10 ms·

I feel like Valve has certainly been putting effort into Linux, but not serious effort. They seem to be going low-moderate risk/investment. Sure there's progr

I feel like Valve has certainly been putting effort into Linux, but not serious effort. They seem to be going low-moderate risk/investment. Sure there's progress, but then the Wine devs are moving pretty steadily too at the moment. If Valve wants to really be serious: - Offer incentives to Devs to support Linux/Vulkan - Release a goddamn new game (HL3 - dreams) and make it Linux exclusive for a time - develop and release new features for Linux first (maybe if GoG ever get the Galaxy client over to Linux Valve will get a kick in the pants to act...) - Promote SteamOS and (maybe) Steam Machines, like at least some. Show Steam Machines as an 'out-of-the-box Windows gaming replacement, not a console competitor. - Fund Linux devs or take a lower cut from Linux releases - Convince Adobe to release their suite on Linux! Push for/fund official Unity and Unreal Engine Linux versions - Offer the ability to natively launch games through Wine (and either use 'community' environment files or require one exist, or have a link to WineHQ for help) Be serious Valve, be genuine and get your flat structured 'follow the shiny thing' company focused and determined.

gambiting 9y ago
>>Release a goddamn new game (HL3 - dreams) and make it Linux exclusive for a time I think people seriously overestimate how popular that game would be. If they really did release it as a Linux exclusive, a lot of us nerds(and I mean it as a compliment here) would install Linux in a heartbeat just to play it, but I think overall, the game would sell very poorly. It has been so many years since the last one that the mainstream public doesn't care about it anymore - a group of hardcore enthusiasts would buy it + some people interested in what the whole Half-Life hype is about, but I'd be surprised if it sold million copies.
- mohaine 9y ago
  Agreed but all they really need to do is make the BETA Steam OS only. This still gets the hardcore enthusiast interested while not alienating everyone else.
- epicide 9y ago
  I also think about the other side of it. I love teaching people about Linux/(F)OSS/etc. However, I would hate to see HL3 exclusive for Linux. It would largely hurt the community, I think. Let's assume millions did rush to buy it and install Linux. Think of how many of them would be installing it just to play one game. Most would gripe about not being able to do something they're used to in their other OS [0]. While I love Linux, there are some pain points on desktop. Just getting it installed on your machine is not always trivial even when you know what you're doing. Something you've done a thousand times sometimes just doesn't work for no real reason and you just have to try again [1]. Linus help them if they need a proprietary driver [2]. I imagine most of the people trying Linux for the first time would be trying it with the intention of playing a game instead of learning a new system. That sets them up to be annoyed every step of the way and walk away angry at the new system (Linux). On top of all that, it could cause some frustrations for people like myself who try to help others install and learn Linux. I imagine having several conversations with friends/family thinking they want to finally learn some of this Linux thing I keep talking about. Only to discover it's just because they want to play HL3. [0]: http://linux.oneandoneis2.org/LNW.htm http://linux.oneandoneis2.org/LNW.htm [1]: I realize this happens with computers, in general. The point here isn't to bash Linux (heh). [2]: obviously, not a fault of the Linux ecosystem, but that doesn't change the fact that it is incredibly frustrating. EDIT: formatting.
  - jsgo 9y ago
    Exactly. Convince people Linux is worth moving to, but don't force them towards it. If memory serves, when Valve was initially getting their feet wet, publicly, with Linux, they were getting Left 4 Dead (1 or 2, can't remember) to work there. If I remember correctly, they got it to a point that hardware for hardware, they got the Linux port to run better than the Windows version. And that's a direction worth going if you want the gaming crowd to follow: come this way and get an extra boost in performance. We know you just spent $300 to get a couple frames per second boost, come get a few more for free. They really need to do something about Big Picture mode though: that thing looks terrible on anything above 1080p. Even more so at 3440x1440 where it is blurry and inside black bars. If they're trying to make Steam into an appliance of sorts, the user interface needs to be right.
- larrik 9y ago
  I know why you think that, but when Fallout 4 came out even my father was interested in it, and he'd never heard of any prior Fallout game, and hadn't really gamed in years. Of course, he also still asks me every year when "the next Half-Life is coming out".
  - jsgo 9y ago
    your dad is trolling you. He knows.
    - larrik 9y ago
      I doubt it. If it's not called "Wolfenstein", "Doom", "Half-Life", or "Call of Duty", he probably hasn't heard of it.
- TheRealDunkirk 9y ago
  I've always thought that they've been saving a HL3 release for a proper, SteamOS-based console, ala Xbox or PS4.
- bwat49 9y ago
  It would also have the danger of backfiring - fans being pissed off that they'd have to change their OS because valve decided to arbitrarily make it exclusive.
eptcyka 9y ago
