cross-posted from: https://lemmy.world/post/3398415
This was a big issue ~5 months ago, and they ended up unbanning all of the linux players (I know reddit sucks, I’m sorry, but it’s currently the best source of info I could find): https://www.reddit.com/r/apexlegends/comments/11gaefo/ea_is_falsely_massbanning_steam_deck_and_linux/
However, three reports from this morning (including myself) just rolled in, as well as a few others from the past month (check recent replies): https://answers.ea.com/t5/Technical-Issues/Linux-players-getting-banned/td-p/12338557
One of the banned players from this morning was also banned (then unbanned) when this was an issue 4-5 months ago.
More recent reddit posts about it: https://www.reddit.com/r/apexlegends/comments/15uqt7w/linux_users_getting_falsely_banned_again/ https://www.reddit.com/r/linux_gaming/comments/15ur654/apex_legends_linux_users_getting_falsely_banned/
Valve’s github issues: https://github.com/ValveSoftware/Proton/issues/4350#issuecomment-1684189384
“Unsupported” (or “your mileage may vary” as you put it) means it lacks support. As in, if you try to contact support they are totally in their right to answer “sorry, this platform is unsupported, you’re on your own” if something doesn’t work or is buggy.
“Unsupported” does not mean that it’s a bannable offense.
Given that, let me ask you: why do you think trying to run software on an unsupported platform without malicious intent should be banned, as you seem to imply?
deleted by creator
You’re pretty misinformed here. EA (or rather the internal studio, Respawn) had to include the EasyAnticheat
.sofile (which is specifically designed to allow EasyAnticheat to function under Linux –.sofiles are the Linux equivalent of Windows.dlls) in their Apex Legends builds to begin with. Otherwise, EAC will not run on Linux, period. This developer opted-in to EasyAnticheat running, and has continued to opt-in to this.This isn’t Valve “tacking on” support, the presence of that file is an explicit “we’re permitting this to work” (even if they don’t “officially” consider it supported).
If they want money from from Linux users then they need to do better. If they don’t then offer out refunds.
They don’t want money from linux users. They never wanted money from linux users (to my knowledge).
If you buy a bunch of apple peripherals and then switch to linux, you don’t get a refund from the apple store.
I think it’s fair to assume shareholders want money from anyone who will give it to them.
Local laws determines if you can get a refund so I can only argue I think you should get a refund if a product stops working due to the manufacture.
Personally I’d rather not buy from them in the first place but there is likely a benefit to showing Linux users will buy it if you treat them right.
By that logic, McDonald’s is accountable for not serving lobster. I mean, I want lobster and I might be dumb enough to give McDonald’s money for it.
A closer analogy might be selling uncooked food that is safe for people with a peanut allergy and then one day adding peanuts as an ingredient after they’ve paid for a shipment. [It should go without saying avoiding a peanut allergy reaction is more important than preventing a company locking you out of entertainment software you paid for]
It’s my hope that corporations will learn it’s a dumb choice to needlessly cut off their Linux users but a better choice would be to not play video games where a company can arbitrarily lock you out in the first place. I hope someone is working on a libre version of Apex.