Epic Games have confirmed a Linux version of their store is not on the roadmap

Quoting: iiari

Quoting: Comandante ÑoñardoI thing Valve should split in two: One store for big games and another for Indies....
That is what I do for my accounts.

That a tough one. Where do you draw that line?

This is very subjective for me.
An Indie game is a low budget game... most of them self published.. barely with English audio and , if We are lucky, subtitles in other languages.

Big games, unlike indies, have big budget, so they have audio in various languages, very good 3d models (depends on the game), good production, availability in several platforms and a lot advertising.

But There are few games in the middle...
Example, Killing Floor 2 in an indie game, but it has audio in several languages like an AAA.
The Witcher is an indie game but with an AAA production, it has several audio languages, except Spanish...

Spoiler, click me

C'mon, CD projekt! There are 20 countries that speak Spanish!
I live in Argentina, so a game without Spanish audio is not an AAA for me.

Cool, now you can stop being hype about a store which main resource to compete is using Fortnite money to pay greedy developers for exclusive stuff.
Epic store has everything I hate from console gaming, shady agreements with greedy developers to develop exclusive games or exclusive content for X platform or store, poor control to customers, almost no info about the quality of the port or the game on the store among other things.
If some games or devs will leave, then goodbye, COD BO4 leaves, nobody miss it, EA games leave, nobody miss those horrible new NFS games or those Battlefield games which has been using the same engine and assets for YEARS, remember how awful was the last Sim City with their "always online" and micro-transactions?
Fallout 76 is not on Steam and nobody asked Bethesda to put in on Steam because its awful.

We are going backwards in terms of gaming service, going back to those days when Nintendo ask developers that if they want their game on the NES or SNES they cant develop the game for other consoles. This is all the same EPIC asking devs to develop only for them, not allowing devs to sell their game in other stores.

But Steam haters are laughable, have you ever heard about Valve paying a lot of money OR promising higher
revenues to a third party developers for exclusive content?

Never, still they support these EPIC 4ssh0l3s, you cant reason properly when you hate.


Last edited by orochi_kyo on 31 December 2018 at 5:01 am UTC

It's absolutely painful to read how detached from reality some people are. This is why we can't have nice things on Linux. From b*tt-hurt comments about why the Epic store doesn't have a Linux version planned to absurd conspiracy theories. We should set a Patreon goal called "aluminum foil", so that we can buy the lot of you material to make nice hats.

The Epic store is absurdly barebones. Epic thought they could get away with a very cut down version of a game store, but reality slapped them in the face pretty fast. So now they need to integrate a crap ton of stuff Steam has, to make users happy. Anybody who is not completely insane would prioritize that over a Linux version, because there are more Windows gamers who care about achievements, than there are Linux gamers overall. It's basic math. I am 100% sure Linux support is happening. Don't forget - we're still waiting on GOG Galaxy, which is why I only play GOG games on Windows.

I'm not even going to comment on the whole Tencent conspiracy theory. Somebody even mentioned the Chinese government. Seriously guys?

Quoting: Creak

Quoting: SalvatosTo be honest I don't see it either.

• Encumbered UI


• Poorly made preferences/config window with way too many options that are difficult to memorize


• No smooth scrolling


• Not responsive/slow


• Using several windows (the same complaint everyone told about GIMP)


• Popups that keep stealing focus at startup


• Uselessly complex badge system (with badge levels into badges)


• Workshop that says "Follow" when you would simply expect "Install"


• and so on and so forth..

Meh. That's just me, but most of those are hardly a bother to me and I'd gladly keep those minor inconveniences over the risk of yet another mobile-first overhaul that dumbs things down and makes actual info harder to get to and/or sacrifices screen real estate in favor of huge shiny graphics. Many of those issues could be fixed within the context of the current design instead of rebuilding everything.

Not So Epic Games anyway.

Quoting: Salvatos

Quoting: Creak

Quoting: SalvatosTo be honest I don't see it either.

