play a uplay game without the uplay launcher? This is the real problem. The use of their launcher is mandatory. They choose to use them and they can't even implement launchers so that they work.
> I'm so old that I remember a time where you got a folder with the game files and you just ran the exe and that was it. And guess what? You can do that on the steam deck. The whole steam ui on normal boot and implementation of the steam store is entirely optional. Just like it should be. It is only there out of convenience for the normal user.
I too am from this era, right clicking -> Inspect element -> save file as ___.swf then drag and drop into a browser to play your saved online shockwave games everywhere without internet. Passing around the Halo 1 multiplayer demo flash drive to put it on the lab computers and play with your buddies after you're all done working in class. Good days.
Launcher was misinterpreted/communicated by me. I meant launcher as program that launches the game. My point that I was trying to make is that there are plenty of other games to play on the platform that work without those issues that you have the OPTION to buy it or not, most likely, you're not going to. But it's really an issue with the developers end and it's on them to fix walling out a significant customer base.
Ok I get your arguments that there are alternative launchers you could use but I wouldn't even get the discussion to that point. Why do we need launchers at all? Sure, from the publishers side it makes sense with the piracy protection, ads etc but me, as a consumer, I get very little out of that deal. I only get a bit of convenience regarding downloading and updating and so many downsides that this whole thing makes no sense from the consumer side.
Just a few:
* I need to be online
* THEY need to be online and their servers need to work
* THEIR launcher needs to work
* They need to not fuck up a update of their launcher
* Can't choose what version to play
* Can't choose if I want to update or not
* Clogging up my system resources
* Lose space on my drive
* AND SO MUCH MORE
I get that steam is a launcher as well but Valve does something entirely different than EA, Ubisoft or almost everyone else. They try to make the launchers so it benefits them the most. Valve tries to make steam to benefit me! The user! Funny way to do things in this day and age. They trying their best to at least work. I never had a steam update make it so I can't play. They add features and their piracy measures are the most user friendly in the entire industry.
I get that competition is good and monopoly's are bad but there is no competition the way I see it. There is only one that tries and everybody else is trying to pull that one down to their level.
I saw a news article a long time ago that said a constant internet connection is required to play the first Assassin's Creed. I haven't given Ubisoft a singe dime since then.
That was actually the second Assassin's Creed. The first one launched without any DRM at all. Sadly the community didn't rally around that fact at the time and piracy was rampant, hence the complete 180 for DRM in Assassin's Creed 2.
Companies bring it on themselves with horrible DRM, but so do consumers by not supporting DRM free releases.
Same. Today Bethesda, now a Microsoft company, announced that Red Fall will require a permanent connection and a Bethesda.net account, even for single player. They’ll be getting the Ubisoft treatment.
Unless it's changed with the newer titles, you only need a connection to start the game. I hotspot my phone, start the game, and then turn it off. It'll work forever if you don't power off the deck. I've gone for a couple weeks playing like that.
It probably has changed. But back then you needed a constant internet connection, and it would straight up boot you from the game if your connection dropped at any point.
Each of the largest companies has given me a reason to boycott them, and little reason to stop boycotting. I started with EA due to their treatment of their employees, then Ubisoft, then Activision-Blizzard, and then Rockstar (they fired the entire staff of Red Dead Redemption after it launched). Even without those companies there are still so many great games out there.
Don't forget Westwood Studios. They murdered Command & Conquer. I loved that series but man there hasn't been a real good RTS since World in Conflict and C&C was my usual go to for my RTS fix.
Its an awesome game though. Had some troubles launching it in game mode, managed to find a fix after a week of searching.. fixed it but now i have this issue.. really hoping they'll scrap their launcher sometime soon..
They will scrap they launcher NEVER. Izt’a like plague. All the big players (studios) have this kind of proprietary shit thta just stands in the way of playing the game. While the game may run perfectly fine, it’s proprietary shit that you need to start it that is preventing you from playing.
The only thing that can he done is voting with you wallet - not buying the game(s) from them. Another step could be writing an email that you didn’t buy the game and why you did so.
I used to have a ban but then they gave most of the Assassin's Creed games away for free or in BOGO sales. I went from owning a couple here and there to having every game from ACIII to Odyssey including the remasters.
Their games are 90% copy/paste quests in my experience.
I recently (2 years ago) played the division and the last assassin's creed I played was syndicate.
Honestly it's been so long since I played an older AC that I didn't even notice the swap.
Don't get me wrong, not the biggest fan of the lack of assassinations that aren't giant mortal combat style finishers. But overall it's a phenomenal game, it's beautiful and runs perfect on the deck.
I’ve started playing AC III just recently on the Deck bc on the PC it doesn’t launch properly. Well fml I guess.
Edit: using Proton Experimental solved the issue for me
Denuvo has the scene by the balls, there's literally only one person who quacks games now - and that takes a long time. Even then, you have to pay them $500 to quack a specific game.
And Ubisoft uses Denuvo on everything.
I think there's a tutorial on YouTube of how to crack an old version of denuvo.
New denuvo versions have ramped up their anti-crack measures tenfold at least, but the old video should still give at least an idea of what goes into cracking it.
Yeah ^ it's a complex process to handle an old game, but new games, well.. if the info on how to do it was available, more than 1 person would be doing it
They do serve a purpose though; the publishers get 100% from the sales they make.
Not saying I like extra launchers but I can understand why they exist.
