It's always interesting to read about what happens inside of Valve. Rich Geldreich, who previously worked at Valve has blogged about his experience inside Valve during Valve's push towards Linux.
It seems Rich was a rather important member of the team and one of the influential people in getting OpenGL + Linux support up to scratch.
He was responsible for speaking to external driver teams and their managers/execs, and he helped present to external game developers about how to get good performance out of OpenGL.
I fondly remember reading the Valve blog post about getting Left 4 Dead 2 running faster on Linux than it did on Windows. I remember feeling so happy about everything that was happening. Rich Geldreich was the one feeding the information to Gabe Newell himself (the owner of Valve) who wrote the blog post.
It seems Valve's plans well and truly scared Microsoft too:
That's very interesting to read about. I had no idea Valve pushing OpenGL and Linux was this serious a threat that Microsoft visited Valve directly.
It sounds like we have a lot to thank Rich for. He even shares what a lot of other people believe, that Linux was/is a safeguard for Valve against Microsoft:
Sadly, it seems when Valve let a bunch of people go back in 2013, the Linux team suffered due to this.
Check out the blog post here. Article taken from GamingOnLinux.com.
It seems Rich was a rather important member of the team and one of the influential people in getting OpenGL + Linux support up to scratch.
He was responsible for speaking to external driver teams and their managers/execs, and he helped present to external game developers about how to get good performance out of OpenGL.
I fondly remember reading the Valve blog post about getting Left 4 Dead 2 running faster on Linux than it did on Windows. I remember feeling so happy about everything that was happening. Rich Geldreich was the one feeding the information to Gabe Newell himself (the owner of Valve) who wrote the blog post.
It seems Valve's plans well and truly scared Microsoft too:
Rich GeldreichA few weeks after this post went out, some very senior developers from Microsoft came by for a discrete visit. They loved our post, because it lit a fire underneath Microsoft's executives to get their act together and keep supporting Direct3D development. (Remember, at this point it was years since the last DirectX SDK release. The DirectX team was on life support.) Linux is obviously extremely influential.
That's very interesting to read about. I had no idea Valve pushing OpenGL and Linux was this serious a threat that Microsoft visited Valve directly.
It sounds like we have a lot to thank Rich for. He even shares what a lot of other people believe, that Linux was/is a safeguard for Valve against Microsoft:
Rich GeldreichIt's perhaps hard to believe, but the Steam Linux effort made a significant impact inside of multiple corporations. It was a surprisingly influential project. Valve being deeply involved with Linux also gives the company a "worse case scenario" hedge vs. Microsoft. It's like a club held over MS's heads. They just need to keep spending the resources to keep their in-house Linux expertise in a healthy state.
Sadly, it seems when Valve let a bunch of people go back in 2013, the Linux team suffered due to this.
Check out the blog post here. Article taken from GamingOnLinux.com.
Some you may have missed, popular articles from the last month:
The comments on this article are closed.
I don't think they're pushing for a big hit with SteamOS / SteamMachines anymore. It's exactly what's said here, it's the hammer above Microsofts head.
Vulkan, while being a hammer over the head, is a serious competitor. So Microsoft needs to invest a lot there, since they want people to develop DX12 for Windows and XBox, and don't want to become a 2nd class citizen API whise being the "port" rather than the main platform. One who could have changed this would have been Sony, if they decided official support for Vulkan in PS4. But there is no official word about that yet (not one that I've found).
I do not consider Linux distributions or SteamOS a serious competitor to Windows. Not in the next decade, not if Microsoft does not fuck it up royally. My bet is that Google will go competitive one day on the Desktop market with an Android / Linux base or even their own Kernel.
Why? Windows is known, is sold with the PCs, has all titles, and runs the software people know as well as everything runs on Windows, which not necessarily runs on Linux. People are used to things, and they want the exact program, not some "other program which can do this". Android or a "ChromeOS" or what ever it will be called is a more serious competitor, since Google does have all the apps.
Call me pesimistic, but I think that's what we're facing in reality.
Vulkan, while being a hammer over the head, is a serious competitor. So Microsoft needs to invest a lot there, since they want people to develop DX12 for Windows and XBox, and don't want to become a 2nd class citizen API whise being the "port" rather than the main platform. One who could have changed this would have been Sony, if they decided official support for Vulkan in PS4. But there is no official word about that yet (not one that I've found).
I do not consider Linux distributions or SteamOS a serious competitor to Windows. Not in the next decade, not if Microsoft does not fuck it up royally. My bet is that Google will go competitive one day on the Desktop market with an Android / Linux base or even their own Kernel.
Why? Windows is known, is sold with the PCs, has all titles, and runs the software people know as well as everything runs on Windows, which not necessarily runs on Linux. People are used to things, and they want the exact program, not some "other program which can do this". Android or a "ChromeOS" or what ever it will be called is a more serious competitor, since Google does have all the apps.
Call me pesimistic, but I think that's what we're facing in reality.
