Every article tag can be clicked to get a list of all articles in that category. Every article tag also has an RSS feed! You can customize an RSS feed too!
We do often include affiliate links to earn us some pennies. See more here.
Note: Article updated to better explain 1 or 2 points.

There were a few loud users complaining about a recent Linux release where you had to pay for the Linux version on Steam, even if you already own the Windows version. I’ve spoken to a few people and have some thoughts on it.

First of all: I fully agree porters should be paid for their hard work, that’s absolutely not in question at all. It’s a reason why I so heavily dislike grey-market key resellers. If you do the work — you should be paid.

I said at the release of the game that prompted this (Arma: Cold War Assault) that I was torn on the issue, as it’s a difficult topic to address. Difficult because I could easily anger every side of the argument and end up in some hot water myself. Not only that, but I am personally too used to just getting a Linux version for free just for owning a Windows copy from years ago. I purchased it myself personally, because I appreciate the work and because it is stupidly cheap.

Part of the issue is that Valve used to promote “Steamplay”, where you buy once and automatically get it on all platforms Steam supports. So, Valve are partly to blame for issues like this. While I like that system myself, it does have flaws when it comes to situations like this. Valve have actually removed any mention of Steamplay from store items, so perhaps over time people won’t expect to get all versions for free. It is a weird expectation in reality the more I think about it, to get something for nothing like that. I know you can argue all you like about free software and so on, but that’s a different argument for a different day.

It’s a very tough situation to be in for both a developer and a Linux gamer, since it could potentially put people off dual-booting or fully switching to Linux, if you have to pay for your games again. I don’t think there’s a one-size fits all approach here, since a lot of games may require little effort to bring over to Linux. Not all games should require a purchase per platform, but I think it should be an option at times and it should be welcomed. Even something simple like an upgrade option, that way we can still ensure the porter directly gets their due cut of the money for their work.

You could also argue that part of the hook of SteamOS and Steam Machines were that you got access to your library of games that supported Linux. An interesting point of course, but I think it’s also important that the games are just available there, even to buy again, at the very least. There’s also the fact that Steam Machines haven’t really taken off, so that’s quite a weak argument to have anyway.

I think paying essentially peanuts for a really old game that’s been slightly updated and ported to a new platform, well, yeah you should pay for that. You never paid for anything but the original version you got, so it would make sense to pay for something that is essentially different, wouldn’t it? We aren’t talking about a simple patch here, but a game ported to a different platform.

That goes for new games as well, not just older titles. Let’s face it, you don’t buy a game for a PlayStation 4 and demand an Xbox One version as well, do you? No, you don’t. That’s a hypothetical question: think about it even if you don’t own a console. It takes time, effort and many hours of testing to ensure it works correctly on each platform. Then you have the very real ongoing support overhead on top of that. The same can be said for ports of newer AAA-like Linux ports. They often take months, a year even to port and then you need to again add in the testing and support costs.

I thought about all the “no tux, no bux”, the “I only buy/play games on Linux” arguments and all the similar sayings people use that essentially gets thrown out the window if you suddenly refuse to buy a brand new (to Linux) game, just because you own it on another different platform, or because purchasing it won’t give you a version already available on a platform you apparently don’t care about.

I adore the work that Virtual Programming, Aspyr Media, Feral Interactive and others do in bringing games to Linux. They shouldn’t have to deal with a shit-storm every time there’s not a sale, or you have to pay to have it on your platform of choice. It’s the icing on the entitlement cake and it doesn’t taste nice, quite sour in fact.

Every time I see “will only get it on sale” or the instant “will it be released with a sale?!” posts I really do fear for our platform as gaming choice. Why is a Linux port worth so much less to you? It damn well shouldn’t be. We are gaming on a platform that has to prove itself to survive in what’s quite a hostile environment full of publishers with dollar signs for eyes. If we consistently pay less, create storms about small issues like this, then again, I fear for our future.

