510
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 17 Feb 2026
510 points (97.6% liked)
PC Gaming
13927 readers
1241 users here now
For PC gaming news and discussion. PCGamingWiki
Rules:
- Be Respectful.
- No Spam or Porn.
- No Advertising.
- No Memes.
- No Tech Support.
- No questions about buying/building computers.
- No game suggestions, friend requests, surveys, or begging.
- No Let's Plays, streams, highlight reels/montages, random videos or shorts.
- No off-topic posts/comments, within reason.
- 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
TeamSpeak only supports 32 simultaneous users, you must purchase a license to support more than that.
Yeah, this bit was all I needei to know:
How does CC details qualify as age verification? It's WAY better than gov ID or face scan.
I just mean this type of business model is ripe for enshittification.
Face scan is actually much easier to defeat than CC details.
Nowadays with VISA '3D Secure' and the equivalent on Mastercard you have to validate your legal name attached to the credit card, this is done via third-party which can request details your bank has on file (often your home address or mobile number), and even while those details are not supposed to be shared with the merchant (we know how careful banks are about keeping control of PII), the core detail - your legal name, is confirmed. It is not hard to tie a user to other data via data brokers once you have their legal name, and credit card number, and any other details they may share with the service (email, phone, etc).
I don't understand. You don't need to "defeat" CC details.
They do not contain your age or your govt documents. Even if they did, a child is likely just going to use their parents' CC. So it's not a form of age verification at all.
In context, defeating the privacy exposure of requiring to use CC details would be by getting an anonymous credit card, which in most countries are now either very difficult to obtain or simply no longer offered (outlawed).
Hope that helps.
(Edit: spelllering)
It is the same effectiveness of scanning an ID since that could also be their parent's.
The point of scanning the ID is (supposedly) the verify the age of the user, not their parents.
Using a credit card or an ID are both just using a physical item to 'verify' an age of someone who may or may not be that person. Getting a credit card has a minimum age, so the end goal of age 'verification' is met either way although the ID has way more personally identifiable information like skin color, actual birth date, gender, etc.
It isn't like scanning an ID verifies that the person scanning the ID is the person on the computer.
Not true, anyone can become a "verified user" on another's account. That's what my parents did when I was a kid.
You are a verified user for their account. That is literally using their card with extra steps.
Also, there is frequently an age 13 requirement to be an authorized user which would count for everything except porn.
Right, which is different from the user's account, and thus does not verify their age.
Discord doesn't have a 13 age group. It's just adults and children.
Tangentially related: Fuck Arc raiders.
Oh dang. Why?
*https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ARC_Raiders#AI_use
Oh. Fuck Arc Raiders.
For me, it wasn't about the AI. It's that early development of the game was all PvE play. PVP was something that was added at launch, and the game is tagged as PvE, along with PvP on steam. Stupid me thought there would be PvE only lobbies and I was clearly mistaken. I tried playing it, I put 100 hours in. The entire game was me grinding the easy map, to level up and craft/buy better guns, only to be shot on sight by someone and have everything I worked for taken. I would solo down bastions, leapers, and bombdiers to have someone run up and shoot me on site, without asking if I would share loot. (I would rather share than lose everything.) Events in the game also reward PvP play by awarding cred. People are making smurf accounts so they can end up in friendly matches to dominate people that don't want to pvp. Enemy spawns are fucked up too. I've downed arc only for the corpses to despawn as I attempt to loot it. I've walked into clear areas, only to have bombadiers spawn on top of me out of nowhere. The worst part of the game is being dropped into a map/match after 10 minutes has elapsed, which means anything decent has already been looted and you're more likely to run into people camping extraction points. They have a temp event running that rewards PvE cooperative play, and I've still gotten killed on site, although less frequently. After the event is over, I'll probably uninstall the game again.
Not trying to change your mind because if you don’t like it you don’t like it, but the fame was developed and play tested as a PvE game. It was slated for release before The Finals. The playtesting revealed that the game was just not fun. The developers, the play testers, everyone involved felt it was boring. They delayed the game and created what was released.
I understand not personally enjoying what was released, but Embark made a decision to change the gameplay during development on their own, they weren’t forced to by a publisher or anything, and they didn’t renege on any promise or anything.
The stuff I read about the play testing indicated it was PVE. I didn't do enough research before purchasing, no argument there. I happen to actually enjoy fighting the arc, and I really enjoy when I can play co-operatively, and do things like save someone that's pinned down by ARC, or help others down bastions, bombadiers, and matriarchs. Getting shot in the back after I'm soloing arc and my shield is down isn't fun. Getting shot even after I say I'm friendly, and I can't defend myself, or else trigger the algorithm to put me in more pvp matchups isn't fun. If it was already tested as a PvE game, I don't see why they can't give us PVE and PVP lobbies. Letting players decide if they want to risk PVP or not.
I absolutely loath PvP in gaming. Always have. However, I recently discovered that I enjoy extraction shooters (I think that's what these types of games are called). Been playing HOLE and wished for something like it with co-op for me and a friend to play.
Shit, thanks for your insight. I was somewhat interested in the game just because of the world it's set in, but, gah that sounds awful.
Oof that's a no-go
That's 32 connected users to voice, not total server users isn't it?
Correct. 32 people connected to voice simultaneously, but there isn't persistent text chat. So really, only 32 users at a time, at all. The lack of text made me set up a Matrix homeserver instead.
I don't know. They call them "slots" without elaborating and tell you to contact them for more details.
For a room to chat or to talk with mic or webcam? I never used Teamspeak before.
For anything, is my understanding. If they try to open it, they're just represented with a "server full" notification.
Only the person who creates the room have to pay or everyone who want to join a room that is bigger than the limit?
Whoever hosts the server