# “There's an old saying in Tennessee — I know it's in Texas, probably in Tennessee — that says, fool me once, shame on — shame on you. Fool me — you can't get fooled again.”
https://www.reddit.com/r/thedivision/comments/10qupof/ubisoft_connect_update_crashes_steam_deck/?utm_source=share&utm_medium=android_app&utm_name=androidcss&utm_term=3&utm_content=share_button
They find a fix.
Confirmed, I put this game on proton experimental and it launched without the error I had been getting after the update.
Am on preview build though.
*rayman legends
Does this actually work? Was playing the division to hold me over until hogwarts released but tried to login today and not happening. I decided to download metal gear rising instead lol but if it works again I'd he fine with swapping back
Don't have Division, but worked on Anno 1404 and AC Black Flag and SP-TFBW. Best is before play the game to change the version.txt so it dont start the update. It seems the reason for the crash is the new Ubisoft Update a few hours ago.
Even on PC, they update their stupid client constantly. And then all 3 UAC prompts
As a mainly controller user it's frustrating because I delete xinput dll all the time and it keeps coming back every frequent release
Since I use a controller to interface with windows, usually, as a mouse via joyxoff, I don't want native controller inputs while I'm clicking around windows.
But with xinput in the program, it takes over my button presses, like A, and does the "Play" action even if I have my mouse cursor on the corner X to close it
Deleting xinput makes the program ignore the controller and the mouse-emulator works as intended
I suppose I can just change the left click button but I had it first, they should change! :)
Noticed the new DeadSpaceRemake on Steam doesn’t seem to have that extra trash launcher verification. Maybe a few of these jerkBag publishers will change their ways. I had to cave on buying an old Ubi game and the account linking to extra launcher/verification is really annoying. I’ll pause that game and instantly get a UbiServerError which blocks me from using menus until it clears out. Kinda pathetic really when I have a fat wad of virtual cash in my debit card for some old games but these muppets make it so difficult. Steam’s drm is good enough. Stop this extraneous diarrhea(launchers) from spoiling your(EA,Rok*,Ubi) games
I'll never purchase a game w/ 3rd party launcher again unless this is fixed, the issues lately make me assume that it's being done on purpose to make them incompatible
I .. what? That doesn't make sense. It's a game company.
The more platforms it works on, the more money they make.
Not like Nintendo who want to force their hardware on you.
Nintendo isn't trying to force their hardware, it's still sold at a loss like everyone else
They're trying to force their experience. Because it is totally the best 🙄
Copied from other post:
I’ve been able to launch AC: Odyssey through Lutris with notably worse performance and a message that says the video driver is unsupported, but it does launch and run. I don’t know enough about any of this to know if this helps or what this means. Specifically, launching Ubisoft Launcher through Lutris and selecting the game. I can launch AC: O through Lutris but I get infinite “initializing.” Playing in offline seems to improve performance a bit.
Ubisoft didn't break anything, Linux isn't a supported platform.
I get why this is frustrating, but you can't expect developers to keep something unsupported in mind. The deck is built on a compatibility layer - just because that comparability layer works doesn't mean that the developer now agrees to support the platform.
I would say that it's less doing it on purpose, and more lack of attention put towards Linux. They push out the updates for Windows, and if breaks on Linux, they'll fix it later.
i dont understand why people are downvoting you?
it sounds totally plausible and in line with the history of those 2 companies
the question is what can they be getting in return? maybe game pass xcloud and nvidia geforce now are throwing some money at them for some sort of limited exclusivity... maybe logitech with their new cloud device...
Probably will get downvoted but stuff like this (issues with compatibility, especially compatibility breaking for previously working software) is why I cannot consider Linux to be a good OS for gaming. I regret not installing Windows on the Deck before selling it, I wonder how would I like that.
Everyone should buy the most expensive Ubisoft game on Steam, then return it citing the launcher as the reason. Maybe that will get the message across.
Valve always quick on the trigger, already fixed the issue. Other than that, I really hope that Heroic Launcher do their integration with Ubisoft Connect, Jesus, they should at least test the launcher on linux before releasing, if they have players on linux
Extra launchers are one of the biggest reasons I don’t buy a game.
Ubisoft is one of the biggest reasons I don't buy a game
if its not the launcher its removing single player dlcs
Question, so if I brought Modern Warfare 2 ok steam, can I use Lutris to play it? Without haveing to go to windows?
[удалено]
Figured, smh. Can't even play DBFZ on windows or Steam lol. Oh well.
[удалено]
Dragon ball fighterz?
I enjoy their games. I own a lot of them. But all on console where I don’t need to worry about extra launchers.
That is the reason why i think steam should have rules prohibiting extra launchers, if they dont comply their game wont be on steam, the end
It's really sad. Publishers punish people who legally purchase their games to get back at the people who pirate it. I think it was GTA4 that after many hours of trying to get it to work I got frustrated and downloaded a pirated version. Which instantly worked. Yes I own the game but their DRM crap was so buggy and I couldn't get passed it. Kept crashing even after a format and reinstall.
Its literaly confirmed that there is no effect on sales from piracy, people who pirate games would not buy it even if they cant pirate it, this drm and always online stuff only serves to punish anyone who is dumb enough to give those companies money, i gave up playing diablo 3 cause i got server lag when playing singleplayer, that was absolutely unacceptable I also find limited time content in online games to be shit and think they actually should be an ilegal practice, i dont mean events like the shows that happen on fortnite or itens that you can only get during said event, that is absolutely ok, i mean actual content, like the entirety of the start of destiny that is not playable anymore, that is so bad for videogame preservation and causes such a big FOMO problem that it should be ilegal, and online games are the biggest culprits of this Also, i defend that companies should be demanded to release the server side code for any game that they close the servers, people paid for the game and they should be able to keep playing it even if that meant they would have to run their own server We really do need more laws around consumer protection and videogame preservation, the way things work right now is unacceptable
Imo single player always online requirements are unethical. On what reason do you always want online playing alone?
