Because two is an improvement on one in almost every way?
![User banner]()
Goodeye8 @ Goodeye8 @piefed.social Posts 0Comments 127Joined 3 mo. ago
Goodeye8 @ Goodeye8 @piefed.social
Posts
0
Comments
127
Joined
3 mo. ago
Yeah. I think they're officially registered as a UK company which means sanctions don't apply.
If there was no Rockstar launcher OP wouldn't be having this issue now would he? I'm not saying Rockstar should magically keep the information correct, I'm saying Rockstar shouldn't need this information in the first place. Their launcher shouldn't exist in the first place. I guess it's impossible for you to imagine a world without useless launchers.
I simply repeat: it is OPs job to keep their accounts in order and contact information updated.
I don't defend 3rd-Party launchers, those are unneeded trash.
Clearly both of those statements can't be true because the only reason he needs to keep his accounts in order is because the unneeded trash of a third party launcher requires it, so which is it?
Actually, it doesn't matter. This discussion has already shown that you'd rather be a corporate cuck than stand with the consumers.
But as a veteran support, I have to defend them - they are not responsible for picking up OPs slack that hasn't been cleaned up for years.
There's nothing wrong with defending the support, doesn't mean you need to blame OP. Support has to deal with this shit because Rockstar sucks.
Since you seem to share the notion that it's not important if you lose access to an account which active software is bound to, WITH NO OTHER REAL WAY TO PROVE THAT YOU OWN THAT SPECIFIC LICENSE (you can't even be sure from Rockstar's side that the Steam account hasn't been hacked and now the criminal wants to get the GTA credentials, and Rockstar does not have an ID stored to compare OP's to), you will probably learn it too sooner or later.
Which they wouldn't have to do IF THEY DIDN'T REQUIRE AN ACCOUNT IN THE FIRST PLACE.
Also do you even realize what you're saying? You're pretty much saying OP shouldn't have bought any of the rockstar games to begin with because (if we exclude Steam) THERE IS LITERALLY NO WAY TO PROVE THAT YOU OWN THE LICENSE. When social club rolled around there wasn't even a store there, the only way to buy the game was through a third party store like Steam. That said, they will still verify against licenses bought on Steam but I'll get to that.
That the support asked him for the original username (that's something they HAVE stored and is bound to the owner, because it was defined at account creation) to confirm his ownership (on a pretty weak basis i might add), is the way Rockstar wants to remedy those situations unbureaucratically. But OP can't give them an straight answer because he has ignored the situation for so long that he can't remember that info anymore.
And that weak basis can get you nowhere because that happened to me. They asked the same things and when I gave them that information (which, before you start speaking stupid, was correct information) they closed the ticket but didn't return my account. I'm pretty sure they store game keys with the account and then verify using the time of purchase and the key, because that's what they asked the second time around and then I got my account unlocked. AFAIK support did the same thing OP and I think for that support should get shit because why are you asking for useless information when you could ask for useful information?
The legal office of any Corp worth their salt forbids the (outsourced, but where it's inhouse the rule is the same tbh) support to login into user accounts, because that's one way to be in real trouble if your support takes over user accounts and pulls shady shit with them.
Now you're talking about a different thing. OP shouldn't have given them their password because support can't use it. That's on OP. But that doesn't invalidate what I've been talking about.
The Crew name is public information, so it's of no use to them, and sending your password in cleartext per email is either a sign of being mentally unwell or you don't care because you got it from a hack somewhere. If I were the support here, i would suspect someone other than the owner of the account wants to take over the account (no definite answer to my questions and infobombing are social engineering tactics), and go into high alert mode, which happened here.
And OP here is on attempt 3 trying to fix something they shouldn't have to fix in the first place. I can imagine OP is already frustrated beyond belief. Of course he's going to look unhinged, but maybe he wouldn't be in that situation if support had actually tried to help him the first time around. Or better yet, if he wasn't put in this situation to begin with.
I get wanting to defend support but support is not to blame (except for the poor procedure where they don't ask the correct information) and OP is not to blame (for forgetting to update an account they most likely haven't directly used for year, because for the longest time once the account was made it would be linked to Steam and it would never show itself). If there's anyone to blame for this hole mess it's Rockstar for putting in the stupid third party launcher in the first place.
