Google plan over 120 Stadia games this year, 10 coming to Stadia before other platforms

Valve got developers interested in SteamOS by showing them the value of Linux as a gaming platform. Google has failed to do that with Stadia. They want developers to port to their platform exclusively. Why not port to Stadia and also release a Linux version? That gives developers more incentive since Linux already as a community, albeit a small one.

If a game is developed for only one platform it is not an exclusive. It becomes exclusive at the point where an agreement is done with whoever to exclude a certain platform from development.

for all intents and purposes, it dont matter, many games that we think on then as being nintendo games, arent developed by nintendo.
pokémon is actually made by gamefreak who owns one third of it.
some zelda games for gameboy where developed by capcom.
and in the end of the day, it dont matter why an game is exclusive, whats matter is the fact it is.

It is one thing to not care about a platform. Actively hindering that platform to prosper is a different thing.

it dont prevent the platform from being an sucess, sony counter attack nintendo exclusives with their own exclusives or exclusivity deals, the same goes for microsoft.
that is the only strategy that works.

Also I do not agree with your statement on Windows becoming the only gaming platform without exclusives. Yes Exclusives sell consoles. Without exclusives consoles would have to offer another benefit over the PC. If they can not do that they would die (rightfully so). However Linux and MacOS have been around without attention from game developers and do obviously offer a meaningful benefit for the user over Windows,

macOS have exclusives developed by apple or in exclusivity deals.
linux exclusives came mostly due to then not being able to exist on windows, since microsoft control some parts of it like explorer and dont allow alternatives for it.
even if linux had no advantage or exclusives some people would use it anyway due to ideology rather than pragmaticy.

its impossible to kill linux economically because it dont rely only on money to survive, even if all companies stop donating for it, it could rely on volunteers, but the same cant be said about almost anything.
and its not an matter of existing, sure linux may be an viable alternative for a few people, but for most people, its not really an option.
if i need an certain software to survive, and due to the low marketshare, its not worth for the company to develop such software for linux, linux is not an option for me.
if we had exclusives, the ony software that we might need to survive and not have, would be the ones developed by ms, apple or that had exclusivity deals by then.

we are 26 years without any significant growth, its time to learn that this strategy dont works, gamecube had more users than linux ever had (on desktop) in just 4~6 years, and its still considered an failure, ps2 had exclusives and all the most relevant games from its generation, it had more than 150 millions of users and reach this market in only 5~8 years.
just imagine if we had that + wine.

"consoles would have to offer another benefit over the PC."
software is what sells, gamecube was stronger than ps2, it didnt matter, ps2 sold more.
everyone says linux is better than windows, it dont matter, people will keep using windows.

honestly, the reason why linux dont grow isnt that people dont give it an try, it is because they give it an try and either hate it (due to the lack of games and softwares), or love it, but give up on using it due to the lack of games and software.

many games that were exclusives for xbox or playstation are being ported to windows now, its only proves that an temporary exclusive is enough, but without even that, we have no chance.

honestly, i my self am almost giving up and going back to windows, if valve nor google prove they can make the market change in favor of linux, i will just quit wasting my time and go back to where i can play the games i want.
i dont mind hold my breath for a few years to see the linux year, i waited ten years for that, but i will not hold in vain, and that is the same case for everyone.
linux is not growing not because there arent new users, but because for every new user we have, some one else goes back to windows.
and i dont want to be one of then, but ideology is the only reason holding me back, and it was proven over and over again that this ideology will change nothing.

there are still many games that i waited ten years to play on wine and still cant play, and this will never change with the things they way they are.


