Support us on Patreon to keep GamingOnLinux alive. This ensures we have no timed articles and no paywalls. Just good, fresh content! Alternatively, you can donate through PayPal, Liberapay or Buy us a Coffee. You can also buy games using our partner links for GOG and Humble Store.

Cyberpunk 2077 confirmed for Stadia on November 19

By - | Views: 20,507

While the upcoming Cyberpunk 2077 will not support the Linux desktop, it is at least confirmed to be launching on Stadia same-day as other platforms on November 19.

This gives Linux gamers another way to play, with Stadia getting more huge upcoming games, as on Linux all you need is a Chromium browser and a mouse or gamepad hooked up. If your country is in the supported list for Stadia, that is. Google has still yet to announce wider support for the game streaming service.

Stadia getting probably one of, if not the biggest release this year day and date with other platforms with Cyberpunk 2077 is pretty huge news and perhaps a show of how serious Google are about bringing more people and more games over to it.

From the press release:

“Huge in scale and scope, Cyberpunk 2077 is our most ambitious game to date. It’s humbling to see just how many people are looking forward to playing it, and we want to make it possible for as many gamers as possible come November 19th, when the game launches. The Stadia version will allow players to jump into Night City just seconds after the game unlocks for play worldwide without any downloads needed,” said Michał Nowakowski, SVP of Business Development, CD PROJEKT.

"CD PROJEKT RED are known for developing some of the biggest and best games ever created, and Cyberpunk 2077 is sure to deliver as the most anticipated game of the last few years. We're thrilled to announce that Cyberpunk 2077 will be available on Stadia November 19th. Cyberpunk 2077 on Stadia will allow gamers to play on their favorite screens and never have to wait for a download or install to get into, and explore, the depths of Night City," said Shanna Preve, Managing Director, Stadia Partnerships.

Plenty more footage was shown off recently too on the official YouTube, like this one showing off plenty of the vehicles you will be able to get your hands on:

YouTube Thumbnail
YouTube videos require cookies, you must accept their cookies to view. View cookie preferences.
Accept Cookies & Show   Direct Link

They also confirmed that people who buy the game on Stadia will get a set of Cyberpunk 2077-themed digital goodies including: the game’s original score, art booklet, the original Cyberpunk 2020 sourcebook and Cyberpunk 2077: Your Voice comic book, as well as a set of wallpapers for desktop and mobile.

See Cyberpunk 2077 on Stadia.

It's worth noting also, that CD PROJEKT RED have been embroiled in plenty of controversy around Cyberpunk 2077. Video game journalist Jason Schreier has been covering it in detail, with a developer who was apparently confirmed to be working on it posting about the working conditions on Reddit too. Crunch is seriously terrible and it's such a massive shame these big games keep forcing such terrible conditions on developers. 


Don't miss that we're expecting more big Stadia news next week, which we will be following along.

Article taken from GamingOnLinux.com.
12 Likes, Who?
We do often include affiliate links to earn us some pennies. We are currently affiliated with GOG, Humble Store and Paradox Interactive. See more here.
About the author -
author picture
I am the owner of GamingOnLinux. After discovering Linux back in the days of Mandrake in 2003, I constantly came back to check on the progress of Linux until Ubuntu appeared on the scene and it helped me to really love it. You can reach me easily by emailing GamingOnLinux directly.
See more from me
129 comments
Page: «10/13»
  Go to:

Shmerl 21 Oct
It's not nonsense because you need to compare resources, not just the amount of work. Small developers have less of them than big companies. So it's a bigger risk for them because of that alone. It's harder to make profit for small developers. Yet they are the ones releasing for Linux, not the huge ones who are making way more money and have more resources for it.

