It's been what, a year or longer, since these "vendors" were working with Valve for anticheat support for WINE? And it's still "far off"? So it's unreasonable to expect anti cheat support to land (even in WIP state) a year or less from now. I am glad he clarified that, because that's disappointing to hear.

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Quoting: Liam Dawe

Quoting: Eike

Thanks to The Linux Foundation, I was able to attend and listen to the talk (the online event requires a ticket purchase)

That's nice, they're supporting your work (or at least did this time)?

I emailed them personally and asked.

You deserve more. I would have loved to see you interview CDPR. If you haven't I urge you to try :smile:

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Quoting: dubigrasuYep, more ammunition (as if it wasn't enough already) for Stadia detractors, I can see them buzzing with excitement for this new opportunity.

Equally so for Stadia community. I've seen so very few if any posts on Stadia reddit about implication Stadia can have for local play. There is plenty circle jerk too in there and misinformation. Like how if you got a great connection Stadia will be good and no waiting, but the fact that a great connection would also significantly reduce the waiting period for local installation too. Or fact consoles have a "update in rest mode" function, which many consoles owners have not turned on. Then a Stadia supporter posts a picture of "X Download" for console and uses that to talk about how great Stadia is.

If Stadia community wants everyone on board they should strive to preserve peoples wishes; that is local play being an option. It does not mean Google needs to provide local releases, but their Stadia business should in no way affect local play on other platforms. But I bet you Google would not listen to such request. So for gamers you are either Stadia or not. More dividing of gamers. We had console and PC, now we have Stadia too.

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Quoting: slaapliedjeNo one in their right mind that uses Linux would allow some of the rootkits that companies have been shipping with their software. The thing is that most Linux users are savvy enough to have things in place to prevent such things. That's why companies don't bother with porting it over. But at least it seems most publishers have been removing that crap after a few months of sales. Seems Conan Exiles finally did and so now it works great in Proton.

I don't have a issue against DRM that lasts six months to a year before it's removed. The anti cheat that's in Valorant I mind though. But it doesn't matter what I think, it will certainly not help with changing gaming on Linux. If marketshare grows, everyone can decide for themselves what software they object to. As long as Linux ecosystem isn't being harmed I don't care if people want to allow crap on their systems just so they can play a game. Alot people who don't use Linux don't care about FOSS principles but yet Linux needs them as users to change gaming landscape.

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Quoting: slaapliedjeRemember back in the days when the various computer platforms were around and companies still managed to release games for all of them? DOS, Amiga, Atari ST, Machintosh? They not only had a wide variety of hardware, but also of operating systems. People tended for some reason to target the minimal Atari ST spec, the upper spec on the Amiga, and DOS / Machintosh usually got CGA / EGA versions until VGA had a lot more users. But DOS devs had the huge task of trying to figure out which hardware was popular to add support for that. But they still did it, even though DOS was definitely not a gaming platform, and not friendly to it. But still a huge majority of games were made for it as that's what systems people had. Then the 3D hardware wars happened, where there were so many APIs for people to target...

It wasn't until Windows and DirectX that there was an abstraction layer for everything. We basically have SDL that is similar, but it took a long time for that to be a thing.

But now that we have it, and we have better drivers, and a free OS, you'd think people would flock to it. Nope, because we are historically a community that is against closed source, DRM, etc. And GAME developers are ALL about the DRM.

And this is the main reason I think most games don't come to Linux. That and 'well they won't even pay for their OS, why would they do anything other than pirate our game' mentality.

No, I got my first PC long time after those events. When it comes down to why games don't come to Linux it's simply because of marketshare. If marketshare was significant enough games would be developed with closed source and with Denuvo implemented into them just like with Windows.

Also it doesn't help the situation that industry has become in my opinion quite corrupt. We are at a point now where microtransactions are intertwined into a game's design and developers hold presentations titled "Let's go whaling" that explains how to maximize money siphoning from gamers using predatory practices. They don't treat Windows gamers right with these predatory practices, so I'd say it would be naive for one to think that these companies, who are releasing their games on Stadia, will be nice to us with a Linux release.

As much as I believe Stadia is a double edged sword, I believe it and primarily Proton, is chance Linux has to break free of the cage Microsoft continues to put platform in with DirectX.

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Quoting: ShmerlIt's not nonsense because you need to compare resources, not just the amount of work. Small developers have less of them than big companies. So it's a bigger risk for them because of that alone. It's harder to make profit for small developers. Yet they are the ones releasing for Linux, not the huge ones who are making way more money and have more resources for it.

Besides, the work and expenses point was addressed above. They already have invested needed effort and spent the money to make it work on Stadia,

I think it's safe to say that companies like EA and Ubisoft, two big Stadia partners, will not want to help Linux. They are big supporters of Games as a service business model and big offenders of bad practice within the industry. So them giving users more choice would possibly work against their profits, instead of one platform to get all the money they would have to accommodate for Linux too. With cross platform software they can overcome those issues, but a greedy company would not want to put in work to make change.

