Check out our Monthly Survey Page to see what our users are running.

We've been wondering what Valve had planned to show off Steam Deck compatibility for games and now they've launched Deck Verified as their answer.

Valve say they are reviewing the entire Steam catalogue on the Steam Deck, with each of them gaining a category that it falls under that will show up across Steam from the store to your own Steam Library. The ratings will be split across Verified, Playable, Unsupported and Unknown. This is good because there's a lot of reasons why games will mix between perfect and unplayable on Steam Deck and the Arch Linux-based SteamOS it ships with.

To be actually Verified the games need to hit these four points:

  • Input - The title should have full controller support, use appropriate controller input icons, and automatically bring up the on-screen keyboard when needed.
  • Display - The game should support the default resolution of Steam Deck (1280x800 or 1280x720), have good default settings, and text should be legible.
  • Seamlessness - The title shouldn’t display any compatibility warnings, and if there’s a launcher it should be navigable with a controller.
  • System Support - If running through Proton, the game and all its middleware should be supported by Proton. This includes anti-cheat support.

When you're playing on a Steam Deck, the first tab in the Steam store will also only highlight games that are "great" on the Steam Deck too.

Check out their video explainer below:

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

Want to see what their plan is? You can check it out on Deck Verified.

Valve also put up a Steam Deck Compatibility Review Process guide, which goes over the steps required for developers to take a look at. It gives an interesting insight into exactly what Valve and developers will be doing. Developers however will not be able to remove their game from being listed as Valve say the Deck is "an extension of Steam onto a new portable PC form factor, and so customers both expect and have access to the same store and library that they would on any other PC".

Article taken from GamingOnLinux.com.
60 Likes
We do often include affiliate links to earn us some pennies. We are currently affiliated with GOG and Humble Store. 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
150 comments
Page: «11/15»
  Go to:

Salvatos 19 Oct
Quoting: CatKillerThe platform sales situation is already messy, and Valve have already picked their solution: a sale counts as a particular platform if that platform has the most playtime at the end of the refund period, falling back to the platform the sale was made on, falling back to Windows. Until Linux has more than 50% market share, that last step isn't going to change.
And considering that a lot of customers will be playing mostly games they already own for the near future, which are already written down as Windows sales for the most part, I imagine Valve will want a very clear picture of the Deck’s usage both in terms of play time and what is getting played – both for their own R&D and to incentivize developers to support Linux or Proton compatibility. So I’m curious to see what changes they make to the surveys or other forms of telemetry towards that end.

If they want the Deck to be seen as successful, they can’t miss out on the numbers "wasted" on past sales and stats being skewed in favor of Windows based on where the sale was made or the ratio of Windows/Deck play time in the first two weeks alone.


Last edited by Salvatos on 19 October 2021 at 6:47 pm UTC
BielFPs 19 Oct
Quoting: SolitaryYou keep calling it mark of shame and your whole argument stands on it.
You're missing the point worrying so much about this nickname (that wasn't me who started btw), but very well...

Quoting: SolitaryValve quite deliberately chose the ratings so it doesn't have negative connotations and just states the obvious truth, they don't even claim it doesn't run, it's just unsupported. Valve also never really says that it's the games fault (maybe with the exception of anticheat), they for the most part take that responsibility on themselves.
In my original point I was stating that users, unaware of steam deck subject, seeing games labeled as unsupported (happy now?) could think that there's something wrong with the game (even if there isn't) and this could cause some kind of backlash from developers claiming that this label could be giving wrong the idea to users about the game.

Quoting: SolitaryI would agree with you if it was "borked" or "broken" (ProtonDB), there you could make the argument much easier.
That's the point, for someone unaware seeing this "unsupported" label they can think that's something else (including broken), specially compared to other games with green / verified label.

Quoting: BielFPsOf course I'm not confirming that any of this will happen, but it is all in the realm of possibility.
mirv 19 Oct
View PC info
  • Supporter Plus
Quoting: Solitary
Quoting: BielFPs
Quoting: SolitaryHow can it be "mark of shame" if the publisher releases the game only for Windows and does not care about some other (new/different) platform? Do you expect that they will lose Windows users because of this new platform that the game isn't even running on?

Publisher might take some flak from users, just like they do if users demand controller support, bugfixes or hell... Linux support. Same is going to be with Deck support. But that's all between users and the dev/publisher.
Try to imagine the developer / publisher side situation: You're selling your game in a store which bites 30% of each sale you do, and suddenly your game is now advertised with the mark of shame in the store because of the lack of support for a OS that you didn't intended to support (for whatever reason), and this can give the idea for some customers that there's "something broken" in your product (even if this does not affect you like windows players), because you can't expect every consumer on steam to know what that mark means.