• Encumbered UI


• Poorly made preferences/config window with way too many options that are difficult to memorize


• No smooth scrolling


• Not responsive/slow


• Using several windows (the same complaint everyone told about GIMP)


• Popups that keep stealing focus at startup


• Uselessly complex badge system (with badge levels into badges)


• Workshop that says "Follow" when you would simply expect "Install"


• and so on and so forth..

Meh. That's just me, but most of those are hardly a bother to me and I'd gladly keep those minor inconveniences over the risk of yet another mobile-first overhaul that dumbs things down and makes actual info harder to get to and/or sacrifices screen real estate in favor of huge shiny graphics. Many of those issues could be fixed within the context of the current design instead of rebuilding everything.

Have to agree. The ONLY thing that annoys me about the Steam client is that it doesn't respect Gnome window decorations. So I can't right click on its border to send it to back, for example. I'm also lucky that I use a mainly dark theme so that it doesn't stand out like a sore thumb.

Smooth scrolling would be nice, I suppose...

Quoting: mao_dze_dunIt's absolutely painful to read how detached from reality some people are. This is why we can't have nice things on Linux. From b*tt-hurt comments about why the Epic store doesn't have a Linux version planned to absurd conspiracy theories. We should set a Patreon goal called "aluminum foil", so that we can buy the lot of you material to make nice hats.

The Epic store is absurdly barebones. Epic thought they could get away with a very cut down version of a game store, but reality slapped them in the face pretty fast. So now they need to integrate a crap ton of stuff Steam has, to make users happy. Anybody who is not completely insane would prioritize that over a Linux version, because there are more Windows gamers who care about achievements, than there are Linux gamers overall. It's basic math. I am 100% sure Linux support is happening. Don't forget - we're still waiting on GOG Galaxy, which is why I only play GOG games on Windows.

I'm not even going to comment on the whole Tencent conspiracy theory. Somebody even mentioned the Chinese government. Seriously guys?

You're very rude.
We have many nice things on Linux, but to the extent we can't, it has nothing to do with people commenting on forums. Talk about detached from reality. Yes, yes, I know it was meant as hyperbole, but if you're going to criticize people's lack of realism it's bad form to lead with total lack of realism.
Continuing on with lack of realism, the reality is they say Linux support isn't on the roadmap. Why then are you saying it's somehow a ridiculous conspiracy theory for people to be talking like Linux support isn't on the roadmap? I would think (although these Epic guys admittedly don't seem to be captains of communication) that if Linux support had been on the radar but got bumped to lower priority because they suddenly realized they need features, that still would mean Linux support was on the roadmap, just at a low priority. If they say it's not on the roadmpap, that would mean they haven't seriously considered it. Sure, maybe someday it'll happen, but if they're not planning for it I don't see why we should be.

Tencent . . . if, as someone says upthread, Tencent own over 40% of Epic shares, it's hardly a conspiracy theory to expect Tencent's objectives will have some influence on the behaviour of a company they control. Rather, it would be bizarre to imagine otherwise. Why would Tencent's ownership be so stupid as not to make use of one asset to advance the profitability of other holdings if they had the opportunity? This is not mysterious voodoo; the suits call it "synergy".

All in all, I'd say your snide swipe at, uh, basically everyone here, is way farther from reality on every point you make than the people you're insulting.

Quoting: iiari

Quoting: LeerdeckLet's be real here. Valve doesn't support Linux because they believe that the year of the Linux desktop is coming. Nobody does that. Valve does this because of cloud-streaming gaming that someday in the far future will be a available alternative. Because if you run a big server farm you don't want use Windows licenses. Every major publisher will someday port their games to Linux but only for their own server farms. Valve will not stop supporting Linux infrastructure because they don't really care about Linux desktop end users. That we profit from it is just a really nice side effect and we provide test results + bug reports.

