Epic looking fantasy RPG 'Edge Of Eternity' still plans a Linux release, not soon though

I've been following this little discussion and I predicted what your point of view was going to be, prior to this clarification you provided. Pitching in with my own view-point, and sharing it for consideration.

Yes, Steam does (to some degree) place the need to use their mandatory client in order to be able to access (i.e. download) and it is needed to play some of the games. BUT, as you've mentioned already in passing, it is possible to use alternative downloaders to perform the download and then you're able to play the DRM-Free game files without Steam client. That is, you are not tied down to the Steam client for all games, and in fact it is the game developer who is deciding if they want their game to be DRM-Free or not (and Steam client is just assisting them one way or the other).

So, assuming the game developer releases their game on Steam DRM-Free and then you have that game title downloaded via alternative downloader or via the official Steam client. Then you have a DRM-Free copy of the game files to backup and store however you desire, they are not tied to the Steam client and you don't need to use the Steam client to access them. Again, it is only the game developers who want to push DRM onto their games where Steam client facilitates this.

You mentioned that Steam client is "always-online", but this is not really true. Apart from when you are forced (by the game, e.g. playing a multi-player game across the internet) you can play your game via the Steam client, entirely offline. Steam client actually has an Offline Mode switch to allow you to select Steam to be offline, and still gain access to your titles for playing when not on the internet.

The point you made about supporting Windows-exclusive Game Developers by buying their games, and then playing those games by Proton. It isn't supporting Linux Game Developers, doing this, but it is making Windows-exclusive Game Developers a bit more aware of the Linux market-share. It also makes Valve aware, and as they release statistics then the rest of the world is aware.

If the Linux market-share is perceived to be large enough, then it could encourage these Windows-only developers to make more consideration of Linux in their current and future titles.

My own feeling is: If I am so keen on a Windows-exclusive game that I am willing to buy it, at least my purchase is counting towards helping the Linux platform, both in demonstrating Linux market-share and presence. Though, like you, I fiercely support Linux Game Developers and the vast majority of my purchases are direct from Linux-supporting Game Developers. What I mean is that a lot of my Game Purchase Decisions are based on whether the game is on Linux, and if it isn't on Linux then I am very unlikely to buy it (i.e. Only in exceptional cases).

Moving on to an additional point, which might cause a little offence, but it is a good visualisation tool:

Who is the better Linux supporter? The Linux Gamer who buys 99 Linux-supporting Game Titles and 1 Windows-exclusive title (which supports Linux market-share statistics because they play the game on Proton) *OR* The (hard-line) Linux Gamer who buys 50 Linux-supporting Game Titles. Sorry, it's a bit of a trick question, heh - The better supporter is the one who bought the more games from Linux developers.

Quoting: Alm888

Quoting: Mountain ManYou misunderstand: if you buy and play a game via Proton, it is counted by Steam the same as if you had bought a native Linux version of the game.

Well, let's talk about "misunderstanding", if you insist. :|
For starters, I won't use Steam until it drops its mandatory client and becomes officially DRM-free. And no, alternative downloaders and games which are "DRM-free on Steam" (i.e. can be launched without the client after being downloaded via the client) won't do. So, in my case, Proton™ isn't even a consideration, and that is not negotiable. Period.

But let's pretend I wasn't so against Valve® and its always-online DRM.

In that case, for all intents and purposes the ones purchasing a Windows-exclusive game must be considered a Windows gamers. Their believes, aspirations and desires are irrelevant: they are giving the money to a company that makes Windows-exclusive products. And that is what truly matters. "Useful idiots", according to the classic. :P
The fact that those Linux-wannabe players prefer to suffer and attempt to misuse the Windows-exclusive game, trying to launch it on Linux… Well, that doesn't matter in this harsh world of hard cash and profit. In fact, this even more preferable: the company is officially relieved of all support obligations (if something doesn't work -- not their problems. A user has violated the terms of contract by not complying to the system requirements). Rumor has it, Sony actually sells its consoles at loss, hoping to recoup in game licenses' sales. If Linux users to start getting their PlayStation games without the console itself, that would make Sony very happy panda. :D

Last edited by g000h on 1 May 2019 at 9:53 am UTC

Quoting: Alm888In that case, for all intents and purposes the ones purchasing a Windows-exclusive game must be considered a Windows gamers. Their believes, aspirations and desires are irrelevant: they are giving the money to a company that makes Windows-exclusive products. And that is what truly matters. "Useful idiots", according to the classic. :P
The fact that those Linux-wannabe players prefer to suffer and attempt to misuse the Windows-exclusive game, trying to launch it on Linux… Well, that doesn't matter in this harsh world of hard cash and profit. In fact, this even more preferable: the company is officially relieved of all support obligations (if something doesn't work -- not their problems. A user has violated the terms of contract by not complying to the system requirements). Rumor has it, Sony actually sells its consoles at loss, hoping to recoup in game licenses' sales. If Linux users to start getting their PlayStation games without the console itself, that would make Sony very happy panda. :D

Your response reminds me of the saying "Cutting off one's nose to spite one's face."

Quoting: Mountain ManYour response reminds me of the saying "Cutting off one's nose to spite one's face."

I'm sorry , but my English is not good enough to understand the (apparently) proverb. Moreover, this seems like direct insult to me, and when one side resorts to insults, than it is a clear indicator it has ran out of arguments.

In any case, your comment does not contribute to the conversation in any meaningful way, so I am assuming our discussion is over.

