5 ms·

Then steam is the most well behaved monopoly I know. They care about Linux.

_cenw 4y ago
They care about whatever Valve employees are interested in / is perceived as creating most value (not always the same as creating most value). Valve has a system of weighted peer feedback (impacting salary and sometimes continued employment) that encourages follow-the-leader mentality despite their supposedly open culture. People Make Games made an enlightening documentary on the Valve model and where it fails: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s9aCwCKgkLo https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s9aCwCKgkLo Though if you need an example: Steam still doesn't have M1 binaries. Steam uses about 15 variants of UI framework, and some of it simply doesn't work on some platforms. Steam also took record time shipping an x86_64 (over x86) binary back in the day. Everything that's not the shiny current thing receives life support at most.
- TazeTSchnitzel 4y ago
  When 32-bit binaries on macOS died, all the old Source games went with them, and Valve has seemingly never fixed it. :(
  - SXX 4y ago
    There a lot of Mac software that been abandoned at some point in time due to API breakage on MacOS updates, driver API changes, etc. Supporting OS that breaks compatibility all the time is expansive even for less complex software and fixing games created on custom engines likely way too expensive. After all you can install it in Parallels and play Windows versions just fine.
- SXX 4y ago
  On M1 support. Apple been actively hostile to game developers. Apple has not maintained OpenGL support well, dropped 32-bit binaries, have no Vulkan support and break their APIs and compatibility all the time. No surprise Valve is not enthusiastic about supporting their platform.
- sgtnoodle 4y ago
  I'm not sure I understand your example. What actual value would M1/aarch64 compiled steam binaries be? Practically all games available on their platform are made for x86 or x86-64. That doesn't seem like something Valve can change. The only reason gaming on Linux is becoming practical is because Vulkan support is maturing and Valve doubled down on getting windows binary compatibility. I suppose Proton could probably be ported to OSX with enough work. Apple isn't making it easy by refusing to natively implement Vulkan, though. DirectX to Vulkan to Metal conversion on top of x86-64 emulation is just a lot going on. It seems like no one's interested in doing the work to convert DirectX directly to Metal.
  - tstrimple 4y ago
    > That doesn't seem like something Valve can change. This is where I'd disagree with you. Valve has all sorts of levers they could pull to encourage ARM builds. One example, they could offer a lower commission rate on games which have ARM builds available. This would incentivize developers to target the platform.
    - wheybags 4y ago
      Given the tiny percentage that osx represents, why would they bother? It's just not worth investing too much effort in apple platforms.
      - BirAdam 4y ago
        Linux was less until SteamDeck.
        depressedpanda 4y ago
        Irrelevant given the potential Linux brings to the table.
        usrusr 4y ago
        Linux support was (is) a hedge against an OS vendor using their power to force themselves into the lucrative middle man position. MacOS support is not.
- dbeley 4y ago
  They supported linux in order to have their own platform outside of Microsoft's reach (first through the Steam Machines, now the Steam Deck). Indeed the Mac support is lackluster, but it's yet another proprietary platform and Apple makes it difficult to work on.
- Dylan16807 4y ago
  > Steam also took record time shipping an x86_64 (over x86) binary back in the day. Steam doesn't need more than 2/4GB so it doesn't seem like that matters.
iaml 4y ago
They care about linux because they fear(ed) ms pulling the plug on their platform.
- DANmode 4y ago
  The enemy of my enemy...is still my enemy because he won't release 3!
ChuckNorris89 4y ago
>They care about Linux. They care about making money. Their investments in Linux are their future insurance policy from Microsoft, as unlike Sony or Nintendo, Valve only own the storefront but not the platform on which their games would run, and with Windows being their biggest customer platform, makes their survival completely dependent on the mercy of Microsoft and the potential dystopian scenario where, for example, on Windows 12, 13 or 14 you'll only be able to install apps through the official Microsoft store. Linux compatibility was their only ticket out. It's purely a business decision, not a benevolent one. Not knocking them for it, but it's good to keep in mind the reality and not blindly worship a for-profit corporation.
- ahartmetz 4y ago
  Long-term self-interest is often indistinguishable from altruism. It is refreshing to see a company at least capable of that. That is as far as my blind worship goes ;)
  - ChuckNorris89 4y ago
    By that logic Microsoft is also incredibly altruistic ;)
    - CamperBob2 4y ago
      (Shrug) They brought cheap commodity PCs of incredible power to the mass market. Do you think that would have happened in a world dominated by Apple?
    - Dylan16807 4y ago
      The logic that says it's possible for them to be the same? Microsoft has that in certain areas, like Typescript. Not so much anything related to Windows.
- depressedpanda 4y ago
  Sure, but Valve has done a lot for the Linux gaming ecosystem. It also goes deeper than just Linux, and the Steam Deck is a perfect example of this. It's a real PC, and they allow you to use the device you bought as you wish. Our incentives are aligned and due to how they operate it's likely that it'll stay that way for a long time. As long as this is the case I will keep giving Valve my money and recommending their products to others.
sireat 4y ago
Linux is a complement to Valve: https://www.joelonsoftware.com/2002/06/12/strategy-letter-v/ https://www.joelonsoftware.com/2002/06/12/strategy-letter-v/ "Commoditize your complements." In general you open source / lower price (to free if possible) your complements. Pretty much all companies do this.
paoda 4y ago
While I can appreciate their dedication to Linux, I find their application process arbitrary and random, if not confusingly prejudiced towards certain types of games. It's honestly a dice roll whether a visual novel will be accepted or rejected from Steam. Whatever reason used will weirdly not apply for titles already released and even titles that will apply after you. It doesn't matter if youre an indie game dev or Square Enix publishing a game set in the same universe as the widely loved Steins;Gate. You're still subject for a ban and for what really? Square Enix at least has the ability to talk behind the scenes to have the game approved. This all matters so much because visual novels are already a niche. If you want to turn a profit you must sell on steam. This means that in response to an imprecise, contradictory policy it's in your best interest to self-censor as much as you can because you can not afford to have your game rejected.
- tadfisher 4y ago
  I thought they got rid of any game content policies a couple years ago. The line was, "everything is allowed except malware and obvious trolling".
  - paoda 4y ago
    If that's their policy, they genuinely make zero effort to follow it.
  - optionalsquid 4y ago
    Their actual content policies are described on the SteamWorks page and they include quite a lot more exceptions than malware and trolling: https://partner.steamgames.com/doc/gettingstarted/onboarding#5 https://partner.steamgames.com/doc/gettingstarted/onboarding... Visual novels and similar games with young (looking) characters tend to get rejected for sexualizing those characters (rule 8). But there are also plenty of examples of tame games getting rejected, while similar but much more risque games were permitted, so it's hard to figure out exactly what Valve objects to.

