Quoting: 0aTT

Quoting: EikeWhich radar item is out of game now? :)

I also wonder. 808 SB12S is still on the radar. :)

https://www.gamingonlinux.com/articles/feral-interactive-are-teasing-another-new-linux-mac-port-with-a-new-clue.7272/comment_id=71914

It appears it wasn't even on the radar, was added. As far as I can tell all the others are still there.

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Quoting: boltronics

Quoting: m2mg2[I use Nvidia, but I'm waiting on AMDGPU to mature. If the performance comes up to par, Nvidia will get dropped quick.

Even under Windows the performance of AMD's best cards do not quite match those of Nvidia's, but there's a point where games are "quick enough", and AMD's cards are often much better value for money.

I have two Fury X GPUs. Hopefully when more games support Vulkan, games will make effective use of both GPUs. fglrx has some Crossfire support (and Fury X cards are just old enough to be supported by Catalyst), but I've never noticed the second card being utilised. AMDGPU has no Crossfire support at all, which sucks for the moment. But the performance of AMDGPU right now is otherwise quite good and still improving. The only game I have which doesn't work fine with AMDGPU/Mesa that I'm aware of (and I have a *lot* of games) is Dying Light. Having said that, it's been a couple of weeks since I tried so I should probably test that again.

My monitor is the BenQ XL2730Z which has FreeSync support, but none of AMD's GNU/Linux drivers support that yet. It seems to be on AMD's radar however and I'm hopeful it will all be working by early next year. I imagine Intel will add Adaptive-Sync support at some point too, at which point hopefully people stop purchasing proprietary G-Sync hardware and it can be killed off. Nvidia will need to support FreeSync eventually anyway.

I think Dying Light was the one that wouldn't run when I was using the r9 270x. I could deal with somewhat less performance but not being able to run a game at all is a real bummer. I'm not really into multi card setups. I ran SLI quite a few years ago, but the benefit was almost unnoticeable and the additional complexity wasn't worth it. The extra space in the case, heat considerations, troubleshooting when one of the cards start having issues. I've rma'd so many cards due to failure under warranty, it is just double the work having two at the same time. That said I do have a GTX 560 that is going on 4 or 5 years without problems. When I was running SLI I went through 4 980 GT's (GT not GTX) in two years (heat was not a problem, just failure prone cards).

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Quoting: boltronics

Quoting: tuubiI'm not so sure. I just think that for most of us protected firmware isn't much more of a problem than proprietary firmware blobs in general. As long as they provide working drivers, from a purely non-ideological standpoint it's all good.

Well I just got back from a Software Freedom Day meet-up, so... :)

Quoting: tuubiI still think this is just about picking what you consider acceptable in your system. You draw the line at that particular detail, others think anything short of of fully open hardware is evil.

That's true. I understand not everyone is as concerned about using free software, and it's up to the individual to make the call. I'll generally accept proprietary games since I only use them temporarily (but won't pay full price for games with nasty DRM or other mechanisms that disrespect or subjugate the user more than is typical), but I won't accept proprietary drivers since the OS would run those most/all of the time.

I do reluctantly accept proprietary firmware/microcode, but wouldn't if a 100% free microcode was available for modern hardware that can do what I want. Unlike some people, I don't care if it's loaded from the HDD or from flash embedded in the hardware (although many free software projects make the later much easier to deal with) - the risk is about the same either way.

For stuff not related to games and entertainment, I use a Lenovo X60 running Libreboot, which has 100% free software for the BIOS and HDD storage contents (which contains a dual-boot GuixSD and Parabola setup). The only proprietary code on the laptop I am aware of is in the HDD firmware, which I am not aware of any solution for.

I am also a backer of the EOMA68 micro-desktop and laptop on crowdsupply.com, so might switch to that later... although then instead of dealing with HDD firmware, I would need to deal with the firmware embedded in the SD card microcontroller. :)

I use Nvidia, but I'm waiting on AMDGPU to mature. If the performance comes up to par, Nvidia will get dropped quick. I love AMD, the performance just hasn't been there. It actually wasn't that bad with Catalyst, aside from having to patch the driver source before compiling it. With my old R9 270x there was only one game I couldn't play, all the rest performed fine. I haven't actually tried AMDGPU, just going by what I've heard. Also I got about $1000 invested between my 980 GTX and my GSYNC monitor to jump ship right now. The first game I go to install that prompts for privilege elevation to install, instant refund request.

View this comment - View article - View full comments

accidental post

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Quoting: Comandante oardo

Quoting: ShmerlI don't think Feral have much say in this matter, it's decided by the publisher. And while Square Enix aren't against Linux versions, when DRM is concerned they are still in the dark ages. Kind of ironic, that a game which explores power corruption and its effect on society in dystopian / cyberpunk settings, is plagued by the same disease.

Just like with Tomb Raider and Life is Strange, Feral IS the publisher of the Linux and Mac versions, so they can choose... and they choose DRM...

And the most irritating part is that, for Feral, Steam is not a DRM and never has been.

