The Witcher 3 is something Linux users have been practically begging to have, but the problem is that it seems it will likely never come to Linux. An ex-Virtual Programming developer has taken to reddit explaining why this may have happened.
I should stress, for our own record here that this is not the official word from Virtual Programming or CD Projekt RED. This is the personal opinion of an ex-VP developer.
Here's the issue: The Linux version of The Witcher 2 was released in a poor state, it had poor performance and just didn't really work well at all. It was later fixed-up and last time I tried it, the performance was absolutely fine for me. The real problem, is the amount of hate that was sent towards the porters Virtual Programming and directly to CD Projekt RED as well. Even I personally saw some of the hate that was sent their way and it was downright idiotic and absolutely uncalled for.
I will absolutely hold my hands up as well, I made mistakes around it since I simply didn't know enough at the time, and to be honest three years ago I was still learning a lot about everything. I later corrected what I said, as I always aim to.
Writing on reddit, this developer said (source):
It seems we may have also seen a port of The Witcher 1 as well, as the developer also said (source):
There's also this post from another user, who said at the time The Witcher 2 released for Linux, CDProjekt apparently lost a fair amount on the Warsaw Stock Exchange. Apparently due to such a big backlash from the community about the initial release quality. I haven't verified that myself, but if true it would certainly make CDProjekt rather against doing another Linux port with anyone.
This is sad, really sad. I hope this makes a few people reconsider their attitude when talking to developer about the performance of ports. Performance can be worked on and fixed, burnt bridges are harder (and sometimes impossible) to fix.
This reminds me of the time the Blizzard President responded to a small petition asking for Linux ports of their games. The response to the petition was really nice to see from such a big company and truthfully the response I fully expected, but the original statement in reply to it from the petition author (now deleted by the author, but captured in my article) was downright childish and idiotic.
Yes problems are annoying, but throwing insults around helps no one and yes it does make us look bad. I get where people are coming from, to an extent, since some games do end up getting left in a terribly broken state for a long time and sometimes forever. However, in this case VP did good and continued working and now, as stated previously, The Witcher 2 seems fine. Their others ports are generally pretty decent too.
I just hope in future that this developer who got a massive amount of hate and CD Projekt RED can look past it somehow, for all the fans of their franchise on Linux.
Note: I personally spoke to this developer about publishing this with their approval, in the hopes that it might get a few people to re-think their initial attitude towards problems in games. Article taken from GamingOnLinux.com.
I should stress, for our own record here that this is not the official word from Virtual Programming or CD Projekt RED. This is the personal opinion of an ex-VP developer.
Here's the issue: The Linux version of The Witcher 2 was released in a poor state, it had poor performance and just didn't really work well at all. It was later fixed-up and last time I tried it, the performance was absolutely fine for me. The real problem, is the amount of hate that was sent towards the porters Virtual Programming and directly to CD Projekt RED as well. Even I personally saw some of the hate that was sent their way and it was downright idiotic and absolutely uncalled for.
I will absolutely hold my hands up as well, I made mistakes around it since I simply didn't know enough at the time, and to be honest three years ago I was still learning a lot about everything. I later corrected what I said, as I always aim to.
Writing on reddit, this developer said (source):
QuoteI agree, things were not right on release... but the vocality of people went way beyond that. It was an all out hate campaign against VP, against CDPR for "lying about the port being native". I attempted to help people out in my own time and got absolutely roasted and abused for it.
The community needs to realise it simply cannot justify this sort of behaviour if they want to convince devs and publishers to support them. There is no excuse.
It seems we may have also seen a port of The Witcher 1 as well, as the developer also said (source):
QuoteThe vitriol was unbelievable. Yes we messed up the performance on release but we put it right. However a huge hate campaign ensued. Both VP and CDPR got lots of vengeful hate mail sent to them. I cannot help but feel this damaged CDPR's view of the Linux platform irrevocably.
They certainly didnt blame us, because they had us work on a Mac port of Witcher 1 to replace the non-functioning Wineskin version. The same port would have ran on Linux too with very little extra work, but they were not interested in releasing it.
There's also this post from another user, who said at the time The Witcher 2 released for Linux, CDProjekt apparently lost a fair amount on the Warsaw Stock Exchange. Apparently due to such a big backlash from the community about the initial release quality. I haven't verified that myself, but if true it would certainly make CDProjekt rather against doing another Linux port with anyone.
This is sad, really sad. I hope this makes a few people reconsider their attitude when talking to developer about the performance of ports. Performance can be worked on and fixed, burnt bridges are harder (and sometimes impossible) to fix.
This reminds me of the time the Blizzard President responded to a small petition asking for Linux ports of their games. The response to the petition was really nice to see from such a big company and truthfully the response I fully expected, but the original statement in reply to it from the petition author (now deleted by the author, but captured in my article) was downright childish and idiotic.