4 Likes, Who?
Quoting: tuubiQuoting: ShmerlAAA is too ambiguous of a term. Some simply mean big budget games by it, and not all big budget games are made by backwards thinking legacy publishers. Some are made by quite innovative and forward thinking ones, who are interested in Linux too. And in my experience, big budget doesn't necessarily guarantee artistic quality, especially if mass market is the target. Personally I'm interested in more good games, and whether they are big or small budget is really secondary for me. I acknowledge though, that perception of art is to a degree subjective, and good can mean different things for different people.The hipster is strong in this one. :)
Seriously, I love a good indie title, but if you play a game like Mad Max or Tomb Raider, you'll see where all those millions went. There's just tons and tons of highly polished content, from graphics and animation to audio design, made by large teams of professional artists.
Millions went somewhere, but it bears a strong resemblance to current day mass market film industry. Most of it is pulp fiction style writing, with flashy graphics and CGI, and barely any depth in the script and story. Or in the games context - reactivity with choices and consequences. Sure, there are good authors out there. But most of the mass market is after flashy things, not after depth. I value more than "polished content" in art.
Quoting: tuubiOf course this is all subjective but assuming a game must be "less good" if it's "mainstream" is just silly. Or at least the assumption part of it is silly. Nothing wrong with informed opinion of course.
It doesn't have to be worse, but it easily can become worse. As soon as mass market kicks in, quality of art can easily be compromised for superficiality with flashy look. I'm not trying to downplay the value of good graphics - I like it same as the next guy. I'm just pointing out the pitfalls of mass market / commercialized art driven by legacy publishers.
Last edited by Shmerl on 5 January 2017 at 4:42 pm UTC
0 Likes
Quoting: ShmerlYou are talking about your personal taste in games and movies here, and that's fine. We're all entitled to our opinions. Though surely you shouldn't judge the entertainment value of a game or a movie based on its budget? Of course this applies equally well to the AAA-only indie-bashers. No need to pick a side, you know.Quoting: tuubiSeriously, I love a good indie title, but if you play a game like Mad Max or Tomb Raider, you'll see where all those millions went. There's just tons and tons of highly polished content, from graphics and animation to audio design, made by large teams of professional artists.
Millions went somewhere, but it bears a strong resemblance to current day mass market film industry. Most of it is pulp fiction style writing, with flashy graphics and CGI, and barely any depth in the script and story. Or in the games context - reactivity with choices and consequences. Sure, there are good authors out there. But most of the mass market is after flashy things, not after depth. I value more than "polished content" in art.
Quoting: ShmerlSure, a big budget can be used to polish a turd, but that doesn't mean everything that shines is hiding shit underneath.Quoting: tuubiOf course this is all subjective but assuming a game must be "less good" if it's "mainstream" is just silly. Or at least the assumption part of it is silly. Nothing wrong with informed opinion of course.
It doesn't have to be worse, but it easily can become worse. As soon as mass market kicks in, quality of art can easily be compromised for superficiality with flashy look. I'm not trying to downplay the value of good graphics - I like it same as the next guy. I'm just pointing out the pitfalls of mass market / commercialized art driven by legacy publishers.
I hope you don't take my posts here as personal attacks. I value your opinion, and your contributions on GOL. I'm just trying to point out that bashing games you admit you haven't even played does seem a bit counterproductive. I also think most of the stuff people watch and play is utter crud, but we have to recognize what is subjective opinion and what is objective fact.
I'm enjoying Mad Max at the moment by the way. AAA, and definitely shallow, but tons of fun. That doesn't mean I enjoy a good old-school adventure or RPG any less.
1 Likes, Who?
The result is the same, Linux is still the second class citizen, the big fluffy cushion down the cliff existing just in case Microsoft goes overboard.
It's really saddening.
It's really saddening.
2 Likes, Who?
In the long run, game development on Linux will be dependent on the same thing it's always been dependent on for every other platform, the size of the audience.
I remember when Commodore Amiga and Atari ST games were much better and more plentiful than IBM PC games. The fact was, even though those platforms were technically better at games than IBM PCs, DOS games started to become popular because more people bought DOS based systems to be compatible with their work computers. DOS became a bigger market and started to get the most attention by game developers.
Then DOS games were better than Windows 3.1 games, but as Windows became a bigger market, and Windows 95 hit, Windows games started to become the most prominent computer games.
The point is, when it comes to general purpose computing devices, both the graphical technology and the games that get developed are driven by existing platform popularity. Of course, if sufficient interest exists to push graphics technology and game development, then this creates a synergy and things progress faster.
The main advantage Linux has is that it can't be knocked out of development by a brilliant business move. If open source software had a theme song, it would be "Time Is on My Side."
While my brothers have Windows computers, they all have Linux computers in their households at this point as well. Linux computers have become extremely practical as second or third computers for households with multiple children, since they need less powerful hardware and require less maintenance than Windows computers, and since children adjust easily to a different platform. This type of growth of the Linux audience may seem slow, but it is beginning to have an effect. It may be part of the reason that older ports and retro games are more popular on Linux, because even older hardware runs them well, but eventually any growth of the market promotes more sophisticated technology.
