Quoting: liamdawe

Quoting: Scoopta

Quoting: TheSHEEEP

Quoting: Guest

Quoting: ScooptaIn my opinion voting for Linux with your wallet through proton is kinda like sending mixed messages. "I'm here give me games" but also "I'll take non-native games so don't bother porting."

It's voting against Linux support, really, because you're showing them that you're on Linux but will pay them regardless for a Windows game and regardless of the fact they aren't supporting Linux, like you said.

That thought completely ignores the fact that you only pay for the game if it works on Linux.
Nobody would pay for a Windows-only game planning to play it via Steam Play if it doesn't run via Proton. Or they do, notice that it won't run and refund - no money lost in that case.
Either way will show both Valve and the developer that their game is being used (or at least tried) on Linux. Which is an infinite amount more than what would have happened without Wine (or rather Proton), in which case the dev never would have known Linux even existed.

It also ignores that the ONLY way for Linux market share growth (within gaming) is supporting as many titles as possible. And for a user thinking about using Linux for a change, and most already using Linux, it doesn't matter in the end HOW that happens (which is why services like Stadia are an interesting take as well).
Natively, this will simply never happen. There will be the odd natively developed game, as it has always been, and that's cool, but that has never lifted the Linux percentage by any significant amount.

In the end, all that matters is that you get to play the game. Convenience wins, usually.

I'm certain we'll see (hopefully before 2030 in Valve time...) some statistics by Valve showing what effect Steam Play had.
I do not see a single possible negative outcome of it. Even if it resulted in fewer native games, the number would be offset incredibly by the amount supported via Steam Play. The whitelisted games alone would probably already have that effect.

Quoting: GuestPaying for Proton games directly hurts you by not giving you support like normal gamers get, and it sends the exact wrong message and discourages future Linux support because you're decreasing the number of gamers willing to pay for Linux support by paying for Windows support instead.

That is incredibly theoretical to the point of irrelevance.
What support are you talking about? The vast majority of bugs are game logic related or appear on other platforms as well. The other kind of bugs will give the ProtonDB rating a lower score so only very few people are going to "fall for it" anyway.

You don't see reduced native games as a problem? Really? So you don't care if Linux just becomes a kerenel for Win32? I guess the upside is it's FOSS Win32? You still need the MS DX runtime and MS VC++ redist which are proprietary and developed by, you know, MS. I think proton is a good market share driver, I really do, but I also think it's dangerous if it starts lowering native releases because I don't want to depend on Win32/Wine for my games.

Seriously where does this attitude come from? This attitude you have and plenty of others, is as if we had a huge amount of support before Steam Play and the fact is we really didn't and still don't.

Aspyr practically stopped, Virtual Programming don't do much either and when they do it's pretty poor, Feral gradually slowed down too and...you can see where I am going right? I really don't see this magical land where Linux ever had a lot of support to begin with. We struggle to even get a lot of good indies to support us and when they do, the answer 99% of the time is that it wasn't actually worth it.

I think people seriously need a reality check on all this.

Native is good, Steam Play is good. Let people enjoy gaming on Linux. That's what we stand for and will continue to do so.

Ultimately I've been thinking something is going to have to happen on the hardware end. Things like Proton, and streaming things like Stadia making the OS irrelevant, and good desktops, and a solid non-game software ecosystem, and good device support, are all lowering the barriers to adoption. But in the end, the barrier can be really low and nobody will bother as long as Windows comes preloaded on everything. What those low barriers to adoption do mean is that if someone decides to market desktoppish (or console-ish eg Steam Machine) hardware of some sort with Linux on it, people who buy the stuff won't have regrets, and so Linux itself won't be a barrier to sales.

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Quoting: Ehvis

Quoting: Purple Library GuyIf Stadia becomes a sizable thing, I wonder if someone will ever create a sort of wrapper that turns Stadia Linux ports into real desktop Linux ports.

I doubt it. You won't be able to access the game files. Unless someone from Google did it, but I highly doubt they'd be allowed to do that.

