Valve has boosted their Linux ranks by hiring another developer to work on open source graphics

You don't attack an overwhelmingly superior enemy straight out of the box; you build your strength and gradually eat away at his defences until you've evened out the odds.

I like your analogy, however I think you also have to be careful about your enemy gaining territory and strength while you mess around learning basic strategy. Unlike many games, the enemy AI in this "reality" game tends to be quite aggressive.

It -is- a sound strategy, and I think a lesson learned from their failed attempt to push SteamOS-based SteamMachines at a time when the product wasn't yet ready to compete with established systems. If you want to gnaw away at Windows/XBox's market share, you need to present customers a fully functional system that's -at least- on par with what you're attacking. We still lack a convincing argument for gamers currently (more or less happily) using Windows for gaming to switch to Linux. Every single game available for Linux is also available for Windows, so we need to beat Windows as a -platform-.

Mind you, we may have a couple of arguments for gamers currently (more or less happily) using consoles for gaming to switch to Steamboxes. At original release those arguments weren't strong enough to stack up against the Steamboxes' disadvantages (polish problems, lack of multimedia integration, price etc), but those are the kind of thing this long game is meant to get rid of, except multimedia which will take a bit of work with the multimedia providers. Get rid of those disadvantages, and you have a console with a big library that, with the Steam controller, allows you to play games you can't normally play on consoles (like complex strategy games) and play other games better than you can normally play them on consoles. And also with games that are often cheap.

I think a future re-release, with issues fixed and a lot bigger marketing push, would have a decent chance of making a dent.

I do hear you about a feeling of lost momentum, at least in the AAA space. I'd say that, more and more, anyone much smaller than that--specifically, anyone using one of the major game engines--is likely to take a "why not?" approach to Linux just because it's so much less work releasing multi-platform than it used to be. Ultimately, though, I don't know that it's going to be a story of this studio waking up or that studio throwing a crumb. We'll see more momentum if Valve starts feeling a pinch from moves by Microsoft and decides they better get Plan B (Linux) under way seriously, or if Linux just starts organically increasing its desktop share. There are some indications that may be slowly happening, but I'd sure as hell like to see a faster shift and less ambiguous data.

I am hoping that with the work that Valve and others are putting into the AMD graphics drivers, then basic AMD Ryzen 5 2400g APU based boxes, like the new one from Zotac, would be 'good enough' Linux gaming platforms. However, I suspect that it will also need modern action games to support Vulkan to get around 60 fps at medium quality. If these boxes can be priced at say $300, then with their advantage of also being a good Linux PC, they could be very competitive to current consoles in the market. The Ryzen APUs are out in a week, so will soon see.

I hope Valve continues to support Linux as their recent activity would suggest. We need someone with as many resources as they have contributing to the Linux gaming world.

By the way - locked-down systems could offend other companies (EA, Blizzard) too. But they may run into the trap by Microsoft first allowing other distribution platforms as Origin or the Battle.Net client for free, and then at some point asking cash for reselling and trying to kill off the "other" platforms. The very much reason why Origin exists (they don't want to pay valve for distribution), and the very reason Blizzard does it (they don't want to pay ~30 % to somebody else), which is very likely for huge AAA publishers.

No matter how many devs they throw at it: On the NVidia end, people always will have to use the proprietary drivers, unless some sanity returns to NVidia management (which is highly unlikely), no?

Solution is quite easy and likely will be a common choice for many Linux gamers going forward. Ditch Nvidia and use AMD. It's a shame of course that Nvidia are being jerks when it comes to proper Linux support, but it's not our problem anymore.


Last edited by Shmerl on 8 February 2018 at 11:38 pm UTC

I don't think that wine will ever reach the level where wine gaming comes close to the quality of Feral like ports.
(And I sincere hope that I'm right about this, otherwise the Linux community would shoot themselves pretty badly into their own feet when wine aims to compete with Feral etc and takes paying costumers away from them.)

I think you are wrong. I see no reason why Wine can't reach same quality, even though it could take longer time since Wine needs to support general Windows compatibility, while Feral can take shortcuts for each title.

Especially with projects like vkd3d for DX12 and dxvk for DX11, Wine eventually will be strongly competitive with Feral ports. And what's the problem with strong FOSS competition?

