It’s been a long time since I’ve done this, but here’s part 5 in the series of me talking to developers about how their games have been selling on Linux.
If you missed the previous articles: part 1, part 2, part 3, part 4.
Beamdog
For those who don’t recognise the name, Beamdog are the people behind revamps of classic RPG titles like Planescape: Torment: Enhanced Edition and Baldur's Gate: Enhanced Edition.
They gave some details about how Planescape: Torment: Enhanced Edition sold on Steam:
- 91.74% - Windows
- 6.22% - Mac
- 2.04% - Linux
Additionally, they also gave details about install numbers from their own Beamdog client:
- 91.13% - Windows
- 6.38% - Mac
- 2.49% - Linux
Here’s what Beamdog CTO, Scott Brooks had to say about Linux support:
QuoteWe really think the Infinity Engine games are something special and work hard to bring them to people that might not otherwise be able to play them. We've worked with professional and volunteer translators to help bring Baldur's Gate: Enhanced Edition to 14 languages, and we add things like Story Mode to help people who otherwise would have a hard time playing these great games. We've ported an engine that was originally built in the 16bit to 32bit transition to 64bit in order to let people continue enjoying these games. There are people on Linux that would love to play our games specifically on Linux, and we would love to let them.
Also, if you missed it I did an interview with Beamdog before, you can see that here.
MidBoss
MidBoss, the roguelike where you possess the bodies of your enemies released with Day-1 Linux support back in May. Here’s the figures their developer gave:
- 93.4 - Windows
- 4.7% - Mac
- 1.9% - Linux
Here’s what the developer of MidBoss had to say about supporting Linux now and in future:
QuoteI feel pretty good about supporting both platforms in MidBoss, particularly since Ethan Lee who made FNA did the ports and it wasn't too expensive. Without him they probably wouldn't have happened.
In the future I'll be using a new, completely custom framework that can create .NET executables as well as JavaScript/WebGL builds from a single C# codebase. We're planning to initially use the web builds with Electron to keep supporting Mac and Linux. This should perform just fine for smaller games such as Ultra Hat Dimension which is probably coming out on Steam in early 2018.
When we do wind up doing a bigger more demanding game again (MidBoss 2? Who knows!) I'll investigate getting the .NET versions working on Mac and Linux too. The .NET side uses OpenTK/OpenGL so it shouldn't be that difficult, hopefully, we just don't have the time/resources right now to go into it.
Milkstone Studios
To my surprise, Milkstone Studios were very open and sent over details about multiple titles!
White Noise 2
- 95.31% - Windows
- 4.06% - OSX
- 0.64% - Linux
Only Linux details given for these:
- Little Racers Street: 12.05%
- Pharaonic: 4.59%
- Ziggurat: 2.19%
- White Noise Online: 0.96%
It’s worth noting, that just before the release of Little Racers Street, I did an interview with Milkstone Studios about the title. That may have helped towards the rather high Linux percentage there.
Here’s what they said about continuing to support Linux:
Milkstone StudiosSeeing these numbers, look like Linux players are more used to single player experiences, so that might be the reason.
We support Linux on a pretty basic level (we're not Linux users ourselves, so we have limited experience with it). Linux support takes up lots of support time (I'd say around 20-25% of our support time is dedicated to addressing Linux issues), and it's hard to justify dedicating our time to this platform if sales for it are low. However, Unity allows for easy generation of Linux builds, and most of the work required for a proper port was done with Ziggurat, so for now we'll continue releasing games with Linux support, and trying to solve issues to the best of our knowledge.
While they weren’t able to give any specific details, I did speak to two of the bigger porters Feral Interactive and Aspyr Media.
Here’s what Feral Interactive had to say:
QuoteThe Linux market remains small in comparison to Mac, and tiny compared to Windows. Three years of bringing AAA games to Linux has taught us a lot about what works in sales terms, and what works less well. Although we had hoped that the Steam Machine would gain more traction, we have been pleasantly surprised by the Linux sales achieved on distros other than SteamOS, and continually encouraged by the passionate (and vocal!) audience of Linux gamers. However, we are disappointed by the promotion of piracy by some, which does disproportionate damage to the economics of bringing games to an already small platform.
Take a look at what Aspyr Media said:
QuoteOur Linux business continues to be an important part of our strategy going forward. We consider Linux a viable platform, and continue to make it a target goal of any deal we strike.
