If you want to see the rhythm-music platformer Runner3 on Linux, they need to see demand for it

I'm all fine with developers asking for demand. Maybe their last game was not really woth the port and they'd like to know if they can hope for better this time... I'd ask for it if I would buy it (not my cup, though), and I'd never play it on WINE. And never ever pirate again. (This excuse is so lame.)

They could start a quickstarter campaign in order to get presales and know if it's profitable on Linux (and that would also let us know which is the "$happy$ $number$" the publisher requires)

I don't like this attitude of developers who shun Linux and ask us to grovel in order to be able to give them money. So how will they measure demand? From a forum post? Forums posts aren't guaranteed sales. I am not interested in this type of game and would not buy it, but i could make a post too. I won't bother though because i find having to beg for a port absolutely pathetic. If they don't want our money, fine, we can play other games.

And the sad fact is that many of those developers don't really need to do this since they have already a history of ports on Linux, so there is no real technical issue for why they didn't port their latest game. Their engine already works on Linux, they don't write engines from scratch, so only minor alterations at best are required. They just don't do it because they know their games mostly work on WINE so they expect to get the sales without having to do any work. Most if not all of those lightweight indie games work on WINE in my experience anyway. So why bother with a Linux native port, right? That way you don't have to support it, or do any porting work, and you still get the money...

You know what developers? You are right, you don't have to do the work to port your game since we are going to play it on WINE. And we don't have to pay for the game since torrents exist. And people like me won't pay in order to have the privilege of playing it on WINE, when an alternative with best price on the market exists, like piratebay. See? Looking after your selfinterest works both ways...

I think someone woke up on the wrong foot today...

To tackle a few of your points:

• Their decision to not support Linux is likely based on sales from their previous title.


• A forum post with much support could point to their decision being wrong.


• Wine is a great tool. As long as they make sure not to break wine compatibility, why not depend on it?


• If Runner2 wasn't profitable, of course depending on Wine is the best balance we can get.


• Pirating games makes linux gamers even less profitable! What a great idea! :D

Now, I love linux gaming. I want to see the best for the platform. You, however, will not help that. People acting like you could be a motivation to NOT support the platform we love.

I'd love to live in a world where linux games were guaranteed to be profitable, sadly that's not the case.


Last edited by nox on 15 May 2018 at 2:03 pm UTC

Translation: "If you peasants want us to extend some basic decency, you're going to have to get on your knees and beg for it."

Translation: "If you peasants want us to extend some basic decency, you're going to have to get on your knees and beg for it."

1) Porting to Linux has nothing to do with decency. Developers need to eat, too.
2) Nobody's on his/her knees when telling that (s)he would buy something.

Pretty disappointing comments here. Measuring interest is a perfectly valid thing to do especially when they've ported their previous games.

So this is why the game will not get a Linux version on release. When the pre-order showed up on GOG, I searched high and low for any Linux clues.

I really dislike this idea of having to prove I want to see the game on Linux though, Mac aren't far off and they get it without question.

Regardless of all that, I guess I'll just cast my vote. I like this series and I definitely wish to play this one too.

I really dislike this idea of having to prove I want to see the game on Linux though, Mac aren't far off and they get it without question.

I agree with you in a sense, but remember that mac is close to 3% steam market share, while linux is currently at 0.55%... It is going to be easier to justify dev and qa on mac than linux with those number :(

Thing is that current Runner developer is not completely same as previous games developer. Noticed, that they dropped Bit.Trip?
This is because previous games was made by Gaijin and current dev is Choice. Gaijin is no more, Choice is new owner. They claim, that "peoples who making Runner 3 is virtually same as before" but its clear that developer policy is changed.

Anyway, while i think that Runner progress over years is sure impressive (wow effect) but as is games is as much frustration and hardly playable as before. Awesome to watch, but goddamn annoying to play.

The first Runner game is available for Linux on Humble Bundle store. It is also available on Steam but is just an empty folder for years.
I'm thinking that if they want to gauge Linux interest they could just browse those several Linux topics asking for help since 2013.

I'd like to buy this game. Maybe if the devs show there's enough interest in me buying it, I'll consider it.

I really dislike this idea of having to prove I want to see the game on Linux though, Mac aren't far off and they get it without question.

I agree with you in a sense, but remember that mac is close to 3% steam market share, while linux is currently at 0.55%... It is going to be easier to justify dev and qa on mac than linux with those number :(

You're talking about the Steam hardware survey. Urgh. Actual dev sales are usually anywhere between 1% and 10%, depending on the game. Those figures come from this site actually asking devs for direct sales figures, not statistically neutered rounding errors from a random survey.

Some actual figures:
Helium Rain (interviewed 2018): 11%
Deep Sixed (2018): "More than 5%"
Shovel Knight (2018): 1.1%
Rise to Ruins (2018): 2.4%
Maia (multiple interviews, latest 2018): 4.9%
Planescape Torment (2017): 2% on Steam, 2.5% on their own client
Midboss (2017): 1.9%

Some titles are less than 1%, however. The most worrying is probably Stellaris, whose devs are usually very supportive of Linux, but who sounded pretty downbeat about the failure of Steam Machines and the Linux market as a whole.