I don't think that wine will ever reach the level where wine gaming comes close to the quality of Feral like ports.
(And I sincere hope that I'm right about this, otherwise the Linux community would shoot themselves pretty badly into their own feet when wine aims to compete with Feral etc and takes paying costumers away from them.)

I think you are wrong. I see no reason why Wine can't reach same quality, even though it could take longer time since Wine needs to support general Windows compatibility, while Feral can take shortcuts for each title.

Especially with projects like vkd3d for DX12 and dxvk for DX11, Wine eventually will be strongly competitive with Feral ports. And what's the problem with strong FOSS competition?

Because I don't think companies should rely on wine for their games and if wine gets that good that might start happening.

What's the problem with strong FOSS competition?

In this case it reduces incentive for companies to natively support Linux.

Pumping as much cash into Linux supporting companies as possible is a big goal for Linux Gamers as cash is king.

Because I don't think companies should rely on wine for their games and if wine gets that good that might start happening.

I agree with you that companies should strive to do proper native ports. But relying on Feral's wrappers for them isn't any better than relying on Wine, if native aspect is concerned.

In fact, Wine has advantages that closed wrappers don't. It gives you more freedom. Not only it's FOSS with available code that you can modify and run as you like, it's not tied to any distributor and can be used with any game you want. Compare it to Feral's wrappers that are available on Steam only and only for a few titles selected by Feral. I.e. personally I don't benefit form Feral's wrappers at all, since I'm not using Steam, while I can easily use Wine with GOG and other DRM-free games.


Last edited by Shmerl on 9 February 2018 at 2:22 am UTC

What's the problem with strong FOSS competition?

In this case it reduces incentive for companies to natively support Linux.

Pumping as much cash into Linux supporting companies as possible is a big goal for Linux Gamers as cash is king.

I wouldn't argue with that, i.e. the fact that wrappers can have a chilling effect on making native ports. But that applies to all wrappers. By this logic you should see a problem with Feral too, since companies that use Feral's work cut costs and avoid proper native ports, using a wrapper instead. It's just cheaper for them. And on the other hand, if you are OK with some wrappers already, then you should be OK with all of them.

And see above, about what practical benefits Wine has in contrast with closed wrappers. Also, we as Linux users should support FOSS more, at least I'd expect that.


Last edited by Shmerl on 9 February 2018 at 1:59 am UTC

If the MacOS gaming scene still exist is, I'm sure the Linux one will remain.

What's the problem with strong FOSS competition?

In this case it reduces incentive for companies to natively support Linux.

Pumping as much cash into Linux supporting companies as possible is a big goal for Linux Gamers as cash is king.

I wouldn't argue with that, i.e. the fact that wrappers can have a chilling effect on making native ports. But that applies to all wrappers. By this logic you should see a problem with Feral too, since companies that use Feral's work cut costs and avoid proper native ports, using a wrapper instead. It's just cheaper for them. And on the other hand, if you are OK with some wrappers already, then you should be OK with all of them.

And see above, about what practical benefits Wine has in contrast with closed wrappers. Also, we as Linux users should support FOSS more, at least I'd expect that.

It's the principle behind my point that you missed. The principle is that developers and publishers who do Linux versions should get as much profit as we can give them if we want to show that we are a worthy pursuit.

The Linux market should be a lake full of gold just waiting for devs to come and tap.

Nothing wrong with gaming on wine it's just that it creates 0 incentive to produce a Linux port if the market will just buy your Windows version and 100% of the support is up to wine instead of the publisher or porter to follow through on.

It's simple stuff.


Last edited by ElectricPrism on 9 February 2018 at 6:07 am UTC

It's the principle behind my point that you missed. The principle is that developers and publishers who do Linux versions should get as much profit as we can give them if we want to show that we are a worthy pursuit.

But they aren't making Linux versions. Feral wraps it for them. That's not native Linux gaming any more than using Wine is. And as above since Feral make it, they tell you with what and where to use their wrapper. Wine developers don't tell you that, you can use it with anything you want. In this sense I see Feral's option as clearly worse one, since it limits you. And since I can't even give Feral any profit (they avoid releasing DRM-free games), it's all becoming completely theoretical, unlike Wine which I can use here and now.