Besides, the work and expenses point was addressed above. They already have invested needed effort and spent the money to make it work on Stadia,


Last edited by Shmerl on 21 October 2020 at 4:29 pm UTC
slaapliedje 21 Oct
View PC info
  • Supporter Plus
Quoting: LinuxwarperI think the expectations of companies porting to Linux is somewhat unreasonable in general. If a company does so, goes through major work to provide a quality release where they target Ubuntu, and then the return on investment is low - why should they? And the assertion that "Indies can manage to make games for many distros why can't big companies???!" is such cloudy argument. Indies are small games with simple design that are easy to scale to Linux. Where as when you are developing a major game like AC Valhala or Cyberpunk, even representing cars in the game becomes a huge project in itself. You have tech like DLSS and raytracing. If big games were so easily and cost effective to release for Linux as indies are, then you would surely have seen raytracing for many if not all indie games. And I am not talking about "We have raytracing", I am talking about shadows, global illumination and reflections.

Quite honestly such argument is nonsense. Looking at a indie game being available on Linux and then asking why big games can't be either. I don't know it all, but one thing I know I should expect from developers it is to provide Vulkan renderer and get involved with Proton issues for their games. If a company decides to port their games, then find out the business isn't there for them then they will give up on Linux in a sour way. I hope Proton will increase marketshare and raise awareness so that Linux gets to that point that more games will be worth it.

It may be a unpopular opinion, but tell me friends..where is that Metro Exodus port we were told would come? If major games like it are so profitable on Linux, why are they so few and far in between? I feel like by time a new major game is released for Linux (year or years later) the Windows version should be very playable through Proton and cost much less ($10 vs $50+).
I was wondering about Exodus the other day. In the discussion forums on Steam it sounds like they're still working on it? But I mean it's been on Stadia since forever.. so if the theory is it's just a direct thing to release a game on Stadia onto Steam with Linux support... maybe that's the one that proves it's not the case?

Sadly a lot of the 'do we port to Linux' is politically based more than financially based. Like Doom (2016) literally having a Linux port made for fun, but was never published / released.
Shmerl 21 Oct
Quoting: slaapliedjeSadly a lot of the 'do we port to Linux' is politically based more than financially based.

Yes, there is a lot of it. That's what I called above platform politics.
x_wing 21 Oct
Quoting: ShmerlIt's not nonsense because you need to compare resources, not just the amount of work. Small developers have less of them than big companies. So it's a bigger risk for them because of that alone. It's harder to make profit for small developers. Yet they are the ones releasing for Linux, not the huge ones who are making way more money and have more resources for it.

A factor in that regard is the engine. That indies can easily create crossplatform solutions is, most of the time, related to the fact that they use the most popular engines around (i.e. Unity or Unreal 4) with not too many third party dependencies. So even when you can't compare resources between an indie and a AAA company you normally can expect that the indie may have an easier path in order to get the Linux build as most of the cross platform work is already done by the big companies behind those engines (unless there is a bug in the engine... which will end up being fixed by the engine company or with a workaround).

I think that you're missing the picture regarding the ROI concept. IMO, in most cases getting profits from a Linux release is not a big issue as a crossplatform solution for your game is not such a big deal as it used to be 10 years ago. The problem is that for a $X inversion for a Linux release they will probably get a ROI that is well below the ROI that what the publisher would get if they invest that same $X in some extra feature for your game (a.k.a. DLC).
Shmerl 21 Oct
Stadia addressed all the above already for CDPR.
x_wing 21 Oct
Quoting: ShmerlStadia addressed all the above already for CDPR.

We don't know. And as it was previously mentioned, in order to make a proper release at the bare minimum they will have do QA with Nvidia GPUs on Linux and the proprietary vulkan/radv libraries (we are not sure if the driver used in Stadia is the same that is provided with AMDGPU-PRO or if it's using Mesa). And over that, they will have to also create the third party dependencies their game will need for the distro they decide to support and maybe replace any deps that may be proprietary for Stadia. Is far to be like creating a port from scratch, but it isn't also a straight forward operation.
Shmerl 21 Oct
Quoting: x_wingIs far to be like creating a port from scratch, but it isn't also a straight forward operation.

I'd say cost wise it's a tiny percentage of the Stadia effort itself.
Linuxwarper 22 Oct
Quoting: ShmerlIt's not nonsense because you need to compare resources, not just the amount of work. Small developers have less of them than big companies. So it's a bigger risk for them because of that alone. It's harder to make profit for small developers. Yet they are the ones releasing for Linux, not the huge ones who are making way more money and have more resources for it.

