No I didn’t know that, would be interesting to see more of them try it, just for curiositys sake.

It makes me wonder—would the dynamic change if there was only an upvote? So you could choose not to upvote, but the default action would be a neutral one, and if you liked/wanted to support/etc you could signal that.

I see tons of posts on here now that are downvoted to oblivion, because they are a legitimate article that says something a group doesn’t like. There won’t even be comments on the post. So like a Reuter article that discusses Palestinian casualties and no comments and like -20. This doesn’t seem like a super useful mechanism. Or at least, it’s just functioning today as a content preference “I don’t want to see this typed content” as opposed to “this is bad info, out of line with the community, etc.”

And despite ranking my list by either hot, or top day/six hours, I still see the downvoted posts regularly so the mechanic doesn’t even really do anything in terms of visibility. Or possibly there’s just too little content on a given community for it to get filtered out.

“It’d be a real shame if something happened to your work file. If you pay us monthly, we can make sure your work is protected”

I mean that’s why I said no company would actually do this. But if they say demand was way more than expected, that means they were basing their financial assumptions off of a smaller sale amount, and stuff like server hosting/capacity was likely scaled to that smaller amount as well.

I do think there’s an ok argument for it though—you avoid a bad first impression where people are frustrated by spending money and having no product (as in the uncertainty of being able to login). And likewise, a wave launch could possibly increase the hype through anticipation like those sneaker drops and such. Would allow you to make the money you “expected” to make and then expand the server infrastructure in manageable chunks that won’t bankrupt you if there isn’t that much more demand.

That said, this wave launch would have to occur pretty quickly, otherwise the demand would move on since it couldn’t get the product for any price (like when I abandoned buying a new graphics card a while back because there literally wasn’t anything I wanted available for sale, except scalped ones on Amazon)

I know no company would ever do this… but if you say “sorry, we weren’t expecting this much traffic, so the servers are at capacity” couldn’t you have just limited sales to some percent over your capacity? I’m not in a huge rush to play, but I was a bit annoyed when I bought the game, launched—it launched on my portrait orientation monitor, which is annoying, i watch the intro cinematic which was funny, then it stalls out on the main screen because capacity and I can’t even access game settings to try to fix the monitor thing. This has more to do with it being a console port, but like sheesh, you can’t even get to a menu if the servers are down?

Well I see the comment, if that helps.

As a Linux Uber-amateur, it feels like we’re basically able to do anything I would want to do on Linux now… the thing where Microsoft tries to not allow you to download stuff because they haven’t paid Microsoft to sign it has always annoyed me. This would be the next level of nope.

One thing that’s kept me on the fence is I like multiplayer games, and I had always heard that battle eye didn’t work on Linux, but with all the proton development and steam deck interest, perhaps this is becoming a non issue?