Hot take: a game shouldn’t be considered fully verified unless it can be played offline. It’s a bloody handheld, I want to play on it while traveling!
Is it wrote on the market page of the game as requirement for play ? If yes, why it shouldn’t apply to the deck ?
It is, but so is Windows. There is also a barely visible small text about it, right next to the trademark and copyright information nobody reads. It’s quite well hidden.
Don’t you have a phone you can hotspot to? I think performance and input are really the two that matter. Everything else is secondary. Maybe they should simply put “requires an Internet connection.”
Does the Switch have any exclusively-online games? That’s a genuine question that I’m interested in for comparison purposes.
I think it’s a load of shit that any single-player experience requires an internet connection. I still know people with shoddy enough connections that they can’t play games like Diablo 4 on their desktop pc. However, I don’t think that it should disqualify a game from being Verified.
That’s a question that occurred to me during this discussion too. Please ping me if you’d get an answer. I’m not a Nintendo person, so I’m not sure where to even start researching that.
Kingdom hearts cloud version for the switch comes to mind, however considering “Cloud Version” is literally in the name I feel like you should expect it to need online.
Yes, but only cloud streaming titles (of which there aren’t many) and the also (few) online-only competitive shooters and MMOs.
There are no Switch games that run locally that lock single player away if you’re not connected.
A niche issue, but if you have two switches utilizing the same account, the second switch needs internet connection to ping/verify to make sure that your account isn’t being played on more than one switch at the same time. This occurs when initially loading any game on the second switch regardless if the game itself is an online game and allegedly every few hours after that.
I mean its debatable, given a person can arbitrarily hotspot with their phone.
Saying that no game with muliplayer only (e.g mmos) cant get verified is a very specific category.
If someone wanted single player experiences, you could just filter out tags.
At the very least there should be a separate category for games verified to work offline. It would be easier to tolerate if it was a generic Proton compatibility rating, but it’s not, it’s a rating for how well it works on this handheld.
A hotspot is hardly a solution. If I’d be willing to drain my phone battery in travel, gaming on a phone is an option too. For me saving the phone battery is one of the primary advantages of a dedicated gaming device.
It is an optional solution. You could choose to have a wifi hotspot as well, or be in a location offering wifi. Its having the specific uaecase of refusing to use any of the 3 is saying, “I dont do this, therefore i want the definition changed” even though the changed definition doesn’t apply to everyone.
The current definition of steam verified is very basic, and should stay basic. And people should adjust their filters for their definition instead of valve picking a more precise definition, and the definition being illogical for other usecases
Using filters or creating/joining a curators list is precisely what you should do for more specific situations.
Is there even such a filter? There is a filter for singleplayer/multiplayer but it’s not the same thing. There are plenty of games that won’t even start offline or the singleplayer experience is severely degraded without a good reason. The modern Hitman trilogy comes to mind. There is no way to filter for that.
Im terms of a perfect filter, not exactly, hence the best method for those crowds would be having a curated list, rather than applying said defition to all users…the users would know more about games tham someone hired at valve who would check a game for basic functionalities and doesnt evem finish the game (there have been times where a game would get verified, but has something broken late into the game). A curator would be able to adjust lists and add remove them as new updates happen that might add/remove functionality, something valve isnt going to revisit after getting a verified status.
That assumes hotspot is included in your wireless plan, and it isn’t included in a lot of the cheapest ones.
Then you get into the debate of who can and cant afford something, which goes nack to the idea that a more specific definition is a bad one.
Hotspot is a free feature on every phone. Just get an unlimited plan and easily share with your Steam Deck.
Ah yes lemme just shell out $50 dollars a month or more just so I can use my steam deck to play multiplayer games over the slow and spotty mobile network that exists where I live. That’s a totally reasonable thing to do.
Or I can just continue to pay 15 bucks a month and use my steam deck offline while still getting decent enough service and enough data to do everything I’d actually be able to reliably do on a mobile network outside of a large city.
Mobile networks ain’t reliable and not every plan permits the mobile hotspot feature to function. That was my entire point with that comment.
That when when your device is unlocked your carrier still gets to decide if that particular feature is even functional.
deleted by creator
And also a shit game.
Literally nothing in the skill trees looks fun or interesting.
I’m sure all 300 active players will be delighted
I wish I could transfer my license from battlenet to steam… sigh.
A little late guys…… already bought the game on the blizzard launcher and installed it on the deck that way. Then I played through the campaign, that was fun. Then I got to the seasonal content (that I was looking forward to as someone with hundreds of hours in Diablo 3) and I uninstalled it
If I get the itch again I’ll fire up 3.
Exact same experience on PS5, here. Aside from the campaign making my character an idiot in order to justify an ending that I would not have let happen, I very much enjoyed the story.
I got through an hour or two of season 1 and haven’t touched it since.
D2r working a ok
Until they drop the price and improve the game I’ll just be plugging away at Grim Dawn.
I’ve been playing it on deck since the launch smoothly with Lutris. Does this mean Diablo IV now has a Linux native client?
No, it just means that it’ll run through proton without tweaks, show proper controller glyphs and default to graphic settings, that lead to playable frame rates.
Anybody figured out how to update the battlenet app on SD?
Only way I found to do it is to reinstall it.
I don’t know how. I also have to just reinstall it, but i’m gonna leave this here in case you find out!
I played through installing the blizzard launcher and it works really well. Not going to rebuy the game, but good to hear.
I also have been very disappointed with the seasonal content, so I am unlikely to play for a while.
Ah yes, now if only anyone actually wished to play the game. At all, let alone on Deck.
Maybe this will help bring down the price of Baldur’s Gate.
I question why this news is being posted at this point, let alone repeatedly.
This is the only post on lemmy I can see that confirms steam deck verification
My mistake, I may have seen a post previously that suggested something more like “Diablo 4 is now compatible with Steam Deck”, and my brain immediately saw the title of a rather controversial game and mentally blocked out the post.
