this post was submitted on 09 Jan 2025
122 points (98.4% liked)

PC Gaming

8877 readers
606 users here now

For PC gaming news and discussion. PCGamingWiki

Rules:

  1. Be Respectful.
  2. No Spam or Porn.
  3. No Advertising.
  4. No Memes.
  5. No Tech Support.
  6. No questions about buying/building computers.
  7. No game suggestions, friend requests, surveys, or begging.
  8. No Let's Plays, streams, highlight reels/montages, random videos or shorts.
  9. No off-topic posts/comments, within reason.
  10. Use the original source, no clickbait titles, no duplicates. (Submissions should be from the original source if possible, unless from paywalled or non-english sources. If the title is clickbait or lacks context you may lightly edit the title.)

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
EXiLExJD@lemmy.ca
UncleBadTouch@lemmy.ca
KairuByte@lemmy.dbzer0.com
122
The Last of Us Part 2 on PC requires a PSN account, too (www.theverge.com)
submitted 1 day ago by alessandro@lemmy.ca to c/pcgaming@lemmy.ca
38 comments fedilink hide all child comments
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] SailorMoss@sh.itjust.works 1 points 3 hours ago (1 children)

The patch was only the files related to the patch not the entire game. It varied but often the developers required a cd key and the disk to be in your drive in order to play the game. Most often patches were just on the open web free to download. There were counter-examples to this but they were the exception rather than the norm.

They’re not comparable now. They are comparable for steam early on to PSN now. PlayStation may be planning to eventually launch a competitor to steam. You would then need a PSN account to download updates.

I’m not defending it I don’t want yet another launcher I have to have on my PC or another account I have to keep up with. I probably won’t buy this game unless it has a steep discount and there is a no PSN patch.

[–] FooBarrington@lemmy.world 2 points 3 hours ago

I know how patches used to work, I used to download them myself. But those were times with far smaller file sizes! Today patches can easily reach 20-100 GB. That's not just expensive, it's also not something companies want to provide for free for pirates. So patches would be locked behind an account no matter what.

That still leaves the criticism of Steam not being necessary as a running program, and it's a valid criticism. But PSN doesn't give me any advantage, while Steam at least increases convenience. PSN only has downsides for me. That's why it's not a comparable requirement.