We will continue to cover Stadia, it is not up for discussion.

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Quoting: BeamboomThere's no "free" games here, this is to be considered a rental service? Monthly fee to access a given set of games, like the Playstation Plus membership?

Stadia Pro can be considered like PSPlus yeah and it largely works the same. You get games you can claim instantly and play and once you claim they will stay in your library, even when removed from Pro it just means newer Pro subs won't be able to claim them. So I claimed Metro Exodus for example, which is no longer in Pro but I can play it any time my Pro sub is active.

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Quoting: GuestI know you build a case before about posting Stadia news...but I forgot to be honest and fail to see reason for these kind of news updates on it. Not trying to be an asshole about it, just failing to see the linux connection here.

We've been over this before, time and time again. We post anything and everything to do with gaming from a Linux machine. If it works on Linux, we might post about it. It's not a discussion either, that's how it is. If people don't like it they can block the tags that offend them or just don't click on the article.

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Quoting: HoriIs ESO any good on a console though?

I tried it with a Steam Controller and it was... ok, casually, for just doing quests (at a slower pace than usual).
But other than that it was a no for me.
I spent quite a bit of effort on the controls scheme and it was miles ahead of the default config, but I still wouldn't call it a good experience.

But I only tried it on the PC version... is the Xbox/PS version any better? How much?

And also, is Stadia ESO gonna be the PC version or the console one?

They confirmed cross-play with "PC", which will mean both Windows and macOS since it's all the same there. So all Windows, macOS and Stadia players are together.

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Quoting: Xpander

Quoting: Liam DaweTo get something is to receive something, seems perfectly appropriate. It mentions clearly it's a patch (doesn't say merged or anything) and notes its 'RFC' directly in the title. A title is just a title, the key is as always the text that accompanies it.

I'm not native english speaker, true. but wouldnt it be better to use "might get" ? :)

i know its request for comments but its not inside the kernel yet lol...

It got the patch, it received it, it hasn't yet done anything with it. The title is factually correct. Splitting hairs at this point. As always, if you have issues it's better to use the correction report system. Edit: However, I have edited to ensure it's as clear as possible.

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Quoting: XpanderThe title is a bit weird. like "gets". Nothing is there yet, its just a patch that isn't accepted yet. Interesting stuff though.

To get something is to receive something, seems perfectly appropriate. It mentions clearly it's a patch (doesn't say merged or anything) and notes its 'RFC' directly in the title. A title is just a title, the key is as always the text that accompanies it.

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Quoting: PatolaWhat is it based on? Arch? I found that information difficult to find. From their github site it is only said that building its image can only be done in Arch Linux [External Link].

It's in their FAQ [External Link]:

GamerOS is based on Arch Linux. However, this is only relevant to GamerOS developers and no Arch Linux knowledge is required to install or use GamerOS.

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Quoting: Linuxwarper

Quoting: Liam DaweIt is still pure an absolute conjecture. There are no facts at play here because a lot of games removed from GFN have not given statements as to why. Don't ever act like speculation is a fact, it doesn't make a good argument. There's a reason why GFN has moved to an opt-in basis now, because their original model was clearly not sitting well with a lot of developers.

Do you really think most developers will come out and say they have removed their game from Geforce Now because of Stadia? In the case of Bethesda, do you really think they will come out and say anything about favoring Stadia over Geforce Now? So why is it necessary for statements from developers before it becomes fact? If Nvidia solves issues devs have, which they have and are doing, will games like DOOM come back to Geforce? Most likely not and because of what I said. Time will tell if I am entirely wrong or not. I disagree that it's pure conjecture and leave it at that.

You can't put speculation down as any form of fact. Simple. You can repeat it as much as you like, doesn't make it true. I'm not saying it's not entirely true, it may be in some cases, we simply do not know and acting like it's what's happening is just not a good argument when we have no clue in reality.

Quoting: Linuxwarper

Quoting: Liam DaweYou used a good word there though: choices. Stadia is a choice, another one, and clearly for some people (me included) one that works quite well.

Better than that would be the choice to be able to play the games locally as well as by streaming it. But that does not fit into what Google is pushing with Stadia and ChromeOS. Most Chromebooks seem to be low spec and not well suited for local play.

I just don't get the point of constantly reiterating the same argument about local play though? Stadia was never designed for that and likely never will offer it because ~95% of "PC" gamers wouldn't be able to use what it offers (Linux builds).

Quoting: Linuxwarper

Quoting: Liam DaweYou have a point there of course. Google are not "proponents" of Linux gaming and I do agree, anyone saying so are wrong. They are now proponents of actual gaming as a whole though, and their service happens to work on Linux and be built with Linux

That my point, which I replied to drlamb who made it seem like Stadia will only help Linux gaming. I disagree and the fact Google is persuing only streaming is proof they want to grow their own gaming space. Which I believe will be Chromebooks running ChromeOS, not Linux.

drlamb is IMO correct though on what they actually said. More services that work on Linux will help Linux. That shouldn't even be a debate. Faced with working and not working, the service working is a clear advantage. It's pretty weird to think it wouldn't help. Not liking it or not liking how it does it, is different to it not helping Linux gaming further when you look at the whole picture. The same way Proton helps people not lose access to existing games, Stadia helps people play the same games on their various devices as they do on Linux through streaming.