The whole situation started because he was forced to make a separate account when he really didn't need one. He wouldn't have to remember any of those things if Rockstar simply let him play their games.
As for the rest, I guess all I can say is I hope it happens to you because you clearly lack the empathy to understand why this is a problem so they only way for you to understand is by having to go through it yourself.
They will say "I'm unable to verify that you own the account" even if you give the correct answers to those questions. I know that because it literally happened to me.
Edit: I just saw the rest of the messages in your comment.
I wouldn't have given you back the account either in their shoes. You just claim things that anyone could claim from their point of view, they have procedures they need to follow.
They can't try your password, or see it anywhere and would never ask you for it either.
They're asking simple things that you should have been able to verify. After that they'd likely ask for IP addresses and last 4 digits of card used etc.
They have to do this, or anyone's account could be hacked by social engineering all too easy.
I honestly don't see how you can turn the blame on him. It's not his fault the support didn't ask for the right things. It's actually part of Rockstar support procedure to ask essentially public information like previous email addresses or previous nicknames. On my first try they asked the same things from me. On my second try they also asked for Steam purchase history and game keys. It's not his fault the support fucked up and didn't ask for the right things.
You know what I meant. If I buy a game on one launcher it shouldn't open another launcher that then launches the game. The other launcher is completely unnecessary but it is mandatory to launch the game, hence mandatory launcher.
Edit: just to make it clear, if I make another account on another store that IMO is fine. I don't have a problem with having steam, gog and itch accounts. But when I buy a game on one storefront/launcher and then I have to make an account on another storefront/launcher to play the game I already bought, that's bullshit. In OPs case he was forced to make an account for a game he bought elsewhere and is now being punished because the company is stupid.
Mandatory launchers can fuck right off. I was lucky enough to get Rockstar support to accept my Steam purchases but even then I had to try twice because the first time they pretty much blew me off.
I also had a similar issue with Ubisoft. There it was actually easier to restore my old email than get Ubisoft support to cooperate.
In short, fuck forced launchers and anyone who says "it's just another account". Yeah, it is at the moment but who knows 10 years from now. You'll be locked out of your games because some fuckery happens and support won't do shit.
That is quite literally how you get Star Citizen.
I think you're just having a blind spot for western shows. Breaking Bad, The Expanse, Game of Thrones, Barry, Mad Men and probably a bunch of others that I can't remember off the top of my head where characters act like people with their own personal motivations and moral compasses. Without spoiling anything in one of the before/mentioned shows one of the main characters literally kills their close friend to protect the fact that they're a shitty human being.
There are also western games that nail the moral gray area. For example New Vegas and Baldurs Gate 3.
I don't think hiring entry level people who regularly use AI will lead to the outcome he envisions. There have been studies that show AI usage can reduce the capacity to learn.
I have a personal, obviously anecdotal, experience where in my team we have a fresh from school business analyst who uses AI for literally every task. Their work is full of repeating ideas (because chatGPT loves to repeat itself), obvious logical errors (because AI can't reason), useless diagrams (because AI can't make diagrams, or they don't know how to prompt AI to make useful diagrams) and the fucking point by point breakdowns that make it blatantly clear it's just copy pasted AI response. And they don't learn any vital skills. They don't know how to get business requirements from the business. They don't know how to map out business processes. They don't even know what's written in their actual output of their "work" because they didn't do the work, AI did and they didn't even bother to proofread it.
I have very little trust in junior employees if they regularly use AI. They use it as a replacement for their work instead of using it as tool in their work. I'm not saying juniors shouldn't be hired. Juniors should be hired and they shouldn't be allowed to use AI. It's just brain rot.
I feel like we have pretty good concepts and tools for world gen. If games are going to use AI I'd expect the best results to be in quest systems. Most games struggle to procedurally generate good quests. They end up feeling formulaic in almost every aspect.
I imagine even if the quest structure stays the same simple "go to X and do Y" but you let AI generate a good reason to go on the quest it instantly improves the quality of procedural quests.
