for a once a year trip I would just rent. Same reason why you don’t need to buy a truck because just in case you need to move, you jsut rent a U-haul for that occasion.
for a once a year trip I would just rent. Same reason why you don’t need to buy a truck because just in case you need to move, you jsut rent a U-haul for that occasion.
SMS is inherently insecure as a MFA, consider using aegis for your TOTP codes instead.
yup especially the pc gamer, especially with the presence of lots of banger indies, is spoiled for choice, that exclusivity is less of something enticing. And selling on FOMO don’t work as well when there’s also tons of f2p games competing on such feelings.
another one big thing is those of us who care just straight up don’t buy the game, and without buying the game we can’t leave a negative review, and we moved on and not talked about it anymore.
What happened here is affecting people who have spent money on this game, who can leave review and actually cannot just walk away without having your spent money thrown into the void.
Also there’s a fundamental fog of war of what your anti-cheat can see. Valorant cheaters are using hardware cheats, that literally takes in a video output, analyzes it, and sends in mouse inputs, on a different computer, the anti-cheat straight up can’t see it, they only see there’s a video out and a mouse in. Ultimately, having physical access of a hardware and you can just tell the software whatever you want it to see.
the code posted in the forum is only pointing out the capture and send to server function exists, but not what calls those functions, so still don’t know if it affects other games until they posted the full article as promised. Btw, taking screenshots as anticheat is not new, they use this to catch overlays/cheat application UIs
the validation shouldn’t cause too much lag since game needs to sync up the game states anyways, which is an operation that is inherently way more expensive than any validation anyways (since each frame of the following game states need to adhere to the game rules anyways, there’s already inherently some form of validation). It’s more about not trusting everything the client says the game state should be.
it is a dominant one if it’s by number of game developers.
Na and Cl, not individually, but people lick it all the time when they combine.
the leaker in question is about people like a qa tester or someone who got an early access review.
it’s a weird case where it only uses steam API and does not hard check it. It attempts to check if the currently associated steam account is allowed to play it and shuts down if you don’t, but does not do anything else if it can’t detect an account (such as if you have no steam) and launch normally.
no, but this specific report is obviously made in bad faith and expect the mods to just blindly remove something just because a report exists.