In a recent interview with PC Gamer, lead producer Brandon Adler of Obsidian said, "I don't think it was worthwhile developing for Linux. They are a very, very small portion of our active user base - I think around one and a half percent of our users were Linux."
While he did add that is was easy to get the game running on Linux, he cites additional logistical problems like QA and a development team with no previous experience developing for the platform.
These comments stand in slight contrast with statements made in June to Mac Gamer HQ where the interviewer asked "Do Mac and Linux sales justify the extra work involved?" and got back "Yes. Any time you can get the game out on multiple platforms is a huge win for sales because obviously your audience is expanded to include many more people." Although one could argue since the site is a Mac site, the response was equally Mac-slanted, despite the mention of Linux.
As with any such statements, I wonder if the aforementioned added burden can be quantified in time/money spent, and how that compares with the income gained form the 1.5% Linux sales. Surely, it was just a matter of it feeling like a larger burden than it really was due to it being new for the studio?
Smaller studios with reservations about Linux development should really consider outsourcing these efforts, or at least be open to licensed ports. I'm fairly sure the likes of Aspyr/Feral would be more than happy to reap the rewards of managing such ports, especially when the effort is purely QA and support, rather than actually needing to port engines.
Editor Note: If any developer creates a Linux version before Steam Machines are released and expects more than 2% of sales from it, they're doing it wrong. You're doing it for the future and for the long run, not for a quick gain which you won't get right now. Article taken from GamingOnLinux.com.
While he did add that is was easy to get the game running on Linux, he cites additional logistical problems like QA and a development team with no previous experience developing for the platform.
These comments stand in slight contrast with statements made in June to Mac Gamer HQ where the interviewer asked "Do Mac and Linux sales justify the extra work involved?" and got back "Yes. Any time you can get the game out on multiple platforms is a huge win for sales because obviously your audience is expanded to include many more people." Although one could argue since the site is a Mac site, the response was equally Mac-slanted, despite the mention of Linux.
As with any such statements, I wonder if the aforementioned added burden can be quantified in time/money spent, and how that compares with the income gained form the 1.5% Linux sales. Surely, it was just a matter of it feeling like a larger burden than it really was due to it being new for the studio?
Smaller studios with reservations about Linux development should really consider outsourcing these efforts, or at least be open to licensed ports. I'm fairly sure the likes of Aspyr/Feral would be more than happy to reap the rewards of managing such ports, especially when the effort is purely QA and support, rather than actually needing to port engines.
Editor Note: If any developer creates a Linux version before Steam Machines are released and expects more than 2% of sales from it, they're doing it wrong. You're doing it for the future and for the long run, not for a quick gain which you won't get right now. Article taken from GamingOnLinux.com.
0 Likes
Some you may have missed, popular articles from the last month:
The comments on this article are closed.
Patreon
PayPal
Last edited by BillNyeTheBlackGuy on 31 August 2015 at 1:14 pm UTC
Fortunately, we have several commenting individuals on this site that actually _do_ have experience in development and specifically game development - Cheeseness being a prime example in this thread. I'm sure you'll find that most Linux communities inherently have more programmers than other OS-specific communities and that many of us who aren't necessarily in the business of games, have been or are involved in projects on the size and scale of most game development projects, as Linux is usually used in critical applications.
In any case, I'd welcome any counterpoint you may have?
No hate from my side, just puzzlement and a desire to understand Obsidian's point of view, as well as let them see mine (and "ours" from what I see in this thread).
Talking about numbers, mine were taken directly from SteamSpy which can track who owns what. It's not perfect, but it's a good measure to go by. There's nothing wrong in doing things like this, as it allows us to see what level of income some developers deem acceptable for a port.
It's true people shouldn't spread hate, but people need to learn to separate hate from curiosity and criticism.
Numbers were clear they couldn't set their expectations higher than what our user base allowed.
But again, what Linux(steamOS) represents is (if sucessful) the FUTURE.
It kills me seeing ppl wanting short term profit on a long term move.
Last edited by amonobeax on 31 August 2015 at 1:42 pm UTC
Now, two things. First, if Linux does not maximise the investment, it does maximise crowd funding campaigns big time, because you can get much more money form game starving Linux and Mac users on the promise of having their OS supported. Just look at how many projects add Linux as a pledged goal without thinking about the technical details before hand... Divinity Original Sin is a perfect example of this tendency, as well as many others.
Then, as many stated before me, supporting Mac & Linux is good for your image and for socially promoting your game. I can't recount how many times I made recommendations for friends of mine after playing a game on Linux. I even bought Metro Redux on PS4 as a birthday present for a friend. Developers should know that. When you reach a customer, his acquittances become potential customers.
How can you count how many Windows users bought PoE because their friends played the Linux version? You can't.
Also, before Microsoft's dreaded monopoly, there used to be so many platforms you couldn't even remember them all. Did it prevent developers from earning wages? Absolutely not. I know coding and porting was much simpler back then, but with all major engines being multiplatform nowadays - including PoE's engine, Unity - it's possible to develop with multiplatform in mind from the ground up, again.
Oh yes, there are some discrepancies in supporting Linux. I for once was very upset with the Witcher 2's launch and its very poor performance. But now and then I see Linux users being very harsh about bug correcting and such. Keep in mind, devs are people for whom making games is their bloody job. They get home during the week-end, and they need to get some rest at some point. Some Linux users seem to forget that, and it's a shame. I mention that fact because it's precisely Q&A which gets pointed at in the article's case. Don't forget to be thankful to companies who support Linux in a good fashion.
So, there is not much to think about in Adler's statement, other than having yet another guy looking for money talking about money, and one of his colleagues not feeling the same about it. So we know those two guys point of view, and another interesting question would be, what does Obsidian, as a company, think about it.
Am I missing something? I would really love for them to come out with a bit more detail about this...
They can't, they have to extrapolate from public profiles. (So everybody who doubts that Steam survey is correct should doubt this one as well.) But that's not the primary number I'm having heavy doubts with. Everybody doing business will tell you that a lot of money is subtracted from your sales before you get it into your hands. Some examples have been given in an article linked by someone above. We cannot just multiply an extrapolated nuber of sales with an unlikely share of it being left to the developer, subtract a made up number of QA cases which we don't know how expensive they are and tell the ones who plainly know better than us how much bucks they made profit from this.