RocketWerkz have confirmed their plans to do a Linux version of Stationeers

<bait>I just told them they are stupid to support linux and that they should just support vulkan instead</bait>

But really, since Valve has opened up Proton, we really have to think this through: do you want game developers to support Linux with crappy graphics, or Vulkan through Proton with nice graphics.
Because all I see is this:
Windows DX (good support by engines) vs Linux Opengl (rather awkward support).
I think we must first push the developers to go Vulkan before going Linux.
Because once you go Vulkan, the remainder of the problems are not that big.
And in a sense, I rather have a middleware in between the game and my machine. That might be Proton, or some other thing.
The problem with going full native on both Windows and Linux is that ABI's and API's change. And in the end you can better install the old Windows version through wine/Proton on Linux, instead of the old Windows version on Windows, or the old Linux version on Linux.
As a matter of fact, I had less problems installing GTA-SA or GTA-IV using Proton, than on Windows 10 that was pre-installed on my Win2.
Divine Divinity needed extra hacking from GOG to run it on a recent windows, while the original version works fine on wine.
So truthfully, I think that developers should focus on Vulkan first. Once Vulkan is really mainstream, the step to Linux is a tiny one.

Quoting: Ardje<bait>I just told them they are stupid to support linux and that they should just support vulkan instead</bait>

But really, since Valve has opened up Proton, we really have to think this through: do you want game developers to support Linux with crappy graphics, or Vulkan through Proton with nice graphics.
Because all I see is this:
Windows DX (good support by engines) vs Linux Opengl (rather awkward support).
I think we must first push the developers to go Vulkan before going Linux.
Because once you go Vulkan, the remainder of the problems are not that big.
And in a sense, I rather have a middleware in between the game and my machine. That might be Proton, or some other thing.
The problem with going full native on both Windows and Linux is that ABI's and API's change. And in the end you can better install the old Windows version through wine/Proton on Linux, instead of the old Windows version on Windows, or the old Linux version on Linux.
As a matter of fact, I had less problems installing GTA-SA or GTA-IV using Proton, than on Windows 10 that was pre-installed on my Win2.
Divine Divinity needed extra hacking from GOG to run it on a recent windows, while the original version works fine on wine.
So truthfully, I think that developers should focus on Vulkan first. Once Vulkan is really mainstream, the step to Linux is a tiny one.

I still won't advocate for developers ignoring actual Linux support in favour of using Proton. There's so many reasons why that's a bad idea I don't know where to start.

Quoting: liamdaweI still won't advocate for developers ignoring actual Linux support in favour of using Proton. There's so many reasons why that's a bad idea I don't know where to start.

Give it a write-up (to link to) some day...


Last edited by Eike on 10 October 2018 at 12:30 pm UTC

Quoting: Eike

Quoting: liamdaweI still won't advocate for developers ignoring actual Linux support in favour of using Proton. There's so many reasons why that's a bad idea I don't know where to start.

Give it a write-up (to link to) some day...

Well, for starters it further reduces the amount of Linux experience developers will gain, making future ports probably even more difficult and less likely. Since developers literally have to do nothing related to Linux to get Proton. I will touch on Vulkan in a moment.

Developers have quite literally zero control, outside of them jumping into Wine/Proton development themselves. Especially for an in-development game, they're going to want that control over any issues that come up. Every single update they do, has the chance to break Proton compatibility. You can argue the same can be said for a native title, but they own and know the code.

It basically locks developers to Steam, unless they play to package Proton themselves for outside Steam (not likely).

Yeah, they could target Vulkan but then why not Linux when they're doing that already considering they have actual plans for Linux support with a version that already works. I think it's madnesss to then go and tell to essentially...don't bother. Telling a developer to not go through with their Linux plans, to focus on Vulkan is essentially telling them not to support Linux. Again, madness.

Edit: To be clear I love Wine/Steam Play's Proton, but for the right situations. Certainly not in-development games.