I think I've made any point I care to at this time :)

For me, Stadia is an option that works and I use it often on top of local desktop Linux games and everything else. It's just another piece of the gaming puzzle.

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Quoting: Linuxwarper

Quoting: Liam DaweThe thing is here though, Google funded Gylt development. It's no different than Valve or any other store/console funding their own games and keeping them to their store.

Did they? From what I gleaned it seemed like a partnership and less about Tequilla Works becoming a studio under Google.

Right from the source [External Link]:

Rubio says this began a "very open and honest dialogue" with Google, as the tech giant financed and produced the project. In fact, under Google he adds, Gylt had the "smoothest production for a Tequila Works game ever."

Emphasis mine.

Quoting: LinuxwarperFurthermore, Rubio heavily implied that Gylt will come to other platforms based on his answers to questions asked by Eurogamer [External Link]. The fact Google has funded development justifies Google's actions yes, but I don't see how it invalidates my point. Gylt would have been available on Steam and other platforms and playable through Proton if it wasn't for it's exclusivity deal regardless of how it would have turned out without Google's funding.

I'm not trying to invalidate anything you say, I'm just making a point that this is just how it works. Again, like I said earlier, Google funded it and so it's no different to Valve or others doing their own games on their own store. In this case, Gylt may still yet go to other stores later, they've not said it won't.

Quoting: Linuxwarper

Quoting: drlambThis is pure conjecture. Nvidia themselves have admitted they needed to work out licensing with publishers. Streaming is a new territory.

Pure conjecture, really? DOOM are among the games removed from GeforceNow. It's known Bethesda are a key player for Stadia. Yet those very same games can be streamed through Remote Play. It's not exactly the same, as you use your own PC, but ultimately you have paid for those games and with Geforce Now you are paying for a service to be able to stream them. Clearly there is licensing to be done, but it seems this became a issue mostly with arrival of Stadia.

And so I disagree. Saying what I said about Stadia making devs remove their game from Geforce Now is pure conjecture because there is licensing issues isn't convincing argument. Because of timing I pointed out, and because publishers and devs can redo their licensing. Except many of them likely won't. Why? Because Google and Stadia will be more lucrative to them than allowing gamers the freedom to stream their games through Geforce Now, a service they aren't currently getting money from.

It is still pure an absolute conjecture. There are no facts at play here because a lot of games removed from GFN have not given statements as to why. Don't ever act like speculation is a fact, it doesn't make a good argument. There's a reason why GFN has moved to an opt-in basis now, because their original model was clearly not sitting well with a lot of developers.

Quoting: LinuxwarperI did not bring up Windows to try persuade you to use Windows. What differentiates Linux and Windows more than anything? FOSS. It's not in line with FOSS principles or Linux spirit to remove games from a streaming service so that another one dominates. I'd argue Stadia isn't Linux gaming either. It's Google gaming. Just because Stadia is powered by Debian it does not make it FOSS. If it did, we would have seen Google being proactive about persuading developers to release their games locally too on Linux. Choices, that's another word that sums up Linux.
But Google has not encouraged or funded developers to release their games locally too. Their intention is clear; streaming is way they want it. That's choice your given, take it or leave it.

We're not talking about FOSS though. Steam is not FOSS, the majority of games we play are not FOSS. This is not a FOSS vs proprietary argument. GOL is also clearly not a FOSS-only website, the majority of what we cover is actually proprietary, just something to keep in mind there.

You used a good word there though: choices. Stadia is a choice, another one, and clearly for some people (me included) one that works quite well.

Google doesn't need to fund or encourage developers to release games locally and on Linux, why would they? That is entirely besides the point and frankly nonsense to bring up into the argument your trying to make. They run a streaming service, they're obviously focused on that. I guess you were trying to use that to back up your argument here but it's an obvious point about their business model so it fell quite flat.

Quoting: LinuxwarperJust because Google is contributing to Linux kernel/open source it does not mean they are proponents of Linux gaming. They are of Google/ChromeOS gaming. There lies the difference. Should I start thinking Microsoft is good for desktop Linux simply because they use Linux and are contributing software (open source) to areas that benefits their business? No, they are in it for their own interest, just like Google.

You have a point there of course. Google are not "proponents" of Linux gaming and I do agree, anyone saying so are wrong. They are now proponents of actual gaming as a whole though, and their service happens to work on Linux and be built with Linux.

Also, wrongly watering down your point with this:

Quoting: LinuxwarperStadia is streaming only service for similar reason many Microsoft apps are not on Linux, and DirectX is only available for WSL2.

Entirely different situations, business models and mechanics of how they work. Why did you even slot Stadia and Microsoft apps in the same pont? That makes absolutely no sense.

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Quoting: DMG

Quoting: rustybroomhandle

Quoting: DMGYeah, game completely broken for me since some last patches. Thanks Feral, thanks. With such support, there is no other option, then play games with proton...

File a bug report? Much more useful than crying here.

I did trough their official e-mail. But support was pretty much useless. Just asked did I try to reinstall the game. When that did not help, said, that Linux Mint is not supported and I must install any of supported OS (maybe they mean windows?). Spent countless hours in game before, and all was fine. Now only option is play it with proton.

Another idea then, post in our tech support forum with your logs so others can have a look.

View this comment - View article - View full comments