Faced with the option of paying extra for a Linux port, even if I have a Windows version I’m never going to use, over no Linux port, the choice seems obvious doesn’t it? If the original developer/publisher doesn’t want to deal with it at all, but isn’t averse to someone else handling all of it, then the only route to a Linux port could mean an entirely separated Linux version. I’m okay with that and I hope more people will be in time too.

If Bethesda turned around to a porting house and said “Okay, we will let you 100% handle Fallout 4 for Linux, but the contact is that you sell it yourselves separately to ours”. Would you turn away from it? I would embrace the crap out of that despite owning a copy for Windows (free with my GPU). Fallout 4 on Linux, yes please. I would enjoy metaphorically throwing money at my screen full price for that on Linux. That and a great many others. I'm not saying it should be the same price as the original Windows release, to be clear on that, since it is a port and not an entire new game.

We should consider ourselves lucky to get a free Linux version for a years old purchase on Windows, not outright expect it and be hostile if it isn’t free.

Please Note: Our comments section is always open for debate, but manners cost nothing. I expect a certain level of decorum on hot topics like this. Article taken from GamingOnLinux.com.
Tags: Editorial
24 Likes
About the author -
author picture
I am the owner of GamingOnLinux. After discovering Linux back in the days of Mandrake in 2003, I constantly came back to check on the progress of Linux until Ubuntu appeared on the scene and it helped me to really love it. You can reach me easily by emailing GamingOnLinux directly.
See more from me
The comments on this article are closed.
172 comments
Page: «17/18»
  Go to:

Alm888 Mar 22, 2017
Quoting: JanIt's not about 3.5 % or 5 % desktop market share for macOS -- it's about profitability of a certain market segment and if people are willing to pay for a product.

Windows is much more profitable. The "game is not even on Steam" behavior is outright irrational if there are no additional factors, like Apple® paying for the exclusive product.

Quoting: JanApple users seem to spend more on apps and games than the average Linux user.

It seems wrong to you. See Humble Visualizations for details. In short, Linux users are more generous.

Quoting: JanThat's one of the major reasons why SteamOS is so important for Linux to have a realistic chance as a gaming platform. It's one target distribution instead of a hundred.

Sorry, I won't buy this. Seen that fallacy too many times. Even though Steam™ is the one additional target distribution to the hundred, I've personally never used Steam (nor I willing to, ever), I've never used Ubuntu™ and I can confirm: that "over 9000 distros hell" is utter BS. Everything works if the developers are following standards and begins to fall apart when they are trying to be smart and start bundling outdated Steam-runtime libraries or packaging to "*.deb".

Quoting: JanGuys like Jonathan Blow might seem to be arrogant or pretentious to you -- but these are smart people and it's sad they don't think of Linux as a "viable" and profitable option for their games.

Are you implying that guys like "Defender's Quest" developers are not smart? Sorry, but that is another BS.

"Jonathan Blow"s and "Tommy Refenes"es are "Windows Programmers" trying to rationalize their lack of skill and general inability to write decent OS-agnostic code with insults. I think by the time Refenes said that phrase he barely understood what Open Source is and was under false impression that releasing under Linux requires to open the code. Not that his code is somewhat unique or unorthodox in any way to be worth protecting...

Quoting: JanAsk Feral why they ported Sleeping Dogs: Definitive Edition to Mac but not Linux, why there's no LEGO or family-themed game from them on the platform, etc.?

I dunno... Because of the RightHolders? "Apple Paid Not To"™? Ask them yourself, please. I couldn't care less about any "Feral-ports".

P.S. I understand clearly you are a Mac user (you stated it yourself in the "PC Info"). I'm sorry if I somehow attacked your feelings.
Dribbleondo Mar 22, 2017
I'm probably gonna make a Video voicing my opinion on this particular subject in the near-future. Porting houses definitely deserve revenue, but beating the convenience of Steamplay to get that revenue by creating 2 game entries is basically the only way around the "guaranteed revenue" minefield.