No, I know it wouldn't be usable at a consumer level. But there could be a tool such that if I'm a game developer and I've put my game on Stadia, I shim it to this thing and it works on a normal Linux, making a desktop release really easy.

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Say, it only just occurred to me--this lets people play games on wimpy little computers. Wonder if there's a Chromebook tie-in?

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Quoting: Mohandevir

Quoting: Ehvis

Quoting: MohandevirJust thinking about it... It's probably related to UPlay stuff? Ya know... No UPlay on Stadia but UPlay on Desktop... And no Linux version of UPlay so no Linux version of Assassin's Creed...

The version they made is likely unsuitable for normal use in more ways than just uplay. Think display output (the new Vulkan extensions) and control input handling for instance. Probably also differences with how it stores progress. So even though the biggest component was made to run on Linux, it's not everything that's needed for Steam. And I don't expect them to "bother" with it for less than a percent. It's simply not in the nature of the big publishers.

Which comes too... No matter the size of the task, just the fact that there is an hurdle, they won't bother, hence SteamPlay.

If Stadia becomes a sizable thing, I wonder if someone will ever create a sort of wrapper that turns Stadia Linux ports into real desktop Linux ports.

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Quoting: Mohandevir

Quoting: etonbearsThe presenter's early comments suggest Ubisoft may be thinking of swapping PC support for Streaming services support.

If I get it right and following this logic, may happen the day when streaming is the only way to go?

Depends on consumer reaction, which I would not venture to predict.

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Quoting: TheRiddickSome people seem to think by sniffing their own farts and acting all high and mighty by not buying anything that isn't native linux will somehow change the situation for linux gamers...I'm here to tell you, IT WON'T

Until Linux gets a PLAYER BASE of %5-10, the majority of developers will not care. So I say just play what you want, how you want, regardless of native support. If anything that will get us to that %5-10 faster and only THEN will developers start releasing more natives.

Essentially when it comes to Linux, the chicken(player) comes first. Then eventually developers (egg) will come later. No amount of soap box fart sniffing will change that!

You have a smidgen of the truth here but you are making false deductions from it.
Yes, Linux needs a player base of 5-10% to get the majority of developers to care about developing for it. Yes, that means Proton is very important. Ideally, Proton should develop quickly and robustly to the point where most games Just Work on Linux, so that it is easy and painless for Windows (and Mac) users to switch over.

So it's reasonable that those switchers, if they start to materialize, should use Proton.

But that does not mean that it's tactically ideal for people who already use Linux and care about it to use Proton. All else being equal, a native game is better than a Proton game; we're trying to get to a place where all new games are made natively for Linux. To get there, people releasing native games have to find some advantage in doing so. Currently, the impact of existing Linux gamers wanting native games is not huge, but it is there--we do after all see a fair number of games released for Linux at the moment. If there were no Linux gamers buying native games, there would be no native games.

If everyone currently on Linux stopped preferring native games and just played Proton stuff, that wouldn't drive any increase in Linux desktop use--these are people who already use Linux. But it would remove any incentive to release native games.

Now it's a marginal effect, and of course it's quite important that Proton sales do count as Linux sales. I don't think it's terrible for people to use Proton, and at some point I will probably find a reason to myself. Maybe when I get a better computer. And it's good that some existing Linux people use Proton if only to get it properly tested and help drive improvement. But there's no reason to make stupid fart jokes about people who don't want to use it; no, their position is not irrelevant, you're just making a category error in imagining that existing users using Proton more will somehow drive new user adoption. The ideal for the future of Linux gaming is probably a strong but not absolute preference for native games, so there's still a reason for native releases but people are helping Proton improve.

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Cool.

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Quoting: mao_dze_dun

Quoting: Purple Library Guy

Quoting: mao_dze_dunIf we let the purists have their way, Linux would have no GUI. Nobody is forcing you to play Windows games on Linux. I believe in the utilitarian approach - if it works then it's good. Liam should probably add some filter on the home page, so the "no tux, no bucks crowd" can only read about native games and then all will be happy. For too long the Linux community has been held back by having to cater to OS hardliners and their politics. The more Linux can do - the better.