I did reach out to Virtual Programming, but they were extremely busy and didn't have time.
I would like to thank everyone who got back to me. Sadly some didn’t reply, but given how busy developers are actually making games, it’s all good!
Some you may have missed, popular articles from the last month:
The comments on this article are closed.
All posts need to follow our rules. For users logged in: please hit the Report Flag icon on any post that breaks the rules or contains illegal / harmful content. Guest readers can email us for any issues.
Oh, boy. Are you kidding? macOS -- unlike iOS -- is an open platform just like Linux.You're calling a platform that is literally illegal to crosscompile to (more precisely, no legal way exists yet and all other ways are explicitly made illegal by Apple) open just like Linux? Who's kidding now? :)
macOS is open from an end user's perspective: You're free to install any software you want, use the terminal, don't use any Apple Services like iCloud or Apple Music/iTunes, download software from websites or Steam. Apple does not force you to use the Mac App Store (except for OS updates) -- unlike on iOS where the App Store is mandatory.
Some people constantly mix up iOS and macOS, which is tiring to be honest.
1 Likes, Who?
1. Lock-in taxes cross platform development making it more expensive.
2. In practice it means some simply won't do it, and will limit their releases to bigger platforms (not Linux).
MS, Apple, Sony and the like do a lot to perpetuate lock-in and tax developers who don't want to limit releases to their platforms. Example of that is them not supporting Vulkan on their locked systems.
1. Depends on the kind of software you're developing. If we as a development studio want to use OS and hardware specific features like Touch ID on Apple devices -- a native app is the way to go. But in many cases we're just building a HTML5/web app with a 'native' viewer/container on our target platform and it works perfectly fine. Both MS and Apple promote HTML5 usage and discard proprietary plug-ins like Flash. It's not always black and white with the big corporations.
2. The reason why you can't port to any platform is resources, especially regarding support after release. iOS for example is very easy to maintain because most Apple users update their devices regularly and it's a relatively unified ecosystem with a limited selection of hardware to test stuff on (we as a small studio can afford to test on the most popular devices).
3. Vulkan on Sony and Apple hardware
Both vendors don't license out their operating systems or technology. They even build their own chips (Sony in the past with Cell, Apple with their customised A+ chips). You cannot legally build and sell an 'alternative PlayStation' or a copycat iPhone. Those companies make money with their fixed/locked hard-/software combination and exclusive features. This is different from MS's business model, which relies on building an OS platform for anyone to use and build whatever they like.
If Microsoft as an 'open platform supplier' decides to ignore or even prevent Vulkan this is much more crucial to Linux' development as a viable gaming platform than Sony or Apple doing their own thing.
1 Likes, Who?
slaapliedje Aug 3, 2017
[quote=Jan]
This is the thing here. If Vulkan was a Linux Only API, then it'd probably very rarely get used. The fact that it was being worked on before Metal (it derives from AMD's Mantle), and Apple had stopped supplying newer OpenGL, they were specifically trying to be more anti-competitive to Linux/other BSDs. For so many years, whenever there was a Mac port of something, Linux users would ask the the developers for a Linux port, and the largest argument for it was "It should be easy, since you have already done the DirectX to OpenGL conversion." But that argument has now been killed. Now it's "Oh, you only have to do the Metal to Vulkan conversion after already converting from DirectX"
You see how that's sort of a jerk move? And what does Metal bring over Vulkan? Nothing except a "DirectX like API, but only for Mac" It's complete vendor lock-in. By the way, Vulkan isn't just a Windows/Linux API, It is supported on Android too. So any reason for 'mobile 3D for metal' goes out the window too.
1. Lock-in taxes cross platform development making it more expensive.
2. In practice it means some simply won't do it, and will limit their releases to bigger platforms (not Linux).
...
3. Vulkan on Sony and Apple hardware
Both vendors don't license out their operating systems or technology. They even build their own chips (Sony in the past with Cell, Apple with their customised A+ chips). You cannot legally build and sell an 'alternative PlayStation' or a copycat iPhone. Those companies make money with their fixed/locked hard-/software combination and exclusive features. This is different from MS's business model, which relies on building an OS platform for anyone to use and build whatever they like.
If Microsoft as an 'open platform supplier' decides to ignore or even prevent Vulkan this is much more crucial to Linux' development as a viable gaming platform than Sony or Apple doing their own thing.