No more calls, we've got a winner! I think this is much closer to the truth than anything else I've read or heard elsewhere. I think Valve has been telegraphing this quite clearly in their focus on Streaming technology, and is one of the reasons I believe the Link went away. Google seems like they are on the verge of a Streaming gaming service themselves. NVIDIA is already in the space. It's the best way Valve maintains their advantage: By having a technology that everyone else will have to spend a fortune to develop, being able to implement that more cheaply than others via their Linux expertise, and leveraging their existing library. We users beta test Proton and win. Quite right. Makes a lot more sense than "new Steam Machines!"

I'm not exactly sure, but didn't Gabe once say something like that he's not a fan of those Streaming plattforms? And the Steam Link didn't go away. The little box, yes. But not the concept. In-Home Streaming is completely different from pure Streaming from a consumer standpoint. One is good, the other isn't.


Last edited by kuhpunkt on 31 December 2018 at 2:22 pm UTC

Quoting: Purple Library Guy

Quoting: mao_dze_dunIt's absolutely painful to read how detached from reality some people are. This is why we can't have nice things on Linux. From b*tt-hurt comments about why the Epic store doesn't have a Linux version planned to absurd conspiracy theories. We should set a Patreon goal called "aluminum foil", so that we can buy the lot of you material to make nice hats.

The Epic store is absurdly barebones. Epic thought they could get away with a very cut down version of a game store, but reality slapped them in the face pretty fast. So now they need to integrate a crap ton of stuff Steam has, to make users happy. Anybody who is not completely insane would prioritize that over a Linux version, because there are more Windows gamers who care about achievements, than there are Linux gamers overall. It's basic math. I am 100% sure Linux support is happening. Don't forget - we're still waiting on GOG Galaxy, which is why I only play GOG games on Windows.

I'm not even going to comment on the whole Tencent conspiracy theory. Somebody even mentioned the Chinese government. Seriously guys?

You're very rude.
We have many nice things on Linux, but to the extent we can't, it has nothing to do with people commenting on forums. Talk about detached from reality. Yes, yes, I know it was meant as hyperbole, but if you're going to criticize people's lack of realism it's bad form to lead with total lack of realism.
Continuing on with lack of realism, the reality is they say Linux support isn't on the roadmap. Why then are you saying it's somehow a ridiculous conspiracy theory for people to be talking like Linux support isn't on the roadmap? I would think (although these Epic guys admittedly don't seem to be captains of communication) that if Linux support had been on the radar but got bumped to lower priority because they suddenly realized they need features, that still would mean Linux support was on the roadmap, just at a low priority. If they say it's not on the roadmpap, that would mean they haven't seriously considered it. Sure, maybe someday it'll happen, but if they're not planning for it I don't see why we should be.

Tencent . . . if, as someone says upthread, Tencent own over 40% of Epic shares, it's hardly a conspiracy theory to expect Tencent's objectives will have some influence on the behaviour of a company they control. Rather, it would be bizarre to imagine otherwise. Why would Tencent's ownership be so stupid as not to make use of one asset to advance the profitability of other holdings if they had the opportunity? This is not mysterious voodoo; the suits call it "synergy".

All in all, I'd say your snide swipe at, uh, basically everyone here, is way farther from reality on every point you make than the people you're insulting.

Well, speaking about Tencent. They do have one weird problem.
If they manage their products/companies/subsidiaries directly, all those stuffs will be poop.
If the products/companies/subsidiaries are independence from their control, those stuffs will be thrived.

Example? Garena. (currently, it's a poop)

Quoting: GuestI do not get this article.

Even i, whom i consider rather clueless about windows, had heard windows being called an open platform because anyone could develop and sell what he or she wanted on it. It was clear from the start he was thinking mainly about windows and eventually other not so closed down commercial platforms.

But they said they will aim for OTHER open platforms. They are ALREADY on Windows. So that doesn't make any sense.