Last edited by Liam Dawe on 10 October 2018 at 12:59 pm UTC

Quoting: ArdjeThe problem with going full native on both Windows and Linux is that ABI's and API's change. And in the end you can better install the old Windows version through wine/Proton on Linux, instead of the old Windows version on Windows, or the old Linux version on Linux.
As a matter of fact, I had less problems installing GTA-SA or GTA-IV using Proton, than on Windows 10 that was pre-installed on my Win2.

Just to be clear, the fact that ABI's and API's change is not really ever an issue, none of which actually makes Proton more viable that running natively. Windows has amazing backwards compatibility because they already install on the system for you a thing actually called "Windows on Windows". So you don't need to install an "old" windows because you already have it.

You can accomplish the same thing on Linux as a "Linux on Linux" but most distros don't do it. There aren't any technical limitations on Linux preventing it. The oldest Linux games still work just fine many times. (and using open source libs is preferred for longevity in my opinion)

Now on the other hand, Windows 10 is a different matter.

To Cestarian about just using DXVK to solve the shader limitation. If DXVK supports the shaders, then that means Vulkan supports them anyway? They just need to be told how to do it. That said, this is just pure speculation-- I don't know their code or why they have an issue. I agree with Liam -- if this project has full porting 90% solved, and the game works fine, then they should just take the native port all the way while they are in development.

Very nice that it might come to Linux! I wishlisted it a long time ago and engaged in the thread mentioned - so it's very cool to see that the devs will try a Linux version now.

I still prefer playing native Linux games as it's still confusing on Steam whether a game is officially supported on Proton. It's nice that Proton exists but I'm using Linux now for 10 years and that made me accustomed to things working right out of the box.

I repeat that last sentence: As a Linux user you just don't need to fiddle around with your system if you use the right distribution. You can and you want to "hack" stuff for trying things out, but as a normal user you absolutely don't need to - less so than on Windows. I'm just not inclined to spend time to fiddle around for making videogames run therefore I prefer every bit of clarity and official guarantee that a game will work on my platform.

Quoting: the3dfxdudeJust to be clear, the fact that ABI's and API's change is not really ever an issue, none of which actually makes Proton more viable that running natively. Windows has amazing backwards compatibility because they already install on the system for you a thing actually called "Windows on Windows". So you don't need to install an "old" windows because you already have it.

I know the WoW, because I've seen it up close for 16 bit on NT 4. And it made me scream when I was looking for a way to open a file from a daemon. (I did windows programming for a very short time around NT4, and then I run away to 100% linux).
But the fact remains: GOG had to fix/wrap a lot of games to make them install on newer systems. And the moment someone has to run a game as administrator... that's so wrong...
It just doesn't work anymore due to abi/api change. And actually that's for most of the software that requires some services of the OS, which turn out to be very release specific.

And neither does linux work:
Try a very old glide2 period game on a current system. First they require root, when you circumvent that, there is glibc and any c++ library. And then we get around to the opengl drivers that probably need new glibc's.
Of course it should all be wrapable fortunately.
The biggest advantage linux has, is that API's seldom change. It's only ABI's that are the real problem.

Quoting: liamdawe

Quoting: ArdjeSo truthfully, I think that developers should focus on Vulkan first. Once Vulkan is really mainstream, the step to Linux is a tiny one.

I still won't advocate for developers ignoring actual Linux support in favour of using Proton. There's so many reasons why that's a bad idea I don't know where to start.

I know, it feels wrong. But when I think about it, and my experiences with gaming on Linux, and my experiences with the hate crowd within the Linux community.
Problem one they have is that they have directx and opengl to support. Look at ark how crap the opengl looks. Now I don't really care about the looks, because it's a wonderful game. But there is a lot of manure because of opengl vs directx.
When I played farcry in wine with the opengl renderer it was beautiful, but when I played farcry in wine with the DX renderer, it looked so much better.
Now if those developers these days focused on vulkan only and scrap directx and opengl support, then what remains is just platform specifics for windows, linux and mac.
(That's mostly input handling that's very bad).

So my point is: if they have to choose between vulkan or linux support (budget wise), then for me it's vulkan first, linux next. The generation of games following that will already be vulkan, so I would pressure for linux.

But yeah, I feel like the devils advocate.