The least developer can expect from a store that takes 30% of your profit is to not officially give "bad publicity" about your game, doesn't matter if it's true or not. (different from users review btw, which are customers opinion)

So I imagine Valve can face the following dilemma:
-They make this information public to every client, and risk to face backlash from some developers / publishers claiming Valve is making "bad PR" of their products

-They make this information available only to steam deck users, and risk people asking for refund (deck) after discover that "games are not working in this console". In my opinion this also defeats the purpose of having all this work to do verification.

Of course I'm not confirming that any of this will happen, but it is all in the realm of possibility.

You keep calling it mark of shame and your whole argument stands on it. Calling it "Unsupported" is maybe a shame (for the user), but hardly shameful. Valve quite deliberately chose the ratings so it doesn't have negative connotations and just states the obvious truth, they don't even claim it doesn't run, it's just unsupported. Valve also never really says that it's the games fault (maybe with the exception of anticheat), they for the most part take that responsibility on themselves. I would agree with you if it was "borked" or "broken" (ProtonDB), there you could make the argument much easier.

It's not the exact wording that matters, it's the impression given to customers. If a game is advertised as working, without consent of the publisher/developer, and then a patch breaks it completely: people will blame the publisher/developer even though they never supported the platform in the first place.
That kind of thing is really the key issue, not what words Valve are using. People generally don't look up a dictionary before deciding to hate on a game publisher.
Valve will have to make it pretty damned clear that a game isn't officially supported on the Deck if they're going start advertising such things without publisher approval, and that the responsibility and culpability lies with Valve, and Valve alone, when seeking support.
Quite honestly that's not a support burden that Valve have a good track record with.
CatKiller 19 Oct
Quoting: Salvatos
Quoting: CatKillerThe platform sales situation is already messy, and Valve have already picked their solution: a sale counts as a particular platform if that platform has the most playtime at the end of the refund period, falling back to the platform the sale was made on, falling back to Windows. Until Linux has more than 50% market share, that last step isn't going to change.
And considering that a lot of customers will be playing mostly games they already own for the near future, which are already written down as Windows sales for the most part, I imagine Valve will want a very clear picture of the Deck’s usage both in terms of play time and what is getting played – both for their own R&D and to incentivize developers to support Linux or Proton compatibility. So I’m curious to see what changes they make to the surveys or other forms of telemetry towards that end.

If they want the Deck to be seen as successful, they can’t miss out on the numbers "wasted" on past sales and stats being skewed in favor of Windows based on where the sale was made or the ratio of Windows/Deck play time in the first two weeks alone.
We know that Valve can track how many sessions are played with a controller (maybe that's synonymous in their stats with people using BPM?) because they've given that information in their annual reviews. I don't know that they pass that information on to developers.

So far, enthusiasm for the Deck (for developers, the media, and customers) seems very high, so I don't think they'll feel the need to do much. If interest from developers slackens off they might start surfacing some of the data about hours played - on Linux, with a controller, on a handheld - in their reports that they send to developers. I expect their 2022 year in review report to have lots of information about the Steam Deck and how they feel it's going, either way.
Cybolic 19 Oct
Quoting: Salvatos
Quoting: damarrinThe SD has ABXY buttons, but not RB/LT etc. For some reason, Valve decided to take these from Playstation and they’re L1,R2 and so on.
Interesting. That suits me fine as RB/LT mean nothing to me, whereas "left 1/right 2" is pretty self explanatory.
Just to complete the roundabout, "left 1/left 2" means nothing to me other than "left". Which is 1 and which is 2? Are we counting top-down, bottom-up, by increasing/decreasing size? There's no immediate logic to it for me.
I had trouble with "LT/LB" as well until I figured out that "B" is "button" - there's only one of the two shoulder things that clicks, so that's the button, done.
At least "LT/LB" can be figured out, "L1/L2" has to be taught.
CatKiller 19 Oct
Quoting: CybolicAt least "LT/LB" can be figured out, "L1/L2" has to be taught.
The PlayStation controllers (and I think the Steam Controller, but it's upstairs and I can't be bothered to go and check) have the numbers embossed on the buttons.

Just so you know, they're counted from the top as you're holding the controller, although the 2 buttons are bigger than the 1s. 3 is pressing in the sticks. That numbering scheme continues with the Steam Deck, with 4 and 5 running down the back.
Arehandoro 19 Oct
Quoting: Eike
Quoting: ArehandoroFor me, the key point is here:

"System Support - If running through Proton, the game and all its middleware should be supported by Proton. This includes anti-cheat support."