I really dislike this idea of having to prove I want to see the game on Linux though, Mac aren't far off and they get it without question.

I agree with you in a sense, but remember that mac is close to 3% steam market share, while linux is currently at 0.55%... It is going to be easier to justify dev and qa on mac than linux with those number :(

You're talking about the Steam hardware survey. Urgh. Actual dev sales are usually anywhere between 1% and 10%, depending on the game. Those figures come from this site actually asking devs for direct sales figures, not statistically neutered rounding errors from a random survey.

Some actual figures:
Helium Rain (interviewed 2018): 11%
Deep Sixed (2018): "More than 5%"
Shovel Knight (2018): 1.1%
Rise to Ruins (2018): 2.4%
Maia (multiple interviews, latest 2018): 4.9%
Planescape Torment (2017): 2% on Steam, 2.5% on their own client
Midboss (2017): 1.9%

Some titles are less than 1%, however. The most worrying is probably Stellaris, whose devs are usually very supportive of Linux, but who sounded pretty downbeat about the failure of Steam Machines and the Linux market as a whole.

Thank you for adding some good examples to counter my slightly negative comment. At no point did I say that native linux games cannot be profitable, however. My point is that them asking for interest is logical enough with those publicly available statistics, as a general point of view - rather than about a specific game or studio.

I don't like this attitude of developers who shun Linux and ask us to grovel in order to be able to give them money.

Maybe it is just some kind of PR to make Sites like GoL write an article about the game to create attention. Otherwise I'd agree that it is a stupid move since developers can already see in their steam statistics how many potential Linux customers have put the game on their wish list.

Otherwise I'd agree that it is a stupid move since developers can already see in their steam statistics how many potential Linux customers have put the game on their wish list.

Of course this won't give them reliable data, but it might affect their motivation.

Wishlists are obviously not a good way to gauge interest though. I for one won't bother adding any games to my wishlist unless they're available or soon to be released for Linux, and people who haven't manually set Linux/SteamOS as their only platform in the Steam client won't even count.


Last edited by tuubi on 16 May 2018 at 8:42 am UTC

Pretty disappointing comments here. Measuring interest is a perfectly valid thing to do especially when they've ported their previous games.

This seems to be most retarded approach to measure interest. I know others have done that before and accumulated hundreds of "+1" posts in Steam discussions. I wonder how many of these "+1" translate into purchases months or years after this discussion. There must be a more sane solution at hand, too - since there are so many Linux ports out there which came into being without that. Let me guess:

We have to invest so many man hours into the port. We have to sell so and so many copies to break even. Looking at our past stats we can expect so and so many sales. If we sell less, it won't cost us a fortune, we can file it under experience gained.

I don't like this attitude of developers who shun Linux and ask us to grovel in order to be able to give them money.

Maybe it is just some kind of PR to make Sites like GoL write an article about the game to create attention. Otherwise I'd agree that it is a stupid move since developers can already see in their steam statistics how many potential Linux customers have put the game on their wish list.

I highly doubt that, to any developer not already fully committing to a Linux version, we probably don't even exist to them. We're still a tiny site compared with RPS, Eurogamer and so on.

This seems to be most retarded approach to measure interest. I know others have done that before and accumulated hundreds of "+1" posts in Steam discussions. I wonder how many of these "+1" translate into purchases months or years after this discussion. There must be a more sane solution at hand, too - since there are so many Linux ports out there which came into being without that. Let me guess:

We have to invest so many man hours into the port. We have to sell so and so many copies to break even. Looking at our past stats we can expect so and so many sales. If we sell less, it won't cost us a fortune, we can file it under experience gained.

Let me guess: The did look at their past sells and it was hardly worth it. So they wonder themselves how to judge. If you'Ve got a better solution, make sure to propose it to them. (I do like the idea of kickstarting a Linux version. It would make sure to only make it when there's a set mimimum of sells.)

Pretty disappointing comments here. Measuring interest is a perfectly valid thing to do especially when they've ported their previous games.

This seems to be most retarded approach to measure interest. I know others have done that before and accumulated hundreds of "+1" posts in Steam discussions. I wonder how many of these "+1" translate into purchases months or years after this discussion. There must be a more sane solution at hand, too - since there are so many Linux ports out there which came into being without that. Let me guess:

We have to invest so many man hours into the port. We have to sell so and so many copies to break even. Looking at our past stats we can expect so and so many sales. If we sell less, it won't cost us a fortune, we can file it under experience gained.

Still, it doesn't warrant some of the extreme comments here, such as an appeal to piracy that only benefits pirates.

EDIT: Quoted wrong comment.


Last edited by nitroflow on 16 May 2018 at 1:23 pm UTC

Still, it doesn't warrant some of the extreme comments here, such as an appeal to piracy that only benefits pirates.

Absolutely. My comments was replying directly to the "some kind of PR" comment.