In what could be a blow to Linux gamers who are fans of Obsidian RPGs, Microsoft is apparently close to acquiring the studio.
Kotaku writes:
One person with knowledge of the deal told Kotaku they’d heard it was “90%” finished. Said a second person: “It’s a matter of when, not if.”
So that sounds basically certain, that Microsoft will soon own Obsidian. Both Microsoft and Obsidian declined to comment on the rumour of course, as companies usually do when deals aren't yet finished.
Naturally, this will be a worry to Linux gamers since this could mean future Obsidian titles may not arrive on Linux like they have before. Obsidian has given Linux fans Pillars of Eternity, Pillars of Eternity II and Tyranny recently so it would be a huge shame not to have their next story-driven RPG land on Linux.
Microsoft acquiring anyone always makes me feel quite uneasy, since they could end up requiring future games they publish to be exclusive to their own store therefore locking out Steam. At least if they stayed on Steam and didn't do a Linux version (for whatever reason) of their next set of games, we would have Steam Play's Proton so it wouldn't be such a major issue.
However, Microsoft seems to have done a good job at letting Mojang continue doing their thing with the Java edition of Minecraft so perhaps it will work out okay.
What are your thoughts?
Article taken from GamingOnLinux.com.
Some you may have missed, popular articles from the last month:
The comments on this article are closed.
buenaventura Oct 10, 2018
Yuck, that's terrible :<
0 Likes
Microsoft has actually changed with the new CEO. So I would not automatically be as pessimistic as we had every reason to be earlier.
0 Likes
Quoting: BeamboomMicrosoft has actually changed with the new CEO
lol
0 Likes
Quoting: DrMcCoyQuoting: BeamboomMicrosoft has actually changed with the new CEO
lol
Why do you laugh out loud for that? It's true. I'm no MS advocate, far from it, but it's quite a distance from the old "Linux is cancer" from the former CEO, to the current MS that cooperates with Red Hat on their cloud computing platform (Azure), and is a major contributor, both economically and codewise, to major open source projects, even the Linux kernel. They are one of the main sponsors of The Linux Foundation, open sourced several of their frameworks (and a massive part of C#) and even has made a version of their SQL server to run on Linux.
So go ahead, be a stereotypical Linuxhead and laugh at me all you like - but fact remains the same. They are not the same today as they were twenty years ago. I would not be surprised if there will be no difference to the support Bethestda do towards Linux today.
2 Likes, Who?
They "support" Linux where they have to, because they couldn't shut out the competition. Coorporations are not your friends, especially not big ones like Microsoft (and neither is Apple, or Google, or EA, or Amazon, or...).
If they are such a great Linux supporter, show me their recent games running on Linux. State of Decay 2 and Sea of Thieves, both Unreal Engine 4 games. Do they run on Linux? Nope. Heck, you can't even buy them on Steam. Forza Horizon 4? Nope. Ori and the Blind Forest? It's a Unity game! Linux support? Nope.
If they are such a great Linux supporter, show me their recent games running on Linux. State of Decay 2 and Sea of Thieves, both Unreal Engine 4 games. Do they run on Linux? Nope. Heck, you can't even buy them on Steam. Forza Horizon 4? Nope. Ori and the Blind Forest? It's a Unity game! Linux support? Nope.
9 Likes, Who?
People often try to assign human emotions and intentions to Microsoft, but it's a corporation. It exists to make money for shareholders, and it will buy and sell its CEO's own mother if it means making an extra few dollars. Having said that, if they find Linux versions of games to be profitable, they might release some, but if Linux ever became serious competition, that would stop.
3 Likes, Who?
Quoting: liamdaweQuoting: x_wingWell, feels like Microsoft answer to Valve Linux embrace & improvement is to buy game studios and start to planning a revenue constriction.I really do hope Valve have some serious other games lined up. They have some seriously good IP that need a refresh and continuation like Left 4 Dead 3, Team Fortress 3, Half-Life 3, Portal 3 and so on.
I could happily go for some L4D3.
They need more than Artifact (even though I've no doubt it will be a ridiculous hit) and In The Valley of Gods.
They could do an "orange box 2" if they really want to avoid the "3" in their names :D
Liam, an interview with both Microsoft and Obsidian would be nice to have after the deal is publicized. Pinning a few statements in an article would be nice, especially as their number one priority will be to reassure fans after the deal :)
Have them go on the record about their DRM, Linux, etc. plans, even if it's just to say "undertermined"/"no plans".
Quoting: BeamboomMicrosoft has actually changed with the new CEO. So I would not automatically be as pessimistic as we had every reason to be earlier.
That's not untrue, but let's not forget Microsoft has multiple departments whose politics and interests wildly differs (although that's getting better). So while their cloud department has exhibited some promising behaviour (and Satya Nadella having put more emphasis on this one), I wouldn't take that for granted.
http://bonkersworld.net/organizational-charts (must-see chart)
0 Likes
Pfft, Microsoft is only playing "nice" with Linux because they have it exactly where they want it to be: widespread enough so that they can present it as "competition" when they are under antitrust-scrutiny, but far from being a real threat.
0 Likes
I want to buy their games so badly... I loved NWN, this should just be about the same.
But time and budget.
Although with Proton out, if I buy a windows game, I also buy a linux game around the same value.
With the exception of GTA V, the linux games was a little less expensive :-).
But time and budget.
Although with Proton out, if I buy a windows game, I also buy a linux game around the same value.
With the exception of GTA V, the linux games was a little less expensive :-).
0 Likes
Quoting: DrMcCoyThey "support" Linux where they have to, because they couldn't shut out the competition. Coorporations are not your friends, especially not big ones like Microsoft (and neither is Apple, or Google, or EA, or Amazon, or...).
Your view is far too binary. The world isn't so black/white, and all corporations are not your enemy. Google contribute a *lot* to the Open Source communities (in fact I'm surprised you even included them in your list). And don't forget that Valve is a corporation too. As well as Feral. Or any of the other corporations that indeed are whom we can thank for why we got more or less every gaming title that's running on our platform today.
Quoting: DrMcCoyIf they are such a great Linux supporter, show me their recent games running on Linux.
I don't see the need to. What I'm saying, is that it's LESS of a danger NOW that Bethesdas current (and let's be frank, already very limited) Linux support will die with a purchase, compared to with the Microsoft we knew before. Microsoft has changed attitude towards Linux, That's just how it is. The former Microsoft would not have cooperated with Canonical to bring Ubuntu to Windows 10. They would not have included Ubuntu in their Windows Store.
If they purchase Bethesda I would not be surprised if the current edition of Microsoft didn't change much of Bethesdas strategies at all. That's all I'm saying. Take their takeover of Mojang, that didn't change much of their strategies with Minecraft? Also ref the recent news about them opensourcing more of Minecraft. That's not the Microsoft we knew 15 years ago.
Last edited by Beamboom on 10 October 2018 at 1:20 pm UTC
1 Likes, Who?
Patreon
PayPal
See more from me