OK, I have no problem with the article, but this is just nonsense. It's intentional nonsense actually--the writer is clearly trying to conflate two groups (people who like command lines and FLOSS people) in order to smear one of them. So, what Aristotle would call false rhetoric, a sophist trick, and what moderns would call dishonest bullshit.
In any case the truth is pretty much the opposite--had there been some way to just emulate the Windows desktop, and the anti-purists had their way, Linux would have no GUI of its own. And then every time Windows changed its GUI, the Linux one would have broken. And then Windows would have regularly made little changes to its GUI that were just enough to fuck us over. It would have been oh so pragmatic.

There is actual practicality in the world, but when people parade their practicality or pragmatism as against ideology or politics, they are generally being neither practical nor pragmatic. Nearly everything that is practically good about Linux is a result of the politics behind Linux--Free, open source, indeed copylefted software and its philosophy. If it were not for that, Linux would phone home, and/or it would be a walled garden, and/or it would get warped to work with only the maker's hardware, and/or it would spy on you, and/or it would come with masses of preinstalled spyware, nagware and general annoyingware, et cetera et cetera. It wouldn't be adaptable or fixable or have spawned the Beowulf cluster or run on Raspberri Pis. Proprietary Linux would not be Linux and would not be nearly as practically, pragmatically useful. That's why all the proprietary Unixes died.

It is foolish and impractical to forget the practical importance of the politics underlying Linux. That's how you lose what we have. So-called pragmatists of this sort are not being pragmatic, just too mentally lazy to think about the implications of their stance, so they go with what's easiest today.

"Mentally lazy"? Fancy way of calling me stupid. And you even used bold text! Hope you didn't hyperventilate too much.

There's a difference. Mentally lazy means you could think, but you choose not to bother. It's a moral, not an intellectual failing. Which apparently holds true again in your reply.

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Quoting: mao_dze_dunIf we let the purists have their way, Linux would have no GUI. Nobody is forcing you to play Windows games on Linux. I believe in the utilitarian approach - if it works then it's good. Liam should probably add some filter on the home page, so the "no tux, no bucks crowd" can only read about native games and then all will be happy. For too long the Linux community has been held back by having to cater to OS hardliners and their politics. The more Linux can do - the better.

OK, I have no problem with the article, but this is just nonsense. It's intentional nonsense actually--the writer is clearly trying to conflate two groups (people who like command lines and FLOSS people) in order to smear one of them. So, what Aristotle would call false rhetoric, a sophist trick, and what moderns would call dishonest bullshit.
In any case the truth is pretty much the opposite--had there been some way to just emulate the Windows desktop, and the anti-purists had their way, Linux would have no GUI of its own. And then every time Windows changed its GUI, the Linux one would have broken. And then Windows would have regularly made little changes to its GUI that were just enough to fuck us over. It would have been oh so pragmatic.

There is actual practicality in the world, but when people parade their practicality or pragmatism as against ideology or politics, they are generally being neither practical nor pragmatic. Nearly everything that is practically good about Linux is a result of the politics behind Linux--Free, open source, indeed copylefted software and its philosophy. If it were not for that, Linux would phone home, and/or it would be a walled garden, and/or it would get warped to work with only the maker's hardware, and/or it would spy on you, and/or it would come with masses of preinstalled spyware, nagware and general annoyingware, et cetera et cetera. It wouldn't be adaptable or fixable or have spawned the Beowulf cluster or run on Raspberri Pis. Proprietary Linux would not be Linux and would not be nearly as practically, pragmatically useful. That's why all the proprietary Unixes died.

It is foolish and impractical to forget the practical importance of the politics underlying Linux. That's how you lose what we have. So-called pragmatists of this sort are not being pragmatic, just too mentally lazy to think about the implications of their stance, so they go with what's easiest today.

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Quoting: BeamboomSorry to be "that" guy, but please: How many litres of blood are in those things? Are they simply water balloons?

I was thinking there was so dang much gore that at times you couldn't see past it. I suspect when the guy talked about customizing the visual experience it was code for "Yes, there's a less gore option."

View this comment - View article - View full comments