This is the thing here. If Vulkan was a Linux Only API, then it'd probably very rarely get used. The fact that it was being worked on before Metal (it derives from AMD's Mantle), and Apple had stopped supplying newer OpenGL, they were specifically trying to be more anti-competitive to Linux/other BSDs. For so many years, whenever there was a Mac port of something, Linux users would ask the the developers for a Linux port, and the largest argument for it was "It should be easy, since you have already done the DirectX to OpenGL conversion." But that argument has now been killed. Now it's "Oh, you only have to do the Metal to Vulkan conversion after already converting from DirectX"
You see how that's sort of a jerk move? And what does Metal bring over Vulkan? Nothing except a "DirectX like API, but only for Mac" It's complete vendor lock-in. By the way, Vulkan isn't just a Windows/Linux API, It is supported on Android too. So any reason for 'mobile 3D for metal' goes out the window too.
0 Likes
Development of Metal most likely was dictated by Apple's hardware design, not Vulkan in particular. Apple sees Android as threat and as Android is one of reason's of Vulkan practical existence, Apple throwing a towel at the feet of Khronos seems logical. Also no one can really force them to act differently, as they aren't monopoly in any market.
While Vulkan not being available on MacOS/iOS is sad, I really don't buy Linux gaming as being one of reasons of Apple behaviour. Let's be honest - they care only about Android.
While Vulkan not being available on MacOS/iOS is sad, I really don't buy Linux gaming as being one of reasons of Apple behaviour. Let's be honest - they care only about Android.
0 Likes
This is the thing here. If Vulkan was a Linux Only API, then it'd probably very rarely get used. The fact that it was being worked on before Metal (it derives from AMD's Mantle), and Apple had stopped supplying newer OpenGL, they were specifically trying to be more anti-competitive to Linux/other BSDs.
Metal's initial release was in June 2014 -- but it was announced in 2013. Around the same time, AMD and DICE started to work on Mantle together. Vulkan's first official release was in February 2016.
Apple does not care about Vulkan or Linux gaming at all. They're focused on their own products as a combination of hardware and software. Metal was initially developed to drastically improve GPU performance on the iPhone and iPad while still being energy-efficient for longer battery life.
Does someone really think the richest company in the world is following a hidden agenda against the adoption of desktop Linux or even Linux gaming?
They own around 33 % of the mobile market -- Android (with Vulkan) is still the dominant platform, especially in developing countries and the tiger states. Vulkan has prominent support from Google.
Trust me, we've worked with Apple as a dev for many years. They play by their own rules, they are very sensitive about what content is being released on their platform and their development guidelines. They never cared about games in a big, meaningful way like Microsoft or Sony -- it was kind of an accident that iOS became the biggest mobile gaming platform. Now they're a gorilla in the gaming space -- if they like it or not -- but I highly doubt they secretly plot against Linux/BSD.
Last edited by Jan on 3 August 2017 at 1:10 pm UTC
1 Likes, Who?
Development of Metal most likely was dictated by Apple's hardware design, not Vulkan in particular.
Spot on.
0 Likes
So, we need bigger userbase.
I see only one way: to sell hardware with preinstalled GNU\Linux distros+all software casual user wanted (word/sheet redactor - office, audio and videoplayers and so on). Ubuntu out-the-box almost perfect. I see something like this in Russia, where DNS shop sells laptops with Ubuntu+ton of preinstalled software on it. But, hey, it's Russia, nobody cares about license in Russia. Vodka, Vodka, Balalaika. Any studen will install unlicensed (but today it is technically original with working updates, thanks to MS, who now practies: let them pirate our Windows, it better case, than they will use Linux) Windows for mere $8! Look at Chromebooks. They have crippled keyboard, very cramped SSD (32GB or so), and sell in millions numbers? Why? They're convenient to use from the box and the're cheap. Dirty cheap and have enough good quality of assembling and not bad battery life. This is exactly what we need. And Valve tried it with Steam machines, but it not go... Because Windows counterparts from the vendors sells cheaper. We need laptops / PCs with distro+preinstalled software and CHEAPER than Windows counterparts. And not in System76 or DNS in Snowy Russia, we need it any big store. From Walmart to Amazon. From BHP to Gamestop.
