9 ms·

I am looking forward to a standalone version of Proton that I can run without having to use Steam. First, most of my games are pirated, and second, Steam is slo

by qvh 8y ago

I am looking forward to a standalone version of Proton that I can run without having to use Steam. First, most of my games are pirated, and second, Steam is slow and clunky and I avoid using it whenever I can, even on Windows. On the flipside, many of the games I run are from the DX9 era, and I've been using wine-d3d9[] with a high degree of success. []https://packages.gentoo.org/packages/app-emulation/wine-d3d9 https://packages.gentoo.org/packages/app-emulation/wine-d3d9

gpderetta 8y ago
Well... It is called wine!
- qvh 8y ago
  Yes, but I mean... Having Proton added to the repos of your distro, and being able to use it as you would use regular Wine. Because right now, it looks like you really need Steam to use Proton. Edit: in response to ekianjo below, I can't reply: Thank you, I wasn't aware of that. I thought it was coupled with Steam tightly. I have even found a Gentoo overlay with a Proton ebuild. I'll give it a spin; I'm not a huge fan of the Linux desktop but I'm tired of Windows 10 chapping my hide with its endless stream of background processes consuming the resources of my computer while I'm trying to do something else.
  - ekianjo 8y ago
    No, there is a git repo where you can use Proton as a separate piece of software.
  - pbhjpbhj 8y ago
    WINE config wrappers for gaming aren't new, one of the better ones IME is Lutris. I've not had much success with WINE for gaming, nor with Proton. I used to play some "Tom Clancy" games using WINE (Origin, I think it was; bought a couple of other games Rayman and something else) but the distributor changed the launcher and it never worked again. I couldn't for the life of me work out why they didn't advertise the fact their launcher worked on WINE, v. simply, nor why they would then squander that advantage by breaking that compatibility (some update loop, apparently it could be worked around but my WINE-fu wasn't up to the task).
AnIdiotOnTheNet 8y ago
Way to show your support for the company that has done more for Linux gaming than anyone else in history, not to mention all the people who make the games you play.
sigi45 8y ago
I don't get how people have no problem at all stating that most of there games are pirated.
- leetcrew 8y ago
  I dunno, when I was in college/hs I never felt bad about pirating stuff. it's not like I would have actually paid $60 for the game if I hadn't torrented it. now that I actually make a good living from writing closed-source software, it doesn't really seem okay, so I pay for them.
- kiriakasis 8y ago
  A good part is that you feel like you are not actually hurting the producer and actually you might be a net positive, as most of those people would have not spent 60$ for a game but still contribute to a lively community. In my case many moons ago not pirating movies and games would have just meant reading more books. Also the total disconnect between quality and price play a role sometimes.
  - imtringued 8y ago
    Nowadays $60 is enough for almost a hundred games if you buy game bundles.
    - ekianjo 8y ago
      Yup, but at the same time we start seeing games that are new and approaching 100 USD (some of the latest AAA games) in Digital Distribution. It's going both ways in terms of pricing, even if the median price is indeed going down.
      - jsgo 8y ago
        Honestly, do I like the Gold/Ultimate/etc. editions? Not particularly (I can stomach it better if there is a minus core game cost upgrade package so I can buy the core and then if I decide I do like the game, upgrade after), but I'm not totally against increasing cost. You've got games like Witcher 3, Red Dead Redemption 2, etc. that are basically epics: you could play them for months (amount of time spent gaming dependent). They're not epic naturally, the teams that put them together made them that way. So in that sense, I feel like you'd still come out okay shelling out for a game like that. Likewise, graphical fidelity is approaching insane levels. Sure, applications assist in this, but at the end of the day, the developer is still spending a ton of time getting various things right visually. As such, I don't mind shelling out for that. Dunno, as far as AAA games go, gamers have decided graphics and length of playtime are important. As an example of then vs now, Zelda used to be a game you could beat in a few hours. Breath of the Wild? Not so much. Both of these take increased development time which no one is doing for free. For them to bump up those two, price needs to go up. If it remains the same, honestly, it will eventually be unsustainable.
imtringued 8y ago
I disagree about steam being slow and clunky. Just get a humble monthly subscription. For $12 a month you will never have to worry about not having enough games even if you only play on linux.
- zimpenfish 8y ago
  > I disagree about steam being slow and clunky. It can seem to be - on my Windows 10 box, a Steam update can take half an hour or more (on the Mac, it'll never be more than a couple of minutes.) Often it'll get stuck downloading updates to games which means you can't play them until it unsticks. I appreciate that these are almost certainly Windows 10 issues (since a lot of other stuff is similarly afflicted) but most people will blame Steam.
  - jamesgeck0 8y ago
    > on my Windows 10 box, a Steam update can take half an hour or more This hasn't been my experience at all. On my Windows 10 box with an aging third gen i5, a 50Mbps connection, and an SSD, Steam client updates rarely take more than a minute or two.
    - zimpenfish 8y ago
      Mine is an AMD <mumblenumbers> with a 1Gbps connection and no SSD. But when Windows 10 comes back after an update, the machine will be unusable for at least an hour whilst it does <something>. Steam updates take forever. Installing Postgres the other day took about half an hour, of which at least 20 minutes was installing VC++ redistributables. The problem with Windows 10 seems to be that it's wildly inconsistent and susceptible to the tiniest variations.