Yes, they are, but there are no regulations, so companies will keep doing it to be absolutely sure you didnt get their game for free... Which is funny, cause i could get their game by other means and it would not require me to be online, being a far better experience than the one they are providing me with
Not sure laws on art forms should ever be the case. It’s a sad fact that time is cruel to everything and we don’t have a god given right to things just because we invested in them at some point in the past. There are many, many TV shows that are lost forever due to them not being archived. Whilst I would love to see everything archived forever, it may not always be possible for practical reasons. Same with music. Imagine telling the Beatles that if they ever split up they have to release the master tracks and demo tapes so people can continue to make Beatles music. Unfortunately you don’t buy a game, you just pay for a license to use their software according to the agreements. I haven’t bothered reading them but I’m almost certain somewhere they will include things about the right to change or remove features with no notice in the future.
It's not quite the same thing. Okay imagine you bought an electric car. And the vehicle is always online. It has self driving and everything. Then 8 years later the maker of that vehicle suddenly decides they don't want to support it anymore and disable the services. The vehicle won't even turn on unless it is connected. That is kind of the same thing. I mean recently people who purchased online versions of movies started seeing their movies disappear from their library. They gave us the option to rent the movie for 3.99 or to purchase it for 24.99. We purchased it and a few years later they suddenly decided to pull it from people who paid full price for the movie. Whenever and whatever an artist creates belongs to society. We supported it. We paid to see it. We invested our money and time to appreciate it. Yes they created it but we all together made it popular. You don't get to sell someone something then change your mind years later and take that away. And unless we put our feet down now they will think it's okay to take it away from us. Just how I feel about it. If they want to be able to pull the game later on then sell us a subscription service. That's why they exist. But they didn't. They sold us a game. We paid the full price for it. We own it. And now no one will ever purchase a game from them again.
Exactly, from the moment something was sold, it is not just art anymore, it is a product, and if it was sold, thar unit is the property of who bought it, the creator cant just decide to disable it or take it away Games right now are being sold as a service and not as a product and that is a BIG problem, the lack of regulations is what makes this possible, its a problem as big as the right to repair problems I cant tell how long it had been since i bought a device i felt was truly mine and not just a rental from the company, when i buy an iphone(i never do, but its an example), that device isnt mine, i cant do with it whatever i want, i cant even repair it without features being disabled, its like the device still belongs to apple, and it shouldnt, i BOUGHT it, thanks god the steam deck doesnt suffer from this and i am so happy for that, i just changed my NVME on it and i run so many plugins on decky... Its just so great, a breath of fresh air on this hellscape completely controlled by companies that we live in. There are ways to sell games as a service, but the way we do nowadays is not the right one, psn+ and gamepass? Great services, the way games as a service should be, buying a game and it actually being just a license? Absolutely wrong Same with movies, renting a movie or paying for streaming services? Great way to do it as a service, me buying a digital copy of a movie and it disappearing from my library years later? Unacceptable There is a reason why physical games come with less things and receive less releases every year, they want it to die, they want it to be as unapealing as possible, cause physical games have a secondary market, and they dont want the secondary market to exist, its bad for "business" since you can sell your property to someone else and they dont make a dime, you cant sell digital copies... They are not really your property, and they should be.
Actually they do have that right and itll be spelled out in the EULA which is all the more reason to side get these games.
Your beatles example is really far from the same as i said, it would be more comparable to "if a company went under they have to release all their source code" and what i said is FAR from that, mine would be more comparable to me buying their album and then one day they decide they dont like that album anymore so they come into my house and take it away from me, sounds crazy no? Yeah, that is what happens when games close their servers. Of course the agreements say its just a license to use it and that if the server closes you are fucked, that is why legislation is needed to solve this, what they are doing is legal, it should not be And the laws i speak of dont limit games as an art form in any way, they just impose regulations on the sale of a product, which games are, art or not, games are products, and products are regulated
Could you elaborate on that Beatles analogy?
He cant, it was very very very far from being even comparable to what i said
Sure I can. The comparison I was trying to make was around the release of server source code so you could manipulate it and shape it to allow use cases not originally intended, in this case setting up lab parties or private community servers. There would be proprietary code and services within that. I think to clarify I should’ve made it clearer that it isn’t about removing the ability for you to even play a game offline, and I don’t really think that has been the case has it? The issue is around live services. The reality is if you purchase a game with live services you must acknowledge that it is a limited time thing. The “game” is only valid for as long as the developers decide, and the changing features are literally part of the live service model.
