What games do you want ported to Linux? Feral Interactive want to know again

Agents of Mayhem. It looks quite good :-)

Focus on recent games because if they are older than 2 years... not enough people will buy them to make it worth it for the developer/porter. Pick more recent/new games people actually play so that future ports will be more eagerly persued because real profit was made. With that... here are my suggestions... and hopefully Feral and other porters build a relationship with the original releaser to have the timeframe of the Linux release reduced to within 2 weeks of Windows release.

Must haves:
1. PUBG
3. Destiny 2 (yeah, should be a definite focus! Money will be made)
3. Grand Theft Auto V (eh, I was torn about this one but there may be value because it's high on the Twitch scale)
4. For Honor

Makes sense to have:
5. Dark Souls 3
6. Nier Automata
7. Titanfall 2
8. Street Fighter 5

Honorable Mentions that would be incredible:
Resident Evil 7
Battlefield 1
Black Desert Online
Final Fantasy XV (maybe...maybe not... kinda feel like most linux users have weak systems that favor Indie games to begin with -->could be wrong)


If it can be played on WINE there is no value to justify porting to linux... and with that logical reasoning --> Witcher 3 and Overwatch did not make the list. Hellblade: Senua (this game seems too short and not enough lasting $/percentage of market interest)


Last edited by ShoNuff!!! on 17 Aug 2017 at 5:57 pm UTC

Final Fantasy XV (maybe...maybe not... kinda feel like most linux users have weak systems that favor Indie games to begin with -->could be wrong)

If it can be played on WINE there is no value to justify porting to linux... and with that logical reasoning --> Witcher 3 and Overwatch did not make the list. Hellblade: Senua (this game seems too short and not enough lasting $/percentage of market interest)

Just because a game "runs" in Wine doesn't mean there's no need to port it. Hell if we make it that way, devs might as well just develop for Windows and sit back while the Wine project advances enough for a game to be playable.

So according to what you say, there's no need for a Witcher 3 Linux port? Sorry but I beg to differ, first let me say about the FFXV and Linux users' systems, have a look at the "View PC info" of the GoL users, you'll find that many of them have medium-high end systems.

Now going back to Witcher 3, getting the game to run in Wine took many patches and my almost 1,200 Euro system cannot run it more than 30fps with low settings. Meanwhile my other old 5 year old system can run it at almost 65+ fps at a much higher detail on Windows. Despite this game's 2 years old now, I bet many Linux users would buy it if it was ported.


Last edited by Avehicle7887 on 17 Aug 2017 at 3:12 pm UTC

Final Fantasy XV (maybe...maybe not... kinda feel like most linux users have weak systems that favor Indie games to begin with -->could be wrong)

If it can be played on WINE there is no value to justify porting to linux... and with that logical reasoning --> Witcher 3 and Overwatch did not make the list. Hellblade: Senua (this game seems too short and not enough lasting $/percentage of market interest)

Just because a game "runs" in Wine doesn't mean there's no need to port it. Hell if we make it that way, devs might as well just develop for Windows and sit back while the Wine project advances enough for a game to be playable.

So according to what you say, there's no need for a Witcher 3 Linux port? Sorry but I beg to differ, first let me say about the FFXV and Linux users' systems, have a look at the "View PC info" of the GoL users, you'll find that many of them have medium-high end systems.

Now going back to Witcher 3, getting the game to run in Wine took many patches and my almost 1,200 Euro system cannot run it more than 30fps with low settings. Meanwhile my other old 5 year old system can run it at almost 65+ fps at a much higher detail on Windows. Despite this game's 2 years old now, I bet many Linux users would buy it if it was ported.

totally agree... even: just because someone managed to get a specific game to run on wine, doesn't mean everyone will be able to do it (had that experience too often).. and I'm talking about easily doing it, not fiddling for hours with settings and reading dozens of forum posts to finally get something that isn't capable to (nearly) fully utilize the hardware available as that won't motivate anyone to go on with Linux for gaming... I didn't buy Witcher 3 (though I'd really be interested) because there's no port for it available and I stopped buying MS-Windows-only games or DLCs for them.. but if there'd be a port available it'd in my list of owned games very quickly.. and after Witcher 2 was ported I thought they give it a chance, though the quality of the port wasn't very well (and what makes it actually bad: the promised optimization/fixes never arrived! so for me the bad response by some users is understandable, though the form may sometimes be questionable); but I think most users would give it a try anyway if it was released for Linux... just for the simple reason that everyone needs to start at some point into a new area and then learns (also with unkind remarks from users of missing expertise, but that isn't different on ANY other platform!) and the results of the further attempts usually improve, so I'd buy it also if it was done by VirtualProgramming again..

Just because a game "runs" in Wine doesn't mean there's no need to port it. Hell if we make it that way, devs might as well just develop for Windows and sit back while the Wine project advances enough for a game to be playable..