I think we're talking about different things, no problem expanding on the topics you prefer, like I said nothing against wine -- hell I'll probably even use it for a select few games I want to make bottles for.

I think I'll call them all "Classics" though as I have a habit of referring to anything as Classic that requires a old emulator, runtime, or layer to make it work.


Last edited by ElectricPrism on 9 February 2018 at 6:22 am UTC

Celebrating again a company giving some efforts back to free and libre projects does not change anything. In fact it is the same "whitewashing" Google is doing, but hey ... it's all about proprietary software here and only sometimes about free / libre software!

What's the problem with strong FOSS competition?

In this case it reduces incentive for companies to natively support Linux.

Pumping as much cash into Linux supporting companies as possible is a big goal for Linux Gamers as cash is king.

I wouldn't argue with that, i.e. the fact that wrappers can have a chilling effect on making native ports. But that applies to all wrappers. By this logic you should see a problem with Feral too, since companies that use Feral's work cut costs and avoid proper native ports, using a wrapper instead. It's just cheaper for them. And on the other hand, if you are OK with some wrappers already, then you should be OK with all of them.

And see above, about what practical benefits Wine has in contrast with closed wrappers.

This is not a technical issues, I see your point in an ideal world where no money is involved. But unfortunately it's all _just_ about money. Developers and publishers need to feel that money can be earned when releasing for Linux. How should that work when Linux users would just buy the windows version anyway?

Lets say wine would aim for perfect support for Rise of the Tomb Raider. Lots of people would then buy the windows version and that in turn would mean a financial disaster for Feral once they release their version. It would be the end of all AAA gaming on Linux when even Feral can't earn money with Linux.

Also, we as Linux users should support FOSS more, at least I'd expect that.

Here we disagree, I prefer to support Linux as Operation System, that includes everything that would attract more users. Non-FOSS software is part of that. Restricting everything to FOSS will never reach the masses. You will need Steam, Netflix, Spotify and the likes if you want people to step over from other OS's. Remember, all non-technical people are usually only interested in having a nice GUI and getting access to their content (pim, documents, games, music, video etc.).

Just to add for clarity: I'm not against wine. I don't use it for games, just for two other applications and I'm grateful that it works. I do however use dosbox for some older games, which is more or less the same as using wine for older games. I just don't want wine to be a competitor to the already very few gaming studios and publishers that took the risk to invest into the Linux market.


Last edited by jens on 9 February 2018 at 8:24 am UTC

If Valve officially supported Wine by contributing with development and allowing to launch Windows games directly from Steam client, that would help to bring Windows gamers to Linux. I will never officially get all Windows games, so Wine is worth it.

The big problem there is that the publishers would have to agree to allowing their Win game(s) to be released with a Wine bottle. That is just as much a hard sell as getting them to release ports, native or not, even if they're not themselves assuming all the risk. Wine can be enough of a problem to work with and configure for the inexperienced without an even more clueless support staff trying to help.
Also currently such bottles would require including Steam itself in the bottle or else a Steam stub* of some kind, because software under Wine is not reliably able, last I checked and by design, to detect that it's under Wine nor any non-Wine software also running on the system (like say Linux Steam). Neither case would be tenable for various reasons to some the parties involved.


*Here I mean a stub in the sense of a truncated version that doesn't provide any UI but provides the standard back end functionality (cf. [url="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Test_stub"]Test stub on Wikipedia[/url])

Celebrating again a company giving some efforts back to free and libre projects does not change anything. In fact it is the same "whitewashing" Google is doing, but hey ... it's all about proprietary software here and only sometimes about free / libre software!

Fortunately Linux has more to offer than just free software.

I hope that Valve continues developing steamos under the radar. What we don't need right now is a public competitor for Windows 10S. Without competitors, Microsoft will only shoot itself in the foot like it did with IE. Of course the penalty and work needed to comply was very small, and Microsoft could hold on to monopolizing the browser "market" long enough to wipe out substantial part of the "competition".
So if we want to get the market healthy, we should refrain -for now- posing steamos as a viable alternative. We as users can though, but Valve shouldn't promote it as that (for now).