Support us on Patreon
PayPalSome fun weekend news for those wanting another RTS to play, as Ashes of the Singularity: Escalation is getting closer to a Linux release.
As a real-time strategy game nut, I've been waiting to play it since I first laid my eyes on it. Back in May of 2017, Stardock Entertainment put up a Steam post themselves asking to see requests for a Linux version which caused some more excitement.
Back in September this year, they mentioned the base game engine was on Linux but not the actual game itself. Seems it's moving along, as yesterday they updated that Steam post to say this:
Update: 12/28/2018:
We now have the core engine compiling under Debian Linux and running via Vulkan. We still have a long, long way to go but this is a major step. Thanks for your continued interest and support!
Only noticing it now, as it's a post I follow that the developer has no replied to mention it. Their wording isn't too different to what was said in September though, so keep that in mind.
I like their honesty with it, that we still have some ways to go but they're still working on it so that's great stuff.
Article taken from GamingOnLinux.com.
Some you may have missed, popular articles from the last month:
The comments on this article are closed.
Quoting: mylkaQuoting: CFWhitmanQuoting: mylkathis game doesnt even have 200 players and is almost 3yrs old
https://steamdb.info/app/507490/graphs/
why are they making a linux port?
i am not complaining, but i dont get it. RUST has over 40.000 players and they drop linux support
https://steamdb.info/app/252490/graphs/
ARMA 3
https://steamdb.info/app/107410/graphs/
over 12000.... dropped linux
i just dont get it
In my experience, publishers with smaller audiences are more likely to seek additional buyers on other systems. If a game has 40,000 players, the publisher says, "Who needs Linux? We've got 40,000 players. Cancelling support will alienate Linux users? Meh, who cares? It's not worth the support headache." On the other hand if a game has 1,500 players, the publisher says, "Where else can we look for buyers? Will Linux and/or Mac support really cost us that much more?"
what you are saying is big companies dont want more money.
that makes no sense to me.
It is not that big companies do not want more money, it is more like big companies are way more conservative to anything that they think is risky. It seems to me that they are like a big ship, even if an island is literally on their way they are likely to prefer to just avoid it.
0 Likes
Quoting: lucinosQuoting: mylkaQuoting: CFWhitmanQuoting: mylkathis game doesnt even have 200 players and is almost 3yrs old
https://steamdb.info/app/507490/graphs/
why are they making a linux port?
i am not complaining, but i dont get it. RUST has over 40.000 players and they drop linux support
https://steamdb.info/app/252490/graphs/
ARMA 3
https://steamdb.info/app/107410/graphs/
over 12000.... dropped linux
i just dont get it
In my experience, publishers with smaller audiences are more likely to seek additional buyers on other systems. If a game has 40,000 players, the publisher says, "Who needs Linux? We've got 40,000 players. Cancelling support will alienate Linux users? Meh, who cares? It's not worth the support headache." On the other hand if a game has 1,500 players, the publisher says, "Where else can we look for buyers? Will Linux and/or Mac support really cost us that much more?"
what you are saying is big companies dont want more money.
that makes no sense to me.
It is not that big companies do not want more money, it is more like big companies are way more conservative to anything that they think is risky. It seems to me that they are like a big ship, even if an island is literally on their way they are likely to prefer to just avoid it.
is it really a risk, if feral makes a living with just porting games?
lets take tomb raider. this game is already 50% off and it runs with proton and they still make a linux version, so they are gonna make more money, than it costs... i guess
ubisoft, rockstar, bethesda,etc have so many sales and i am sure they also would sell a lot of copies on linux
0 Likes
Quoting: mylkalets take tomb raider. this game is already 50% off and it runs with proton and they still make a linux version
I tried the demo on Proton and while it works, it's not exactly great. I wouldn't play the entire game like that. I had a few crashes and pretty bad performance. Feral will deliver a much better experience with their port and I fully intend to buy it whenever they release it.