I remember when Commodore Amiga and Atari ST games were much better and more plentiful than IBM PC games. The fact was, even though those platforms were technically better at games than IBM PCs, DOS games started to become popular because more people bought DOS based systems to be compatible with their work computers. DOS became a bigger market and started to get the most attention by game developers.
Then DOS games were better than Windows 3.1 games, but as Windows became a bigger market, and Windows 95 hit, Windows games started to become the most prominent computer games.
The point is, when it comes to general purpose computing devices, both the graphical technology and the games that get developed are driven by existing platform popularity. Of course, if sufficient interest exists to push graphics technology and game development, then this creates a synergy and things progress faster.
The main advantage Linux has is that it can't be knocked out of development by a brilliant business move. If open source software had a theme song, it would be "Time Is on My Side."
While my brothers have Windows computers, they all have Linux computers in their households at this point as well. Linux computers have become extremely practical as second or third computers for households with multiple children, since they need less powerful hardware and require less maintenance than Windows computers, and since children adjust easily to a different platform. This type of growth of the Linux audience may seem slow, but it is beginning to have an effect. It may be part of the reason that older ports and retro games are more popular on Linux, because even older hardware runs them well, but eventually any growth of the market promotes more sophisticated technology.
5 Likes, Who?
I have to say, I'm really surprised by some of the pessimistic comments being made. Did some people think SteamOS was going to make Linux jump mountains this quickly? It was never going to.
The fact is that it has helped Linux improve in a great many ways in a relatively short amount of time.
It's going to be another good year for us.
The fact is that it has helped Linux improve in a great many ways in a relatively short amount of time.
It's going to be another good year for us.
4 Likes, Who?
So basically Linux support is a scarecrow now. They've put it on a life support and they are throwing bits and pieces at us to keep the crowd satisfied but they won't bring out the big guns because they don't want to go to a war with Microsoft. So unless Microsoft decides to push the store or seal the PC environment around Windows whatever that means there won't be a big Linux push. Some of the people might migrate but it won't ever be more that few % without drastic Microsoft moves. Also SteamOS would be more of a thing if it happened few years ago when people were dissatisfied with Vista, then 8 and when you actually had to pay for Windows. With 10 you just download ISO from the Microsoft website and off you go. With or without a license, it works anyway. Good enough for most of the people I guess. So this is it guys, if you think 2016 was good then hold on to it because all the subsequent years will be the same. Similar marketshare, similar amount of games released, similar treatment by developers unless they come to a conclusion that Linux port only pays the bills and it's not viable. Maybe Valve would be more successful with ReactOS lol.
1 Likes, Who?
Well, competition is always good and you shouldn't forget that Valve is a lot of ex Microsoft engineering people who are still loyal to their colleagues from the development departments there. It is a bit sad, that they didn't really push further with gaming on Linux and made the press call it a big failure of 2016.
Last edited by Milanium on 7 January 2017 at 7:49 pm UTC
Last edited by Milanium on 7 January 2017 at 7:49 pm UTC
0 Likes
slaapliedje Jan 10, 2017
I do find it funny all of the 'SteamOS has clearly failed' and 'it hasn't been updated that much' or 'it's on the back burner.'
Do people realize that it's based on Debian Jessie? And that Debian's release schedule is.. glacial at best? Do people want a 6 month release schedule like Ubuntu? How much extra work by Valve would that take? There is a reason why they chose Debian. Debian Stretch is going into a Soft Freeze soon, then hard Freeze, so there should be a HUGE update to SteamOS once that happens.
I'm wondering how much of Valve's work is just being put back into Debian proper. Anyone who has been following the development of it, should be quite excited for the potential SteamOS.
Do people realize that it's based on Debian Jessie? And that Debian's release schedule is.. glacial at best? Do people want a 6 month release schedule like Ubuntu? How much extra work by Valve would that take? There is a reason why they chose Debian. Debian Stretch is going into a Soft Freeze soon, then hard Freeze, so there should be a HUGE update to SteamOS once that happens.
I'm wondering how much of Valve's work is just being put back into Debian proper. Anyone who has been following the development of it, should be quite excited for the potential SteamOS.
0 Likes
Quoting: slaapliedjeDebian Stretch is going into a Soft Freeze soon, then hard Freeze, so there should be a HUGE update to SteamOS once that happens.Maybe. Jessie will be on long term support "to end of April/May 2020" so there's no actual need to hurry. I'd imagine they'd want to do it sooner rather than later though, unless they want to deviate even more from upstream and take a heavier maintenance burden themselves.
Quoting: slaapliedjeI'm wondering how much of Valve's work is just being put back into Debian proper. Anyone who has been following the development of it, should be quite excited for the potential SteamOS.I don't think they actively upstream anything much. Any changes are in the open SteamOS repo, but Debian maintainers pretty much need to actively trawl for patches. Valve doesn't seem to have an actual policy of keeping a minimal patchset (like Ubuntu claims to) unless I've missed something.
0 Likes
Patreon
PayPal
See more from me