5 ms·

What choice in the matter do they have? If devs aren't developing for Linux, what are they supposed to do?

johnnyanmac 3y ago
>If devs aren't developing for Linux, what are they supposed to do? Then you...Encourage devs to develop for Linux? Easier said than done, but I don't know what answer you're expecting, nor why we're phrasing it as if Valve had some legal obligation to use or support Linux. They are also free to do nothing and target the 97% market share. That's not a decision I would blame them for either. They made a decision and I simply wish they made a different one. Their decision isn't bad, I simply have my own reservations about that direction and reasons to prefer my direction. But if you want my insignificant crackpot theory on how I'd leverage such a position as a market leader to support linux: - Reduce platform share rates from 30% to say, 15% if you choose to implement native Linux support into your game and maintain parity with the Windows platform (I know that AAA games selling over X million already have reduces share rates, this may need to be under negotiation). - Talk and work with AAA developers to properly port to Linux. This may or may not involve having some developers onhand to send out to such studios and work directly on such ports. These can be extra services Valve provides. - Work with major 3rd party tools/engines to fix the cruft in their linux deployments. To be honest, this alone may be the biggest fix if we somehow pull it off. - Make a not crap version of AppImage to help allievate package management issues between different distros, and bundle in a fork of that into Steam (similar to what they did with Proton). Or fix AppImage, whatever is easier. These inevitably make less money but luckily I as this alternate Universe Gabe Newell am not beholden to shareholders forcing infinite growth. So may as well leverage that power while I have it.
- jakobson14 3y ago
  Oh yes, because writing a strongly worded 5-page letter to devs to support the insignificant minority of linux users will work. That's totally how you get people with profit motives to "make different decisions." "Talking with people" has has been a disaster for the FSF for going on 20 years. They had much more success when they DID STUFF, like say, implemented a clone of unix from scratch in the 80's. Here's VALVe (and the WINE project) doing stuff. they've implemented a very capable clone of the windows ABI, creating a massive market for tens of thousands of games on linux out of thin air. Do you really think devs would even give enough of a shit to talk about about linux without those 10,000 windows games that run on the steam deck?
  - johnnyanmac 3y ago
    >writing a strongly worded 5-page letter to devs to support the insignificant minority of linux users will work. we're talking about a billion dollar platform leader, not Richard Stallman (bless his soul). the difference between the latter's net worth and Valve's is a billion dollars. don't underestimate the scale of money here. And you are absolutely right. Talking doesn't work (at a massive scale). That's why I in this alternate universe am making it worth the dev's while. Offering incentive, talent, and tools to help out. It's pretty much what Stadia did but Valve's games wont be stuck on a cloud server. >Do you really think devs would even give enough of a shit to talk about about linux without those 10,000 windows games that run on the steam deck if they can get 15% of their revenue back, yes. Porting to linux is harder than it needs to be, but it's not that hard these days. Even in this alternate universe, if the plan fails I as Gabe Newell just get more money out of the devs. Did you read my actual post or are you simply reacting to the "Encourage devs to develop for Linux" part? I don't know how I write that and someone simply responds "you're writing a strongly worded letter".
    - OkayPhysicist 3y ago
      Linux desktop users are simply not a big enough market to bother spending money on. Until THAT changes, the only good solution is making it so that developers don't need to spend any money to cross-release. Which means Proton and Wine.
      - johnnyanmac 3y ago
        >Until THAT changes Well that's what I want to change. There was once upon a time where Android was in the same position. Considered as crappy alternative phones for people who couldn't get an iPhone. By some miracle Google didn't throw out the baby with the bathwater like they would do for 80% of their other products in the next 13 years, and now IOS has real competition. >Linux desktop users are simply not a big enough market to bother spending money on. And it won't change with that mentality. I don't consider WINE a solution so much as a workaround. Maybe a good workaround, but it doesn't change the "Linux Desktop users market" issue. And I'll just pre-emptively address the constant response I get to this: It's fine if "you" (royal) don't care and simply want to a) be on Linux OS and b) play modern video games. I'm not going to shame anyone using WINE to play their games. Sometimes you need a quick fix and this is the "quickest" fix for that. It's part of my personal mission to care, though.
- OkayPhysicist 3y ago
  Realistically, there needs to be a pretty big incentive for developers to go through the arduous process of achieving Linux compatibility. That means charging Linux users more substantially more. Of course, that shrinks the pool of potential customers even more. Sure the purchasing power of the average Linux user blows the average windows user out of the water, but the willingness to actually purchase anything is dramatically lower. Or, you can just make it so that the developer needs to do no extra work to maker their game Linux compatible. Option 2 is much, much better.