Last edited by Dribbleondo on 22 March 2017 at 3:01 pm UTC
Jan Mar 22, 2017
Dear Alm,

don't worry -- I don't feel attacked at all, just having a serious conversation. I'm both a Linux and Mac user (Desktop: elementary OS + SteamOS, Laptop: macOS).

To put it straight: Jonathan Blow only released the macOS-version of "The Witness" on the Mac App Store first. The Windows version has been out on Steam for quite some time. I'm pretty sure Apple didn't pay any money at all for exclusivity. That's not how they roll. Maybe with one exception: Super Mario Run on iOS.

My point is: The Mac App Store (MAS) is a storefront only for Mac apps. Revenue is clearly coming from Apple users. If you're a developer and enough people buy your app from there, it's a pretty good indication that Mac development is profitable (or at least break-even) for you.

There is no such thing as the MAS on Linux. Ubuntu's Software Center or elementary's App Center are not comparable at all, because they mainly consist of open-source or non-commercial applications.

To be considered a "viable" platform for commercial software development (such as games) -- Linux needs a well-curated and managed storefront for apps (not only games). Steam partly offers that for games, but the "buy once, play everywhere" approach of Steamplay is counter-productive to the business model of the current porting companies.

And as long as no big publisher (EA, 2K, Ubi, etc) is considering Linux as a relevant platform the whole Linux AAA games market depends on the well-being of porting houses such as Aspyr, Feral and Virtual Programming.
adamhm Mar 22, 2017
Quoting: JanPeople not willing to pay for essential work like converting or partly rebuilding a DirectX-based game for OpenGL or Vulkan and play-testing on several distributions is both sad and frustrating to see.

The thing is, people who want to support Linux developers and want more Linux ports generally shouldn't be buying Windows games anyway*, and the existing buyers can reasonably be assumed to be almost entirely Windows-only users (who will likely never even think about using the other versions). So making the Linux ports available to existing buyers should equate to basically no loss, as Linux users should be waiting until a Linux version is available before they buy.

Cutting off existing owners from Linux ports unless they pay extra would only deter new users from trying Linux & inhibit growth of Linux's market share, which in turn would make it even less viable for developers to make Linux ports, which would in turn result in the market stagnating and then shrinking.

*I don't consider this a strict rule though - I don't consider it a problem to buy older Windows games for running in Wine, but only once they're old enough & discounted/cheap enough that a Linux port is highly unlikely (and I insist on DRM-free).

Quoting: Jan2. Jonathan Blow released the Mac version of The Witness using the Metal-API a few days ago on the Mac App Store first (self-published), Steam will follow later. Some people on Twitter and I guess reddit asked him for a Linux version. He basically answered "no one would buy them anyway as Braid didn't make any money on Linux".

Braid, a game which came out on 2009, 4 years before Steam for Linux launched (which marked the start of the current Linux gaming "era" and has since provided a huge boost to Linux gaming), and bundled a fair bit during that time IIRC. Not exactly the best example to use as a metric... also as noted by Alm888, Linux users tend to be the most generous buyers of Humble Bundles.

Quoting: Jan1. Aspyr pitched both a Mac and Linux version of Mafia III to 2K. They agreed on macOS, but were not interested in the Linux market.

Quoting: Jan3. Double Fine released Headlander for Mac using Apple's Metal-API and denied plans for Linux support because Adult Swim doesn't see its viability. The game was built for DirectX and Metal only -- no OpenGL or Vulkan support.

This sounds like the usual big publisher risk aversion TBH. Linux gaming is still relatively new and the market is still quite small, but it's growing. Such big changes won't happen overnight; just give it time.

We also need to do our part of encouraging people to try Linux, and helping to make things as easy as possible for new users.

Quoting: JanThat's one of the major reasons why SteamOS is so important for Linux to have a realistic chance as a gaming platform. It's one target distribution instead of a hundred.

