IIRC, I did try that, but it caused my controller to cease functioning at all. Take that statement with a grain of salt though — I'd need to test again to verify.
I enabled proton 9.0-4 (steamdeck btw), and loaded up my save and let myself take damage a couple times, still no rumble. […] Taking damage triggers it right?
I tested it just now, and yeah there's rumble on taking damage. There's also rumble when hitting an enemy, when striking environmental objects, and binding (for clarity, that is not necessarily an exhaustive list; it's just what I can recall at the moment).
Maybe Silksong unfortunately just has poor support for the Steamdeck at the moment. I found this which seems to support that theory:
[1]
I'm not sure if it's possible on the Steamdeck, but have you tried enabling Steam Input?
I'm currently waiting for them to release a patch for it; my controller is a little fucked: The controller vibration seems to have stopped working. Also, it bugs out for me if I disconnect the controller when the game is running and reconnect: some of the buttons stop working.
UPDATE (2025-09-05T06:54Z): It turns out that the lack of controller rumble is fixable by forcing the use of Proton instead of running the native build [1].
Type: Post. Title: "PSA: If you are experiencing no controller rumble in Silksong, then try forcing Proton in the game's properties on Steam.". Author: "Kalcifer" ("@Kalcifer@sh.itjust.works"). Publisher: ["Lemmy". "sh.itjust.works". "Linux Gaming" ("!linux_gaming@lemmy.world").]. Published: 2025-09-05T06:43:42Z. Created: 2025-09-05T06:43:06Z. Accessed: 2025-09-05T06:58Z. URI: https://sh.itjust.works/post/45439004.
Hm, I've come across a number of statements that the GPL isn't well suited to hardware [1][2][3], but I'm not well enough versed in IP law to be confident in my understanding or the soundness of their rationale. Directly from the GNU Operating System:
Any material that can be copyrighted can be licensed under the GPL. GPLv3 can also be used to license materials covered by other copyright-like laws, such as semiconductor masks. So, as an example, you can release a drawing of a physical object or circuit under the GPL.
In many situations, copyright does not cover making physical hardware from a drawing. In these situations, your license for the drawing simply can't exert any control over making or selling physical hardware, regardless of the license you use. When copyright does cover making hardware, for instance with IC masks, the GPL handles that case in a useful way. [4]
[…] In a nutshell, GPL (and all other software licenses) rely on software being something that can be subject to copyright. In general hardware can not be copyrighted, because copyright is only granted to creative or artistic works, but with some weird exceptions like software, IC masks, yacht designs (!). “Useful articles or utility works” are not generally subject to copyright, but some powerful industrial lobbies got some concessions, as otherwise a software “work” would not be protected under IP laws, although specific software algorithms can be patented. […] tldr; use GPL or LGPL, CC-BY-SA, MIT, etc as you like, as a statement of intent, but realise they have little legal teeth. Other OSHW oriented licenses are equally ineffective to protect or control the use of electronic or hardware designs.
Type: Post. Title: "Using GPL for hardware is a bad idea". Author: "BeagleFury ". Publisher: "RepRap". Published: 2010-03-29T1500. Accessed: 2025-09-04T22:46Z. URI: https://reprap.org/forum/read.php?33,40874.
[…] This in my opinion is a critical flaw... If you want the hardware to be open, first and foremost, you need a license that actually covers hardware. I'm not sure why do people cling to GPL when it does not cover hardware components, (If you search for GPL hardware, one of the top items will be Richard Stahlman saying this same thing -- GPL and hardware do not make sense.) […]
Type: Webpage>Text. Title: "Frequently Asked Questions about the GNU Licenses". Publisher: "GNU Operating System". Accessed: 2025-09-04T22:51Z. URI: https://www.gnu.org/licenses/gpl-faq.en.html#GPLHardware. Location: §"Can I use the GPL to license hardware?".
I catch myself doing this sometimes. I don't mean to belittle anyone's excitement — I just tend to default to responding way too analytically/critically. It's a trait of mine that I despise, and I'm trying to be more aware of it so that I can prevent it from happening.
In B.C.'s defense, imo, most of the land to its North is either too mountainous [1][2.1] or has too harsh a climate [2.2] to be realistically inhabitable. I think it's also worth noting that 15.4% of B.C.'s lands are protected [3].
Ten mountain ranges push west from the Canadian Rockies in the east to the Coast Mountains and the Vancouver Island Ranges in the west, and ancient temperate rainforests hug the coast. In between are rolling grasslands, lush valleys, tens of thousands of lakes, glacier-fed rivers, and even semi-arid desert. Mountains cover 75% of the province.
How so? It wasn't my intent to misrepresent your words. That being said, I do apologize if I've accidentally (and potentially carelessly) misinterpreted what you said. I'll gladly fix my comment if you help me understand where my interpretation went wrong 😊
[misinformation] is hardly an issue on this platform […]
In my opinion, that statement of yours is, ironically, responsible for why there may be an issue with misinformation. You state it with certainty, yet you provide no source to back up your claim. It is my belief that this sort of conjecture is at the source of misinformation issues.
What concrete steps can be taken to combat misinformation on social media? […]
Regarding my own content: I do my best to cite any claim that I make, no matter how trivial. If I make a statement for which I lack confidence in its veracity, I do my best to convey that uncertainty. I do my best to convey explicitly whether a statement is a joke, or sarcasm.
Fundamentally, my approach to this issue is based on this quote:
Rationality is not a character trait, it's a process. If you fool yourself into believing that you're rational by default, you open yourself up to the most irrational thinking. [1]
Regarding the content of others: If I come across something that I believe to be false, I try to politely respond to it with a sufficiently and honestly cited statement explaining why I think it is false. If I come across something of unknown veracity/clarity, I try to politely challenge the individual responsible to clarify their intent/meaning.
For clarity, I have no evidence to support that what I'm doing is an effective means to this end, but I want to believe that it's helping in at least some small way.
This feels like a hasty generalization. For example, if one is experiencing gender dysphoria, we could assume that misgendering them with their undesired pronouns would cause them psychological distress [1] — ie harm.
Gender dysphoria (GD) is the distress a person experiences due to inconsistency between their gender identity—their personal sense of their own gender—and their sex assigned at birth.
IIRC, I did try that, but it caused my controller to cease functioning at all. Take that statement with a grain of salt though — I'd need to test again to verify.