>If devs aren't developing for Linux, what are they supposed to do? Then you...Encourage devs to develop for Linux? Easier said than done, but I don't know what answer you're expecting, nor why we're phrasing it as if Valve had some legal obligation to use or support Linux. They are also free to do nothing and target the 97% market share. That's not a decision I would blame them for either. They made a decision and I simply wish they made a different one. Their decision isn't bad, I simply have my own reservations about that direction and reasons to prefer my direction. But if you want my insignificant crackpot theory on how I'd leverage such a position as a market leader to support linux: - Reduce platform share rates from 30% to say, 15% if you choose to implement native Linux support into your game and maintain parity with the Windows platform (I know that AAA games selling over X million already have reduces share rates, this may need to be under negotiation). - Talk and work with AAA developers to properly port to Linux. This may or may not involve having some developers onhand to send out to such studios and work directly on such ports. These can be extra services Valve provides. - Work with major 3rd party tools/engines to fix the cruft in their linux deployments. To be honest, this alone may be the biggest fix if we somehow pull it off. - Make a not crap version of AppImage to help allievate package management issues between different distros, and bundle in a fork of that into Steam (similar to what they did with Proton). Or fix AppImage, whatever is easier. These inevitably make less money but luckily I as this alternate Universe Gabe Newell am not beholden to shareholders forcing infinite growth. So may as well leverage that power while I have it.

jakobson14 3y ago
Oh yes, because writing a strongly worded 5-page letter to devs to support the insignificant minority of linux users will work. That's totally how you get people with profit motives to "make different decisions." "Talking with people" has has been a disaster for the FSF for going on 20 years. They had much more success when they DID STUFF, like say, implemented a clone of unix from scratch in the 80's. Here's VALVe (and the WINE project) doing stuff. they've implemented a very capable clone of the windows ABI, creating a massive market for tens of thousands of games on linux out of thin air. Do you really think devs would even give enough of a shit to talk about about linux without those 10,000 windows games that run on the steam deck?
- johnnyanmac 3y ago
  >writing a strongly worded 5-page letter to devs to support the insignificant minority of linux users will work. we're talking about a billion dollar platform leader, not Richard Stallman (bless his soul). the difference between the latter's net worth and Valve's is a billion dollars. don't underestimate the scale of money here. And you are absolutely right. Talking doesn't work (at a massive scale). That's why I in this alternate universe am making it worth the dev's while. Offering incentive, talent, and tools to help out. It's pretty much what Stadia did but Valve's games wont be stuck on a cloud server. >Do you really think devs would even give enough of a shit to talk about about linux without those 10,000 windows games that run on the steam deck if they can get 15% of their revenue back, yes. Porting to linux is harder than it needs to be, but it's not that hard these days. Even in this alternate universe, if the plan fails I as Gabe Newell just get more money out of the devs. Did you read my actual post or are you simply reacting to the "Encourage devs to develop for Linux" part? I don't know how I write that and someone simply responds "you're writing a strongly worded letter".
  - OkayPhysicist 3y ago
    Linux desktop users are simply not a big enough market to bother spending money on. Until THAT changes, the only good solution is making it so that developers don't need to spend any money to cross-release. Which means Proton and Wine.
    - johnnyanmac 3y ago
      >Until THAT changes Well that's what I want to change. There was once upon a time where Android was in the same position. Considered as crappy alternative phones for people who couldn't get an iPhone. By some miracle Google didn't throw out the baby with the bathwater like they would do for 80% of their other products in the next 13 years, and now IOS has real competition. >Linux desktop users are simply not a big enough market to bother spending money on. And it won't change with that mentality. I don't consider WINE a solution so much as a workaround. Maybe a good workaround, but it doesn't change the "Linux Desktop users market" issue. And I'll just pre-emptively address the constant response I get to this: It's fine if "you" (royal) don't care and simply want to a) be on Linux OS and b) play modern video games. I'm not going to shame anyone using WINE to play their games. Sometimes you need a quick fix and this is the "quickest" fix for that. It's part of my personal mission to care, though.
OkayPhysicist 3y ago
Realistically, there needs to be a pretty big incentive for developers to go through the arduous process of achieving Linux compatibility. That means charging Linux users more substantially more. Of course, that shrinks the pool of potential customers even more. Sure the purchasing power of the average Linux user blows the average windows user out of the water, but the willingness to actually purchase anything is dramatically lower. Or, you can just make it so that the developer needs to do no extra work to maker their game Linux compatible. Option 2 is much, much better.