this post was submitted on 09 Jul 2025
76 points (88.8% liked)

Gaming

32124 readers
114 users here now

From video gaming to card games and stuff in between, if it's gaming you can probably discuss it here!

Please Note: Gaming memes are permitted to be posted on Meme Mondays, but will otherwise be removed in an effort to allow other discussions to take place.

See also Gaming's sister community Tabletop Gaming.


This community's icon was made by Aaron Schneider, under the CC-BY-NC-SA 4.0 license.

founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] masterspace@lemmy.ca -2 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) (32 children)

Valve expects that the overwhelming majority of its users will keep up with semi-modern hardware (In this case, a machine capable of running windows 10/SteamOS) which I don't feel is is an unreasonable ask.

Valve is forcing them to upgrade their software and hardware to keep playing games they already purchased, on the hardware they purchased it on.

However, expecting Valve to retain support for an OS that hit end of life 20 years ago is unreasonable.

It is very reasonable. No one forced Valve to build their business model this way, and they are one of the most profitable companies per employee, ever. It would not be onerous for them to continue supporting a couple of old versions of Windows, they would just have to hire a few more people to do it. Gabe would still be a billionaire.

[–] missingno@fedia.io 5 points 1 week ago (9 children)

Can you name any other company that supports Windows 98 in 2025?

[–] masterspace@lemmy.ca 1 points 1 week ago (8 children)

Literally any game sold that didn't include always checking in DRM through a particular desktop client. i.e. virtually every single PC game not sold through steam.

[–] missingno@fedia.io 2 points 1 week ago (1 children)

That's not what I asked. You said you wanted Valve to hire people to support Windows 98. What company still supports Windows 98 like that?

[–] masterspace@lemmy.ca 1 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) (2 children)

Lots. Do you know how much corporate software is still of that vintage?

Literally like half of AutoCAD's products still use the graphics and windowing APIs from that era as one example. The WinForms API are clunky by modern standards but also relatively trivial for a programmer to pick up and code with.

I mean, there is still an industry of Cobol engineers maintaining mainframe code for banks from the 80s.

[–] missingno@fedia.io 3 points 1 week ago (1 children)

I am aware that some corporate infrastructure is hopelessly tangled up in legacy systems. But we are talking about consumer support here, which I know you know is very different.

[–] masterspace@lemmy.ca 1 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago)

No, it's not. Autodesk sells that software to consumers and corporations literally every single day.

Try and code a WinForms app, follow any tutorial you can, and notice that it's very possible and not that onerous.

People these days just accept the shit tech companies feed them because they're using to eating shit from them.

[–] HarkMahlberg@kbin.earth 1 points 1 week ago (1 children)

I mean, there is still an industry of Cobol engineers maintaining mainframe code for banks from the 80s.

my gramps, that's not the beacon of good business practice you think it is 🤣

[–] masterspace@lemmy.ca 0 points 1 week ago (1 children)

The question at hand is whether or not there are enough engineers to feasibly support Windows 98. Try and work on your reading comprehension.

[–] HarkMahlberg@kbin.earth 1 points 1 week ago (1 children)

No. The question at hand is whether you expect any company, or any person, to indefinitely fix and maintain legacy systems. And yes, your argument is indefinite support because you want the purchasing machine to be granted use of the software in perpetuity, you want it to never lose access to the software. You provided no deadline by which anyone is allowed to stop fixing things that broke. And yes, things break naturally as a function of time.

[–] masterspace@lemmy.ca 1 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago)

And yes, things break naturally as a function of time.

Why don't you go ahead and explain the exact mechanism that causes software to change and would cause a computer to interpret it differently over time, without a human intervening and updating it to break it.

Don't worry, we'll wait.

load more comments (6 replies)
load more comments (6 replies)
load more comments (28 replies)