I dual boot with win 11, I do so for programming purposes, not gaming. I read online that the game straight up blocks Linux on all fronts (typical EA). So, I booted into win 11 and launched the beta. It still refused to start and complained that secure boot was “disabled”. Booted into BIOS and it was enabled, but not active. I had to reset the keys to the windows default keys to be able to play this game. This is a no go for me. Not giving them my money until they stop this bullshit. Just wanted to let everyone know the situation so far.

  • UltraGiGaGigantic@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    5
    ·
    11 hours ago

    Gigabyte motherboards might brick on users turning this on. IIRC you gotta take the cmos battery out and use the motherboard hdmi port to reset it somehow.

    To many games out there to fuck with this shit. Have fun playing BF6 yall, I wont be there.

    • DonutsRMeh@lemmy.worldOP
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      11 hours ago

      I have a gigabyte MB. Thankfully, nothing bad happened. I disabled it again. Fuck BF6 and fuck EA.

  • Eager Eagle@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    47
    ·
    edit-2
    18 hours ago

    As an exclusive Linux user, I’m glad they just block Linux instead of normalizing kernel-level anti-cheat. BF6 is dead on arrival to me.

  • PHLAK@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    17
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    15 hours ago

    As I already said in another thread…

    There’s nothing wrong with Secure Boot and enabling it can prevent a small subset of attack vectors with no real downsides. That being said, the things Secure Boot does protect against aren’t likely to be an issue for most users but it’s nothing to be afraid of.

    • fuckwit_mcbumcrumble@lemmy.dbzer0.com
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      16
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      14 hours ago

      This weird hatred around secure boot is baffling to me.

      Secure boot isnt even new, it’s been around for over a decade. Most Linux distros work well with it. It’s like the weird hatred with UEFI when it first became a thing.

      • teawrecks@sopuli.xyz
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        4 hours ago

        Are you saying this as someone who has gotten a self-signed key to work with their BIOS + kernel + bootloader + dual boot with windows, someone who runs a mainstream enough distro that they convinced manufacturers to ship with support for their key, or someone who doesn’t run linux with secure boot at all?

      • MonkderVierte@lemmy.zip
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        2 hours ago

        The equivalent on phones locks you in the stock OS on most models. They didn’t pull that yet on laptops.

      • ObsidianZed@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        20
        ·
        12 hours ago

        Personally it’s not a hatred for Secure Boot itself. It’s a hatred for these companies requiring something that 1) is not necessary for their software to function and 2) offers little to no benefit for their software

        I refuse to let these corporations tell me how to use my hardware. Right now, I dual boot and I want to continue to dual boot, at least for the foreseeable future.

        I get irritated when people say “it’s no big deal, it’s easy to enable”, etc.

        You all are just enablers.

      • CptBread@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        arrow-down
        5
        ·
        13 hours ago

        Some of it the hate probably amplified by cheaters and cheat makers. Though to be fair anyone can be annoyed at having to go into their BIOS and change settings…

          • CptBread@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            arrow-down
            2
            ·
            5 hours ago

            Sure. But that doesn’t mean Secure Boot didn’t make it harder to create a cheat or limit what kind of cheat they could create this quickly. The cheat was a wall hack one and that is one of the hardest to stop AFAIK.

  • commander@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    16
    ·
    18 hours ago

    I hope Battlebit Remastered gets popular again. I suppose it’s tough to make it as an indie multiplayer video game dev. Everyone expects regular frequent updates

    • verdigris@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      6
      ·
      13 hours ago

      There’s a big overhaul update that got teased after over a year of radio silence, fingers crossed that it comes out soon!

      • Cowbee [he/they]@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        11
        ·
        18 hours ago

        Yep, seems they are trying to push a big update but that the playerbase is a fraction of what it once was due to the lack of updates.

    • HouseWolf@pawb.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      8
      ·
      17 hours ago

      I still love Battlebit, it’s the closet thing to a real Battlefield game we’ve have in a long time.

      But sadly devs took the money and ran…

      Game hasn’t been updated in 19 months.

      • commander@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        5
        ·
        15 hours ago

        I saw occasional news about progress on a big update someday. Any indie multiplayer has to make it easy from day one for user created content. Maps, server hosting files that’s has some easy to configure parameters for fun casual servers like servers that enable model swap outs, skins, etc.

        Just looked, still 8000 people playing original counter strike

  • taaz@biglemmowski.win
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    3
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    13 hours ago

    I’ve tested the beta yesterday (dual boot) and only had to enable SB and leave it in custom mode - no need to sign & enroll the linux kernel(s) too.

  • HalfSalesman@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    3
    ·
    15 hours ago

    This merely reinforces my decision to not buy it because it only is going to have manipulative EBMM for its main modes instead of a server browser. Even if Portal has a server browser, they know the average player is going to stick to their match making system.

    I bought 2042 and I did play it a lot but my experience was sort of existentially dreadful. I kind of understood its match making was keeping me playing longer by sandbagging my progression on its overly bloated exp requirements. It was like watered down drip feed fun. Fun enough and low barrier enough that I kept jumping on. Every other BF game felt way more mechanically rich and because they lacked match making they were more fulfilling to learn and play. You start out sucking, and you slowly get better, feeling yourself win more often over time. There is satisfaction in starting out bad and being rewarded for your efforts to learn the game that EBMM steals from you.

    Its painful for me though. BF6 looks like such a waste. It checks so many boxes for me in that it looks like a great pvp military shooter: fast TTK, robust map editor, point buy loadout system.

    But all wrapped up in typical corporate bullshit.