III. if you spend money on a Ubisoft game, you get what you fucking deserve.
III. if you spend money on a Ubisoft game, you get what you fucking deserve.
Jack-Off Box
Apparently most of those are alpha/beta versions, only 14 out of 40 are actually new
When will you get out of prison?
No human has perfect consistency, and it’s always an option to manually review data if it’s questionable.
What good is client-side scanning, when you can just run the aimbot outside the client and send the inputs directly through hardware?
Primarily by not sending non-visible information and by detecting unrealistic/impossible motion. If the aimbot has to limit itself to what humans can do, it doesn’t really matter anymore.
Silksong
:(
Let’s not forget that the PSN integration reduces performance, as in: deleting the PSN stuff from Ghost of Tsushima results in higher FPS.
https://steamcommunity.com/app/2215430/discussions/0/7093810588821950373/
I’d agree with you if studios producing actual high-quality games (like Elden Ring or Baldur’s Gate 3) were hurting for money, but they don’t appear to be. So what is the justification for the higher price? All I see is more money being shoveled towards investors, or used to buy (and bleed out/close) smaller studios.
Just as a warning, the macvlan stuff isn’t well documented and seems to have hard limits. I worked with it a couple of years ago and had to eventually read a lot of Docker code to figure some stuff out, and the host was only able to successfully set up 4 macvlan networks at a time - the fifth (and any following ones) were never reachable, even though I used the same scripts as for all other ones.
Things might have improved in the meantime.
Don’t forget to dub over all the prince’s lines with “Hah! Hyah! Huah!”
“Whoops, companies keep doing amoral shit to squeeze more profits from their customers, but it’s totally accidental, every single time”
Enjoy your boots - I sincerely hope that for every person you influenced towards giving corporations the benefit of the doubt, you lose an equal amount of money through legal yet amoral business practices.
Man I’m so sick of people getting blinded by rage. Alright, if you’re just going to go in circles, I might as well repeat myself as well. Companies exist to make money. If they fuck over their customers, those customers leave. Others follow. Congrats. You lose money. Basic logic 101.
And easily disproven by Sony’s recent actions with Helldivers 2. If you were right, they wouldn’t have thought about rolling out the PSN requirement, and they’d still sell the game world-wide. But you’re not.
Again, I’m not a bootlicker. I just don’t automatically assume malice when something could more easily explained by incompetence.
When one party gains a monetary advantage through their “incompetence” and keeps repeating such “incompetencies”, then yes, you are a bootlicker.
Also, way to go ignoring what I said about rockstar and Ubisoft accounts.
Because it doesn’t matter… Come on, this is not that hard.
I guess Sony won’t let you unlink from a steam account based on what, how you feel?
Sony already has the ability to not let you unlink, as shown from the hacker example. So why are you so sure they won’t use the same mechanism to make more money in the future? Because of how you feel? Bootlickers often feel like companies won’t do evil things for profit, sadly they are almost always wrong.
We’ve been over this before… Sony is a company. Companies exist to make money. Sony controls whether you can unlink an account. Sony can choose not to let you unlink your account.
Do you think everyone else is just stupid, and no hacker ever thought of unlinking their account and creating a new one? Or Sony is stupid and doesn’t realise hackers can create a new account? I don’t understand how you completely skip over arguments in the comments you’re replying to.
And therein lies the bootlicking. You’re assuming Sony will play nice and let you keep playing, no questions asked - while they almost took away the ability to play an online game months after launch for players in hundreds of countries, which was only thwarted by massive protests. Yet you stand there and say “nooo, they’d never do that”.
Customer buys a bunch of games from the PS Store using a foreign account.
No, customer buys a bunch of games from Steam, and links their Steam account to a foreign PSN account. Sony bans them, and the player can’t play their Playstation games on Steam games online anymore.
Right… So anyway, I’m talking about where you buy a game from, not who makes it. On PC, your PSN account itself isn’t tied to your purchases, just PS services like trophy and friends lists, right? Exclusively PC players don’t actually have much to care about there, right? On PC, if your psn account gets removed, what’s stopping you from just making a new one?
Sony. Their whole argument for introducing the PSN requirement to Helldivers was the ability to ban hackers and the like. This wouldn’t make any sense if you could just switch the PSN account. They can ban your purchase, even when you bought it on Steam. That’s the whole point.
It would take a special kind of stupid to think a customer would come back to buying from you if you did something like that, but sure. If your hypothetical situation were actually possible, a corporation would probably do it.
Please explain to me how this situation is not possible. You’ve been obviously wrong before without looking things up, so I’d love an actual explanation beyond “nu-uh”. It takes a special kind of stupid to think that children who want to play their favorite games wouldn’t re-buy them if access were taken away, especially if it was “their fault” for “breaking ToS”.
Besides, aren’t we talking about PC players who aren’t even buying from Sony?
You’re absolutely right - the publisher of a game has zero income from any purchases. How could I be so stupid to forget that all publishers are doing their work for the good of the people, they would NEVER take a single cent from any purchase. Sony happens to be the publisher of the games we’re talking about, but THEY WOULD NEVER.
Sony is a public company. Companies exist to make money. If Sony thinks they can get more money by banning ToS-breaking PSN accounts (since people would have to buy games again to play them), they’ll do so.
Why do you think companies exist?
What if earnings don’t go up enough next quarter, and they see this as an opportunity to make more money? What if they expand PSN coverage and start enforcing their ToS then? You’re giving people advice that will likely result in them losing access to their purchases in the future. That’s bootlicking to me.
How about you stop licking Sony’s boots and accept that it’s not a viable solution to tell people “the only way to consume this media is for you to be in constant danger of being banned”?
They can remove your access to the game. That is unacceptable from a consumer rights perspective.
Why? The devs can just go with another publisher. Or does Annapurna own the IP?