- Fund Linux devs or take a lower cut from Linux releases I believe Valve is already employing people to work on Linux and it's ecosystem directly. - Convince Adobe to release their suite on Linux! Push for/fund official Unity and Unreal Engine Linux versions Maybe they should just convince Microsoft to port over win32 and all the other APIs to linux? Whilst they're at it, they could also convince your most hated political figure to be more like your most loved political figure. With the convincing powers like these, Valve could just convince the world to no longer suffer from hunger. The only incentives that work would be of the financial kind, however, paying for support is not sustainable. Console vendors can pay for first party or exclusive support from game devs because they are fairly sure this will increase revenue in the long term. Valve gains no more money if they incentivize developers to support Linux. I also don't really want for things to be supported exclusively on Linux unless if there are good technical reasons - I use Linux because of the freedom it provides me, I wouldn't advocate for people to be forced to use it. FWIW, Unity and Unreal run on linux, but a lot of developers elect to use windows-only Unity plugins. The developers don't care. What Linux really needs is non-shit drivers and a mainstream desktop environment that takes into account input latency when developing it's window manager - Wayland on Gnome is really bad in this regard, yet Gnome is the target desktop environment for Steam OS (at least last time I checked). They should maybe make sure that their games run just as fast on Linux as they do on other platforms - currently this is not the case. I believe that solving these issues will be hard and may require a unilateral effort across various entities in the ecosystem - something which is incredibly hard to do, especially when it comes to Gnome. Then there's things like drivers - yes, performance wise Intel and Nvidia drivers might be OK, but they are not feature complete especially when it comes to power management. I don't believe there is a single problem that has to be fixed to make gaming on linux a massive success - there isn't even a shortlist of 10 incredulous tasks. It has to be a long-term effort and the open source community has to take part in it.
- aaron-lebo 9y ago
  It has to be a long-term effort and the open source community has to take part in it. That statement is not fair to the people who do this every single day. We're only where we are because the open source community took part of it and took us there, give some credit where it's due. edit: don't mean to sound ungrateful, point is OSS is dramatically underfunded, we need big corps to do more
zeroxfe 9y ago
> I feel like Valve has certainly been putting effort into Linux, but not serious effort. Wait, what? Valve has been making huge contributions to the large parts of the Linux ecosystem. Of course they can do more -- anyone can, but patronizing them with "be genuine" and "follow the shiny thing" is really unnecessary.
- sametmax 9y ago
  Everytime somebody does a bit of good, he is more severely judged and on highter expectations than those doing nothing. Generally by people not doing much themself. It's an exhausting and unfair reality.
  - balfirevic 9y ago
    In the field of ethics, this is known as the Copenhagen interpretation of ethics [0]. In short: "The Copenhagen Interpretation of Ethics says that when you observe or interact with a problem in any way, you can be blamed for it. At the very least, you are to blame for not doing more." [0] - https://blog.jaibot.com/the-copenhagen-interpretation-of-ethics/ https://blog.jaibot.com/the-copenhagen-interpretation-of-eth...
  - magduf 9y ago
    Be careful with this line of thinking. Not everyone contributing something is "doing a bit of good"; it's quite possible they're making it worse. It's sorta like "good samaritans" who try to help accident victims, but because they have no training, end up hurting the victim even more than if they had just left them alone until someone qualified could get there. Just because someone (or some group) contributes something to the Linux ecosystem doesn't necessarily mean it's a net positive. It could, arguably, be a negative: it could cause more fragmentation and confusion, it could make Linux look bad to outsiders (decreasing adoption rates), it could take mindshare away from a better organized project, etc. Worst case, it could be done with malicious intentions, such as contributing code that has a secret (and not obvious) backdoor/vulnerability. Also, I think there's a logical fallacy about criticizing people who don't contribute yet offer criticism, though I can't name it. For an extreme case, imagine a group of lousy coders writing an OS kernel, and some actual kernel expert like Linus or Dave Cutler jumps in an offers some criticism, though they aren't contributing to this particular project. Who should you listen to, the actual expert in the field, or one of the amateurs who really doesn't know what he's doing? Obviously, the expert's criticism should be considered and not rejected out-of-hand just because they're not a contributor.
bitL 9y ago
> but not serious effort. Dunno, my Steam Box runs games like Grid Autosport, Mad Max, Tomb Raider, Deus Ex etc. without a single issue, as fast as on Windows (quad i5 + NVidia), and I don't even notice I am on Linux. So thanks to Valve and Feral Interactive, I can slowly move away from Windows to Linux for all my computing needs, not just for programming, Deep Learning and blockchain. What else is missing? Moreover, I can run a lot of software under Wine, like Adobe CS6 or MS Office, or even many games (it has gotten significantly better lately).
- jsheard 9y ago
  > Dunno, my Steam Box runs games like Grid Autosport, Mad Max, Tomb Raider, Deus Ex etc. It runs them now, but none of those games ran on Linux when they first launched. Grid Autosport took 17 months after the initial release, Mad Max took 13 months, Tomb Raider took 3 years (and the 2015 sequel is still not available on Linux) and Deus Ex MD was the only somewhat timely one at 2 months (but the previous game in the series was never ported to Linux at all). I know not everyone cares about playing games the moment they come out, but many people do. Especially with multiplayer games where the community is most active closer to launch.
  - bitL 9y ago