Yes problems are annoying, but throwing insults around helps no one and yes it does make us look bad. I get where people are coming from, to an extent, since some games do end up getting left in a terribly broken state for a long time and sometimes forever. However, in this case VP did good and continued working and now, as stated previously, The Witcher 2 seems fine. Their others ports are generally pretty decent too.
I just hope in future that this developer who got a massive amount of hate and CD Projekt RED can look past it somehow, for all the fans of their franchise on Linux.
Note: I personally spoke to this developer about publishing this with their approval, in the hopes that it might get a few people to re-think their initial attitude towards problems in games. Article taken from GamingOnLinux.com.
Some you may have missed, popular articles from the last month:
The comments on this article are closed.
Quoting: etonbears[But, when was the last time you saw a flashy ad on TV ( or anywhere else ) for Linux? "Ordinary" people are much more attuned to wanting things that are advertised to them as aspirational than as a matter of good sense.
What stops anyone from partnering with Dell, and making them provide Linux option on all their models, and not just on a couple of laptops? I agree though it requires money. I'd also like to see KDE used for such purpose.
Last edited by Shmerl on 7 July 2017 at 7:00 pm UTC
0 Likes
Metallinatus Jul 7, 2017
Quoting: ShmerlHonestly, if someone tried that, Microsoft would strike back their own deal with Dell to keep it from happening.... maybe they would even strike a deal to make Windows only on ALL of their computers. And Dell themselves would be the ones alerting Microsoft of the Linux negotiations expecting a better deal from them.Quoting: etonbears[But, when was the last time you saw a flashy ad on TV ( or anywhere else ) for Linux? "Ordinary" people are much more attuned to wanting things that are advertised to them as aspirational than as a matter of good sense.
What stops anyone from partnering with Dell, and making them provide Linux options on all their models, and not just on a couple of laptops? I agree though it requires money. I'd also like to see KDE used for such purpose.
0 Likes
Quoting: MetallinatusQuoting: ShmerlWhat stops anyone from partnering with Dell, and making them provide Linux options on all their models, and not just on a couple of laptops? I agree though it requires money. I'd also like to see KDE used for such purpose.Honestly, if someone tried that, Microsoft would strike back their own deal with Dell to keep it from happening....
They can be hit with anti-trust pretty hard if they'd do that. The only way they get away with their crazy Windows tax now, is their claim that they don't force manufacturers to bundle Windows. If they'll try to force Dell, there is a straightforward way to hit them back.
Last edited by Shmerl on 7 July 2017 at 7:13 pm UTC
0 Likes
Quoting: ShmerlQuoting: etonbears[But, when was the last time you saw a flashy ad on TV ( or anywhere else ) for Linux? "Ordinary" people are much more attuned to wanting things that are advertised to them as aspirational than as a matter of good sense.
What stops anyone from partnering with Dell, and making them provide Linux option on all their models, and not just on a couple of laptops? I agree though it requires money. I'd also like to see KDE used for such purpose.
The problem is the lack of a compelling business model. Eric Raymond's paper's notwithstanding, it is VERY hard to find a justification for spending money to promote Linux as the return is uncertain, and likely not worth the risk.
Even Valve, a company that seems to have a good reason to promote Linux, has very deep pockets, and requires the consent of only one person ( Gabe Newell owns over 50% of voting stock ), has really not spent the money necessary to move the market; possibly out of concern that Valve would get into a pissing contest with Microsoft.
0 Likes
Quoting: etonbearsEven Valve, a company that seems to have a good reason to promote Linux, has very deep pockets, and requires the consent of only one person ( Gabe Newell owns over 50% of voting stock ), has really not spent the money necessary to move the market; possibly out of concern that Valve would get into a pissing contest with Microsoft.
Valve's weak point is marketing. They utterly failed to push their Steam Machines. I really don't get why they treated their hardware partners that way. They don't have anything to fear from MS. If MS let's say goes, and bans Steam from Windows, so many people will be outraged, that MS will quickly back from that decision, otherwise risking a lot of people switching to Linux.
May be it was always just a leverage tool, and not a serious project? Though that would be pretty weird, and again very bad towards their hardware partners.
Last edited by Shmerl on 7 July 2017 at 7:26 pm UTC
1 Likes, Who?
elbuglione Jul 7, 2017
Quoting: ShmerlQuoting: etonbearsEven Valve, a company that seems to have a good reason to promote Linux, has very deep pockets, and requires the consent of only one person ( Gabe Newell owns over 50% of voting stock ), has really not spent the money necessary to move the market; possibly out of concern that Valve would get into a pissing contest with Microsoft.
Valve's weak point is marketing. They utterly failed to push their Steam Machines. I really don't get why they treated their hardware partners that way. They don't have anything to fear from MS. If MS let's say goes, and bans Steam from Windows, so many people will be outraged, that MS will quickly back from that decision, otherwise risking a lot of people switching to Linux.
May be it was always just a leverage tool, and not a serious project? Though that would be pretty weird, and again very bad towards their hardware partners.