They care about whatever Valve employees are interested in / is perceived as creating most value (not always the same as creating most value). Valve has a system of weighted peer feedback (impacting salary and sometimes continued employment) that encourages follow-the-leader mentality despite their supposedly open culture. People Make Games made an enlightening documentary on the Valve model and where it fails: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s9aCwCKgkLo https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s9aCwCKgkLo Though if you need an example: Steam still doesn't have M1 binaries. Steam uses about 15 variants of UI framework, and some of it simply doesn't work on some platforms. Steam also took record time shipping an x86_64 (over x86) binary back in the day. Everything that's not the shiny current thing receives life support at most.

TazeTSchnitzel 4y ago
When 32-bit binaries on macOS died, all the old Source games went with them, and Valve has seemingly never fixed it. :(
- SXX 4y ago
  There a lot of Mac software that been abandoned at some point in time due to API breakage on MacOS updates, driver API changes, etc. Supporting OS that breaks compatibility all the time is expansive even for less complex software and fixing games created on custom engines likely way too expensive. After all you can install it in Parallels and play Windows versions just fine.
SXX 4y ago
On M1 support. Apple been actively hostile to game developers. Apple has not maintained OpenGL support well, dropped 32-bit binaries, have no Vulkan support and break their APIs and compatibility all the time. No surprise Valve is not enthusiastic about supporting their platform.
sgtnoodle 4y ago
I'm not sure I understand your example. What actual value would M1/aarch64 compiled steam binaries be? Practically all games available on their platform are made for x86 or x86-64. That doesn't seem like something Valve can change. The only reason gaming on Linux is becoming practical is because Vulkan support is maturing and Valve doubled down on getting windows binary compatibility. I suppose Proton could probably be ported to OSX with enough work. Apple isn't making it easy by refusing to natively implement Vulkan, though. DirectX to Vulkan to Metal conversion on top of x86-64 emulation is just a lot going on. It seems like no one's interested in doing the work to convert DirectX directly to Metal.
- tstrimple 4y ago
  > That doesn't seem like something Valve can change. This is where I'd disagree with you. Valve has all sorts of levers they could pull to encourage ARM builds. One example, they could offer a lower commission rate on games which have ARM builds available. This would incentivize developers to target the platform.
  - wheybags 4y ago
    Given the tiny percentage that osx represents, why would they bother? It's just not worth investing too much effort in apple platforms.
    - BirAdam 4y ago
      Linux was less until SteamDeck.
      - depressedpanda 4y ago
        Irrelevant given the potential Linux brings to the table.
      - usrusr 4y ago
        Linux support was (is) a hedge against an OS vendor using their power to force themselves into the lucrative middle man position. MacOS support is not.
dbeley 4y ago
They supported linux in order to have their own platform outside of Microsoft's reach (first through the Steam Machines, now the Steam Deck). Indeed the Mac support is lackluster, but it's yet another proprietary platform and Apple makes it difficult to work on.
Dylan16807 4y ago
> Steam also took record time shipping an x86_64 (over x86) binary back in the day. Steam doesn't need more than 2/4GB so it doesn't seem like that matters.