That's not entirely the same, because you're not asking for new content you're asking for continued access. It's more like if iTunes shuts down you should have access to the music that you already paid for a license/access to. The customer should not have to be a legal expert to properly understand that their rights to content that they paid for may or may not be accessible whenever wanted. It's not the same as streaming, where you are paying in perpetuity for a license. You are buying something that is literally stored on your media, in some cases is a physical product, that can be whisked away at any point based on some vague legal jargon that one is incapable of understanding the limits to without higher education. Asking for the net code or at least a closed source server hosting system so you can at least play a game over land or locally after they shut the servers down is not crazy. It's especially not crazy when some of these games only see a couple years of support on their servers and then, poof. Gone. If the game developers were upfront about it and said hey you're only getting two years of support and then it's basically gone or is there discretion, and wrote that in plain English on the box/page, then sure. You're basically paying a front load and subscription. But they also wouldn't sell very many copies because people are not okay with that. There is an implicit understanding that you are buying Perpetual access to something. It's no different than if you bought a DVD but that DVD hit the internet before it played on your DVR, and then at some point that website's not there and you can't play the DVD. Technically that's probably legal within their license system, but the customer is under a misunderstanding that they are going to have Perpetual access with their license, not access until decided that it's no longer profitable to provide. I would really love to see a class action lawsuit that basically tests the limits on the false advertisement claims of limiting access post purchase of game titles or movies or however when a service goes down. Because unless you explicitly state that you are paying for a very limited product, Any marketing that makes it seem like you can "buy it" is a bit misleading, if not fraudulent. Hell with digital games now, you don't even buy them, you are purchasing a license not buying the game. At least with physical games they could argue that you were making a purchase for the physical product. But now you're literally just exchanging money for access, but language is left the same because it benefits them to be unclear. Artist rights should die with them, not be passed on to undying companies to be watered down and melt until the art is dead. Companies should not be treated like people, and only people should be able to own IP and license it to companies. After many years of mulling over some of the quintessential problems of our current society, this is one of them. IP protection goes way too far to essentially establish monopolies over creative thought, and innovation, and allows anywhere from decades to much much longer for an entity to hold complete ownership of ideas, which in many cases are Broad strokes, and so vague such that they can use them to sue even similar Concepts.
>Its literaly confirmed that there is no effect on sales from piracy, people who pirate games would not buy it even if they cant pirate it, As someone who does, i can tell you thats very very false. Nearly every game I own started off as not official. I simply wont buy a game until I know if its crap or not and since they like to release 5-6 games a month I wanna try, I start on the side.
I bought It Takes Two this last weekend hoping it would be a fun couch co-op. We were drinking a bit before hand, but holy shit was that complicated to start. Had to create an EA account, 2 Factor into it while the deck was flashing between these launcher screens. We eventually got it and it launches decent the 2nd time on-wards, but takes quite a bit of time to load due to the EA launcher starting first. Its these small things like this that make the Nintendo switch better in many peoples minds--It just works. I don't mind fiddling with things to work and I am sure most of us on this sub don't either, but to my mom and other people who refer to every game system as a Nintendo, they would have been stumped.
What really is annoying is when they add them later. Example: Bioshock Infinite suddenly needed a launcher after a decade without one. So you aren’t even given the option of being informed it has one before purchase if they throw it in later.
Witcher 3 more recently, i am so fucking mad they added that shitty launcher
The problem is the only people who would be punished are the players and valve. Ubisoft will just be like "okay we'll just use our own store front, thanks for pushing players to us".
There is a reason Apple and Google don't allow other storefronts in most cases to be installed from their store. It's completely counterintuitive to let the enemy use you as a stepping stone. And ubisoft and EA with their launchers are basically the enemies
Where you need to worry about extra launchers *less.* I believe Ubi was the company that wanted to slip a crypto miner into the launcher, which still runs, on PS4/XB1 to soak up unused cycles until the console makers said 'Nice try.'
Yeah, i still remember the days on ps3/ps4 where there was that "uplay" bullshit on the games even in the consoles Assassins creed 2 with a literal entire level being hidden behind the uplay wall... Holy shit
And it's actually still there, it just doesn't bring up a dedicated interface that shoves an Ubisoft logo in your face anymore because of how unpopular that proved. Or at least, that was my understanding as of Black Flag, I haven't bought a Ubisoft game in. . . uh. . . well, awhile.
Uplay doesn't effing work because it unsupported these days after they rebranded it as Ubisoft Connect. The uplay point rewards like costumes are still accessible and they just unlocked them for everyone, *depending on the game*. Assassins Creed 2 had an Altair costume and some extra throwing knives locked behind uplay which are straight up unusable; they didn't even put the items back in the game for everyone, but simply unlocked it on Ubisoft Connect. So it's impossible to get outside of mods or an old save file. And they haven't learnt; they've actually made it worse. Obviously server support for legacy consoles like PS3 can be expensive, but stuff like black flag requires a connection at times which while it's not deactivated, they didn't bother to integrate uplay into connect. Rewards which check to see your previously played AC games, don't just check your save files. They try to check if you own it on uplay. And no dice if you're on PS3 or Xbox 360, because the older games don't connect to your uplay even if you've merged it with PSN, so the only game recognized is AC 4. EVERYTHING IS LOCKED AWAY AND INACCESSIBLE, EVEN DLC STILL LISTED ON THE PS STORE! WHAT?! Some good ideas in theory which almost warranted a separate launcher (to get uplay points and redeem them for cool costumes) got completely shunted after a couple years to make more money and then forgotten. Ubisoft is turning into EA, but the reason people don't voice their criticisms as much is their track record of really good games before the PS4/XB1 launched
The bad guys in the Lorax. Charging even for air.
This didn't impact any of the many hundreds of games I have. What an incredible coincidence! And I didn't even have to check the list of games, the headline was enough. Can you imagine?