    If currently Linux has 1% gaming market share, I am thankful they port these games at all. I am one of those early adopters that paid >$1200 for a top end Steam Box, and bought every single AAA game available on Linux even if I might not play them all, just to put my money where my mouth is and perhaps contribute a bit to getting Linux more relevant. It's only going to be because companies will see some money out there as well, so I try to give them what they want.
    - electricEmu 9y ago
      It's not even 1%. You might consider saving that money instead of promoting Linux through buying games you won't play. Compound the interest, and maybe you can find an indie game studio investment instead. That would be a real and substantial contribution that moves the needle. https://www.gamingonlinux.com/articles/looks-like-the-linux-market-share-on-steam-went-up-in-january.11185/ https://www.gamingonlinux.com/articles/looks-like-the-linux-...
sametmax 9y ago
"sure, you guys sell delicious chocolate near by, but i feel you are not commited to this. You should open a factory if you are to show you are serious with my street"
shadowmint 9y ago
This seems like a lovely sentiment... however... If you release games on a platform, or targeting a hardware spec which has a player base with is too small (like say, VR), and don't make enough money in your 'big bang' release, you're screwed, and your company goes under. Heck, even if you do make some money, if its not enough to 'wow' investors, your studio will probably still be shut down. The economics of big bang release software are very hard ('Explain to me again why after making a million dollars this month you want another million dollars investment that will not generate any return for the next 2 years?'), and game companies are behind the curve in dealing with it. The alternative (freemium) is just a race to the bottom, and its happening on steam right now the same way it happened on the app stores. Incentives to encourage developers to target 'linux first' isn't just not going to work; its actually unethical. You're basically paying people to target a platform that you know isn't significant enough for them to recoup the significant development costs in making games. So yeah. Realistically, you need to do one thing: Figure out a way to provide a meaningful continuing income stream to developers targeting the platform. As I understand it, what value is currently doing is attempting to bootstrap the market to consume linux games, by: - Minimise the cost of developing on the platform by improving the tooling and making it easier to target 'cross platform' to include an additional platform (vulken, steam networking, etc). - Make a platform that will consistently actually run said games, and push that upstream for other distributions to pick up. - Work with partners to provide hardware that is configured in a way that can actually run that platform without having to compile the kernel yourself. So... frankly, that seems like a pretty smart way to tackle the problem. ...but on the other hand, it hasn't been massively successful, to be fair. Practically speaking, 'linux first' is never going to work; but I don't really know what else they can really do to help it along the way.
- jdright 9y ago
  > Incentives to encourage developers to target 'linux first' isn't just not going to work; its actually unethical. Care to explain? People seems to think this kind of politics from first parties and even from Microsoft very acceptable. But for some reason these tactics applied to Linux would be unethical?
mtgx 9y ago
One thing Valve may just be able to do is somehow convince Apple to support Vulkan. I feel that if Vulkan becomes the official API for both macOS and iOS (even if say 3 years from now), that would be a huge boost to the Vulkan ecosystem. I think the prospect of developing a game that "automatically" works on both Windows (and not just 10, but also 7 and 8) and macOS would be quite compelling. Plus the bonus that the games would also work on Linux, and iOS/Android, and eventually the web (at least some of them for these last three). Besides Apple, Valve should also convince Sony to support Vulkan on the next-gen PS5 console. They should tell both of these companies that they benefit more from being in this larger ecosystem than they do by creating their little walled gardens while Microsoft's gaming ecosystem engulfs and dominates them from outside. It's also quite imperative for Valve to try to achieve this because they are still at risk of being obsolete by a future version of Windows that restricts Win32 apps by default for consumers (a non-zero chance of that happening over the next 10 years). So Valve should have a big incentive to try to get some kind of "partnership" with both Apple and Sony and get them to support Vulkan.
- jsheard 9y ago
  Apples lack of support for Vulkan is less of an issue now that MoltenVK is available: https://github.com/KhronosGroup/MoltenVK https://github.com/KhronosGroup/MoltenVK Metal is low-level enough that Vulkan can be implemented on top of it without too much overhead.
- pjmlp 9y ago
  3D API support is a radio button on most engines. Most game companies don't care about Linux, because the added development costs on testing and community support don't translate in any meaningful revenue.
austinshea 9y ago
This is absurd. They aren’t trying to promote Linux. They are trying to have an open platform to run and sell games. Why would they be talking to Adobe, limit their sales while pissing off fans by releasing a Linux exclusive (for any amount of time,) or spend/forgo money on Linux development/sales? This doesn’t make any sense. It’s just a wishlist for someone who likes Linux, not a part of strategy to deal with DirectX.
- jsgo 9y ago