iaml 4y ago

They care about linux because they fear(ed) ms pulling the plug on their platform.

DANmode 4y ago
The enemy of my enemy...is still my enemy because he won't release 3!

ChuckNorris89 4y ago

>They care about Linux. They care about making money. Their investments in Linux are their future insurance policy from Microsoft, as unlike Sony or Nintendo, Valve only own the storefront but not the platform on which their games would run, and with Windows being their biggest customer platform, makes their survival completely dependent on the mercy of Microsoft and the potential dystopian scenario where, for example, on Windows 12, 13 or 14 you'll only be able to install apps through the official Microsoft store. Linux compatibility was their only ticket out. It's purely a business decision, not a benevolent one. Not knocking them for it, but it's good to keep in mind the reality and not blindly worship a for-profit corporation.

ahartmetz 4y ago
Long-term self-interest is often indistinguishable from altruism. It is refreshing to see a company at least capable of that. That is as far as my blind worship goes ;)
- ChuckNorris89 4y ago
  By that logic Microsoft is also incredibly altruistic ;)
  - CamperBob2 4y ago
    (Shrug) They brought cheap commodity PCs of incredible power to the mass market. Do you think that would have happened in a world dominated by Apple?
  - Dylan16807 4y ago
    The logic that says it's possible for them to be the same? Microsoft has that in certain areas, like Typescript. Not so much anything related to Windows.
depressedpanda 4y ago
Sure, but Valve has done a lot for the Linux gaming ecosystem. It also goes deeper than just Linux, and the Steam Deck is a perfect example of this. It's a real PC, and they allow you to use the device you bought as you wish. Our incentives are aligned and due to how they operate it's likely that it'll stay that way for a long time. As long as this is the case I will keep giving Valve my money and recommending their products to others.

sireat 4y ago

Linux is a complement to Valve: https://www.joelonsoftware.com/2002/06/12/strategy-letter-v/ https://www.joelonsoftware.com/2002/06/12/strategy-letter-v/ "Commoditize your complements." In general you open source / lower price (to free if possible) your complements. Pretty much all companies do this.

paoda 4y ago

While I can appreciate their dedication to Linux, I find their application process arbitrary and random, if not confusingly prejudiced towards certain types of games. It's honestly a dice roll whether a visual novel will be accepted or rejected from Steam. Whatever reason used will weirdly not apply for titles already released and even titles that will apply after you. It doesn't matter if youre an indie game dev or Square Enix publishing a game set in the same universe as the widely loved Steins;Gate. You're still subject for a ban and for what really? Square Enix at least has the ability to talk behind the scenes to have the game approved. This all matters so much because visual novels are already a niche. If you want to turn a profit you must sell on steam. This means that in response to an imprecise, contradictory policy it's in your best interest to self-censor as much as you can because you can not afford to have your game rejected.

tadfisher 4y ago
I thought they got rid of any game content policies a couple years ago. The line was, "everything is allowed except malware and obvious trolling".
- paoda 4y ago
  If that's their policy, they genuinely make zero effort to follow it.
- optionalsquid 4y ago
  Their actual content policies are described on the SteamWorks page and they include quite a lot more exceptions than malware and trolling: https://partner.steamgames.com/doc/gettingstarted/onboarding#5 https://partner.steamgames.com/doc/gettingstarted/onboarding... Visual novels and similar games with young (looking) characters tend to get rejected for sexualizing those characters (rule 8). But there are also plenty of examples of tame games getting rejected, while similar but much more risque games were permitted, so it's hard to figure out exactly what Valve objects to.