Insurgency: Sandstorm no longer getting Linux/Mac support or a campaign mode

Truly the best and worst of times for Linux gaming to be sure... I have to say, I feel for developers. It's a very uncertain time and very hard to know where to put resources. I heard a Qualcomm rep say that mobile gaming revenue has surpassed all other gaming combined (including PC and console). You have to decide if you're going to do Epic, or Origin, or go in on streaming with Stadia or any of the other streamers waiting in the wings (XBox, Valve, NVIDA, etc). Costs keep going up. Psychiatrists are calling excessive playing a disorder.... There's an increasing glut of games and it's hard to get noticed...

Those are big decisions with a lot of cash on the line. It almost makes the decision of whether to support Linux or Mac seem quaint and homey by comparison. Ah, the good ol' simpler days!

Our future, as someone put it waaay back on page 1, is to back streaming and Proton solutions which allow us to play everything regardless of OS. Linux is a platform to run software, period. If that platform runs games which run elsewhere, I'm not bothered. Linux is too small for dedicated efforts, the Mac is small for dedicated efforts, and hell, it seems like Windows is too small for dedicated efforts, as it feels like everything needs a console and Switch edition these days, if not mobile too (including games like XPlane and Eve Online!).

Speaking of Sandstorm, as someone pointed out, it's been a rough launch on Windows for them as well. This one has had issues...


Last edited by iiari on 11 December 2019 at 6:04 am UTC

The sad news. You can play Squad with Proton.

The trouble with both tactics, "No Tux, no bucks!" for more native games as well as Proton for more Linux gamers is that they didn't work. We tried the former one for years, and Linux ports were on a decline lately, then Proton arrived over a year ago, and the number of Linux gamers didn't rise.

Quoting: EikeThe trouble with both tactics, "No Tux, no bucks!" for more native games as well as Proton for more Linux gamers is that they didn't work. We tried the former one for years, and Linux ports were on a decline lately, then Proton arrived over a year ago, and the number of Linux gamers didn't rise.

You may be right but I think it's still a little early to tell with Proton. I mean, for most of that "over a year" it's been in beta. Is it out of beta yet, even? And for the most part, the only people who have heard of it are people already running Linux. That obviously isn't going to help people to think of trying Linux.
Proton isn't going to significantly accelerate Linux adoption unless/until some kind of product is released that runs Linux and uses Proton's ready access to Windows games as a selling point. And there's not much point in a company funding Proton (as Valve have) unless they plan some such product (or, OK, maybe just to use the threat of such a product to keep MS from pushing them). But I don't expect Valve, or anyone else, to try to release a product that significantly requires Proton as a selling point until anti-cheat issues are resolved. Anti-cheat just blocks too many of the most popular games.

So I'd want to claim the jury's still out on what effect Proton is going to have. We won't know until someone tries to use it for something, and either succeeds or fails.


Last edited by Purple Library Guy on 11 December 2019 at 6:31 pm UTC

Quoting: GuestI was on the fence of a few things until I read the actual post on steam community and they noted:

"... that our team is plowing full speed ahead with our efforts at bringing Insurgency: Sandstorm to console."

Ahhhh that explains a lot. They've chosen to go with the more Expensive and at this point in time riskier target, quite possibly believing there are more moneys to be made there, won't blame them since that is generally the case.
IMO on consoles this game is DOA, they're aiming a bazooka at their foot with this move.

Quoting: Purple Library Guy

Quoting: EikeThe trouble with both tactics, "No Tux, no bucks!" for more native games as well as Proton for more Linux gamers is that they didn't work. We tried the former one for years, and Linux ports were on a decline lately, then Proton arrived over a year ago, and the number of Linux gamers didn't rise.