Last edited by Areso on 3 August 2017 at 1:38 pm UTC
I see only one way: to sell hardware with preinstalled GNU\Linux distros+all software casual user wanted (word/sheet redactor - office, audio and videoplayers and so on). Ubuntu out-the-box almost perfect. I see something like this in Russia, where DNS shop sells laptops with Ubuntu+ton of preinstalled software on it. But, hey, it's Russia, nobody cares about license in Russia. Vodka, Vodka, Balalaika. Any studen will install unlicensed (but today it is technically original with working updates, thanks to MS, who now practies: let them pirate our Windows, it better case, than they will use Linux) Windows for mere $8! Look at Chromebooks. They have crippled keyboard, very cramped SSD (32GB or so), and sell in millions numbers? Why? They're convenient to use from the box and the're cheap. Dirty cheap and have enough good quality of assembling and not bad battery life. This is exactly what we need. And Valve tried it with Steam machines, but it not go... Because Windows counterparts from the vendors sells cheaper. We need laptops / PCs with distro+preinstalled software and CHEAPER than Windows counterparts. And not in System76 or DNS in Snowy Russia, we need it any big store. From Walmart to Amazon. From BHP to Gamestop.
Last edited by Areso on 3 August 2017 at 1:38 pm UTC
0 Likes
Does it all impact linux gaming in any way? In other words: do you think there would be a lot people suddenly installing a linux distro on their computers if Apple changed its practices?
All that has a negative impact. Consider for example engine developers like Epic and their UE. Because they need to support multiple redundant backends (DX, Metal, GNM, and then OpenGL/Vulkan), what do you think they are focused on more? Bigger ones of course. That's why games like Everspace suffer from bugs on Linux that aren't fixed in a long time. All that is a direct consequence of lock-in jerks pushing their APIs, instead of using open ones which would allow engine developers to produce higher quality result for each OS. What other practical demonstration of that impact do you need?
1 Likes, Who?
Does someone really think the richest company in the world is following a hidden agenda against the adoption of desktop Linux or even Linux gaming?
They have a simpler agenda, but still quite wicked. Insane lock-in everywhere, total NIH and sabotage of open standards when they can get away with it. Linux is just a collateral damage of that stance, but it doesn't make Apple's behavior any less evil.
Consider other cases (besides graphics). Apple didn't join Alliance for Open Media (while even MS did). Apple refused to support WebRTC in desktop Safari, they refused to support MSE, trying to sabotage adoption of DASH, and so on and so forth. The bottom line, they are the most notorious lock-in jerks around and they are causing a lot of damage to the industry because of that.
Last edited by Shmerl on 3 August 2017 at 3:52 pm UTC
0 Likes
slaapliedje Aug 3, 2017
And why wouldn't they have a hidden agenda against Desktop Linux? How many in the tech industry use Macs because they have a Unix-like environment underneath the shiny bits? Windows is just not good at administrating thousands of Linux servers. Macs are almost good enough if you can tolerate older versions of bash / python, etc. If it weren't for Apple lock-in for these people, I'm sure there would be more Desktop Linux users.
I'm still puzzled on what Mac owners are buying these games that don't get Linux ports. Most of them are too large and require more hardware than the majority of Macbooks have. Try running something like Mad Max on a intel chipset.. While there are ones out there with Nvidias, I'm betting that is a smaller majority. Then there are the PROs but who would spend that much money on something to game?
As far as the Metal vs Vulkan thing. Vulkan wasn't created mainly for Android, that was an afterthought. In fact only the most recent Android versions even support it. It was started as a low level API to replace openGL, which Apple had already long ago ditched. They created their own for lock-in there is only one reason to create an API that isn't cross platform. Same reason as MS not releasing DirectX everywhere.
I'm still puzzled on what Mac owners are buying these games that don't get Linux ports. Most of them are too large and require more hardware than the majority of Macbooks have. Try running something like Mad Max on a intel chipset.. While there are ones out there with Nvidias, I'm betting that is a smaller majority. Then there are the PROs but who would spend that much money on something to game?
As far as the Metal vs Vulkan thing. Vulkan wasn't created mainly for Android, that was an afterthought. In fact only the most recent Android versions even support it. It was started as a low level API to replace openGL, which Apple had already long ago ditched. They created their own for lock-in there is only one reason to create an API that isn't cross platform. Same reason as MS not releasing DirectX everywhere.