  it is a weird dance, for sure. But currently, they're very dependent on Windows (and based on the restructuring at Microsoft, dependent on Windows remaining a big thing indefinitely). While saying Linux First outright is probably a bad move, they do need to funnel developers' attention elsewhere to something either they control (a linux distro called SteamOS) or something compliant with Linux in general so that whatever flavor of the month distro can run them. I'd personally aim for the latter as it enables sales to people in love with Arch, Ubuntu, etc., but I could see a push for SteamOS too. But yeah, Linux only? Not a good idea. Creating incentives for companies to target Linux too seems like a good path, but at the same time, you have to make it worth their time to support another version.
  - austinshea 9y ago
    They don't, actually. They just need to support a model for developing once and targeting all operating systems. This is about DirectX, and not about what you use as a desktop OS.
giobox 9y ago
In Gabe Newell's own words, Linux support was a hedging strategy against Microsoft potentially mandating software distribution through the Windows App Store: "So we’re going to continue working with the Linux distribution guys, shipping Steam, shipping our games, and making it as easy as possible for anybody who’s engaged with us — putting their games on Steam and getting those running on Linux, as well. It’s a hedging strategy. I think that Windows 8 is kind of a catastrophe for everybody in the PC space." > https://venturebeat.com/2012/07/25/valves-gabe-newell-talks/ https://venturebeat.com/2012/07/25/valves-gabe-newell-talks/ Given Gabe's fears never really materialized (perhaps with the exception of Windows 10 'S', but even that no longer has fees to enable third party software sources), there simply hasn't been anything like as much pressure for Valve to push SteamOS/Linux.
- brodock 9y ago
  It's like a nuclear race, you are funding it not because you want to nuke someone but because you don't want to be nuked. So the incentive here is to continue to make it viable in order to have an argument against someone trying to blackmail you because you are so locked-in into their ecosystem. On the other side, the more viable you make it, the better future you are building, as you then have access to a platform where you can actually control from end to end, and so implement whatever your future requirements require you to. They are not in a hurry to change the status quo, they are playing it for the long term.
- magduf 9y ago
  It's really too bad that Microsoft didn't stick to their guns with their strategy of forcing software distribution through the Windows App store. I'm curious how history would have played out with that decision, and I think it would have been fun to watch.
AnIdiotOnTheNet 9y ago
> Release a goddamn new game (HL3 - dreams) and make it Linux exclusive for a time A move like this would definitely not win Linux any friends, because as it turns out the Linux Desktop really isn't that great and you'd just be causing a huge headache for a lot of people. The gamers would be annoyed at having to deal with Linux's bullshit, the Linux Destkop community would be annoyed at the huge influx of new users who don't think "try another distro" (especially after the third distro), or "write your own driver, it's open source!", are acceptable solutions to their problems. If Linux wants gamers there's a simple (note: simple != easy) thing they have to do: make their platform attractive to gamers and game developers. So far they can't manage either, the only reason gaming on Linux is even remotely viable is A) Valve coming in and saying "Ok, since there's no such thing as a standardized base system in Linux Desktop land, here's a standardized base system for Steam you can target", and 2) the popularity of Android making engines like Unity and Unreal have Linux support, which allows devs to tack it on without too much extra effort.
- headsoup 9y ago
  > the Linux Desktop really isn't that great That's not true. Stick to the 'user friendly' popular ones (Ubuntu, Mint, etc) and they're very solid now. Sure, edge cases are still a problem, but for gaming - if supported - not really anything more problematic than Windows. When did you last try Linux?
  - dsego 9y ago
    Ackchyually?
  - AnIdiotOnTheNet 9y ago
    I use Linux all the time, Linux Desktop much less often but I keep an eye on things in that sphere. It makes a great web kiosk, and as long as you color inside the lines of what the distro developers intended as a use case you're fine, but as soon as you try to make any changes to fit your workflow you get buried in broken overengineered crap and outdated documentation.
megaman22 9y ago
The thing is, statistically, no one uses Linux desktops. There's really no point in expending any great effort there, aside from ideological reasons. I suppose it could be a hedge against Microsoft doing something incredibly stupid, like cutting support for Win32 and mandating UWP garbage through their garbage store.
- deleted 9y ago
  [deleted]
p0nce 9y ago
Sunken cost fallacy at its best.
jenscow 9y ago
> make it Linux exclusive for a time I completely disagree with that. I don't believe anyone should be forced to use a different platform, when the only reason behind it is a handshake and a piece of paper - even if it's my preferred platform. Kinda goes against one of the reasons for using Linux.
desireco42 9y ago
Pretty much if you could get Adobe on Linux, it would be a clincher for me. I would move, endure whatever drama I have to endure with configuration etc, and just live happily ever after. Even change distro every now and then.
dleslie 9y ago
Are there any Linux exclusives? It's been a long while since I launched a game on Steam; I was under the impression that a Windows binary is required.
zelon88 9y ago
> Convince Adobe to release their suite on Linux! Push for/fund official Unity and Unreal Engine Linux versions I run UE4 on Linux without errors. But everything else you mentioned I agree with 100%. I'll also add my opinion that Valve is lazy and hard of hearing.