Quoting: GuestAnd he doesn't seem to have much Unix knowledge judging by the questions he asks so Linux is probably not even on his radar.

Wasn't this the guy who was beflustered by such arcane Linux commands as 'sudo apt-get install'? Or was that someone else? I remember some game dev complaining about 'sudo apt-get'.

Quoting: Purple Library Guy

Quoting: ecosvaldoEven IF their store supported Linux, it still will not get me to use their platform. Why? One word... Tencent. They ALMOST have controlling interest in Epic Games (around 48 - 49%)!

Ehhh, for practical purposes that's controlling unless there are no small shareholders at all. I know, in theory you need 50%+1, but in practice you need more votes than will be cast against you, and there will always be a fair number of shareholders who don't get the memos or aren't interested and don't vote their shares. So 48% is plenty to win any plausible vote. You can often have control with 30% or so!

Epic is however a private company and not a public one so the other 51.6% is most likely owned by the founders or some other investors, but more important for the question at hand is that it's owned by a small circle of people so there will not bee a situation where some shareholders don't get the memo or aren't interested.

For public companies it's quite often (for the big ones) to have several share classes where the one listed on an exchange have either no or very little voting rights. One example is Google where Page and Brin owns 59.16% of the votes due to them owning a lot of the B class shares (their A class gives 1 vote, B class gives 10 votes and C class gives zero votes where only the A and C classes are publicly traded).

Since some people have brought up the ownership of Epic, I would like to point out the following tidbit from the Wikipedia article on Epic. I am not claiming it is accurate, I want to bring attention to it, in particular the bit I bolded:

"Epic announced in October 2018 that it had acquired US$1.25 billion in investment from seven firms: KKR, ICONIQ Capital, Smash Ventures, aXiomatic, Vulcan Capital, Kleiner Perkins, and Lightspeed Venture Partners. The firms join Tencent, Disney, and Endevour as minority shareholders in Epic, which is still controlled by Sweeney.With the investment, Epic Games was estimated to have a nearly US$15 billion valuation"

The sources they point to are the following:

https://variety.com/2018/gaming/news/epic-games-gets-1-25-billion-investment-from-seven-firms-1202998408/

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2018-10-26/fortnite-s-epic-games-gets-1-25-billion-from-new-investor-group

https://www.wsj.com/articles/fortnite-creator-epic-games-valued-at-nearly-15-billion-1540577025


If it is true that Tim Sweeney holds a controlling interest and that 9 companies other than Tencent are shareholders, then I doubt Tencent own 48 to 49% or even the original 40% they bought.

Quoting: F.Ultra

Quoting: Purple Library Guy

Quoting: ecosvaldoEven IF their store supported Linux, it still will not get me to use their platform. Why? One word... Tencent. They ALMOST have controlling interest in Epic Games (around 48 - 49%)!

Ehhh, for practical purposes that's controlling unless there are no small shareholders at all. I know, in theory you need 50%+1, but in practice you need more votes than will be cast against you, and there will always be a fair number of shareholders who don't get the memos or aren't interested and don't vote their shares. So 48% is plenty to win any plausible vote. You can often have control with 30% or so!

Epic is however a private company and not a public one so the other 51.6% is most likely owned by the founders or some other investors, but more important for the question at hand is that it's owned by a small circle of people so there will not bee a situation where some shareholders don't get the memo or aren't interested.

For public companies it's quite often (for the big ones) to have several share classes where the one listed on an exchange have either no or very little voting rights. One example is Google where Page and Brin owns 59.16% of the votes due to them owning a lot of the B class shares (their A class gives 1 vote, B class gives 10 votes and C class gives zero votes where only the A and C classes are publicly traded).

All very true. And of course they could also form some sort of alliance with one member of such a small circle of shareholders. So really it's very hard to tell from the outside just who has control. But I think we can suspect that Tencent wouldn't have accumulated that much of an interest in one company if they didn't have some hope of controlling it . . . so I guess we really don't know if they have control or not, but we can be pretty sure they were giving it a try, whether they succeeded or failed.

