but anything built on top of web engines is going to be a little dogshit on native platforms.

Hard disagree on “little”.

Software designed for “native first” experiences like Flutter aren’t as popular in web dev because they work on that same, but reversed, assumption of a local disk being your source.

Popularity should not be dictated by what web devs prefer. As long as they build for desktop, I won’t pardon excessive resource usage. And I’m not talking about Flutter. Better performance oriented frameworks exist, see sciter.

It’s not CEF that does most of the impact. It’s the contents web devs make it load and process. And web devs generally not being very competent in optimizing is just a sad reality.

Let me guess… It uses CFE or Electron?

Think of it as a “this game is not yet available for purchase” seal. It may also mean “we know our game is not up to standards (it wouldn’t sell well on Steam), so we chose to let idiots at epic decide if they want to pay for it, and hey it worked so that’s something”.

Developers have full control over servers in most cases. A viable server side anti cheat should be a thing. For every case of “client sending false data to server” we can come up with a solution to verify that to some degree. Finally, it should help a lot to rely on player generated reports and utilize replay recording on server.

But no, developers will continue to rely on 3rd party solutions (made by people who never developed a game), even infect their co-op-only games with it, and complain “uh oh we can’t handle Linux cheaters”.

What’s more interesting is that DRM developers don’t have enough experience with game development. They have no idea how the game code should really work for everyone to not be affected by something that is injected inside (and they are injecting a lot - some executables get inflated by more than 1 gb I think).

Steam getting better isn’t linked to anyone becoming a billionaire. That sentiment sounds like people can’t stop looking for things to blame Valve for.

Is it too difficult to accept that every single company failed in competing with Steam? I’d say they didn’t even try their best (especially Epic). Must’ve assumed that just serving a website with a web app is all they needed to get as rich as Gabe.

Hard disagree on denuvo. If it’s no problem for you then you must have tons of experience in re. Which puts you into some 1%-ish group. Depends on the type of mods you do of course.

You can. Google steamless.

Steam DRM is nothing like stuff people should be aware of. Ask any modder for confirmation.

Well did it help Epic when they added achievements? Guess not much. Either they never marketed this feature enough or most spending users never cared about achievements on Epic.

If you mean just the percentage of users I might agree. But those people don’t really correlate with the users who provide most of the profit of the platform.

My profile is also not public but it’s visible to friends. Also I can make it public when I want.

There are also achievement statistics.

I see. Still, I can see that for many people achievements with no value are no better than their absence. Platform provides value, and for now only steam provides a lot of it with almost each purchase.

Are you serious? Obviously people don’t care about achievements on a platform that has almost no community-related functionality.

I mean the basic logic of the service was designed somewhere before its release. Data policies, promises to users are nothing if you assume services should adapt to stuff like this, at the expense of breaking those policies and promises.

Here is an old article from telegram about reasons for how it works https://telegra.ph/Why-Isnt-Telegram-End-to-End-Encrypted-by-Default-08-14

No, just personal experience (I use telegram for many years) and absence of server data implications anywhere across the issues in the past (at this time too). You can find questionable or illegal businesses in telegram with a few words, they are all public channels. Hence “no moderation” accuses mentioned in every article.

There are of course darknet-like private communities, but I assume they are not a subject of interest at this time. Authorities would need to dig very deep past all the obvious illegal stuff, and telegram shouldn’t care about resources consumed by such a small chunk of user base. Those groups will stay, as they are, private and safe, I assume, for quite some time.

Assuming things should work that way is ignorant. According to you, service owners should design and redesign their services to not store any data in order to avoid arrests. Also that a service owner should invent stuff they might not had a plan for if they have even a theoretical possibility to help identify individual users, in other words go against policies they designed at some point.

That’s a wild way of twisting the logic. Just because the platform doesn’t fall under your e2ee definition doesn’t mean they had to do something that is only possible on purely cloud services.

The reason for arrest doesn’t even have anything to do with encryption. All content that facilitates mentioned crimes is public. Handling it shouldn’t involve any backdoors or otherwise service-side decryption.

Wording is confusing. Here are some better takes that sound valid and are true:

• Telegram’s e2ee is only available for chats of 2 people, and only on official mobile client.

• Telegram’s e2ee is a feature you have to enable whenever you need it (called secret chats).