1 Likes, Who?
As far as the Metal vs Vulkan thing. Vulkan wasn't created mainly for Android, that was an afterthought. In fact only the most recent Android versions even support it. It was started as a low level API to replace openGL, which Apple had already long ago ditched. They created their own for lock-in there is only one reason to create an API that isn't cross platform. Same reason as MS not releasing DirectX everywhere.
Yep. I totally don't buy the argument "Metal was needed because Apple has some quirky hardware". Apple had all the time to join Vulkan working group, and address the needs of their hardware through participating in the API design. Apple didn't want to. Because lock-in.
Last edited by Shmerl on 3 August 2017 at 3:55 pm UTC
0 Likes
[quote=Shmerl]
What about CUPS, WebKit, Swift, Darwin, OpenCL/Grand Central, Bonjour/Zeroconf, USB-C/Thunderbolt, FireWire, embracing of HTML5 instead of Flash, etc.?
I have the impression certain people like to cherry pick a lot just to find another reason to bash 'Evil Apple' instead of focusing on the real reasons why Linux adaption in gaming and on the desktop in general is lacking.
Apple is not preventing Linux from succeeding.
The lack of software people actually want and use on a daily basis (e.g. Adobe Creative Suite, Microsoft Office) and no flagship hardware/software company with an attractive Linux-specific product is more important than anything coming out of Cupertino.
Consider other cases (besides graphics). Apple didn't join Alliance for Open Media (while even MS did). Apple refused to support WebRTC in desktop Safari, they refused to support MSE, trying to sabotage adoption of DASH, and so on and so forth. The bottom line, they are the most notorious lock-in jerks around and they are causing a lot of damage to the industry because of that.
What about CUPS, WebKit, Swift, Darwin, OpenCL/Grand Central, Bonjour/Zeroconf, USB-C/Thunderbolt, FireWire, embracing of HTML5 instead of Flash, etc.?
I have the impression certain people like to cherry pick a lot just to find another reason to bash 'Evil Apple' instead of focusing on the real reasons why Linux adaption in gaming and on the desktop in general is lacking.
Apple is not preventing Linux from succeeding.
The lack of software people actually want and use on a daily basis (e.g. Adobe Creative Suite, Microsoft Office) and no flagship hardware/software company with an attractive Linux-specific product is more important than anything coming out of Cupertino.
2 Likes, Who?
Woah, I must have missed Planescape: Torment availability. Time to rectify that problem...
1 Likes, Who?
What about CUPS, WebKit, Swift, Darwin, OpenCL/Grand Central, Bonjour/Zeroconf, USB-C/Thunderbolt, FireWire, embracing of HTML5 instead of Flash, etc.?
Apple abandoned OpenCL as far as I know. Sure, in some cases they are doing something useful. But their general culture is very toxic.
Apple is not preventing Linux from succeeding.It's not about preventing. It's more about putting more roadblocks on purpose. They can't prevent it in the end.
Last edited by Shmerl on 3 August 2017 at 4:12 pm UTC
0 Likes
Your last paragraph is almost certainly true. But it does not actually counter anything anyone else is saying. If I have chickenpox and cancer, it is the cancer that is killing me--but it doesn't mean the chickenpox isn't there, or that it's wrong of me to ever complain about the chickenpox.Consider other cases (besides graphics). Apple didn't join Alliance for Open Media (while even MS did). Apple refused to support WebRTC in desktop Safari, they refused to support MSE, trying to sabotage adoption of DASH, and so on and so forth. The bottom line, they are the most notorious lock-in jerks around and they are causing a lot of damage to the industry because of that.
What about CUPS, WebKit, Swift, Darwin, OpenCL/Grand Central, Bonjour/Zeroconf, USB-C/Thunderbolt, FireWire, embracing of HTML5 instead of Flash, etc.?
I have the impression certain people like to cherry pick a lot just to find another reason to bash 'Evil Apple' instead of focusing on the real reasons why Linux adaption in gaming and on the desktop in general is lacking.
Apple is not preventing Linux from succeeding.
The lack of software people actually want and use on a daily basis (e.g. Adobe Creative Suite, Microsoft Office) and no flagship hardware/software company with an attractive Linux-specific product is more important than anything coming out of Cupertino.