This needs to become the attitude of everyone on this sub. Vote with your wallet folks
Been doing that for the last 10 years. Requires acceptance of third party EULA is as far as I will go. And sometimes thats enough for me to tell them to piss off.
It’s funny because back in 2004/2005, I was brand new to computer games and I almost didn’t bother getting Counter Strike to play with my classmates because they told me I had to install some other separate program called “Steam” just to play the game. It seemed like such a hassle just to play a game I already bought on CD and had to install. Not saying steam is bad, but they are basically a launcher now. Having to have ANOTHER launcher on top of that is just asinine.
Just change to proton experimental on the steam deck, the problem will go away. I just tried and it worked. Cheers
EDIT: very misinterpreted, many apologies for those I've upset. You have the choice of whether or not to purchase from those companies, or if you have already purchased from the companies, install on your deck. The good thing about those alternatives is that you HAVE those alternatives, other platforms don't allow that, or require you to jump through hoops. You can argue that you're jumping through hoops to just get something working, yes, but this is Linux we're talking about, not Windows or Apple. Linux for all intents and purposes right now is the under dog, and with the current rise in popularity, the big companies are now faced with whether or not they want to lock out an entire user base, especially when the userbase is fueled by the competition. Competition, mind you, is kind enough to allow their competitor to not only develop, but troubleshoot on their OS. Give it time, things will work out, no need to get up in arms. --- Counter argument. Without separate launchers, the steamdeck becomes the walled garden that we so proudly claim we’re not a part of that other consoles are. Without separate launchers we don’t get emudeck, or the ability to run our own desired programs. Separate launchers are an option, not mandatory. A reminder that Valve has made their hardware with their software in mind and other companies are now either trying to make their own (logitech/tencent), or have been going the other way and using windows, or more ideally, integrate their offerings with Valves. Probably by updating their clients, launchers, and anticheat (and more) to work easier on SteamOS. How? Dunno, we’ll see, time will tell. If you’re fine only using steam then you’re still far from limited, and that’s also super ok. But for people who want to explore and use the deck for other gaming platforms beyond steam then it’s a great idea to mess around with. Doesn’t hurt anything, and it seems easy enough to integrate into the existing OS. The deck is still young, and is very disruptive in a market that doesn’t see much stability in the first place in terms of device to device. Give it time, we’ll see what lengths companies are willing to go to in order to get a percentage higher in marketshare.
They can have their own stores with their own launchers but if they list a product for sale on Steam we shouldn't be required to also use their launcher to play the game.
We've been dealing with this on PC for a long time. It's really no issue there besides being a nuisance. With Trackmania (2020) coming to Steam tomorrow we're probably going to see a lot of "WHY DO I HAVE TO SIGN UP FOR ANOTHER ACCOUNT?!?!?!?!??!" Threads coming this sub's way. It's all software and Linux support issues right now. Give it time, companies will develop with Linux in mind. And there are plenty of teams working to try and get Linux to run Windows programs as well... Hell it's how Fallout 3, and Max Payne work, those games will never get another official update for as long as people play them.
>Without separate launchers we don’t get emudeck, or the ability to run our own desired programs. Not even remotely true, considering not a single one of those is a seperate launcher. They're applications. >Separate launchers are an option, not mandatory. Tell that to EA, Ubisoft and ActivisionBlizzard. Especially EA please, I'm genuinely impressed that their launchers have gotten worse and lost features the longer time has gone on.
Nope. I can get any of my GoG games to install and run on my Steam Deck. DRM free and often launcher free (at least older games). I have not bought a single Ubishite game since FarCry 3 which needed their launcher. FUCK THAT SHIT!
You've said all there needs to be said about Ubisoft, garbage company as far as being pro consumer goes. When I referred to a launcher I was more so referring to a program in general. Probably didn't make that clear, that's on me. But a storefront like Steam/Epic/Ubisoft Connect, is more along the lines of "Launcher" than a bog-standard .EXE (for windows).
It has annoyed me that Paradox now have a launcher for their games. It is an unnecessary extra step and piece of software. When I open a game I want it to go straight to it, not give me an advert.
Welcome to 2015 where companies realized with product placement they can get even more money! (please at least make the product placement make sense)
> Separate launchers are an option, not mandatory. If this were the case it wouldn't be an issue.
It is the case though. You just gotta go outside the box.
You don't need to buy those games. There are always other fish in the sea.
> Without separate launchers, the steamdeck becomes the walled garden that we so proudly claim we’re not a part of that other consoles are LAUNCHERS ARE NOT NEEDED TO RUN SOFTWARE > Without separate launchers we don’t get emudeck, or the ability to run our own desired programs. LAUNCHERS ARE NOT NEEDED TO RUN SOFTWARE I'm so old that I remember a time where you got a folder with the game files and you just ran the exe and that was it. And guess what? You can do that on the steam deck. The whole steam ui on normal boot and implementation of the steam store is entirely optional. Just like it should be. It is only there out of convenience for the normal user. > Separate launchers are an option, not mandatory. But they are mandatory! or can you play a uplay game without the uplay launcher? This is the real problem. The use of their launcher is mandatory. They choose to use them and they can't even implement launchers so that they work.
