3 ms·

Exactly. I played life is strange 2 recently. It has a native Linux Version. On startup it complained I should set my CPU governor to performance instead of gov

Exactly. I played life is strange 2 recently. It has a native Linux Version. On startup it complained I should set my CPU governor to performance instead of governor. Then it said it only supports AMD and Nvidia cards. I pressed continue and the system hard-locked. This machine is about a year old today, and this is the only crash I had, ever. After that I configured steam to use the windows version instead, and I could play through the entire game flawlessly. So, at least from personal experience yes, it makes absolutely no sense to port to Linux, if the result is still worse than proton. Regularly test under proton during development, and you got a Linux Version of your game for free. From my experience, epic already took good care to make sure unreal engine works well under proton, so if you just pick that and don't add a ton of additional stuff that uses esoteric winapi stuff, you're already set.

pjmlp 4y ago
Hence "OS/2 runs Windows better", all over again. We all know how that ended.
- scheeseman486 4y ago
  That was in an era of rapid change for Windows APIs, these days games target Windows from ~5 years ago. Another comparison that I think is more apt: "IBM PC Compatibles run IBM PC software better"
- iforgotpassword 4y ago
  I don't see too many parallels there tbh, so genuinely no idea how this will play out in the long run. But it's pretty exciting to watch.
pxc 4y ago
Source ports to Linux are actually pretty rare. Most big games with a 'native' Linux version are non-native in exactly the same way as Proton ports— they run using a custom compatibility layer based on WINE or something similar. Often the port is of such high quality that you wouldn't be able to tell (Feral Interactive has done a ton of great ports this way), but this is still how most are done, especially for AAA games. (In that sense, developers (or Linux porting studios) switching from their in-house compatibility layers to Proton isn't really a change in terms of those ports being 'truly native' or whatever.) I wonder if what we're starting to see, rather than the inferiority of source ports, is actually that some of these alternative compatibility layers are just no longer keeping up with Proton, since Proton/WINE has such wide use/testing and rapid development these days.

pjmlp 4y ago

Hence "OS/2 runs Windows better", all over again. We all know how that ended.

scheeseman486 4y ago
That was in an era of rapid change for Windows APIs, these days games target Windows from ~5 years ago. Another comparison that I think is more apt: "IBM PC Compatibles run IBM PC software better"
iforgotpassword 4y ago
I don't see too many parallels there tbh, so genuinely no idea how this will play out in the long run. But it's pretty exciting to watch.

pxc 4y ago

Source ports to Linux are actually pretty rare. Most big games with a 'native' Linux version are non-native in exactly the same way as Proton ports— they run using a custom compatibility layer based on WINE or something similar. Often the port is of such high quality that you wouldn't be able to tell (Feral Interactive has done a ton of great ports this way), but this is still how most are done, especially for AAA games. (In that sense, developers (or Linux porting studios) switching from their in-house compatibility layers to Proton isn't really a change in terms of those ports being 'truly native' or whatever.) I wonder if what we're starting to see, rather than the inferiority of source ports, is actually that some of these alternative compatibility layers are just no longer keeping up with Proton, since Proton/WINE has such wide use/testing and rapid development these days.