305
and Epic Games stance on Linux gaming is known
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 23 Oct 2025
305 points (100.0% liked)
Linux Gaming
21811 readers
226 users here now
Discussions and news about gaming on the GNU/Linux family of operating systems (including the Steam Deck). Potentially a $HOME away from home for disgruntled /r/linux_gaming denizens of the redditarian demesne.
This page can be subscribed to via RSS.
Original /r/linux_gaming pengwing by uoou.
No memes/shitposts/low-effort posts, please.
Resources
WWW:
Discord:
IRC:
Matrix:
Telegram:
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
I didn't say I purchased a game, I said I paid for a game. Whether that's a "purchase" or a "license" is irrelevant to the fact that I can't even play the game I "licensed" either.
They have altered the license. Pray they do not alter it further.
Hmm, your original response pre-edit was a lot nicer.
I also didn't use the word purchase. You said "paid for a game", I quoted you as saying you "paid for a game".
Why are you pretending I misquoted you?
Because the difference seemed to be what your point was. If it wasn't, I have no idea what it was. I paid for a license for a game. Thus I paid for a game.
That was my point -- I was building off of what you said...
This is exactly the problem. This should be true, but it isn't in most cases.
Store's like GOG get much closer by giving you a DRM free copy. But some would say that even then, if you aren't allowed to modify and distribute that, you don't really own the game either.
Okay so if I didn't pay for a license for a game, what did I pay for?
You did, and that licence comes with plenty of terms that can restrict or revoke your access to that game.
Which shouldn't be allowed, but it is.
In an ideal world, you wouldn't have to purchase a license to the game at all. You could purchase the game itself by receiving a packaged copy of it along with a copy of the source code.
But something inbetween would be a nice start.
Great, I'm glad we sorted that out. Thanks for the unnecessary clarification.
Lol you say you want a discussion and then act like a dickhead when someone engages in that discussion.
Nice work.
I didn't say I wanted a discussion? Why are you misquoting me? I just honestly have no fucking idea what your point is and it's tiresome. Goodbye now.
This you?
Skill issue.
How convenient that you omitted the part of the sentence that describes what the conversation is about. It wasn't this.
Yeah, it was about what constitutes a refund, which I built upon...
You didn't build upon anything, you exclusively attempted to derail the conversation into some sort of ridiculous semantics argument that I still don't understand.
I didn't attempt to derail anything, nor did I make any kind of "ridiculous semantics argument".
That you don't understand it continues not to surprise me.