Edited to add: If the info Kristian cites is correct, they don't . . . or didn't at that time, anyhow. Or, Sweeney could be kidding himself. The emphasis on seven firms seems a bit off, makes it sound like oh, Tencent is just one small player among many . . . but they can't all have bought a 40% stake! One way or another, it's interesting information. Nobody's going in big like that without anticipation of payoff. Presumably a big deal like that was put together in anticipation of some major move by Epic which would cost a lot of money but have big profit potential . . . such as, say, creating a game store that could really grab some market share from Steam.

Perhaps a pity we have little choice but to be agin' it.


Last edited by Purple Library Guy on 31 December 2018 at 8:23 pm UTC

omg :(
still unreal engine supports linux which is good.
I'm sad tho.

The $1.25 billion investment might have diluted Tencent's share. Although it should have diluted Tim Sweeney's too...

Gameindustry.biz attributes the statement about Tim Sweeney holding the controlling interest to Epic themselves. Surely they know who their controlling shareholder is:

https://www.gamesindustry.biz/amp/2018-10-26-epic-games-raises-usd1-25-billion-from-handful-of-investors

It could be a case of different classes of shares with different voting rights as someone alluded to earlier with regard to Google(to be pendantic they presumably meant Alphabet Inc).


Last edited by Kristian on 31 December 2018 at 8:55 pm UTC

time and time again wine proves to them that their applications can work in linux. the least they can do is what valve did by introducing proton. im sure epic can do something similar to experimentation. the wine community are happy to test and improve it. like i just installed subnautica on epic in wine. its working like gold out of the box.

Quoting: backplate101time and time again wine proves to them that their applications can work in linux. the least they can do is what valve did by introducing proton.

No, I think they can do a lot less than that. And if I had to guess, I'd say we'll all be finding out just how little the least they can do is.

Quoting: Cestusyeah 3 billion dollar profit in 2018 is just not enough to have a couple people working on it.... sorry....

Yep, and all they need to to is build a launcher that supports Linux and get EAC working on Linux and all of their UE4 engine games like Fortnite would work. But no, there's not enough money in it for them.

Quoting: GuestLet's focus here. Software drives hardware (and OS to a 'particular' lesser degree).

- VisiCalc sold Apple II.

- Tomb Raider sold Voodoo and 3dfx cards.

- Halo sold Xbox (and XP and Vista)

- Steam, Valve, and Half-Life (i.e. Source games) sold nearly every enthusiast PC in existence today. (<--Prove this wrong, anyone.)

Discounting the PS4, Xbox, and six other "open" platforms, how much PC hardware is EPIC (Fortnite Battle Royale, Inc.) going to sell? ANSWER: Jack Shit! (and Jack just left town.)

After installing video drivers, EVERY user with an enthusiast-level gaming computer installs Steam — NOT Origin, NOT UPlay, NOT GoG, NOT Itch.io, NOT GeForce NOW, NOT PS NOW, NOT Google Project Stream ... and certainly NOT Epic Games. (Maybe Blizzard. Maybe.). No. It's OS, drivers, and Steam. That's PC gaming today. No exceptions.

Here's a weird thought: If people could buy a new enthusiast-level gaming computer and just install the latest video drivers and Steam, guess what they would probably do?

Sorry, B Group! You already lost. Welcome to the day before yesterday. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

Software can sell Hardware, but it's no requirement to be successful. You cannot even begin to list all successful software running on i386 PC, after Wing Commander drove people to buy them.
Millions of people already installed Epic (and Steam for the most part, maybe even Origin and UPlay and Blizzard additionally), because of Fortnite. And once it's there, why shouldn't people buy Epic exclusives there? Why not purchase games cheaper on Epic? It will not defeat Steam, but it can hurt it.


Last edited by Nevertheless on 1 January 2019 at 10:58 am UTC