Besides, the work and expenses point was addressed above. They already have invested needed effort and spent the money to make it work on Stadia,
I think it's safe to say that companies like EA and Ubisoft, two big Stadia partners, will not want to help Linux. They are big supporters of Games as a service business model and big offenders of bad practice within the industry. So them giving users more choice would possibly work against their profits, instead of one platform to get all the money they would have to accommodate for Linux too. With cross platform software they can overcome those issues, but a greedy company would not want to put in work to make change.

The reason I said it's nonsense is because I don't think releasing a game like Cyberpunk for Linux, and maintaining it over time, is as easy as a indie game. If a indie and AAA game gets equal resources to port game to Linux, I can see AAA being far more difficult. And even if both games are ported, I can imagine the AAA one breaking over time because of a dependency while the simpler indie game will have higher probability of not breaking because of less software involved. I didn't mean to sound authoritarian, I just am not convinced that referring to indies releasing on Linux is entirely valid when asking why AAA games aren't. Some software used for smaller games seems to be ubiquitous, which may explain one of reasons why indies are more prevalent on Linux.

Quoting: slaapliedjeI was wondering about Exodus the other day. In the discussion forums on Steam it sounds like they're still working on it? But I mean it's been on Stadia since forever.. so if the theory is it's just a direct thing to release a game on Stadia onto Steam with Linux support... maybe that's the one that proves it's not the case?

Sadly a lot of the 'do we port to Linux' is politically based more than financially based. Like Doom (2016) literally having a Linux port made for fun, but was never published / released.
Perhaps the holdup is 4A Games using good time because they plan to release a Redux with Vulkan raytracing. Metro Last Light port wasn't a great port. or perhaps Google has a NDA exclusivity contract with developers that prohibits them from releasing their games for Linux if they want to release for Stadia. Think about it, local play is a competitor to Stadia, whether you are on Windows, Linux or a device like Switch. A "insignificant" platform like Linux can be surely swept under the rug if a big company tries to undermine it through such tactics.

I think it's former, 4A taking good time to give us a good release. Afterall, after Epic exclusivity ended they released their game on GOG too. That must be a good sign.


Last edited by Linuxwarper on 22 October 2020 at 3:23 pm UTC
slaapliedje 22 Oct
View PC info
  • Supporter Plus
Quoting: Linuxwarper
Quoting: ShmerlIt's not nonsense because you need to compare resources, not just the amount of work. Small developers have less of them than big companies. So it's a bigger risk for them because of that alone. It's harder to make profit for small developers. Yet they are the ones releasing for Linux, not the huge ones who are making way more money and have more resources for it.

Besides, the work and expenses point was addressed above. They already have invested needed effort and spent the money to make it work on Stadia,
I think it's safe to say that companies like EA and Ubisoft, two big Stadia partners, will not want to help Linux. They are big supporters of Games as a service business model and big offenders of bad practice within the industry. So them giving users more choice would possibly work against their profits, instead of one platform to get all the money they would have to accommodate for Linux too. With cross platform software they can overcome those issues, but a greedy company would not want to put in work to make change.

The reason I said it's nonsense is because I don't think releasing a game like Cyberpunk for Linux, and maintaining it over time, is as easy as a indie game. If a indie and AAA game gets equal resources to port game to Linux, I can see AAA being far more difficult. And even if both games are ported, I can imagine the AAA one breaking over time because of a dependency while the simpler indie game will have higher probability of not breaking because of less software involved. I didn't mean to sound authoritarian, I just am not convinced that referring to indies releasing on Linux is entirely valid when asking why AAA games aren't. Some software used for smaller games seems to be ubiquitous, which may explain one of reasons why indies are more prevalent on Linux.

Quoting: slaapliedjeI was wondering about Exodus the other day. In the discussion forums on Steam it sounds like they're still working on it? But I mean it's been on Stadia since forever.. so if the theory is it's just a direct thing to release a game on Stadia onto Steam with Linux support... maybe that's the one that proves it's not the case?