by qvh 8y ago

gpderetta 8y ago

Well... It is called wine!

qvh 8y ago
Yes, but I mean... Having Proton added to the repos of your distro, and being able to use it as you would use regular Wine. Because right now, it looks like you really need Steam to use Proton. Edit: in response to ekianjo below, I can't reply: Thank you, I wasn't aware of that. I thought it was coupled with Steam tightly. I have even found a Gentoo overlay with a Proton ebuild. I'll give it a spin; I'm not a huge fan of the Linux desktop but I'm tired of Windows 10 chapping my hide with its endless stream of background processes consuming the resources of my computer while I'm trying to do something else.
- ekianjo 8y ago
  No, there is a git repo where you can use Proton as a separate piece of software.
- pbhjpbhj 8y ago
  WINE config wrappers for gaming aren't new, one of the better ones IME is Lutris. I've not had much success with WINE for gaming, nor with Proton. I used to play some "Tom Clancy" games using WINE (Origin, I think it was; bought a couple of other games Rayman and something else) but the distributor changed the launcher and it never worked again. I couldn't for the life of me work out why they didn't advertise the fact their launcher worked on WINE, v. simply, nor why they would then squander that advantage by breaking that compatibility (some update loop, apparently it could be worked around but my WINE-fu wasn't up to the task).

AnIdiotOnTheNet 8y ago

Way to show your support for the company that has done more for Linux gaming than anyone else in history, not to mention all the people who make the games you play.

sigi45 8y ago

I don't get how people have no problem at all stating that most of there games are pirated.

leetcrew 8y ago
I dunno, when I was in college/hs I never felt bad about pirating stuff. it's not like I would have actually paid $60 for the game if I hadn't torrented it. now that I actually make a good living from writing closed-source software, it doesn't really seem okay, so I pay for them.
kiriakasis 8y ago
A good part is that you feel like you are not actually hurting the producer and actually you might be a net positive, as most of those people would have not spent 60$ for a game but still contribute to a lively community. In my case many moons ago not pirating movies and games would have just meant reading more books. Also the total disconnect between quality and price play a role sometimes.
- imtringued 8y ago
  Nowadays $60 is enough for almost a hundred games if you buy game bundles.
  - ekianjo 8y ago
    Yup, but at the same time we start seeing games that are new and approaching 100 USD (some of the latest AAA games) in Digital Distribution. It's going both ways in terms of pricing, even if the median price is indeed going down.
    - jsgo 8y ago
      Honestly, do I like the Gold/Ultimate/etc. editions? Not particularly (I can stomach it better if there is a minus core game cost upgrade package so I can buy the core and then if I decide I do like the game, upgrade after), but I'm not totally against increasing cost. You've got games like Witcher 3, Red Dead Redemption 2, etc. that are basically epics: you could play them for months (amount of time spent gaming dependent). They're not epic naturally, the teams that put them together made them that way. So in that sense, I feel like you'd still come out okay shelling out for a game like that. Likewise, graphical fidelity is approaching insane levels. Sure, applications assist in this, but at the end of the day, the developer is still spending a ton of time getting various things right visually. As such, I don't mind shelling out for that. Dunno, as far as AAA games go, gamers have decided graphics and length of playtime are important. As an example of then vs now, Zelda used to be a game you could beat in a few hours. Breath of the Wild? Not so much. Both of these take increased development time which no one is doing for free. For them to bump up those two, price needs to go up. If it remains the same, honestly, it will eventually be unsustainable.

imtringued 8y ago

I disagree about steam being slow and clunky. Just get a humble monthly subscription. For $12 a month you will never have to worry about not having enough games even if you only play on linux.

zimpenfish 8y ago
> I disagree about steam being slow and clunky. It can seem to be - on my Windows 10 box, a Steam update can take half an hour or more (on the Mac, it'll never be more than a couple of minutes.) Often it'll get stuck downloading updates to games which means you can't play them until it unsticks. I appreciate that these are almost certainly Windows 10 issues (since a lot of other stuff is similarly afflicted) but most people will blame Steam.
- jamesgeck0 8y ago
  > on my Windows 10 box, a Steam update can take half an hour or more This hasn't been my experience at all. On my Windows 10 box with an aging third gen i5, a 50Mbps connection, and an SSD, Steam client updates rarely take more than a minute or two.
  - zimpenfish 8y ago
    Mine is an AMD <mumblenumbers> with a 1Gbps connection and no SSD. But when Windows 10 comes back after an update, the machine will be unusable for at least an hour whilst it does <something>. Steam updates take forever. Installing Postgres the other day took about half an hour, of which at least 20 minutes was installing VC++ redistributables. The problem with Windows 10 seems to be that it's wildly inconsistent and susceptible to the tiniest variations.