Emphasis is mine.

Does that mean a game can be verified for Windows on Steam Deck but not Linux/Proton? If that's the case, I don't see that going down too well...

No, it means they still can be Linux native.

Thanks, that makes sense :)
By the way, following this, We need a new method for reporting PROTON games compatibility... ProtonDB is a mess.
Only official PROTON should be allowed in the reports with only three options:
*Out of the Box.
*Playable after some manual workarounds..(legal workarounds)
*Unplayable
Cybolic 19 Oct
Quoting: CatKiller
Quoting: CybolicAt least "LT/LB" can be figured out, "L1/L2" has to be taught.
The PlayStation controllers (and I think the Steam Controller, but it's upstairs and I can't be bothered to go and check) have the numbers embossed on the buttons.
Just so you know, they're counted from the top as you're holding the controller, although the 2 buttons are bigger than the 1s. 3 is pressing in the sticks. That numbering scheme continues with the Steam Deck, with 4 and 5 running down the back.
Ah, you're right, the Steam Deck is labelled! I don't care what they call them then :)
The Steam Controller isn't labelled BTW, but the bindings editor calls them "LT/LB / RT/RB".
Solitary 19 Oct
Quoting: mirv
Quoting: Solitary
Quoting: BielFPs
Quoting: SolitaryHow can it be "mark of shame" if the publisher releases the game only for Windows and does not care about some other (new/different) platform? Do you expect that they will lose Windows users because of this new platform that the game isn't even running on?

Publisher might take some flak from users, just like they do if users demand controller support, bugfixes or hell... Linux support. Same is going to be with Deck support. But that's all between users and the dev/publisher.
Try to imagine the developer / publisher side situation: You're selling your game in a store which bites 30% of each sale you do, and suddenly your game is now advertised with the mark of shame in the store because of the lack of support for a OS that you didn't intended to support (for whatever reason), and this can give the idea for some customers that there's "something broken" in your product (even if this does not affect you like windows players), because you can't expect every consumer on steam to know what that mark means.

The least developer can expect from a store that takes 30% of your profit is to not officially give "bad publicity" about your game, doesn't matter if it's true or not. (different from users review btw, which are customers opinion)

So I imagine Valve can face the following dilemma:
-They make this information public to every client, and risk to face backlash from some developers / publishers claiming Valve is making "bad PR" of their products

-They make this information available only to steam deck users, and risk people asking for refund (deck) after discover that "games are not working in this console". In my opinion this also defeats the purpose of having all this work to do verification.

Of course I'm not confirming that any of this will happen, but it is all in the realm of possibility.

You keep calling it mark of shame and your whole argument stands on it. Calling it "Unsupported" is maybe a shame (for the user), but hardly shameful. Valve quite deliberately chose the ratings so it doesn't have negative connotations and just states the obvious truth, they don't even claim it doesn't run, it's just unsupported. Valve also never really says that it's the games fault (maybe with the exception of anticheat), they for the most part take that responsibility on themselves. I would agree with you if it was "borked" or "broken" (ProtonDB), there you could make the argument much easier.

It's not the exact wording that matters, it's the impression given to customers. If a game is advertised as working, without consent of the publisher/developer, and then a patch breaks it completely: people will blame the publisher/developer even though they never supported the platform in the first place.
That kind of thing is really the key issue, not what words Valve are using. People generally don't look up a dictionary before deciding to hate on a game publisher.
Valve will have to make it pretty damned clear that a game isn't officially supported on the Deck if they're going start advertising such things without publisher approval, and that the responsibility and culpability lies with Valve, and Valve alone, when seeking support.
Quite honestly that's not a support burden that Valve have a good track record with.

Valve was always rather clear that Proton support goes on their shoulders, but obviously if the devs do their own QA before updates, all the better. They even mention it in the video, the rating can change as developers release updates or the Deck software improves, which quite honestly admits that games might break. Yea, sure, its some throwaway comment in a video, but it shows where they are coming from. Also in the end Valve might be content with some possible friction between publishers... and are probably okay with bit of strong-arming and putting on peer pressure.
While you're here, please consider supporting GamingOnLinux on:

Patreon, Liberapay or PayPal Donation.

This ensures all of our main content remains totally free for everyone with no article paywalls. We also don't have tons of adverts, there's also no tracking and we respect your privacy. 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.