Quoting: ShmerlValve's weak point is marketing.Yes, sure.
VALVe's fault
1 Likes, Who?
Quoting: elbuglioneQuoting: ShmerlValve's weak point is marketing.Yes, sure.
VALVe's fault
We are talking about Steam Machines. It is Valve's fault they didn't market them at all.
0 Likes
elbuglione Jul 7, 2017
Quoting: ShmerlQuoting: elbuglioneQuoting: ShmerlValve's weak point is marketing.Yes, sure.
VALVe's fault
We are talking about Steam Machines. It is Valve's fault they didn't market them at all.
The only real problem of VALVe is not knowing how to choose GOOD partners ...
If these partners did not meet the launch promises for their platform, VALVe should have been much tougher with these ... in fact, VALVe should learn a little more from companies like SONY ...
When a SONY partner does not comply with a contract for a launch, SONY punishes with financial penalties for such partners.
When I talk about these partners, I mean titles like The Witcher 3, Project Cars, Street Fighter V, etc...
0 Likes
Quoting: elbuglioneThe only real problem of VALVe is not knowing how to choose GOOD partners ...
If these partners did not meet the launch promises for their platform, VALVe should have been much tougher with these
I think Dell/Alienware were ready with their Steam Machines way before Valve were in any production ready state with SteamOS. In fact it caused them to start selling them with Windows as "Alpha" consoles. So whose fault is that? Hardware wasn't the issue by any means.
Last edited by Shmerl on 7 July 2017 at 8:46 pm UTC
0 Likes
Quoting: ShmerlQuoting: etonbearsEven Valve, a company that seems to have a good reason to promote Linux, has very deep pockets, and requires the consent of only one person ( Gabe Newell owns over 50% of voting stock ), has really not spent the money necessary to move the market; possibly out of concern that Valve would get into a pissing contest with Microsoft.
Valve's weak point is marketing. They utterly failed to push their Steam Machines. I really don't get why they treated their hardware partners that way. They don't have anything to fear from MS. If MS let's say goes, and bans Steam from Windows, so many people will be outraged, that MS will quickly back from that decision, otherwise risking a lot of people switching to Linux.
May be it was always just a leverage tool, and not a serious project? Though that would be pretty weird, and again very bad towards their hardware partners.
It is hard to say. Gabe Newell was very clear that he saw Windows Store as an existential threat to Valve's business, particularly with the implied threat of "Universal Windows Platform" applications being the only ones allowed on Windows. So diversifying their business to other platforms is obviously a good idea. At the same time, Windows is 93% or more of Valve's revenue, so they need to avoid pushing so hard that Microsoft react in a way that causes immediate damage to their business.
Valve wanted to get as many other companies to support them as possible and build a viable gaming ecosystem not controlled by a single entity like Microsoft, but seem to have been keen to avoid looking like it was all about Valve. Valve have obviously spent ( and continue to spend ) money to make a fixed Linux target ( set of libraries ) for games developers to aim at, and this is probably the single most important enabler allowing many developers to produce Linux ports. They also continue to produce and enhance tools useful for Linux game developers, and fund other aspects of Linux development that they think are useful, which seems like continued committment.
It is unclear whether Valve have directly funded companies porting games to Linux; it is possible they have, but no-one has confirmed it. Valve have a reputation for making good decisions, so they may have simply been good at persuading developers that supporting Linux is in their own interest. I really don't think that this is just about leverage ( I certainly hope not ), since an open market has to remain a credible threat to Microsoft in the long term. If developers don't make money from Linux ports they will not continue to produce them, and the threat/leverage will disappear.
I see Steam Machines as a different case. They were part of the Steam Hardware push, aimed at providing a console experience on a PC platform. There is actually no requirement for a Steam Machine to run SteamOS; most do, although the more expensive designs dual boot Windows as well. Valve invested heavily to produce their controller and streaming link, but for the machines themselves they wanted, as with software, to encourage 3rd parties to enrich the ecosystem.
The trouble is, 3rd parties have not been able to match the price/performance you can get from a console, because Steam Machines do not contain fixed components to optimize games against. Obviously you can get a very expensive Steam Machine, in a console format, that is much better than XBox/PS4; but who would buy that? As you say, Valve are not good at traditional marketing, and I think the notion of an upgradeable Steam Machine console will only make sense if MS/Sony are forced by the pace of hardware improvement to obsolete their consoles every couple of years.
To me, the whole games industry, and the decisions they take, seem like a complex mix of financial and power politics between participating companies. Personally, I never expect promises to be honored, dates to be kept, or high quality at initial delivery. I am patient enough to not buy pre-release, or even at release until a game is shown to actually work on my platform. It is still hard being a Linux gamer, but it is a lot more fun than it used to be.
Last edited by etonbears on 7 July 2017 at 10:26 pm UTC
3 Likes, Who?
Patreon
PayPal
See more from me