gambiting 9y ago

>>Release a goddamn new game (HL3 - dreams) and make it Linux exclusive for a time I think people seriously overestimate how popular that game would be. If they really did release it as a Linux exclusive, a lot of us nerds(and I mean it as a compliment here) would install Linux in a heartbeat just to play it, but I think overall, the game would sell very poorly. It has been so many years since the last one that the mainstream public doesn't care about it anymore - a group of hardcore enthusiasts would buy it + some people interested in what the whole Half-Life hype is about, but I'd be surprised if it sold million copies.

mohaine 9y ago
Agreed but all they really need to do is make the BETA Steam OS only. This still gets the hardcore enthusiast interested while not alienating everyone else.
epicide 9y ago
I also think about the other side of it. I love teaching people about Linux/(F)OSS/etc. However, I would hate to see HL3 exclusive for Linux. It would largely hurt the community, I think. Let's assume millions did rush to buy it and install Linux. Think of how many of them would be installing it just to play one game. Most would gripe about not being able to do something they're used to in their other OS [0]. While I love Linux, there are some pain points on desktop. Just getting it installed on your machine is not always trivial even when you know what you're doing. Something you've done a thousand times sometimes just doesn't work for no real reason and you just have to try again [1]. Linus help them if they need a proprietary driver [2]. I imagine most of the people trying Linux for the first time would be trying it with the intention of playing a game instead of learning a new system. That sets them up to be annoyed every step of the way and walk away angry at the new system (Linux). On top of all that, it could cause some frustrations for people like myself who try to help others install and learn Linux. I imagine having several conversations with friends/family thinking they want to finally learn some of this Linux thing I keep talking about. Only to discover it's just because they want to play HL3. [0]: http://linux.oneandoneis2.org/LNW.htm http://linux.oneandoneis2.org/LNW.htm [1]: I realize this happens with computers, in general. The point here isn't to bash Linux (heh). [2]: obviously, not a fault of the Linux ecosystem, but that doesn't change the fact that it is incredibly frustrating. EDIT: formatting.
- jsgo 9y ago
  Exactly. Convince people Linux is worth moving to, but don't force them towards it. If memory serves, when Valve was initially getting their feet wet, publicly, with Linux, they were getting Left 4 Dead (1 or 2, can't remember) to work there. If I remember correctly, they got it to a point that hardware for hardware, they got the Linux port to run better than the Windows version. And that's a direction worth going if you want the gaming crowd to follow: come this way and get an extra boost in performance. We know you just spent $300 to get a couple frames per second boost, come get a few more for free. They really need to do something about Big Picture mode though: that thing looks terrible on anything above 1080p. Even more so at 3440x1440 where it is blurry and inside black bars. If they're trying to make Steam into an appliance of sorts, the user interface needs to be right.
larrik 9y ago
I know why you think that, but when Fallout 4 came out even my father was interested in it, and he'd never heard of any prior Fallout game, and hadn't really gamed in years. Of course, he also still asks me every year when "the next Half-Life is coming out".
- jsgo 9y ago
  your dad is trolling you. He knows.
  - larrik 9y ago
    I doubt it. If it's not called "Wolfenstein", "Doom", "Half-Life", or "Call of Duty", he probably hasn't heard of it.
TheRealDunkirk 9y ago
I've always thought that they've been saving a HL3 release for a proper, SteamOS-based console, ala Xbox or PS4.
bwat49 9y ago
It would also have the danger of backfiring - fans being pissed off that they'd have to change their OS because valve decided to arbitrarily make it exclusive.