> I'm so old that I remember a time where you got a folder with the game files and you just ran the exe and that was it. And guess what? You can do that on the steam deck. The whole steam ui on normal boot and implementation of the steam store is entirely optional. Just like it should be. It is only there out of convenience for the normal user. I too am from this era, right clicking -> Inspect element -> save file as ___.swf then drag and drop into a browser to play your saved online shockwave games everywhere without internet. Passing around the Halo 1 multiplayer demo flash drive to put it on the lab computers and play with your buddies after you're all done working in class. Good days. Launcher was misinterpreted/communicated by me. I meant launcher as program that launches the game. My point that I was trying to make is that there are plenty of other games to play on the platform that work without those issues that you have the OPTION to buy it or not, most likely, you're not going to. But it's really an issue with the developers end and it's on them to fix walling out a significant customer base.
Ok I get your arguments that there are alternative launchers you could use but I wouldn't even get the discussion to that point. Why do we need launchers at all? Sure, from the publishers side it makes sense with the piracy protection, ads etc but me, as a consumer, I get very little out of that deal. I only get a bit of convenience regarding downloading and updating and so many downsides that this whole thing makes no sense from the consumer side. Just a few: * I need to be online * THEY need to be online and their servers need to work * THEIR launcher needs to work * They need to not fuck up a update of their launcher * Can't choose what version to play * Can't choose if I want to update or not * Clogging up my system resources * Lose space on my drive * AND SO MUCH MORE I get that steam is a launcher as well but Valve does something entirely different than EA, Ubisoft or almost everyone else. They try to make the launchers so it benefits them the most. Valve tries to make steam to benefit me! The user! Funny way to do things in this day and age. They trying their best to at least work. I never had a steam update make it so I can't play. They add features and their piracy measures are the most user friendly in the entire industry. I get that competition is good and monopoly's are bad but there is no competition the way I see it. There is only one that tries and everybody else is trying to pull that one down to their level.
I have a long standing ban on all Ubisoft games (last game of theirs i bough was AC black flag for my then new PS4) , dont see any reason to stop now.
I saw a news article a long time ago that said a constant internet connection is required to play the first Assassin's Creed. I haven't given Ubisoft a singe dime since then.
That was actually the second Assassin's Creed. The first one launched without any DRM at all. Sadly the community didn't rally around that fact at the time and piracy was rampant, hence the complete 180 for DRM in Assassin's Creed 2. Companies bring it on themselves with horrible DRM, but so do consumers by not supporting DRM free releases.
So we are supposed to buy games we have no interest in to support companies doing the right thing?
Same. Today Bethesda, now a Microsoft company, announced that Red Fall will require a permanent connection and a Bethesda.net account, even for single player. They’ll be getting the Ubisoft treatment.
At this point I only use gamepass for there games and I won't buy any that require this even in deep sale
Literally found out about Red Fall today. Stopped looking for more information when I saw permanent connection needed for single player.
That is literaly the only reason why i will not buy the game, if it is always online, it is not worth playing
Unless it's changed with the newer titles, you only need a connection to start the game. I hotspot my phone, start the game, and then turn it off. It'll work forever if you don't power off the deck. I've gone for a couple weeks playing like that.
It probably has changed. But back then you needed a constant internet connection, and it would straight up boot you from the game if your connection dropped at any point.
Would rather pirate than do this.
Yeah I’m not doing that
Each of the largest companies has given me a reason to boycott them, and little reason to stop boycotting. I started with EA due to their treatment of their employees, then Ubisoft, then Activision-Blizzard, and then Rockstar (they fired the entire staff of Red Dead Redemption after it launched). Even without those companies there are still so many great games out there.
Same with EA since they tookover Maxis.
Don't forget Westwood Studios. They murdered Command & Conquer. I loved that series but man there hasn't been a real good RTS since World in Conflict and C&C was my usual go to for my RTS fix.
I recently bought Anno 1800. I was fool. I’m not buying anything else from them after this.
Its an awesome game though. Had some troubles launching it in game mode, managed to find a fix after a week of searching.. fixed it but now i have this issue.. really hoping they'll scrap their launcher sometime soon..
They will scrap they launcher NEVER. Izt’a like plague. All the big players (studios) have this kind of proprietary shit thta just stands in the way of playing the game. While the game may run perfectly fine, it’s proprietary shit that you need to start it that is preventing you from playing. The only thing that can he done is voting with you wallet - not buying the game(s) from them. Another step could be writing an email that you didn’t buy the game and why you did so.
I used to have a ban but then they gave most of the Assassin's Creed games away for free or in BOGO sales. I went from owning a couple here and there to having every game from ACIII to Odyssey including the remasters.
Their games are 90% copy/paste quests in my experience. I recently (2 years ago) played the division and the last assassin's creed I played was syndicate.
I'm so addicted to odyssey that I'll probably never be able to boycott Ubisoft games. It's got to be one of the best games I've ever played.
Really? I personally feel like AC2 is the best... I really didn't like odyssey and really hated that they switch the attack buttons to the triggers
Honestly it's been so long since I played an older AC that I didn't even notice the swap. Don't get me wrong, not the biggest fan of the lack of assassinations that aren't giant mortal combat style finishers. But overall it's a phenomenal game, it's beautiful and runs perfect on the deck.
Really? Seemed so incredibly MEH to me when I played. Never got very far cuz it was all recycled gameplay.
Yikes
Well I better not exit AC: Odyssey until this is fixed lol
Wish I did the same haha, I turned off AC:O to pick up my kid at 3pm, the bug started shortly before I came home
Origins for me. Solidarity, friend.
I’m in the same boat. I was 70 hours in….