You may be right but I think it's still a little early to tell with Proton. I mean, for most of that "over a year" it's been in beta. Is it out of beta yet, even? And for the most part, the only people who have heard of it are people already running Linux. That obviously isn't going to help people to think of trying Linux.
Proton isn't going to significantly accelerate Linux adoption unless/until some kind of product is released that runs Linux and uses Proton's ready access to Windows games as a selling point. And there's not much point in a company funding Proton (as Valve have) unless they plan some such product (or, OK, maybe just to use the threat of such a product to keep MS from pushing them). But I don't expect Valve, or anyone else, to try to release a product that significantly requires Proton as a selling point until anti-cheat issues are resolved. Anti-cheat just blocks too many of the most popular games.

So I'd want to claim the jury's still out on what effect Proton is going to have. We won't know until someone tries to use it for something, and either succeeds or fails.

Which brings up another concern valve money tap am starting to worry they will go ahh well we tried and we didnt gain any traction.

Quoting: Guest

Quoting: Whitewolfe80Well yes but if you now buy sandstorm are you not vindicating that decision see the linux guys bought it anyway and didnt cost us a dime.

This is EXACTLY my point. Why would any company that sees that Linux users are willing to pay for a Windows game ever make an effort to create a Linux-native version? Heck, if I were a business owner, even I would do the same thing; create only a Windows port, and get the Linux users 'for free'. I just don't see the incentive for any other action. Never have, really.

Except Insurgency Sandstorm does not work through Proton because of EAC. So for this particular case, making the claim that the developers are being lazy is completely void. I don't get what's so hard to understand. Many games, particularly major ones, are not profitable or yields little compared to developing new content for Windows. As consequent of that the developers drop support. Many developers probably aren't even aware of Proton, WINE or Linux (japanese devs I imagine). Many have already made up their mind and will NEVER make their game available for Linux regardless of any petition or outcry for support. I don't see anything nefarious with Focus Home Interactive omiting Linux (and MAC) support to focus on the game and more profitable consoles.

If any complaint I have it is that developers should help out with running games through WINE. For example if there is something in their source code that is important to know for WINE and DXVK devs, they should be nice and provide it with a agreement they won't disclose it to others. Or maybe they can give back some money to Linux users who decide to play a Windows game through Proton. Suppose the game costs $60: You buy and play the game (on Linux) til you no longer are able to refund it, you then receive $10 or $10 of wallet back.

Quoting: EikeThe trouble with both tactics, "No Tux, no bucks!" for more native games as well as Proton for more Linux gamers is that they didn't work. We tried the former one for years, and Linux ports were on a decline lately, then Proton arrived over a year ago, and the number of Linux gamers didn't rise.

I don't see any problem with any of the tactics. If you are able to and like a game that's developed for Linux, your purchase will be a win for Linux. With Proton you are forgetting some things. First, the project isn't complete. One of biggest missing puzzle to be solved is anti cheat. If that is solved many major online games such as FortNite, Apex Legends, PUBG, etc will work or be easier to work around. These are games that many people would switch over for. Lastly, it will take more than a year or two for Proton to increase number of Linux gamers. But one thing is certain, it has helped retain users and convince X people to switch to Linux. For any compatiblity layer, starting at 1% marketshare and trying to make it 5% by itself will be like a slow and difficult task. And it can and will be disrupted by ChromeOs (Stadia) and Windows (Xbox Game Pass and XCloud). So while Linux is starting to become feasible thanks to Proton, other platforms are also on the rise and making it harder to persuade people to switch.


Last edited by Linuxwarper on 11 December 2019 at 11:00 pm UTC

Quoting: Guest

Quoting: Purple Library Guy

Quoting: EikeThe trouble with both tactics, "No Tux, no bucks!" for more native games as well as Proton for more Linux gamers is that they didn't work. We tried the former one for years, and Linux ports were on a decline lately, then Proton arrived over a year ago, and the number of Linux gamers didn't rise.