Last edited by Purple Library Guy on 3 August 2017 at 4:16 pm UTC
0 Likes
And why wouldn't they have a hidden agenda against Desktop Linux? How many in the tech industry use Macs because they have a Unix-like environment underneath the shiny bits? Windows is just not good at administrating thousands of Linux servers. Macs are almost good enough if you can tolerate older versions of bash / python, etc. If it weren't for Apple lock-in for these people, I'm sure there would be more Desktop Linux users.
I use Linux daily on my own PC, but I cannot put it on the machines of our employees because the software we need to run our business is simply not available for Linux. Fact.
The Mac for us is like the best of both worlds: Great hardware and software design, reliable and well supported, but still customisable thanks to the proper UNIX foundation. The ROI is convincing, ask our CFO.
Personally, I don't know a single person in the tech and startup world leading a vendetta against free software and Linux adaption on desktop. We all use it to run our servers and web services – we've got Ubuntu, Debian, elementary, etc. running in VMs and on certain machines.
But my people want Photoshop, not Gimp and Final Cut Pro and some like Excel, even though I don't like MS Office either. We're a 'choose your fave OS' kinda employer. But 99 % of people pick a MacBook Pro over a System76 equivalent running Ubuntu for example. Of course, we're just a super tiny fraction of the creative/tech market -- but that's been our experience in the last 15, 17 years.
0 Likes
Your last paragraph is almost certainly true. But it does not actually counter anything anyone else is saying. If I have chickenpox and cancer, it is the cancer that is killing me--but it doesn't mean the chickenpox isn't there, or that it's wrong of me to ever complain about the chickenpox.
That's true, but I listed several important open source technologies which Apple mainly contributed to or developed themselves. One of them is the foundation of their operating system and another the standard programming language on iOS and macOS.
However, I'm not Apple's advocate or lawyer, it's not my duty to defend their business moves. Apple going all-in on Vulkan would have been my choice, I have stated this several times before.
But they decided to do their own thing -- again, like a thousand times before.
They built their entire business on integrated, relatively closed down systems. It's how they roll. This might be wrong for you and me and Linux geek 52 on stackoverflow, but it doesn't influence Linux' success in a meaningful way.
Valve bravely ventured into Linux gaming to fight 'evil and locked-down' Microsoft. What's left three years later? No Witcher 3, no Street Fighter V, broken promises and a confusing, failed Steam Machines campaign.
I like SteamOS, run it daily on my couch PC, it just got another stable update two days ago. Dig what Valve still does. But will it really change anything?
Not until someone finally goes all-in on Linux/SteamOS and treats it as a priority project.
Linux gaming's problem is not Apple or Microsoft having a hidden agenda against open source -- it's no one in the Linux world is having any gaming related agenda at all.
1 Likes, Who?
They built their entire business on integrated, relatively closed down systems. It's how they roll. This might be wrong for you and me and Linux geek 52 on stackoverflow, but it doesn't influence Linux' success in a meaningful way.
Lock-in has no impact only if those who push it are small players. Apple are far from small, they quite unfortunately have significant influence on various markets. So their anti-competitive moves cause actual damage (slowing down progress and so on). "That's how they roll" doesn't justify it in any way. You can repeat that "no agenda" argument, but it doesn't change the fact of actual damage caused.
Regarding Swift, Apple only opened it because of strong competition (Rust). Which is good in the end, but personally I'd prefer Rust by a huge margin. In general Apple is a complete opposite of openness when it comes to development tools.
Last edited by Shmerl on 3 August 2017 at 4:49 pm UTC
1 Likes, Who?
Lock-in has no impact only if those who push it are small players. Apple are far from small, they quite unfortunately have significant influence on various markets. So their anti-competitive moves cause actual damage (slowing down progress and so on). "That's how they roll" doesn't justify it in any way. You can repeat that "no agenda" argument, but it doesn't change the fact of actual damage caused.
Apple is a giant in mobile, but a dwarf on the desktop. If we're still discussing graphics APIs for demanding PC games I don't think the argument of "Apple is slowing down progress" is strong enough. How could they? They are only a fraction of the market and don't offer gaming specific hardware.
Microsoft and DirectX on the other hand is a different case. They're the elephant in the room of PC gaming and a big player in the console space with Xbox. I guess DirectX > Vulkan conversion and feature parity is the deciding factor for Linux in the future, not a handful of Metal titles.
0 Likes
Patreon
PayPal
See more from me