Developers will be required to disclose if their game uses kernel anti-cheat. This applies to both new games and existing games. Non-kernel anti-cheat is encouraged to be disclosed as well, but it’s only mandatory for developers to declare if they’re using kernel anti-cheat for the time being.
It’s worth mentioning that many games use kernel anti-cheat on windows, but only use user space anti-cheat on Steam Deck and Linux.
Now punish publishers who try to change the terms of sale after sale. “Want to play the single player game you bought a decade ago? Agree to this new arbitration clause.”
Games that change their terms post-sale should present the customer the option for an automatic no-questions-asked refund. Leaving the customer with the options: Agree, Decline, Refund.
Hmm, you have uncovered a problem with both of our ideas. Steam’s leverage is reduced after they have deposited sales proceeds, and is gone after the publisher isn’t selling games on the platform any longer.
(I’m griping about Rockstar specifically but my point is still flawed in the general case.)
Add a clause to the contract between Steam and the developer requiring the dev to reimburse Steam for refunds due to post-sale changes (ie, from that specific ‘accept, decline, refund’ option). If the dev doesn’t pay the bill, Steam can use the breach of contract as leverage.
Include adding kernel level anti cheat to that. This should just give us an option to get a full refund.
At the very least a choice. Keep using it as is or get updates related to the new agreement.
It should only be applicable to new sales. Old sales should function the same as before.
FYI - the owner of this site, gamingonlinux, was a mod on the !linux_gaming@lemmy.ml community until they were caught abusing their moderator powers. Then they deleted their account and complained on mastodon that it’s stupid design that mod logs are public. [Screenshot]
Instead, here’s a link to the official post https://steamcommunity.com/groups/steamworks/announcements/detail/4547038620960934857
A lemmy.ml mod, being an absolute joke of a mod? Say it ain’t so!
I’m interested to hear more. I’ve followed Liam’s work for almost a decade at this point and I haven’t ever seen or heard of him acting unprofessionally, but I’m quite new to Lemmy.
What abuse of their moderator powers? Is there a link to see the mod log somewhere? Sorry, I know I’m being a bit needy, but I’m not really sure what I’m doing.
So I tried looking into it, but all I can find is this same user (go $fsck yourself) had some comments deleted by him about 6 months ago. I didn’t actually comb through the modlog to see what the deleted comments contained, I’m not sure how feasible it is to review the modlog going that far back.
I couldn’t find any actual proof of wrongdoing, the closest thing to evidence is that screenshot of Liam saying he thought it was stupid that modlogs were public. I also didn’t find anyone else complaining about him as a mod, literally just this same guy copy pasting this comment on a ton of different gamingonlinux lemmy posts for the past 6 months.
Liam complaining about public modlog does sound like he got caught abusing mod privledges, but I’m leaning towards it just being between him and this go $fsck yourself user rather than widespread abuse.
Thank you very much for pointing me in the right direction. I was able to dig a bit and I think I found it - it looks like they were being a bit of a pedantic asshole about some spelling/grammar thing, the moderator deleted their comment because… yes, it’s a pedantic spelling/grammar nitpick. Then that user threw a massive tantrum and started yelling mod abuse.
Honestly, it’s a real shame that Liam lost faith in Lemmy over something stupid like this. Yeah, there are downsides of a public mod log - really hateful vile shit will just persist in there forever when realistically it should be just wiped out entirely. I think overall it has more benefits than drawbacks, but I certainly wouldn’t say that being opposed to a public mod log is some sort of smoking gun evidence that he abused his mod powers.
So yeah, this one guy behaving like a self-centred jerk actively contributed towards pushing a well-known and prolific linux gaming journalist off the platform. Great stuff, love to see it.
Screenshot:
That’s unfortunate to hear, gamingonlinux has been a really good source for news, so I hate to hear he’s not been handling mod stuff respectably.
I’d like to see it show if there is any third party DRM as well, like the Augmented Steam extension does.