Valve themselves recommend that developers target Ubuntu, and this is generally accepted as the de-facto "standard" Linux distro. This doesn't mean that the games won't work on other distros though (and the overwhelming majority work just fine on other popular distros such as Arch due to the use of standardised libraries, as Alm888 noted).
Whitewolfe80 Mar 22, 2017
Quoting: DribbleondoI'm probably gonna make a Video voicing my opinion on this particular subject in the near-future. Porting houses definitely deserve revenue, but beating the convenience of Steamplay to get that revenue by creating 2 game entries is basically the only way around the "guaranteed revenue" minefield.

Not sure if i do not have a game that i want and its ported to Linux of course i will be all over it but i am not keen on paying Feral or Aspyr for a game I already own. I agree it would be interesting to see the various contracts Feral etc draw up is it totally based on units sold on Linux or is it a flat fee with additional sales royalties.
Alm888 Mar 22, 2017
Quoting: JanIf you're a developer and enough people buy your app from there, it's a pretty good indication that Mac development is profitable (or at least break-even) for you.

Somewhere here was an article stating Feral just recently getting even on Linux while being profitable on Mac for some time. So yes, I do not worry about Feral's (or other porters' ) wellbeing. ;)

Quoting: JanThere is no such thing as the MAS on Linux. Ubuntu's Software Center or elementary's App Center are not comparable at all, because they mainly consist of open-source or non-commercial applications.

I loathe the sole idea of all eggs in one basket! That one can be happy that all of the games are being provided by single publisher (be it Microsoft, Nintendo, Sony, Apple, Valve or whatever) which can single-handily decide what to sell and what not and how much take for itself (30%.. 40%? 90%! And what will you do about it? It is either you comply or GTFO!) and having the ability to "ban" users for whatever reason instantly stripping them from all purchases is mind-bogging to me!

That's why I'm all for Humble Bundle, GOG, itch.io, Desura (RIP!) and even self-distribution! PC is an Open Platform, not some walled garden.

Quoting: JanTo be considered a "viable" platform for commercial software development (such as games) -- Linux needs a well-curated and managed storefront for apps (not only games). Steam partly offers that for games, but the "buy once, play everywhere" approach of Steamplay is counter-productive to the business model of the current porting companies.

The heck with Steam! (See above)

Saying that, I see no problems having Linux versions separately. It should teach Windows and Mac users a lesson not to pretend to be a Linux users. Apparently there are a lot of simpletons pre-ordering Windows games on unsustained promises of future Linux version (I will not post examples here... they are too well-known) and bugging developers with "+1 for Linux" comments while having 200+ hours of Windows gameplay themselves. This only makes developers believe every Linux user secretly has Windows partition so there is no point releasing Linux versions: all interested Linux users got Windows version already.


Last edited by Alm888 on 22 March 2017 at 4:27 pm UTC
Jan Mar 22, 2017
Quoting: Alm888I loathe the sole idea of all eggs in one basket! That one can be happy that all of the games are being provided by single publisher (be it Microsoft, Nintendo, Sony, Apple, Valve or whatever) which can single-handily decide what to sell and what not and how much take for itself (30%.. 40%? 90%! And what will you do about it? It is either you comply or GTFO!) and having the ability to "ban" users for whatever reason instantly stripping them from all purchases is mind-bogging to me!

That's why I'm all for Humble Bundle, GOG, itch.io, Desura (RIP!) and even self-distribution! PC is an Open Platform, not some walled garden.

It's a common misunderstanding macOS would be a "walled garden" like iOS or consoles. It is not and it never has been. Apple introduced the Mac App Store in January 2011, but you can buy, download or install applications from wherever you want as long as you checked the right box in your system security settings.

But the Mac App Store has been a blessing for less tech-savvy users like my wife if they want to download and install apps from an official, safe source without the risk of getting malware or being the victim of some shady online reseller (like key resellers).

Those storefronts are not for geeks like us, but they are important for mainstream adoption of an OS (or console).

Personally, I buy from GOG for both Mac and Linux (love their DRM-free DNA and business model!), directly from the Feral store (ports), Mac App Store, MacGameStore and Humble Bundle. Rarely off of Steam.