True, however, right now if a game is available to be played through WINE... a developer/porter may not want to dedicate the effort. Just my personal belief. Future games... need to be direct ports but right now, those games ran through WINE... if I were in business to make money porting... I would not waste my time.

So according to what you say, there's no need for a Witcher 3 Linux port? Sorry but I beg to differ, first let me say about the FFXV and Linux users' systems, have a look at the "View PC info" of the GoL users, you'll find that many of them have medium-high end systems.

Judging things from the GoL user pool may not be a good demographic to look at. Also, the Linux pool of players is small from a gaming perspective.... so from a revenue standpoint it's better to focus on currently played games that have a bigger impact for the company... if their focus is making money. If you focus n the top 4 games + revenue makers... that the great majority want to play then I think the company will be happy and most Linux users would be happy (will still be complaints but it will come from a smaller group).

Now going back to Witcher 3, getting the game to run in Wine took many patches and my almost 1,200 Euro system cannot run it more than 30fps with low settings. Meanwhile my other old 5 year old system can run it at almost 65+ fps at a much higher detail on Windows. Despite this game's 2 years old now, I bet many Linux users would buy it if it was ported.

All I am saying is the number of Linux users looking to play Witcher 3 (for that matter Overwatch), who have a system that'll even play it might not be significant enough to warrant doing from a business perspective... I would need to see real statistics though to confirm this... I could be completely wrong and admit that. Steam statistics on hardware and OS might be better to look at.


Last edited by ShoNuff!!! on 17 Aug 2017 at 4:47 pm UTC

8. Street Fighter 7

A couple of things on this... The latest Street Fighter is V (5) not 7.
My mates who are big Street Fighter fans do not like the latest version...

[What is wrong with Street Fighter V](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kNbAVIvr00g)

8. Street Fighter 7

A couple of things on this... The latest Street Fighter is V (5) not 7.
My mates who are big Street Fighter fans do not like the latest version...

[What is wrong with Street Fighter V](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kNbAVIvr00g)

Thanks.. was thinking about Tekken 7 for some reason ;-)

8. Street Fighter 7

A couple of things on this... The latest Street Fighter is V (5) not 7.
My mates who are big Street Fighter fans do not like the latest version...

[What is wrong with Street Fighter V](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kNbAVIvr00g)

best SF still was Street Fighter II turbo on SNES!!!
..... yes, I'm old.....

[quote=peta77]

best SF still was Street Fighter II turbo on SNES!!!
..... yes, I'm old.....

I'm probably just as or older... most people would rather play SFV overall right now... I know Capcom claims SF2 sold well but I don't really see it played that much in the small pool of people I know online. Additionally, I remember USSFIV having way to many issues when it was released.


Last edited by ShoNuff!!! on 17 Aug 2017 at 7:16 pm UTC

[quote=ShoNuff!!!]

best SF still was Street Fighter II turbo on SNES!!!
..... yes, I'm old.....

I'm probably just as or older... most people would rather play SFV overall right now... I know Capcom claims SF2 sold well but I don't really see it played that much in the small pool of people I know online. Additionally, I remember USSFIV having way to many issues when it was released.

of course no one wants to play the old stuff (SF2t is mor than 20 years old) when the "same thing" is available in a higher quality (at least graphically)... but at the time it was released it was top notch and a lot of fun to play... can't say the same for street fighter 4... comparing the improvement of hardware and the games' appearance; doesn't match! (for me)... also the interface (controls) got way to complicated for non-hardcore-players when considering "special"-move/attacks... but actually that's the problem with every sequel of something successful... you want to satisfy the nerds only, you end up with something like X3 and everyone left complaining about X rebirth (for me was the most playable as I actually got an explanation what it's about and how to do it... please don't get me wrong, I really like what they do and don't think at all any of them is a bad game/simulation).. or you redo it with better appearance only: everyone complains it's too boring/useless because there's nothing new... the path in between is even harder (consider you'd have to have done the sequel of Star Wars after the whole story has already been told...).

but anyway I'd like to have SF5 to have it on linux, so I'd still be able to play that kind of stuff... also for the new characters which may make some fights more interesting...

final note: as the developers themselves stated pretty early there'd be a linux version of the game (also reported here on GOL), I think it shouldn't be necessary to request a port of it but rather complain at capcom that they still aren't able to deliver! about 18 months after the official release! (though I wouldn't mind sending money to feral, as their ports and the support have been fantastic for all the games I bought from them)...

Despite this game's 2 years old now, I bet many Linux users would buy it if it was ported.

No. That's the problem - the Linux users who want to play Witcher 3 have already bought it, and would want the Linux port "for free".

I bought Witcher 2 and am awaiting the green light to drop the money on Witcher 1 and 3....

Despite this game's 2 years old now, I bet many Linux users would buy it if it was ported.

No. That's the problem - the Linux users who want to play Witcher 3 have already bought it, and would want the Linux port "for free".

I do want to play it, but why would I buy a game I can't play?