The reason I said it's nonsense is because I don't think releasing a game like Cyberpunk for Linux, and maintaining it over time, is as easy as a indie game. If a indie and AAA game gets equal resources to port game to Linux, I can see AAA being far more difficult. And even if both games are ported, I can imagine the AAA one breaking over time because of a dependency while the simpler indie game will have higher probability of not breaking because of less software involved. I didn't mean to sound authoritarian, I just am not convinced that referring to indies releasing on Linux is entirely valid when asking why AAA games aren't. Some software used for smaller games seems to be ubiquitous, which may explain one of reasons why indies are more prevalent on Linux.

Quoting: slaapliedjeI was wondering about Exodus the other day. In the discussion forums on Steam it sounds like they're still working on it? But I mean it's been on Stadia since forever.. so if the theory is it's just a direct thing to release a game on Stadia onto Steam with Linux support... maybe that's the one that proves it's not the case?

Sadly a lot of the 'do we port to Linux' is politically based more than financially based. Like Doom (2016) literally having a Linux port made for fun, but was never published / released.

Perhaps the holdup is 4A Games using good time because they plan to release a Redux with Vulkan raytracing. Metro Last Light port wasn't a great port. or perhaps Google has a NDA exclusivity contract with developers that prohibits them from releasing their games for Linux if they want to release for Stadia. Think about it, local play is a competitor to Stadia, whether you are on Windows, Linux or a device like Switch. A "insignificant" platform like Linux can be surely swept under the rug if a big company tries to undermine it through such tactics.

I think it's former, 4A taking good time to give us a good release. Afterall, after Epic exclusivity ended they released their game on GOG too. That must be a good sign.

View this comment - View article - View full comments

> Open sources a calculator
> Makes Edge available (strategy tactic I bet)
> DX12 made available for WSL but not for Linux and continues pushing it on developers
Their love for linux managed to warm 0.5/1000 of my cold penguin heart:whistle:

View this comment - View article - View full comments

I think the expectations of companies porting to Linux is somewhat unreasonable in general. If a company does so, goes through major work to provide a quality release where they target Ubuntu, and then the return on investment is low - why should they? And the assertion that "Indies can manage to make games for many distros why can't big companies???!" is such cloudy argument. Indies are small games with simple design that are easy to scale to Linux. Where as when you are developing a major game like AC Valhala or Cyberpunk, even representing cars in the game becomes a huge project in itself. You have tech like DLSS and raytracing. If big games were so easily and cost effective to release for Linux as indies are, then you would surely have seen raytracing for many if not all indie games. And I am not talking about "We have raytracing", I am talking about shadows, global illumination and reflections.

Quite honestly such argument is nonsense. Looking at a indie game being available on Linux and then asking why big games can't be either. I don't know it all, but one thing I know I should expect from developers it is to provide Vulkan renderer and get involved with Proton issues for their games. If a company decides to port their games, then find out the business isn't there for them then they will give up on Linux in a sour way. I hope Proton will increase marketshare and raise awareness so that Linux gets to that point that more games will be worth it.

It may be a unpopular opinion, but tell me friends..where is that Metro Exodus port we were told would come? If major games like it are so profitable on Linux, why are they so few and far in between? I feel like by time a new major game is released for Linux (year or years later) the Windows version should be very playable through Proton and cost much less ($10 vs $50+).

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Quoting: FrawoTotally agree with this, but I still want Stadia to succeed anyway. Because if it does, it could convince more companies to choose Vulkan over DX12 in the first place, as they would have near to no trouble porting their stuff to Stadia. Linux users would benefit from Vulkan, even if there would be no Linux version at all. And I don't like the idea of MS dominating the graphics api market again...

I really hope CDPR already regrets being tied to DX12, especially now against the background of their crunch time.

What if Stadia's success turns to dominance, and Google makes streaming exclusive deals? Then you would be trading in one evil with another. I wouldn't worry much about Microsoft dominating, Valve seems to be committed to improving gaming on Linux. They are not only improving Proton (DX11/DX12 games) but they are also providing VR support. I hear the VR support isn't perfect, but neither was Proton either if you look back to when it all began.

I wouldn't judge CDPR so harshly. Crunch or no crunch at least their game practices are largely good. Where as other companies I bet do crunch on top of filling their games with ads, drm, micro transaction and other awful things. We will see what kind of company CDPR truly is with Cyberpunk and Witcher nextgen. But whatever they do, hateful or angry posts will never help to change the situation.

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Quoting: ShmerlI'm not sure I'm going to buy the game any time soon. I'll wait for CDPR to make an effort to release the game for desktop Linux, or the game to go on a major sale on GOG first, to play it in Wine.

I said things wrong. I will wait and see if CDPR implements Vulkan for Cyberpunk. If they do, then I will consider buying game early. If they don't, I will do as you and wait til major sale.

If CDPR does not include Vulkan for Cyberpunk or Witcher nextgen, then I will have no doubt anymore about them being hostile to Linux.

View this comment - View article - View full comments