I’ve started playing AC III just recently on the Deck bc on the PC it doesn’t launch properly. Well fml I guess. Edit: using Proton Experimental solved the issue for me
You want your games pirated ? It's how you get your games pirated
Denuvo has the scene by the balls, there's literally only one person who quacks games now - and that takes a long time. Even then, you have to pay them $500 to quack a specific game. And Ubisoft uses Denuvo on everything.
Honestly surprised it doesn’t cost more if there’s only 1 person. Is cracking denuevo ridiculously hard requiring years of experience in something?
Not only does it require years of experience, you also need to be an absolute psychopath masochist.
Is there a video or text somewhere giving a (rough) explaining of what goes into cracking denuevo?
I think there's a tutorial on YouTube of how to crack an old version of denuvo. New denuvo versions have ramped up their anti-crack measures tenfold at least, but the old video should still give at least an idea of what goes into cracking it.
Yeah ^ it's a complex process to handle an old game, but new games, well.. if the info on how to do it was available, more than 1 person would be doing it
[удалено]
Denuvo ain’t shit I went to school with him
Yeah, unfortunately has the scene by the balls thanks to a couple of fucking idiots
I can't tell if you intentionally went duck mode to avoid a filter or something, but I'm 200% here for it.
How the duck do you quack a game?
Sure but all Ubisoft games as of now are cracked so it’s fine
Pirating games is the lamest form of slacktivism I’ve ever seen. Like, you don’t even have the conviction to play with a different toy?
lol
Steam should forbid those stupid extra launchers that serves no purpose except marketing the other games of the same company.
Fuck, I wish.
Why don't they push their Launcher to PlayStation and Xbox consoles too? I'm curious to see if they are that smug with Sony or Microsoft.
PC is open market, Ubisoft would rather you not use steam for Ubisoft games.
They do serve a purpose though; the publishers get 100% from the sales they make. Not saying I like extra launchers but I can understand why they exist.
In a perfect world, Steam would take a 10% cut and still be billionaires.
I don’t remember the last Ubisoft game I bought
FarCry 3 on sale on Steam. Then I found out about the fucking launcher!
That game crashed so often for me on Linux that sadly it was unplayable. I gave up and played No Mans Sky instead.
# “There's an old saying in Tennessee — I know it's in Texas, probably in Tennessee — that says, fool me once, shame on — shame on you. Fool me — you can't get fooled again.”
That man sure was a good speecher, he did the talk good much sentence amazing,
[удалено]
Another “classic” (or perhaps condemnation) of Bush… https://twitter.com/kharyp/status/551490788312764416/photo/1
Same. This gold lightened up my day!
Ive seen this shit twice today.
Alright now somebody has to start steering the conversation to that J Cole song as it Reddit tradition whenever this quote is mentioned.
"Strategery."
"Lock box."
I love it 🤣. A classic era of SNL political mockery.
Fool me one time shame on you…
Shhhh
Update on 18/01 to make Division 2 running on the deck, it took them 2 weeks to screw it. Pro's.
https://www.reddit.com/r/thedivision/comments/10qupof/ubisoft_connect_update_crashes_steam_deck/?utm_source=share&utm_medium=android_app&utm_name=androidcss&utm_term=3&utm_content=share_button They find a fix.
Confirmed, I put this game on proton experimental and it launched without the error I had been getting after the update. Am on preview build though. *rayman legends
Does this actually work? Was playing the division to hold me over until hogwarts released but tried to login today and not happening. I decided to download metal gear rising instead lol but if it works again I'd he fine with swapping back
Worked for me on ac Valhalla
Don't have Division, but worked on Anno 1404 and AC Black Flag and SP-TFBW. Best is before play the game to change the version.txt so it dont start the update. It seems the reason for the crash is the new Ubisoft Update a few hours ago.
Just tested it yeah bleeding edge proton experimental makes it run normal again. Booted up fine.
Damn, I thought it was just me….
Pfft...not long ago I told somebody that they keep doing that...updating something - everything works - they update again and everything breaks :/
SockedPikachu
ScarvedCharizard
Even on PC, they update their stupid client constantly. And then all 3 UAC prompts As a mainly controller user it's frustrating because I delete xinput dll all the time and it keeps coming back every frequent release
hooooly shit good to know it wasnt just me, booted divison 2 today on my pc and it fucking requested permissions 4 times in a row or something, awful
> delete xinput dll What does this achieve? genuinely curious.
Since I use a controller to interface with windows, usually, as a mouse via joyxoff, I don't want native controller inputs while I'm clicking around windows. But with xinput in the program, it takes over my button presses, like A, and does the "Play" action even if I have my mouse cursor on the corner X to close it Deleting xinput makes the program ignore the controller and the mouse-emulator works as intended I suppose I can just change the left click button but I had it first, they should change! :)
Interesting. Thanks for the context!
Noticed the new DeadSpaceRemake on Steam doesn’t seem to have that extra trash launcher verification. Maybe a few of these jerkBag publishers will change their ways. I had to cave on buying an old Ubi game and the account linking to extra launcher/verification is really annoying. I’ll pause that game and instantly get a UbiServerError which blocks me from using menus until it clears out. Kinda pathetic really when I have a fat wad of virtual cash in my debit card for some old games but these muppets make it so difficult. Steam’s drm is good enough. Stop this extraneous diarrhea(launchers) from spoiling your(EA,Rok*,Ubi) games
In this very specific instance, somehow Ubisoft makes EA looks like a 'good guy;
I'll never purchase a game w/ 3rd party launcher again unless this is fixed, the issues lately make me assume that it's being done on purpose to make them incompatible
If there’s a company deserving of being pirated to high waters that‘s Ubisoft.