Quoting: g000h

Spoiler, click me

Yes, Steam does (to some degree) place the need to use their mandatory client in order to be able to access (i.e. download) and it is needed to play some of the games. BUT, as you've mentioned already in passing, it is possible to use alternative downloaders to perform the download and then you're able to play the DRM-Free game files without Steam client. That is, you are not tied down to the Steam client for all games, and in fact it is the game developer who is deciding if they want their game to be DRM-Free or not (and Steam client is just assisting them one way or the other).

So, assuming the game developer releases their game on Steam DRM-Free and then you have that game title downloaded via alternative downloader or via the official Steam client. Then you have a DRM-Free copy of the game files to backup and store however you desire, they are not tied to the Steam client and you don't need to use the Steam client to access them. Again, it is only the game developers who want to push DRM onto their games where Steam client facilitates this.

You mentioned that Steam client is "always-online", but this is not really true. Apart from when you are forced (by the game, e.g. playing a multi-player game across the internet) you can play your game via the Steam client, entirely offline. Steam client actually has an Offline Mode switch to allow you to select Steam to be offline, and still gain access to your titles for playing when not on the internet.

First of all, thank you for the rehearsal of the current situation regarding Steam DRM. As much as I despise Gabe Newell, I must admit he is not a stupid man. And that man once said that "Piracy is not the matter of Price, it is a matter of convenience" (inexact quote). And that's damn right!
And what you just described is a horrible nightmare! Not only you have to go through all theses circles of Hell in order to get your game, but you are not shielded against right-holders whims. You know, recently SquareEnix has "updated" their Final Fantasy Whatever <sorry, can't remember whether it was X or XI or something, but it was an old game, like 5 to 6 years old>. The only thing that had been "updated" was the inclusion of "Denuvo Anti Tamper".
I am not paying for this level of "support". Sorry, but in a compliance with Gabe Newell, torrent editions are preferable. But more importantly, my time is more valuable than all that Windows-exclusive BS. After all, I have only so much of it and I'd better spent it on Linux-native DRM-free games.

Quoting: g000hThe point you made about supporting Windows-exclusive Game Developers by buying their games, and then playing those games by Proton. It isn't supporting Linux Game Developers, doing this, but it is making Windows-exclusive Game Developers a bit more aware of the Linux market-share. It also makes Valve aware, and as they release statistics then the rest of the world is aware.

Yeah, it make them aware they can ignore Linux and still get the (minuscule) amount of money "Linux users" possess. I prefer to rise Linux awareness among game developers by giving my money to Linux-friendly devs and then watch their reports about how disproportionately big Linux sales were compared to "Steam statistics".

Quoting: g000hMy own feeling is: If I am so keen on a Windows-exclusive game that I am willing to buy it, at least my purchase is counting towards helping the Linux platform, both in demonstrating Linux market-share and presence. Though, like you, I fiercely support Linux Game Developers and the vast majority of my purchases are direct from Linux-supporting Game Developers. What I mean is that a lot of my Game Purchase Decisions are based on whether the game is on Linux, and if it isn't on Linux then I am very unlikely to buy it (i.e. Only in exceptional cases).

I admit, I am not inerrant either and sometimes purchase Windows-exclusive games (granted, they are twelve years old and heavily discounted, but still!). But, please, see my comment about my time. Currently, I am stocked on (Linux-native) games already and will have something to play even if I lose Internet connection for five years or so. Don't see a point in getting Windows-exclusive games (I am not a man of hype and do not feel the urge to play every popular Windows game around).

Quoting: g000hWho is the better Linux supporter? The Linux Gamer who buys 99 Linux-supporting Game Titles and 1 Windows-exclusive title (which supports Linux market-share statistics because they play the game on Proton) *OR* The (hard-line) Linux Gamer who buys 50 Linux-supporting Game Titles.

Well, that's easy! :D The better supporter is who buys 200 Linux games and 0 Windows games, hands down!

Quoting: Alm888

Quoting: Mountain ManYour response reminds me of the saying "Cutting off one's nose to spite one's face."

I'm sorry , but my English is not good enough to understand the (apparently) proverb. Moreover, this seems like direct insult to me, and when one side resorts to insults, than it is a clear indicator it has ran out of arguments.

It's a bit hypocritical that you would complain about insulting language when you referred to people who use Proton as "Useful idiots".

Anyway, the saying "cutting off one's nose to spite one's face" is not an insult. It means to respond to a situation in a needlessly aggressive and self-destructive way. In other words, your militant refusal to use Proton even though it is counted as a Linux sale ultimately does more harm than good in promoting Linux as a viable and profitable platform.

Think about it this way: Who is more likely to support Linux in the future, a developer who sees zero sales from Linux users, or one who sees 10% of sales from Linux users using Proton? Now you might argue that the latter will dismiss Linux users because the developer didn't have do any extra work to get those sales, but it could also be argued that they might consider releasing a native Linux version of their next product in order to attract even more Linux customers.

Quoting: Mountain ManThink about it this way: Who is more likely to support Linux in the future, a developer who sees zero sales from Linux users, or one who sees 10% of sales from Linux users using Proton? Now you might argue that the latter will dismiss Linux users because the developer didn't have do any extra work to get those sales, but it could also be argued that they might consider releasing a native Linux version of their next product in order to attract even more Linux customers.

And since it can go either way, it'll remain speculation. I suspect the highest number will go to those that simply ignore it.

For now, I'll stick with a practical approach. I value native much higher than non-native, so it'll take a substantial sale before non-native becomes interesting.