Sadly a lot of the 'do we port to Linux' is politically based more than financially based. Like Doom (2016) literally having a Linux port made for fun, but was never published / released.
Perhaps the holdup is 4A Games using good time because they plan to release a Redux with Vulkan raytracing. Metro Last Light port wasn't a great port. or perhaps Google has a NDA exclusivity contract with developers that prohibits them from releasing their games for Linux if they want to release for Stadia. Think about it, local play is a competitor to Stadia, whether you are on Windows, Linux or a device like Switch. A "insignificant" platform like Linux can be surely swept under the rug if a big company tries to undermine it through such tactics.

I think it's former, 4A taking good time to give us a good release. Afterall, after Epic exclusivity ended they released their game on GOG too. That must be a good sign.
Remember back in the days when the various computer platforms were around and companies still managed to release games for all of them? DOS, Amiga, Atari ST, Machintosh? They not only had a wide variety of hardware, but also of operating systems. People tended for some reason to target the minimal Atari ST spec, the upper spec on the Amiga, and DOS / Machintosh usually got CGA / EGA versions until VGA had a lot more users. But DOS devs had the huge task of trying to figure out which hardware was popular to add support for that. But they still did it, even though DOS was definitely not a gaming platform, and not friendly to it. But still a huge majority of games were made for it as that's what systems people had. Then the 3D hardware wars happened, where there were so many APIs for people to target...

It wasn't until Windows and DirectX that there was an abstraction layer for everything. We basically have SDL that is similar, but it took a long time for that to be a thing.

But now that we have it, and we have better drivers, and a free OS, you'd think people would flock to it. Nope, because we are historically a community that is against closed source, DRM, etc. And GAME developers are ALL about the DRM.

And this is the main reason I think most games don't come to Linux. That and 'well they won't even pay for their OS, why would they do anything other than pirate our game' mentality.
Linuxwarper 22 Oct
Quoting: slaapliedjeRemember back in the days when the various computer platforms were around and companies still managed to release games for all of them? DOS, Amiga, Atari ST, Machintosh? They not only had a wide variety of hardware, but also of operating systems. People tended for some reason to target the minimal Atari ST spec, the upper spec on the Amiga, and DOS / Machintosh usually got CGA / EGA versions until VGA had a lot more users. But DOS devs had the huge task of trying to figure out which hardware was popular to add support for that. But they still did it, even though DOS was definitely not a gaming platform, and not friendly to it. But still a huge majority of games were made for it as that's what systems people had. Then the 3D hardware wars happened, where there were so many APIs for people to target...

It wasn't until Windows and DirectX that there was an abstraction layer for everything. We basically have SDL that is similar, but it took a long time for that to be a thing.

But now that we have it, and we have better drivers, and a free OS, you'd think people would flock to it. Nope, because we are historically a community that is against closed source, DRM, etc. And GAME developers are ALL about the DRM.

And this is the main reason I think most games don't come to Linux. That and 'well they won't even pay for their OS, why would they do anything other than pirate our game' mentality.
No, I got my first PC long time after those events. When it comes down to why games don't come to Linux it's simply because of marketshare. If marketshare was significant enough games would be developed with closed source and with Denuvo implemented into them just like with Windows.

Also it doesn't help the situation that industry has become in my opinion quite corrupt. We are at a point now where microtransactions are intertwined into a game's design and developers hold presentations titled "Let's go whaling" that explains how to maximize money siphoning from gamers using predatory practices. They don't treat Windows gamers right with these predatory practices, so I'd say it would be naive for one to think that these companies, who are releasing their games on Stadia, will be nice to us with a Linux release.

As much as I believe Stadia is a double edged sword, I believe it and primarily Proton, is chance Linux has to break free of the cage Microsoft continues to put platform in with DirectX.


Last edited by Linuxwarper on 22 October 2020 at 8:29 pm UTC
While you're here, please consider supporting GamingOnLinux on:

Patreon, Liberapay or PayPal Donation.

We have no adverts, no paywalls, no timed exclusive articles. Just good, fresh content. Without your continued support, we simply could not continue!

You can find even more ways to support us on this dedicated page any time. If you already are, thank you!
Login / Register

Or login with...
Sign in with Steam Sign in with Twitter Sign in with Google
Social logins require cookies to stay logged in.