eptcyka 9y ago

- Fund Linux devs or take a lower cut from Linux releases I believe Valve is already employing people to work on Linux and it's ecosystem directly. - Convince Adobe to release their suite on Linux! Push for/fund official Unity and Unreal Engine Linux versions Maybe they should just convince Microsoft to port over win32 and all the other APIs to linux? Whilst they're at it, they could also convince your most hated political figure to be more like your most loved political figure. With the convincing powers like these, Valve could just convince the world to no longer suffer from hunger. The only incentives that work would be of the financial kind, however, paying for support is not sustainable. Console vendors can pay for first party or exclusive support from game devs because they are fairly sure this will increase revenue in the long term. Valve gains no more money if they incentivize developers to support Linux. I also don't really want for things to be supported exclusively on Linux unless if there are good technical reasons - I use Linux because of the freedom it provides me, I wouldn't advocate for people to be forced to use it. FWIW, Unity and Unreal run on linux, but a lot of developers elect to use windows-only Unity plugins. The developers don't care. What Linux really needs is non-shit drivers and a mainstream desktop environment that takes into account input latency when developing it's window manager - Wayland on Gnome is really bad in this regard, yet Gnome is the target desktop environment for Steam OS (at least last time I checked). They should maybe make sure that their games run just as fast on Linux as they do on other platforms - currently this is not the case. I believe that solving these issues will be hard and may require a unilateral effort across various entities in the ecosystem - something which is incredibly hard to do, especially when it comes to Gnome. Then there's things like drivers - yes, performance wise Intel and Nvidia drivers might be OK, but they are not feature complete especially when it comes to power management. I don't believe there is a single problem that has to be fixed to make gaming on linux a massive success - there isn't even a shortlist of 10 incredulous tasks. It has to be a long-term effort and the open source community has to take part in it.

aaron-lebo 9y ago
It has to be a long-term effort and the open source community has to take part in it. That statement is not fair to the people who do this every single day. We're only where we are because the open source community took part of it and took us there, give some credit where it's due. edit: don't mean to sound ungrateful, point is OSS is dramatically underfunded, we need big corps to do more

zeroxfe 9y ago

> I feel like Valve has certainly been putting effort into Linux, but not serious effort. Wait, what? Valve has been making huge contributions to the large parts of the Linux ecosystem. Of course they can do more -- anyone can, but patronizing them with "be genuine" and "follow the shiny thing" is really unnecessary.

sametmax 9y ago
Everytime somebody does a bit of good, he is more severely judged and on highter expectations than those doing nothing. Generally by people not doing much themself. It's an exhausting and unfair reality.
- balfirevic 9y ago
  In the field of ethics, this is known as the Copenhagen interpretation of ethics [0]. In short: "The Copenhagen Interpretation of Ethics says that when you observe or interact with a problem in any way, you can be blamed for it. At the very least, you are to blame for not doing more." [0] - https://blog.jaibot.com/the-copenhagen-interpretation-of-ethics/ https://blog.jaibot.com/the-copenhagen-interpretation-of-eth...
- magduf 9y ago
  Be careful with this line of thinking. Not everyone contributing something is "doing a bit of good"; it's quite possible they're making it worse. It's sorta like "good samaritans" who try to help accident victims, but because they have no training, end up hurting the victim even more than if they had just left them alone until someone qualified could get there. Just because someone (or some group) contributes something to the Linux ecosystem doesn't necessarily mean it's a net positive. It could, arguably, be a negative: it could cause more fragmentation and confusion, it could make Linux look bad to outsiders (decreasing adoption rates), it could take mindshare away from a better organized project, etc. Worst case, it could be done with malicious intentions, such as contributing code that has a secret (and not obvious) backdoor/vulnerability. Also, I think there's a logical fallacy about criticizing people who don't contribute yet offer criticism, though I can't name it. For an extreme case, imagine a group of lousy coders writing an OS kernel, and some actual kernel expert like Linus or Dave Cutler jumps in an offers some criticism, though they aren't contributing to this particular project. Who should you listen to, the actual expert in the field, or one of the amateurs who really doesn't know what he's doing? Obviously, the expert's criticism should be considered and not rejected out-of-hand just because they're not a contributor.

bitL 9y ago

> but not serious effort. Dunno, my Steam Box runs games like Grid Autosport, Mad Max, Tomb Raider, Deus Ex etc. without a single issue, as fast as on Windows (quad i5 + NVidia), and I don't even notice I am on Linux. So thanks to Valve and Feral Interactive, I can slowly move away from Windows to Linux for all my computing needs, not just for programming, Deep Learning and blockchain. What else is missing? Moreover, I can run a lot of software under Wine, like Adobe CS6 or MS Office, or even many games (it has gotten significantly better lately).

jsheard 9y ago
> Dunno, my Steam Box runs games like Grid Autosport, Mad Max, Tomb Raider, Deus Ex etc. It runs them now, but none of those games ran on Linux when they first launched. Grid Autosport took 17 months after the initial release, Mad Max took 13 months, Tomb Raider took 3 years (and the 2015 sequel is still not available on Linux) and Deus Ex MD was the only somewhat timely one at 2 months (but the previous game in the series was never ported to Linux at all). I know not everyone cares about playing games the moment they come out, but many people do. Especially with multiplayer games where the community is most active closer to launch.
- bitL 9y ago
  If currently Linux has 1% gaming market share, I am thankful they port these games at all. I am one of those early adopters that paid >$1200 for a top end Steam Box, and bought every single AAA game available on Linux even if I might not play them all, just to put my money where my mouth is and perhaps contribute a bit to getting Linux more relevant. It's only going to be because companies will see some money out there as well, so I try to give them what they want.
  - electricEmu 9y ago
    It's not even 1%. You might consider saving that money instead of promoting Linux through buying games you won't play. Compound the interest, and maybe you can find an indie game studio investment instead. That would be a real and substantial contribution that moves the needle. https://www.gamingonlinux.com/articles/looks-like-the-linux-market-share-on-steam-went-up-in-january.11185/ https://www.gamingonlinux.com/articles/looks-like-the-linux-...