Despite this game's 2 years old now, I bet many Linux users would buy it if it was ported.

No. That's the problem - the Linux users who want to play Witcher 3 have already bought it, and would want the Linux port "for free".

How do you know they already bought it? I'd guess once Wine will reach full support, number of Linux users who would buy it will grow, but until that happens, port still can boost sales quite a bit as well. Either way, CDPR will get some money.


Last edited by Shmerl on 18 Aug 2017 at 6:53 am UTC

No. That's the problem - the Linux users who want to play Witcher 3 have already bought it, and would want the Linux port "for free".

I just don't have the budget to buy all the games I'd like to play, so the simplest solution for me to keep my wishlist from getting out of hand is to only buy games that actually support Linux. I've still got more than enough to choose from (wishlist currently at ~90 games on steam alone) but a game like Witcher 3 would shoot straight to the top.

The only non-Linux game I've bought since I started gaming again a few years back was Tesla Effect. That taught me not to buy based on promises. It's a good game and at some point started working beautifully in Wine, which is nice, but that's not Linux support. And I didn't resort to wine until it was certain that the Linux port was cancelled. I've since got a couple more Windows games as gifts or freebies, but I wouldn't pay a cent for any of them.

Despite this game's 2 years old now, I bet many Linux users would buy it if it was ported.

No. That's the problem - the Linux users who want to play Witcher 3 have already bought it, and would want the Linux port "for free".

Well, speaking as a Linux gamer who severely wants Witcher 3 and Shadow Warrior 2 - I have held off and refused to buy those games. For me, either they come out for Linux and I pay a good price for them or I wait 'til they drop to a fraction of their current price in a sale (e.g. 80% off).

But you're right too.. Numerous Linux gamers might have already bought Witcher 3 either dual-booting to Windows in order to play or messing around with WINE. Those people are unlikely to buy it again, if there is a subsequent Linux port.

EDIT: While on this subject, I really really hope AAA game developers get on board using Vulkan. Then if there is a fantastic AAA game which comes out, which people in the Linux community are desperate to play - at least it'll be easy-ish to get the game working with WINE, and performance should be decent too. Vulkan! Vulkan! Vulkan! Come on devs :)


Last edited by g000h on 18 Aug 2017 at 10:19 am UTC

Despite this game's 2 years old now, I bet many Linux users would buy it if it was ported.

No. That's the problem - the Linux users who want to play Witcher 3 have already bought it, and would want the Linux port "for free".

But that brings up another question, why should the end user be punished for paying for a game on a different platform if CD projeckt had kept their word. No linux user would of had to buy it on another platform

Despite this game's 2 years old now, I bet many Linux users would buy it if it was ported.

No. That's the problem - the Linux users who want to play Witcher 3 have already bought it, and would want the Linux port "for free".

But that brings up another question, why should the end user be punished for paying for a game on a different platform if CD projeckt had kept their word. No linux user would of had to buy it on another platform

Why should the porting house be "punished" by not getting paid for their work?

Well perhaps they should take that up with steam ie its not the end users responsibility who gets what. I do indeed have every sympathy for feral or whoever ports a game however I work damn hard for my money and if i own a game already am not going to buy it again just so i can go rah rah linux.

and after Witcher 2 was ported I thought they give it a chance, though the quality of the port wasn't very well (and what makes it actually bad: the promised optimization/fixes never arrived! so for me the bad response by some users is understandable, though the form may sometimes be questionable);

Um, exactly what optimizations did VP promise and not deliver ?

mainly performance improvements as even on decent hardware it was always very slow and had terrible framerates... that anouncement was that they would first finish the 2 or 3 other ports they had in the queue at that time and then start optimizing their wrapper framework and do update first the new ports and later the others including witcher 2... but that actually never happened (at least for witcher 2)

Despite this game's 2 years old now, I bet many Linux users would buy it if it was ported.

No. That's the problem - the Linux users who want to play Witcher 3 have already bought it, and would want the Linux port "for free".

But that brings up another question, why should the end user be punished for paying for a game on a different platform if CD projeckt had kept their word. No linux user would of had to buy it on another platform

Why should the porting house be "punished" by not getting paid for their work?

Well perhaps they should take that up with steam ie its not the end users responsibility who gets what. I do indeed have every sympathy for feral or whoever ports a game however I work damn hard for my money and if i own a game already am not going to buy it again just so i can go rah rah linux.

exactly, as much as you want to get paid for you work, so do others for theirs... and what you have paid for is the ms windows binaries and the data... so i'd agree with you if you'd say you don't want to pay the full price again, as the data should be platform independent... but the binaries & libraries can't be platform independent and from my point of view it would be totally OK if you pay for the binaries for each platform independently... then we'd also get rid of the discussion 'do porters get their share' that comes up every now and then...

Elite Dangerous
Doom ( 2016 )
Quake Champions ( assuming id's new overlords don't bother doing one )