You may be right but I think it's still a little early to tell with Proton. I mean, for most of that "over a year" it's been in beta. Is it out of beta yet, even? And for the most part, the only people who have heard of it are people already running Linux. That obviously isn't going to help people to think of trying Linux.
Proton isn't going to significantly accelerate Linux adoption unless/until some kind of product is released that runs Linux and uses Proton's ready access to Windows games as a selling point. And there's not much point in a company funding Proton (as Valve have) unless they plan some such product (or, OK, maybe just to use the threat of such a product to keep MS from pushing them). But I don't expect Valve, or anyone else, to try to release a product that significantly requires Proton as a selling point until anti-cheat issues are resolved. Anti-cheat just blocks too many of the most popular games.

So I'd want to claim the jury's still out on what effect Proton is going to have. We won't know until someone tries to use it for something, and either succeeds or fails.

Perhaps I'm being pedantic, but why would anyone other than Valve be funding "Proton"?
Wine, on the other hand, companies (including Valve) do fund.

A default packaging of wine for gaming (without needing Steam) is really needed if gaming is going to go that route. That's not something Valve alone can fix - distros, GOG, itch.io, etc, really all need to come together for a GNU/Linux gaming desktop experience, rather than Steam/Linux gaming desktop experience.

That was sort of my point, actually. Valve made (and therefore funded; it wasn't free, it cost them something) Proton. One would expect they expended those resources for some reason; just allowing existing Linux users to have a slightly better Wine doesn't seem likely to be that reason.


Last edited by Purple Library Guy on 11 December 2019 at 11:55 pm UTC

Quoting: GuestIgnore = not develop games for.

So what, as long as people are using Linux?

As I said, even if Proton only manages to double the Linux market share to around 2%, I'd see that as a net win. But let's say, purely for the sake of argument, that as many as 25% of the people playing Windows games end up doing it on Linux instead of natively... how could that be a bad thing?

Quoting: Whitewolfe80

Quoting: Purple Library Guy

Quoting: EikeThe trouble with both tactics, "No Tux, no bucks!" for more native games as well as Proton for more Linux gamers is that they didn't work. We tried the former one for years, and Linux ports were on a decline lately, then Proton arrived over a year ago, and the number of Linux gamers didn't rise.

You may be right but I think it's still a little early to tell with Proton. I mean, for most of that "over a year" it's been in beta. Is it out of beta yet, even? And for the most part, the only people who have heard of it are people already running Linux. That obviously isn't going to help people to think of trying Linux.
Proton isn't going to significantly accelerate Linux adoption unless/until some kind of product is released that runs Linux and uses Proton's ready access to Windows games as a selling point. And there's not much point in a company funding Proton (as Valve have) unless they plan some such product (or, OK, maybe just to use the threat of such a product to keep MS from pushing them). But I don't expect Valve, or anyone else, to try to release a product that significantly requires Proton as a selling point until anti-cheat issues are resolved. Anti-cheat just blocks too many of the most popular games.

So I'd want to claim the jury's still out on what effect Proton is going to have. We won't know until someone tries to use it for something, and either succeeds or fails.

Which brings up another concern valve money tap am starting to worry they will go ahh well we tried and we didnt gain any traction.

That's certainly also possible. But I have the impression Valve is very, very, very, very, very rich. What they've been doing, with the exception perhaps of the big "launch the Steam Machine" phase, is not a huge expense even just for a hedge against future contingencies, let alone if they have actual projects in mind.
The very fact that they could keep up their current level of effort forever and never notice it is actually one of the stronger counterarguments against my theory that they must have something in mind. They might just be laying groundwork so that if "just in case" ever happens, Linux will be as ready as possible for whatever play they might need to make with it, because what the heck, it's cheap insurance. It might even just be that a few upper-level Valve people have sentimental attachments to Linux; many developers are fond of Linux for its open source nature and its so-much-less-broken-than-alternatives status in many non-desktop roles.
Nonetheless, I think balance of probabilities is that they have some kind of strategy.


Last edited by Purple Library Guy on 12 December 2019 at 12:10 am UTC