sametmax 9y ago

"sure, you guys sell delicious chocolate near by, but i feel you are not commited to this. You should open a factory if you are to show you are serious with my street"

shadowmint 9y ago

This seems like a lovely sentiment... however... If you release games on a platform, or targeting a hardware spec which has a player base with is too small (like say, VR), and don't make enough money in your 'big bang' release, you're screwed, and your company goes under. Heck, even if you do make some money, if its not enough to 'wow' investors, your studio will probably still be shut down. The economics of big bang release software are very hard ('Explain to me again why after making a million dollars this month you want another million dollars investment that will not generate any return for the next 2 years?'), and game companies are behind the curve in dealing with it. The alternative (freemium) is just a race to the bottom, and its happening on steam right now the same way it happened on the app stores. Incentives to encourage developers to target 'linux first' isn't just not going to work; its actually unethical. You're basically paying people to target a platform that you know isn't significant enough for them to recoup the significant development costs in making games. So yeah. Realistically, you need to do one thing: Figure out a way to provide a meaningful continuing income stream to developers targeting the platform. As I understand it, what value is currently doing is attempting to bootstrap the market to consume linux games, by: - Minimise the cost of developing on the platform by improving the tooling and making it easier to target 'cross platform' to include an additional platform (vulken, steam networking, etc). - Make a platform that will consistently actually run said games, and push that upstream for other distributions to pick up. - Work with partners to provide hardware that is configured in a way that can actually run that platform without having to compile the kernel yourself. So... frankly, that seems like a pretty smart way to tackle the problem. ...but on the other hand, it hasn't been massively successful, to be fair. Practically speaking, 'linux first' is never going to work; but I don't really know what else they can really do to help it along the way.

jdright 9y ago
> Incentives to encourage developers to target 'linux first' isn't just not going to work; its actually unethical. Care to explain? People seems to think this kind of politics from first parties and even from Microsoft very acceptable. But for some reason these tactics applied to Linux would be unethical?

mtgx 9y ago

One thing Valve may just be able to do is somehow convince Apple to support Vulkan. I feel that if Vulkan becomes the official API for both macOS and iOS (even if say 3 years from now), that would be a huge boost to the Vulkan ecosystem. I think the prospect of developing a game that "automatically" works on both Windows (and not just 10, but also 7 and 8) and macOS would be quite compelling. Plus the bonus that the games would also work on Linux, and iOS/Android, and eventually the web (at least some of them for these last three). Besides Apple, Valve should also convince Sony to support Vulkan on the next-gen PS5 console. They should tell both of these companies that they benefit more from being in this larger ecosystem than they do by creating their little walled gardens while Microsoft's gaming ecosystem engulfs and dominates them from outside. It's also quite imperative for Valve to try to achieve this because they are still at risk of being obsolete by a future version of Windows that restricts Win32 apps by default for consumers (a non-zero chance of that happening over the next 10 years). So Valve should have a big incentive to try to get some kind of "partnership" with both Apple and Sony and get them to support Vulkan.

jsheard 9y ago
Apples lack of support for Vulkan is less of an issue now that MoltenVK is available: https://github.com/KhronosGroup/MoltenVK https://github.com/KhronosGroup/MoltenVK Metal is low-level enough that Vulkan can be implemented on top of it without too much overhead.
pjmlp 9y ago
3D API support is a radio button on most engines. Most game companies don't care about Linux, because the added development costs on testing and community support don't translate in any meaningful revenue.

austinshea 9y ago

This is absurd. They aren’t trying to promote Linux. They are trying to have an open platform to run and sell games. Why would they be talking to Adobe, limit their sales while pissing off fans by releasing a Linux exclusive (for any amount of time,) or spend/forgo money on Linux development/sales? This doesn’t make any sense. It’s just a wishlist for someone who likes Linux, not a part of strategy to deal with DirectX.

