Good question. Because I would play on Steam Deck, but write a review on my PC. Maybe this could be done with profiles or something like that? But it would vastly complicate things for most people.
Maybe number of monitors/resolution/framerate/use of freesync or framegen, too, since that can affect glitches.
The problem with that is, this is highly dependent on the settings you set to play the game. Your system may have 4k, but you maybe play the game at 1080p with upscaling and RayTracing enabled. I mean this is just an example. Therefore it could be misleading information for many. There is a reason why even Protondb doesn't list that. In my initial reply and suggestion here I excluded stuff like refresh rate and resolution for that reason.
Kinda needs to be default. I mean, I’m a privacy buff, and I don’t care if you know my raw specs if I’m telling you how a game runs in a public forum. Because without the specs, that information is worthless.
I'm against sharing privacy information by default. This has to be opt-in. Also a review without specs is not worthless. All the years I found the reviews without specs still helpful in Steam. Having specs gives a little bit information, especially important when you want to understand some performance or compatibility issues. But most reviews don't need that.
Great addition. ProtonDB had this for a long time and it is a useful information. Maybe in Linux it should list the Kernel (Linux version) too. And for Nvidia the driver version would be useful to have too. Protondb does that already for anyone who opted into sharing specs: https://www.protondb.com/app/379720
mirrors.kernel.org is down because it threw 2 disks in a RAID-6 array and then ground itself to a halt.
Sure, but we don't know the limit of those budgets. And its not like Valve wouldn't do innovation or try things out; otherwise there would be no improvemetns to the Steam store, no Steam Deck, no Steam Frame, no SteamOS, the controller, and they would not fund Linux projects and the FEX project, no Proton and so on. So I think its fair to say that Valve does all of that. Then to expect on top of that to lose money on selling hardware... when the hardware is already cheap and there is no need to.
The only reason I still hesitate is, because of the potential time sink and then it might be not for me. I watched a few YouTube videos, but still no conclusion for me so far... Biggest fear of playing new games is the time.
I'm about to start ELITE: Dangerous (played the ELITE game on NES way back...) which also have the first person element nowadays. Did you try that one yet? I still wait for Star Citizen to be "completed", in the sense that I do not like playing Early Access periods.
They did not give money to Geoff. It was Geoff's personal decision to include it in the end.
But besides that, I find it incredible sad that so many people hate this game, just because it was shown at the last in the show... That's a bit unfair to hate a game based on that. Later people played it and it wasn't that good either, but they addressed the issue. Still sad what happened to the game...
Why not? Not only you was much different, the game was a different man too. I want to like this game, but the gameplay loop and activities seem not for me. I played it for a few hours years ago and might go back and try again.
The goal of any business is not to eat the loss, if its not important for survival. The Steam Deck is not crucial for operation of their business. Compared to consoles where its their only income (usually) and they depend on the number of sold units. Also compared to consoles, Valve is not in a position where they heavily compete on price and need to bring it down to price of competition.
In short, there is no need for Valve to eat the cost. It's already a good price too.
I do not want to think about every possible error that can happen. I do not want to study every program I call to look for any possible errors. Only errors that are important to my task.
As I said, there are reasons to use this option when the script MUST fail on error.And its helpful for creating the script. I just don't like generalizations to always enable this option.
Bash and the commandline are designed to work after an error. I don't want it to fail after an error. It depends on the error though, and how critical it is. And this option makes no distinction. There are lot of commands where a fail is part of normal execution. As I said before, this option can be helpful when developing, but I do not want it in production. Often "silent" fails are a good thing (but as said, it depends on the type). The entire language is designed to sometimes fail and keep working as intended.
You really can't compare Bash to a normal programming language, because the language is contained and developed in itself. While Bash relies on random and unrelated applications. That's why I do not like comparisons like that.
Edit: I do do not want to exit the script on random error codes, but maybe handle the error. With that option in place, I have to make sure an error never happens. Which is not what I want.
In my experience this option is too risky. Making simple changes to the script without scientifically proofing and testing it works under all cases becomes impossible (depending on how complex the script and task itself is). It has a bit of the energy of "well you have to make no errors in C, then you can write good code and it never fails".
This option is good if the script MUST fail under any circumstances, if any error return of a program occurs. Which is usually not the case for most scripts. It's also useful in testing when debugging or when developing. Also useful if you purposefully enable and disable the option on the fly for sensitive segments of the script. I do not like this option as a default.
As you'll learn later in this blogpost, there are some footguns and caveats you'll need to keep in mind when using -e.
I am so glad this article is not following blind recommendations, as lot of people usually do. It's better to handle the error, instead closing the script that caused the error. I think the option -e should be avoided by default, unless there is a really good reason to use it.
Good question. Because I would play on Steam Deck, but write a review on my PC. Maybe this could be done with profiles or something like that? But it would vastly complicate things for most people.