4 ms·

Never look a gift horse in the mouth. Be it altruistic or capitalist, Linux stands to benefit from the exposure and backing.

zanny 13y ago
But you can't assume it is a gift. What does it matter if desktop Linux takes off on the backs of proprietary nonfree software? Not just proprietary apps on top of a free stack, but a proprietary distribution platform where most programs bought for it only run through it, where the controller can at whim close your account, and they vet and determine who they bless to use their platform earpiece? Doesn't that defeat the purpose? The vast majorty of current Linux titles are not on Linux because of Steam. Few titles (Crusader Kings comes to mind) actually ported their engine to run on opengl / posix / alsa or sdl just because Steam appeared there. Most of the last 2 years of Linux gaming boom has been due to Unity and the Humble Bundle. Unity was porting to Linux before Steam on Linux was announced, same with the Humble Bundle. Having a platform is fine and everything, but here are two observations from seperate perspectives: 1. Why develop for a platform where you can only expect a few thousand sales, even on the de facto distribution platform that takes a cut of proceeds? 2. If there are no games on a platform, wouldn't you just want to release directly and let your potential customers come to you? If they are desperate, wouldn't cutting out the middle man be more profitable, since Steam isn't making Linux development easier, just marketing and sales processing? I think Steam is so important on the desktop PC because there are so many games on it. People don't go download Origin or seek out a developers site to buy a game, they just buy it on Steam. If you are on something like gnu/linux, you have no competition game-wise, you just have to make sure people know you exist. In almost any genre, you have minimum modern competition on the platform. So why give Valve whatever % they take?
- adwf 13y ago
  Knowing that the game exists is 80% of the battle for indie devs. I check Steam everyday looking for new Linux releases. I can't say the same for checking indie game blogs or wherever else I'm supposed to find the announcements of a Linux version. Even if I did, it's simple mathematics - do I check 30+ websites of various game publishers, news organisations and indie devs, or do I just check Steam? They have a pretty powerful platform; I think the publicity benefits of being on Steam far outweigh the cut they take as a middleman.
- nl 13y ago
  What does it matter if desktop Linux takes off on the backs of proprietary nonfree software? Meh. I'm old enough to remember how Serverside Linux took off in corporate environments: Oracle ported its database. That was seen as a sign of approval, and soon Linux was everywhere. It was pretty rare to actually be running Oracle, but that was the tipping point. A rising tide raises all ships.

zanny 13y ago

But you can't assume it is a gift. What does it matter if desktop Linux takes off on the backs of proprietary nonfree software? Not just proprietary apps on top of a free stack, but a proprietary distribution platform where most programs bought for it only run through it, where the controller can at whim close your account, and they vet and determine who they bless to use their platform earpiece? Doesn't that defeat the purpose? The vast majorty of current Linux titles are not on Linux because of Steam. Few titles (Crusader Kings comes to mind) actually ported their engine to run on opengl / posix / alsa or sdl just because Steam appeared there. Most of the last 2 years of Linux gaming boom has been due to Unity and the Humble Bundle. Unity was porting to Linux before Steam on Linux was announced, same with the Humble Bundle. Having a platform is fine and everything, but here are two observations from seperate perspectives: 1. Why develop for a platform where you can only expect a few thousand sales, even on the de facto distribution platform that takes a cut of proceeds? 2. If there are no games on a platform, wouldn't you just want to release directly and let your potential customers come to you? If they are desperate, wouldn't cutting out the middle man be more profitable, since Steam isn't making Linux development easier, just marketing and sales processing? I think Steam is so important on the desktop PC because there are so many games on it. People don't go download Origin or seek out a developers site to buy a game, they just buy it on Steam. If you are on something like gnu/linux, you have no competition game-wise, you just have to make sure people know you exist. In almost any genre, you have minimum modern competition on the platform. So why give Valve whatever % they take?

adwf 13y ago
Knowing that the game exists is 80% of the battle for indie devs. I check Steam everyday looking for new Linux releases. I can't say the same for checking indie game blogs or wherever else I'm supposed to find the announcements of a Linux version. Even if I did, it's simple mathematics - do I check 30+ websites of various game publishers, news organisations and indie devs, or do I just check Steam? They have a pretty powerful platform; I think the publicity benefits of being on Steam far outweigh the cut they take as a middleman.
nl 13y ago
What does it matter if desktop Linux takes off on the backs of proprietary nonfree software? Meh. I'm old enough to remember how Serverside Linux took off in corporate environments: Oracle ported its database. That was seen as a sign of approval, and soon Linux was everywhere. It was pretty rare to actually be running Oracle, but that was the tipping point. A rising tide raises all ships.