jsgo 9y ago
it is a weird dance, for sure. But currently, they're very dependent on Windows (and based on the restructuring at Microsoft, dependent on Windows remaining a big thing indefinitely). While saying Linux First outright is probably a bad move, they do need to funnel developers' attention elsewhere to something either they control (a linux distro called SteamOS) or something compliant with Linux in general so that whatever flavor of the month distro can run them. I'd personally aim for the latter as it enables sales to people in love with Arch, Ubuntu, etc., but I could see a push for SteamOS too. But yeah, Linux only? Not a good idea. Creating incentives for companies to target Linux too seems like a good path, but at the same time, you have to make it worth their time to support another version.
- austinshea 9y ago
  They don't, actually. They just need to support a model for developing once and targeting all operating systems. This is about DirectX, and not about what you use as a desktop OS.

giobox 9y ago

In Gabe Newell's own words, Linux support was a hedging strategy against Microsoft potentially mandating software distribution through the Windows App Store: "So we’re going to continue working with the Linux distribution guys, shipping Steam, shipping our games, and making it as easy as possible for anybody who’s engaged with us — putting their games on Steam and getting those running on Linux, as well. It’s a hedging strategy. I think that Windows 8 is kind of a catastrophe for everybody in the PC space." > https://venturebeat.com/2012/07/25/valves-gabe-newell-talks/ https://venturebeat.com/2012/07/25/valves-gabe-newell-talks/ Given Gabe's fears never really materialized (perhaps with the exception of Windows 10 'S', but even that no longer has fees to enable third party software sources), there simply hasn't been anything like as much pressure for Valve to push SteamOS/Linux.

brodock 9y ago
It's like a nuclear race, you are funding it not because you want to nuke someone but because you don't want to be nuked. So the incentive here is to continue to make it viable in order to have an argument against someone trying to blackmail you because you are so locked-in into their ecosystem. On the other side, the more viable you make it, the better future you are building, as you then have access to a platform where you can actually control from end to end, and so implement whatever your future requirements require you to. They are not in a hurry to change the status quo, they are playing it for the long term.
magduf 9y ago
It's really too bad that Microsoft didn't stick to their guns with their strategy of forcing software distribution through the Windows App store. I'm curious how history would have played out with that decision, and I think it would have been fun to watch.

AnIdiotOnTheNet 9y ago

> Release a goddamn new game (HL3 - dreams) and make it Linux exclusive for a time A move like this would definitely not win Linux any friends, because as it turns out the Linux Desktop really isn't that great and you'd just be causing a huge headache for a lot of people. The gamers would be annoyed at having to deal with Linux's bullshit, the Linux Destkop community would be annoyed at the huge influx of new users who don't think "try another distro" (especially after the third distro), or "write your own driver, it's open source!", are acceptable solutions to their problems. If Linux wants gamers there's a simple (note: simple != easy) thing they have to do: make their platform attractive to gamers and game developers. So far they can't manage either, the only reason gaming on Linux is even remotely viable is A) Valve coming in and saying "Ok, since there's no such thing as a standardized base system in Linux Desktop land, here's a standardized base system for Steam you can target", and 2) the popularity of Android making engines like Unity and Unreal have Linux support, which allows devs to tack it on without too much extra effort.

headsoup 9y ago
> the Linux Desktop really isn't that great That's not true. Stick to the 'user friendly' popular ones (Ubuntu, Mint, etc) and they're very solid now. Sure, edge cases are still a problem, but for gaming - if supported - not really anything more problematic than Windows. When did you last try Linux?
- dsego 9y ago
  Ackchyually?
- AnIdiotOnTheNet 9y ago
  I use Linux all the time, Linux Desktop much less often but I keep an eye on things in that sphere. It makes a great web kiosk, and as long as you color inside the lines of what the distro developers intended as a use case you're fine, but as soon as you try to make any changes to fit your workflow you get buried in broken overengineered crap and outdated documentation.

megaman22 9y ago

The thing is, statistically, no one uses Linux desktops. There's really no point in expending any great effort there, aside from ideological reasons. I suppose it could be a hedge against Microsoft doing something incredibly stupid, like cutting support for Win32 and mandating UWP garbage through their garbage store.

deleted 9y ago
[deleted]

p0nce 9y ago

Sunken cost fallacy at its best.

jenscow 9y ago

> make it Linux exclusive for a time I completely disagree with that. I don't believe anyone should be forced to use a different platform, when the only reason behind it is a handshake and a piece of paper - even if it's my preferred platform. Kinda goes against one of the reasons for using Linux.

desireco42 9y ago

Pretty much if you could get Adobe on Linux, it would be a clincher for me. I would move, endure whatever drama I have to endure with configuration etc, and just live happily ever after. Even change distro every now and then.

dleslie 9y ago

Are there any Linux exclusives? It's been a long while since I launched a game on Steam; I was under the impression that a Windows binary is required.

zelon88 9y ago

> Convince Adobe to release their suite on Linux! Push for/fund official Unity and Unreal Engine Linux versions I run UE4 on Linux without errors. But everything else you mentioned I agree with 100%. I'll also add my opinion that Valve is lazy and hard of hearing.