Porter, publisher are not content owners. Whoever has rights to the content (the game) can dictate the terms. If they insist on DRM, the only thing Feral can do to prevent it is not port it. They can try and negotiate, but all they can do is try. I don't know how hard they try, I don't think content owners are concerned about DRM as much after a game has been out for a year. In these situations I would prefer a year delay to getting DRM'd. When we start having to enter root (or sudo) credentials to install games, it will be a sad day!

View this comment - View article - View full comments

I have so much money I'm waiting to give them, if they would only start releasing Linux ports again.

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Quoting: STiATMost interesting part for me was that middleware companies actually start to adopt. That's real news to me.

I was very pleased to hear this also, hopefully we will start seeing less canceled ports for this reason.

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Quoting: MaCroX95

Quoting: maodzedun

Quoting: nocriI don't think that it'll use Vulkan -- feral main source of income is OSX, so it is obvious that they will put an effort to learn how to write performant apps using Metal, however, Linux userbase is too small, so I don't they will make an effort to learn Vulkan when openGL (at least for them) will make the trick. The only option is if there exists translation layer Metal->Vulkan (the other way around than MoltenVK).

Or maybe I am wrong ;-)

This is run so bad if they use OpenGL. It is way too heavy on DX as it is.

I think that Feral realizes that we would need at least gtx 1080 to run this game on OpenGL with reasonable framerates, at least I hope they do... I really hope that vulkan will be used but I am thankful for any kind of port, at least we will be able to play OpenGL version after few years when we all have bought better graphics cards :D

I think a lot of people are blaming OpenGL for performance issues that aren't really a problem with OpenGL. The biggest problem is that no one is really coding for good performing OpenGL, they are coding for DirectX. The methods used to make DirectX perform well, don't necessarily work for OpenGL. Feral has said as much and indicated that a lot of their work is spent on this issue. It is in large part the reason for the game performance (not actual OS or graphics performance) difference between Windows and Linux. If the game was coded for OpenGL in the first place, for people that know how to get the most out of OpenGL it wouldn't likely be a problem. That is an ideal world though, the one we live in where they are taking DirectX code and porting it to OpenGL you are probably right. Feral has been doing great though and I don't think they have taken on something they can't handle. Maybe they will be doing DirectX12-> Vulkan or Metal->Vulkan or something.

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Quoting: valgusk

Quoting: throghThis will be another DRM-release on Steam, so no chance to buy this one for me. :)

I agree that everybody has their principles, but Linux users are so good at their pickiness that it makes me wonder why devs even bother trying to port their games. DRM, microtransations, paid DLC, ...
Not only we are less in numbers, but 7bigger part of us reject purchases too easily. I don't like these problems either, but I will always buy a great game made for Linux even when devs can see the community hostility that clearly. DRM? Their right, people do pirate games too much. Microtransactions? Just don't buy them, thats the best way to battle them. Paid dlc? You are offered something that was rejected from original games most likely due to lack of time/money - profits like these are better than making the game 1.5x more expensive and you don't have to buy them either.

Why not just buy games we want to play for now until Linux is stable as a dev choice and then battle secondary wars?

For the most part I agree with you. But some of these DRM mechanisms are really bad (at least in Windows, but we don't really want them in Linux). They can inspect your files that have nothing to do with the game, monitor your activities that have nothing to do with your game. They require admin level privileges and are closed source, which means you really have no way of knowing what they actually do (you could capture traffic, but it would probably be encrypted so you wouldn't know it is sending; only where it is being sent). These days with EULA's what they are by installing them you can basically give them full control over your computer and everything on it, give them the right to use your computer as their server for whatever they want to use it for (Microsoft's bit torrent like protocol for using your computer to distribute their updates). Remember the Sony Rootkit DRM? I do want good games on our platform, but I don't want to feel like I now have to sandbox my Linux box, the same way I feel I would need to sandbox Windows if I was using it (I'm not). That is one of the biggest reasons I use Linux in the first place.

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Quoting: dmantione

Quoting: MaCroX95They did not mean to take over the Market with steam machines in 2 years which many people seem to be thinking.

I believe Valve did actually intend to takeover the market in two years. At least their behaviour was like it: They hyped SteamOS a lot, they announced many different Steam Machines. It all sounded like a "Windows 95" that was supposed to conquer the gaming market, as Gabe Newell did it back then.

However, I believe that at some point, Valve realised it is not possible to go this fast: They didn't enough support from third party game developers and hardware manufacturers. The fact that it was much harder to developer a good Steam Controller than they initially thpught may also have contributed to this.

The lack of hype around the Steam Machine launch was remarkable, and I think at that point Valve knew they couldn't conquer the world by storm.

It's kind of comforting that Timothee Besset states what many of us suspected, Valve still believe in Linux gaming, and are playing the long game. If Valve would have given up, Timothee would know it. This means that the lack of activity on SteamOS is not worrying at all.

The theory that Valve is internally developing on an unstable version of SteamOS and just releases small updates to the stable version is IMO also becoming more plausible.

I think they had to hype it at first whether they wanted to or not otherwise no one would have shown any interest. Whether they thought they could do it in two years who knows, maybe they did. They did port their whole catalog over pretty quick.

View this comment - View article - View full comments