0 Likes
Quoting: BrisseQuoting: mylkalets take tomb raider. this game is already 50% off and it runs with proton and they still make a linux version
I tried the demo on Proton and while it works, it's not exactly great. I wouldn't play the entire game like that. I had a few crashes and pretty bad performance. Feral will deliver a much better experience with their port and I fully intend to buy it whenever they release it.
and till then its 60% off and they still make enough money
rise of the tomb raider came to linux 2,5yrs after release. it was 10€ in wintersale. 30% to steam and maybe some % to enix. lets say feral makes 5€ per copy and then they have to pay taxes.
i really dont know how they make enough money, but obviously they do, so a linux port cant be that expensive
if feral can exist by porting "old" games to linux, i cant see why it would be a risk to port gta6, far cry 6, wolfenstein 3, cyberpunk to linux. maybe with day 1 linux support like tropico 6
0 Likes
Quoting: mylkaQuoting: CFWhitmanQuoting: mylkathis game doesnt even have 200 players and is almost 3yrs old
https://steamdb.info/app/507490/graphs/
why are they making a linux port?
i am not complaining, but i dont get it. RUST has over 40.000 players and they drop linux support
https://steamdb.info/app/252490/graphs/
ARMA 3
https://steamdb.info/app/107410/graphs/
over 12000.... dropped linux
i just dont get it
In my experience, publishers with smaller audiences are more likely to seek additional buyers on other systems. If a game has 40,000 players, the publisher says, "Who needs Linux? We've got 40,000 players. Cancelling support will alienate Linux users? Meh, who cares? It's not worth the support headache." On the other hand if a game has 1,500 players, the publisher says, "Where else can we look for buyers? Will Linux and/or Mac support really cost us that much more?"
what you are saying is big companies dont want more money.
that makes no sense to me.
It's not that big companies don't want to make more money. It's that big companies like maximum return on investment. If they are already making a lot of money, they start to care more about profit percentage than total profit. Smaller companies can't afford that luxury.
Really though, it doesn't matter that much why smaller publishers care more about diversifying their audience. The fact that smaller publishers are more likely to support Linux is fairly obvious when you go to buy a game.
0 Likes
Quoting: mylkaStill ActiVision/Vivendi(Blizzard), EA, Ubisoft, et al seem to not want more money... even though Square Enix has shown good faith examples.Quoting: CFWhitmanQuoting: mylkathis game doesnt even have 200 players and is almost 3yrs old
https://steamdb.info/app/507490/graphs/
why are they making a linux port?
i am not complaining, but i dont get it. RUST has over 40.000 players and they drop linux support
https://steamdb.info/app/252490/graphs/
ARMA 3
https://steamdb.info/app/107410/graphs/
over 12000.... dropped linux
i just dont get it
In my experience, publishers with smaller audiences are more likely to seek additional buyers on other systems. If a game has 40,000 players, the publisher says, "Who needs Linux? We've got 40,000 players. Cancelling support will alienate Linux users? Meh, who cares? It's not worth the support headache." On the other hand if a game has 1,500 players, the publisher says, "Where else can we look for buyers? Will Linux and/or Mac support really cost us that much more?"
what you are saying is big companies dont want more money.
that makes no sense to me.
0 Likes
Quoting: ThetargosQuoting: mylkaStill ActiVision/Vivendi(Blizzard), EA, Ubisoft, et al seem to not want more money... even though Square Enix has shown good faith examples.Quoting: CFWhitmanQuoting: mylkathis game doesnt even have 200 players and is almost 3yrs old
https://steamdb.info/app/507490/graphs/
why are they making a linux port?
i am not complaining, but i dont get it. RUST has over 40.000 players and they drop linux support
https://steamdb.info/app/252490/graphs/
ARMA 3
https://steamdb.info/app/107410/graphs/
over 12000.... dropped linux
i just dont get it
In my experience, publishers with smaller audiences are more likely to seek additional buyers on other systems. If a game has 40,000 players, the publisher says, "Who needs Linux? We've got 40,000 players. Cancelling support will alienate Linux users? Meh, who cares? It's not worth the support headache." On the other hand if a game has 1,500 players, the publisher says, "Where else can we look for buyers? Will Linux and/or Mac support really cost us that much more?"
what you are saying is big companies dont want more money.
that makes no sense to me.
They're too busy implementing gambling mechanics and micro-transactions into their games to care about Linux. That's sadly where the big money is. Yes, it's dystopia.
0 Likes
See more from me