Ads are ads, just because it from the same ecosystem is moot.

so should Steam not have any game discovery features? Is it bad for Steam to display “trending games” because it’s technically advertising them by showcasing them?

go to your library there is ads for updates for your games.

I have no problem with patch notes

most people don’t. and I don’t think it’s reasonable to expect them to.

what kind of apps cant be updated through playstore/fdroid?

it’s not that they can’t be (maybe some apps I use can’t) but rather that I don’t like some things about F-Droid. One of the big things being unreliable app updates. They are often significantly outdated compared to GitHub releases.

https://www.privacyguides.org/en/android/#f-droid

“Due to their process of building apps, apps in the official F-Droid repository often fall behind on updates. F-Droid maintainers also reuse package IDs while signing apps with their own keys, which is not ideal as it gives the F-Droid team ultimate trust.”

• Simple Gallery for your gallery (just purchased but there is an emerging fork I’m blanking on the name of)

https://github.com/FossifyOrg/Gallery

Simple Gallery was bought by ZipoApps and will be soon flooded with ads and tracking garbage, FossifyOrg forked the whole simple mobile tools suite, and will continue development independently of ZipoApps

Obtainium is great for updating apps hosted outside the playstore, big upside being you don’t need to bother with FDroid releases

I just think it’s quite funny that in their justification, they project their own arrogant judgemental attitude towards those they justify their own behavior against.

[it’s justified because] best case scenario, [the reason why] you don’t [have social media] is probably from having some sort of arrogant judgement value about people who do

seriously? I think that’s where people disagree.

it’d be different if they said:

a single woman setting up dates is going to use what limited info they have to avoid stalkers, cheaters, red pillers, and anti social people. That this might filter out perfectly normal people along with the creeps is the cost of maintaining safety and not wasting time, which is pretty much par for the course in dating

but that’s not what they said, and that’s not what people are responding to.

Imagine if some guy said:

“honestly, dating women who have social media is a red flag, at best they’re probably attention whores, but there’s also a good chance they’re a cheating slut.”

now imagine if someone responded to the “rustled jimmies” with

well, obviously they meant ((something else))

same thing, they should’ve said that then

dumb decision to dedicate yourself to a proprietary game’s little microtransaction market now aint it.

Owners of CSGO(CS2) 3rd party marketplaces seem to be making a killing off of fees, so it can be done successfully. But I doubt that Rocket League trading sites see anywhere near the volume of CS2 sites.

Why in gods name would a game remove trading after it’d been around for a while?

Jagex removed trading from RuneScape back in the day, for less greedy purposes than Epic is doing here, and it effectively killed their game.

You don’t want to understand, am I right? I don’t get you.

No, I understand. You are fine with regional pricing as long as there’s absolutely no way to enforce regional pricing. Which, when talking about a purely digital storefront, means there will be no more regional pricing.

This has already started happening in some regard. Recently, many games on Steam have already had their regional pricing removed, to the ire of gamers in poorer regions.

Truly a massive W

No that’s exactly the same thing.

No it’s not. Telling someone from California that they can’t buy products in Mississippi is WAY different than telling them they are offered a different price in the two states. They are not told that they can’t buy it. Your analogy does not translate to the situation.

What they don’t can [can’t do] is tell other EU citizens that they are not able to buy the product in those EU countries.

That’s not what they’re told though. They are told “yes, you can buy our product.”

I don’t know why you can’t understand this simple fact.

What you’re saying doesn’t make sense. You’re telling me you don’t have a problem with regional pricing (within the EU) on digital goods, but you’re stating that companies must offer that same ‘regional’ pricing to everyone (within the EU)… that’s no longer regional pricing, it’s all just one price then. These two lines of thought completely contradict each other. How can you have regional pricing if you want everyone from every region to be offered the same price?

Do you really think that companies who offer discounts on digital goods to buyers in poorer regions are being nefarious? If the companies are not able to regionally price the games, then they cannot offer a discount to the poorer regions, and all that happens is everyone in the poorer regions ends up paying more.

deleted by creator

So someone from California can’t buy products in Mississippi, that’s just fair - or it’s ok just because it’s via the internet?

this is not the same thing.

regional pricing does not block people from buying the game.

regional pricing allows people in poorer countries to afford games.

I do not see a problem with companies offering discounts to people who would not otherwise be able to afford their product.

I understand the principle, but in practice, the result of this will be negative.

So to comply, companies will now charge people in the poorer countries more money. epic w