But that assumes AI can generate a good reason and I have my doubts about that, and a lot of other things AI supposedly can do.
Maybe I'm not old enough but I don't remember a time where shareware and freeware were part of a physical distribution channels. Most of my shareware I found on the internet and my knowledge of the Amiga public domain comes from Aminet, which started as a FTP site. I still had to get physical discs for full games, but shareware and abandonware I could easily find on the web.
As for for many big companies starting as indies. I'm not arguing "indie" didn't exist back then, my point was that it was too expensive for most people to be indie. The fact that we had 10-20 "indie" studios (kinda hard to call them indie when most of the time they also ended up being publishers for other studios) back in the day and now we have thousands of indie studios supports my point that it is easier to be indie today than it was when physical media was dominant. Part of it is because of easier development tools, part of it is easier publishing.
Take off your rose-tinted glasses. We would be having this issue with physical goods as well because every game would still be competing for the attention of the customer with every other game ever released. The only thing physical goods would do is chop off the legs of the indie scene because it would simply be too costly to put their random ideas on a disc. Vampire survivors wouldn't exist without digital releases, Balatro also probably wouldn't exist. A lot of even weirder indie games wouldn't exist because the cost of physically releasing them would be too much to take these random chances of releasing something weird.
Not just that. For that supposed 20% he reinvigorated NATO (prior to the full scale invasion countries started questioning if we still need NATO), got EU to increase defense spending and got Finland and Sweden to join NATO. They also proved they're a paper tiger and their arms manufacturing is crap. Oh and of course sanctions and the war completely wrecking the economy.
Even if they somehow get 20% it's a Pyrrhic victory.
And why can't university IT set up the server? No offense but you're a nobody asking us, also nobodies, how to set up some sort of a funky server on the university network, meanwhile the university pays people to do this for a living.
Where will the server actually be? Will it be in a secure location where only authorized personnel can physically access the machine or will it be behind the trash can in the cafeteria where anyone can access it?
Since you will lose access to it once it's set up who will monitor the system? Who turns it on in case it somehow gets shut down? Who sets up backups and does rollbacks if something breaks?
What happens to the hardware when research project is over?
To me it all smells like something the IT department should set up. They already know the best practices. They also know whatever security guidelines they need to follow. They will have monitoring systems in place so they could admin the system instead of leaving it without an actual administrator. And they're probably the ones decommissioning the hardware when the research project is over.
My suggestion is to leave it to the people who are getting paid to do this. It's one thing to know how to set up a home server on your home network, it's a different thing to set up a server on an enterprise network.
It's hard to say what is best. It comes down to what you're trying to achieve. For example Tailscale and Wireguard are both VPN-s, but the purpose of those two is to set up your own personal VPN so that you could securely access devices and services that are available only in your personal VPN. The difference between Tailscale and Wireguard is basically the monetary cost of having an easy setup vs the complexity of setting it up yourself. Wireguard is an open source protocol and software that allows you to set up your own VPN if you have the technical know-how how to set it up. Tailscale is built ontop of Wireguard so at its core it does what Wireguard does, but it offers easier setup at the cost of asking for money if your network starts expanding beyond the free tier.
And then there's "VPN" which are actually VPN service providers. Some of them allow setting up your own personal VPN but more often than not they offer VPN tunneling where you securely connect your device to their VPN server to route your traffic through their servers. The purpose of that is to hide your online activity. For example if your country really cracks down on illegal torrents you pretty much have to torrent through a VPN. And another purpose is to circumvent regional laws or trademarks. For example VPN usage in the UK went up in response to the Online Safety Act because a VPN lets you circumvent those laws. And another example is if a streaming service doesn't offer a show in your country but offers it in another country and your VPN provider has a server there you can tunnel yourself into that server and you get to see your show because technically you're in that country.
Depending on what you're planning on doing with your home server you might need both kind of "VPN".
I would say if you're through Fungal Wastes and you're not feeling it then it's probably not for you. I usually don't recommend the city as a decision point on the off chance someone stumbles into deepnest first. Once you go into Deepnest you can't come back the same way, so you pretty much have to do a ring around the rosie and enter the city from the east. Which is a cool first time experience but definitely not for everyone.