goldberg_emulator VS gc

For a lot of games you can simply copy out of Steamapps/common and run the exe and it'll run like a standalone copy.

For games that use steam features, you can drop in a steam emulator[0] to shim the API calls. I use this for when I want to run multiple versions of the base game with different mods.

Typically this works fine as long as there's no real Drm/anticheat (which is common in multi player games but rare for single player).

So this should allow you to clone parts of your library for your son to play (as well as consolidate your many accounts).

[0] https://gitlab.com/Mr_Goldberg/goldberg_emulator/blob/master...

Goldberg steam emu

I highly recommend you go to https://gitlab.com/Mr_Goldberg/goldberg_emulator to find more information.

I tried to use Goldberg Emulator and I can't enable the overlay for it. How do I turn on the steam overlay because otherwise I won't be able to invite my friend?

What do you mean?

Why do you think you can't find Goldberg Steam emulator on Steam/Xbox/Playstation/Switch? (https://gitlab.com/Mr_Goldberg/goldberg_emulator)

Hint: it's used to play games without Steam DRM :)

Do you say that Valve's been a bully for years as well for trying to block Goldberg from Steam?

You would do the same if people made it easy to illegally distribute and use your products for free

And Nintendo is forced to do something to protect 3rd party studios/publishers as well

Any VPN will do (I used to use NeoRouter back in the day, but now I use OpenVPN to my cloud server or my home router), and you may be able to get some traction with Steam releases using Goldberg. https://gitlab.com/Mr_Goldberg/goldberg_emulator

I'm not gonna put the actual instructions for cracking here since that's already on the sites of the tools you'll be using. I will only link the tools here and the rest will be up to you. The main tools for cracking are going to be Steamless, and Goldberg emulator. These tools can be a bit tedious on their own but someone has graciously made an auto cracker that requires you to download the first 2 tools and then automates the process for you.

No clue, I'm using the Goldberg Steam Emulator. If you're asking what the Steam Emulator does, it allows the game to run without Steam installed, usually replaces the original steam(_api64/_api/client/client64).dll(s).

I have no idea about cracking games but try Goldberg Emulator. I use it for pirating DLCs but I think you can use it too. Also, its easy to use.

Hmm. I have a question. Would this work if the game had used say... the goldberg emulator for the steam drm bypass?

It may take some time for WasmGC to be usable by .NET. Based on the discussions the first version of WasmGC does not have a good way to handle a few .NET specific scenarios, and said scenarios are "post-post-mvp". [0]

My concern, of course, is that there is not much incentive for those features to be added if .NET is the only platform that needs them... at that point having a form of 'include' (to where a specific GC version can just be cached and loaded by another WASM assembly) would be more useful, despite the pain it would create.

[0] - https://github.com/WebAssembly/gc/issues/77

Yes, that's definitely true: a single GC will not be optimal for everything, or even possible. Atm interior pointers are not supported at all, for example, but they are on the roadmap for later:

https://github.com/WebAssembly/gc/blob/main/proposals/gc/Pos...

What launched now is enough WasmGC to support a big and useful set of languages (Java, Kotlin, Dart, OCaml, Scheme), but a lot more work will be required here!

GC proposal is from 2018: https://github.com/WebAssembly/proposals/issues/16 and there’s code: https://github.com/WebAssembly/gc/blob/master/proposals/gc/O...

Seems like an awefully long time for progress to be made, given all the possibilities it would unlock.

First is the size. Writing a server-side and client-side program is possible with Rust, and the resulting WASM package will be small enough. At the same time, Microsoft Blazor converts C# code to WASM, but the client delivery has to include the reduced .NET runtime, taking several megabytes for a script. The same is true for GoLang, even with an attempt to reduce the runtime delivery in TinyGo WASM. Developers want to work with their favorite languages, whether it is Java, Kotlin, Dart, C#, F#, Swift, Ruby, Python, C, C++, GoLang, or Rust. These languages produce groups of runtimes. For example, JVM and .NET have many common parts, Ruby and Python are dynamically interpreted at runtime, and all mentioned depend on automatic garbage collection. For smaller WASM packages, browser vendors can include extended runtime implementations, for example, by delivering a general garbage collector as part of WASM. Garbage collection support by WASM is currently in progress: WASM GC, .NET WASM Notes.

My understanding is that the main limitation is technical. WASM doens't do GC or the host system calling conventions and cannot interact directly with object from Javascript because of this. However, this is being worked[0] on and will be solved eventually. Even without this the performance overhead of bridging to JS is low enough that WASM frameworks can beat out React.

0: https://github.com/WebAssembly/gc/blob/main/proposals/gc/Ove...

I’ve just watched a video on YouTube from Google I/O 2023 on Flutter for the web. Kevin Moore explains that Flutter can compile to Wasm, but now that GC support has been added to the standard and WasmGC is supported in Chromium and Firefox, I’m quite intrigued.

I have found the main thread about using WebAssembly GC in C#: https://github.com/WebAssembly/gc/issues/77. If I understand it correctly, it is not possible to use the current prototype version of GC in C#.

The .net team has given their notes on it, the concern is more on the memory layout from what I remember. Though it may be possible still. The runtime would likely still ship some gc code, but only a subset for cases not supported by the wasm gc itself and a few more for interfacing with the gc service, which overall should still result on smaller payloads compared to current sizes.

I assume that's one of the parts of the work done at https://github.com/WebAssembly/gc - not happening any soon yet, but it'll eventually be done.