Last edited by Jan on 22 March 2017 at 5:10 pm UTC
Alm888 Mar 22, 2017
Quoting: JanIt's a common misunderstanding macOS would be a "walled garden" like iOS or consoles. ...but you can buy, download or install applications from wherever you want as long as you checked the right box in your system security settings.

Well, the idea is there. Microsoft is also going in that direction with Windows Store (or however it is called). It is generally better for the owning company to fully control all and every outlets and sources of applications for the OS as it allows to control money flow.

Quoting: JanPersonally, I buy ... directly from the Feral store. Rarely off of Steam.

But I thought Feral Store is just Steam-keys re-seller. Am I right?

P.S. I wonder whether Feral will be able to easily maintain Mac releases profitable with Apple's Metal push (and OpenGL abandonment) or not... Current setup with "enemy of my enemy is also my enemy" with Direct3D 12 vs. Metal vs. Vulkan makes things extremely murky. Most probably Apple will pay developers for MacOS exclusives for the time being (till Metal gains enough of traction). Apple is not Valve, they will not repeat Gaben's mistake with SteamOS.
elmapul Mar 23, 2017
Quoting: adamhmWe also need to do our part of encouraging people to try Linux, and helping to make things as easy as possible for new users.

i guess it maybe easier to persuade mac users to use linux than windows people.
why? reasons:
dead island:
http://store.steampowered.com/app/383150/
Saints Row: The Third:
http://store.steampowered.com/app/55230/?snr=1_7_7_230_150_3
payday 2:
http://store.steampowered.com/app/218620/?snr=1_7_7_230_150_4

we have at least 3 AAA that they dont (we might have others, i'm to busy to search)

also for this game, they will not need buy again.



and for windows users, we might get those few games who have an better performance on linux than on windows (and remind then that the others run worse due to bad ports and being designed for DX)
they will not change for linux but may at least dualboot


Last edited by elmapul on 23 March 2017 at 11:05 am UTC
Jan Mar 23, 2017
Quoting: Alm888But I thought Feral Store is just Steam-keys re-seller. Am I right?

P.S. I wonder whether Feral will be able to easily maintain Mac releases profitable with Apple's Metal push (and OpenGL abandonment) or not... Current setup with "enemy of my enemy is also my enemy" with Direct3D 12 vs. Metal vs. Vulkan makes things extremely murky. Most probably Apple will pay developers for MacOS exclusives for the time being (till Metal gains enough of traction). Apple is not Valve, they will not repeat Gaben's mistake with SteamOS.

Yes. But if you buy a Steam key from Feral it counts as a Linux/Mac sale and they might even get a little bit more money for their efforts.

Back in the day I used to buy Feral's Mac games directly from their store on DVD. There was no DRM, just a simple CD-check. Nowadays you can get Feral's ports on the Mac App Store and Steam (Linux and Mac).

No porting company (except Aspyr's Bloober Team games) offers DRM-free titles on GOG or similar sites.

Regarding Apple and Metal: I'm not sure if they would ever buy "exclusive" Metal titles for the App Store. They have never been seriously interested in games. It's a good way to show off new OS features or their own Ax chips at WWDC, but most devs will be very happy to get some stage time at Apple events or a nice feature banner on the App store, which helps boosting sales.

Both Unity and Unreal Engine 4 offer Metal-support out of the box. Therefore I don't think Apple cares too much about Vulkan. iOS is still the most important mobile gaming platform in terms of revenue, so devs will support Metal no matter what. Android uses Vulkan, but all the mobile app developers I talk to on a regular basis make more money on Apple's storefront, even though the market share of iPhone and iPad is smaller.
While you're here, please consider supporting GamingOnLinux on:

Reward Tiers: Patreon. Plain Donations: PayPal.

This ensures all of our main content remains totally free for everyone! Patreon supporters can also remove all adverts and sponsors! Supporting us helps bring good, fresh content. Without your continued support, we simply could not continue!

You can find even more ways to support us on this dedicated page any time. If you already are, thank you!
The comments on this article are closed.