Quoting: scaineI'm tired of arguing this on behalf of the various indies I follow on Twitter, but I'll say it one more time - these Indies used to (past tense) get great value from Valve, by way of large customer base and a tiny bit of exposure to engage that customer base. As of the 2018 change, that is no longer the case.

If you are tired of repeating the same argument, why do you keep repeating it?
I read it and acknowledged it, but it still doesn't make a whole lot of sense to me. What I can state is what I obviously see most of the time: people like Steam as a software, as a product in itself, and someone has to pay for it. If you don't charge developers, then you will have to charge customers for the premium features. What do you think is the best compromise?

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Quoting: Liam Dawe

Quoting: toorI feel now that my money should rather go to Valve than to them for sure.

They haven't been a part of Humble Bundle for years.

Rosen and Graham have been CEO and COO of Humble Bundle up until 2019, and are still in the company today as "advisors" after stepping down. Source [External Link]

Quoting: TheSHEEEPThe solution is simple: Lower the minimal cut to something reasonable (closer to the Epic cut), then allow developers to opt-in to features they actually need, which would then increase the cut.

If you do this, it's the customers who will complain, like they did with the Epic store. People want community hubs, Steam Family Sharing, Steam overlay's custom gamepad button mapping, etc. Games from developers who don't have the money to get these will be even more prejudiced.

Quoting: scaineThese aren't popular games, but they're solid games that used to get exposure. Now they don't. So the 30% cut by Valve, for these devs, is particularly insulting, because Valve is adding precisely no value. Indeed, many of these indies saw (for the first time, ever, over years) greater sales via Itch, than on Steam.

The algorithm is a real problem indeed, but it doesn't mean the cut is unfair. People these days want to get everything for free and they realise later on why it was so cheap. Steam does take 30% but they inject it back in functionality, infrastructure and (sometimes open source) development.
Epic spend most of their money into buying exclusives, which are AAA games. In the end both consumers and indie developers get screwed but no one seems to care.

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Alright, Metro Exodus has landed on Linux and I still don't have a copy... So count me in for the giveaway.

I think my good old 1050Ti is going to have a hard time running it but I don't mind, I've played 15fps games on software renderer in the past :happy:

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Quoting: LordDaveTheKind

Quoting: omer666Would you share with us which games were troublesome to you?
I would really like to use an AMD GPU sometime in the future, and although I know the support is always getting better, I'm a bit concerned about problems I'm not aware of...

Yes, apologies if I answer just now.

There are a few exceptional cases:

• Games currently based on the Ray-Tracing extensions, or any other missing Vulkan extension on AMD;


• Some DirectX12 games such as AC Valhalla. There are some recent discussions though on how to make it work with specific versions of RADV/Mesa (Link on the GitHub discussion here [External Link] ). If you try to use AMDVLK, the whole X session crashes instead.

Of course they are very small exceptions, and I know very few people might get interested to it. But we have to consider them if we want to do an unbiased evaluation. And, to be fair, it isn't bad: it's healthy to have the possibility of making a choice between two options.

It's fine :wink:
Thank you for your answer. Yes those are very small issues, but issues they are indeed.

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Quoting: LordDaveTheKind

Quoting: Grazen

Quoting: KohlyKohl

Quoting: omer666Well, maybe they realised AMD's hardware was competitive again, and they need to better their software to stay on top. In any case, I'm still waiting for Nvidia's promises to materialise, but that's very good news at last.

From what I've seen, AMD is still a bit behind NVidia in terms of hardware. NVidia is also way ahead in software so I don't think they are that worried.

This is so true. I aspire to one day moving to AMD but I'm not going to do it strictly because they offer "open source" drivers... frankly that's the least valuable item on my list of wants (considering that I'm using proprietary software in Steam and the games themselves!). AMD needs to catch up on the hardware front, particularly on RT and supersampling technologies like DLSS (which apparently will never work via proton, but alas). The AMD drivers also generally lag behind the Nvidia proprietary drivers in my experience. I'm hoping that the 7000 series cards solve the hardware issues when i'm looking to upgrade from my 2000 series Nvidia cards.

I've tried both the top tier cards currently (scarcely) available in the market. I would say that although AMD cards have a better efficiency, they still don't support as many games as Nvidia does. There is still no straight answer to the question which one is better for Linux gamers.

Would you share with us which games were troublesome to you?
I would really like to use an AMD GPU sometime in the future, and although I know the support is always getting better, I'm a bit concerned about problems I'm not aware of...

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Quoting: Grazen

Quoting: KohlyKohl

Quoting: omer666Well, maybe they realised AMD's hardware was competitive again, and they need to better their software to stay on top. In any case, I'm still waiting for Nvidia's promises to materialise, but that's very good news at last.

From what I've seen, AMD is still a bit behind NVidia in terms of hardware. NVidia is also way ahead in software so I don't think they are that worried.

This is so true. I aspire to one day moving to AMD but I'm not going to do it strictly because they offer "open source" drivers... frankly that's the least valuable item on my list of wants (considering that I'm using proprietary software in Steam and the games themselves!). AMD needs to catch up on the hardware front, particularly on RT and supersampling technologies like DLSS (which apparently will never work via proton, but alas). The AMD drivers also generally lag behind the Nvidia proprietary drivers in my experience. I'm hoping that the 7000 series cards solve the hardware issues when i'm looking to upgrade from my 2000 series Nvidia cards.

@KohlyKohl
I said competitive, which doesn't imply that AMD is ahead, but from what I can observe, many more people (even on Windows) are willing to buy AMD whenever it is available, because there is a whole bunch of users who don't care about Ray Tracing at all. Also AMD does lead in power efficiency.

@Grazen
Well that's debatable. On the one hand, there's great compatibility and some quality of life features in Nvidia's drivers, but on the other, if you consider AMD's integration at the heart of the Mesa stack, its compatibility with Wayland, and the fact that GPU passthrough has been supported like forever, I would certainly not say Nvidia's software is ahead of AMD's.

Add in the fact that Nvidia drivers can have some very tiresome bugs that take very long to get fixed, and that AMD's open source drivers have almost all of AMD's official features available + some extra features from Valve, and I could almost say AMD's got the lead.

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Well, maybe they realised AMD's hardware was competitive again, and they need to better their software to stay on top. In any case, I'm still waiting for Nvidia's promises to materialise, but that's very good news at last.

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Honestly, for the price it is a great computer. There are not a lot of Ryzen 5 or 7 in this price bracket that are premium built and Linux oriented.

Of course there is no dedicated GPU but Vega graphics are quite capable. Nonetheless, for gaming I would rather wait for an hypothetical RX 6600M.

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Used to have a Pentium III just like this one with a Matrox G200 GPU I bought at some yard sale for 5 bucks plugged in it.
I could play games like Quake or Myth on LAN with my PowerMac when a friend came over. It's the computer that used to run SuSE back when I discovered Linux.

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Quoting: AkonadyIf they stop with this Open Source bs they could sell the game, make money from it, and turn the game into a real game, hiring developers, not this garbage, this game is not even close to Age of Empires, sorry. But hey, they still got 1.000 years to finish the game.

I've been reading the exact same kind of comments about using Linux as a desktop OS for years now. What strikes me the most is that those who make these statements either don't actually use a Linux DE, or they don't have to use macOS or Windows 10 on a regular basis, i.e. for actual work. I do, and as such I can't help laughing when I read such argumentation.

I read the same things about LibreOffice and stuff, it's all over the place, and yet I can find many instances where it fares better than the "serious" alternatives.

The point of developing 0ad is to have an open source game like AoE, and as such, it's been doing an amazing job.

View this comment - View article - View full comments