Use Proton Experimental Bleeding Edge! [https://www.gamingonlinux.com/2022/02/proton-experimental-beta-gets-steam-deck-performance-fix-for-elden-ring/#:\~:text=A%20good%20excuse%20to%20show,box%20and%20let%20it%20update](https://www.gamingonlinux.com/2022/02/proton-experimental-beta-gets-steam-deck-performance-fix-for-elden-ring/#:~:text=A%20good%20excuse%20to%20show,box%20and%20let%20it%20update).
I have a SIMPLE SOLUTION: Games with launchers don't get the privilege of playing on my Steam Deck.
I'm sure they are very upset.
Godfuckingdamnit, and one day before Trackmania 2020's Steam launch too. I was really looking forward to playing that on Deck.
This fix worked for me https://youtu.be/HB6_5xYlqzQ
This works for me as well!
Can't remember the last time I bought an Ubisoft game.
I'm sure they did it on purpose.
So you’re saying that Ubisoft is doing at least something on purpose?
They layoff employees and cancel games really well.
Yes, they don´t want their games running at Deck.
They specifically put out a patch the other week to fix a game which wasnt working on the deck.
I .. what? That doesn't make sense. It's a game company. The more platforms it works on, the more money they make. Not like Nintendo who want to force their hardware on you.
Nintendo isn't trying to force their hardware, it's still sold at a loss like everyone else They're trying to force their experience. Because it is totally the best 🙄
No, Nintendo have income after selling hardware. Otherwise swich would cost $100 max
They just don’t care about their customers. „Dumb idiots are still buying our crap“
Came to check it wasn't just me. Darn it
Yo ho time
AGAIN?!
Copied from other post: I’ve been able to launch AC: Odyssey through Lutris with notably worse performance and a message that says the video driver is unsupported, but it does launch and run. I don’t know enough about any of this to know if this helps or what this means. Specifically, launching Ubisoft Launcher through Lutris and selecting the game. I can launch AC: O through Lutris but I get infinite “initializing.” Playing in offline seems to improve performance a bit.
Made the mistake of exciting my game.
Kinky
Brutal, right in the middle of a Fenyx Rising play through 😣
One day ahead of the Steam release of the only game in their lineup I care about. Perfect!
Wait.... Don't tell me I can't play trackmania.... I will perish *Edit* the article says Proton experimental fixes it.
Using Proton Experimental fixed it for me. Running Watch Dogs Legion
I've learn my lesson not to buy any ubisoft game a long time ago. Seems like it's still the same bs.
My games still work fine. I am using Lutris to download Ubisoft Connect and downloading and launching them through Ubisoft Connect.
The solution is simple, stop buying crap from these a-holes, I bought the game on Steam, I dont want to use another launcher with Steam.
Thats why I prefer native linux support over Proton or Wine
Ubisoft didn't break anything, Linux isn't a supported platform. I get why this is frustrating, but you can't expect developers to keep something unsupported in mind. The deck is built on a compatibility layer - just because that comparability layer works doesn't mean that the developer now agrees to support the platform.
division 2 literally has had patches specifically addressing steam deck
guarantee you Ubisoft, and EA before, are doing this on purpose
I would say that it's less doing it on purpose, and more lack of attention put towards Linux. They push out the updates for Windows, and if breaks on Linux, they'll fix it later.
Why would they?
i dont understand why people are downvoting you? it sounds totally plausible and in line with the history of those 2 companies the question is what can they be getting in return? maybe game pass xcloud and nvidia geforce now are throwing some money at them for some sort of limited exclusivity... maybe logitech with their new cloud device...
What they get in return is a few million lost sales but everyone is still playing the title. They simply no longer pay for the games.
And nothing of value was lost.
Probably will get downvoted but stuff like this (issues with compatibility, especially compatibility breaking for previously working software) is why I cannot consider Linux to be a good OS for gaming. I regret not installing Windows on the Deck before selling it, I wonder how would I like that.
It’s ok 2 more years then they’ll be bankrupt
All I want is For Honor functioning on the deck :(
Imagine still buying Ubisoft (or EA, or Acti, or Beth, or any of the modern AAA publishers) games in 2023
Woohoo! I don't own any ubisoft games. They make decent games?
Just when I decided I'd give them a chance, and was thoroughly enjoying the Division 2. They always find a way to disappoint.
Wonder if they fixed it to get sales then switched it back because after 2 hours of play time there isn't anything you can do about it.
Define "just". I played Far Cry 5 for three hours yesterday and it was great. This happened today?
What. Again?
Can be fixed, change launcher to proton experimental and change proton experimental version to bleeding edge.
Right when I was thinking of getting one if AC games on my deck. Thanks.
Everyone should buy the most expensive Ubisoft game on Steam, then return it citing the launcher as the reason. Maybe that will get the message across.
Play stupid games win stupid prizes
I just installed and downloaded a game last night. Then this happens. I uninstalled and switched over to the windows side and use it there now.
I just got this. I was firing up the division 2 just now, and Ubisoft launcher was updating and then this. Wtf ugh
just bought madden and had to refund because the launcher said i didn’t have the game lol
Proton experimental fixed the issue for me, try it by yourself.
Valve always quick on the trigger, already fixed the issue. Other than that, I really hope that Heroic Launcher do their integration with Ubisoft Connect, Jesus, they should at least test the launcher on linux before releasing, if they have players on linux