Last edited by elmapul on 3 February 2020 at 1:27 pm UTC

for all intents and purposes, it dont matter, many games that we think on then as being nintendo games, arent developed by nintendo.
pokémon is actually made by gamefreak who owns one third of it.
some zelda games for gameboy where developed by capcom.
and in the end of the day, it dont matter why an game is exclusive, whats matter is the fact it is.


it dont prevent the platform from being an sucess, sony counter attack nintendo exclusives with their own exclusives or exclusivity deals, the same goes for microsoft.
that is the only strategy that works.



macOS have exclusives developed by apple or in exclusivity deals.
linux exclusives came mostly due to then not being able to exist on windows, since microsoft control some parts of it like explorer and dont allow alternatives for it.
even if linux had no advantage or exclusives some people would use it anyway due to ideology rather than pragmaticy.

its impossible to kill linux economically because it dont rely only on money to survive, even if all companies stop donating for it, it could rely on volunteers, but the same cant be said about almost anything.
and its not an matter of existing, sure linux may be an viable alternative for a few people, but for most people, its not really an option.
if i need an certain software to survive, and due to the low marketshare, its not worth for the company to develop such software for linux, linux is not an option for me.
if we had exclusives, the ony software that we might need to survive and not have, would be the ones developed by ms, apple or that had exclusivity deals by then.

we are 26 years without any significant growth, its time to learn that this strategy dont works, gamecube had more users than linux ever had (on desktop) in just 4~6 years, and its still considered an failure, ps2 had exclusives and all the most relevant games from its generation, it had more than 150 millions of users and reach this market in only 5~8 years.
just imagine if we had that + wine.

"consoles would have to offer another benefit over the PC."
software is what sells, gamecube was stronger than ps2, it didnt matter, ps2 sold more.
everyone says linux is better than windows, it dont matter, people will keep using windows.

honestly, the reason why linux dont grow isnt that people dont give it an try, it is because they give it an try and either hate it (due to the lack of games and softwares), or love it, but give up on using it due to the lack of games and software.

many games that were exclusives for xbox or playstation are being ported to windows now, its only proves that an temporary exclusive is enough, but without even that, we have no chance.

honestly, i my self am almost giving up and going back to windows, if valve nor google prove they can make the market change in favor of linux, i will just quit wasting my time and go back to where i can play the games i want.
i dont mind hold my breath for a few years to see the linux year, i waited ten years for that, but i will not hold in vain, and that is the same case for everyone.
linux is not growing not because there arent new users, but because for every new user we have, some one else goes back to windows.
and i dont want to be one of then, but ideology is the only reason holding me back, and it was proven over and over again that this ideology will change nothing.

there are still many games that i waited ten years to play on wine and still cant play, and this will never change with the things they way they are.

1. My Point was, that it is a different thing and calling it exclusive misses that. If some developer/publisher just so happens to develop for a certain platform (and only that platform) there is no harm done. If a different platform is prohibited from being developed for the platform inevitably becomes worse due to not offering that game. Whether it is Nintendo or whoever else is besides the point.

2. My point was not a game not being on a certain platform will make it impossible from succeeding but rather will make it worse of a platform and therefore hinder it from being more competitive. To the downside of the platform and its users (therefore being anti-consumer)

3. Linux and mac exclusive Software can surely be a reason to use these OSs but the OSs themselves do offer benefits over Windows that would justify using them. However when talking about games there is little to no exclusives on those OSs.

4. If Linux is not an option for you wouldn't you like that supersoftware that would get people to use Linux to be on windows and Mac as well so you could use the software regardless of what OS you use and just choose the OS, that suits you best. Then it would just be a question of what OS is actually better, not what software can I use on that OS. and everyone can just choose the best OS for themselves.

5. A) I'd like to know where you got those numbers from. B) If Linux or any free and open source software would start with exclusives that would not be free and open source anymore as you wouldn't be able to freely change and redistribute it on e.g. Windows.

6. Currently it is exclusives that sell a console. The point was that it shouldn't be that way. A console should offer a better experience in other ways. Platforms should be competing on features, price, performance etc.

7. You mention that people stop using Linux due to a Lack of Software availability (games in particular). The point is games being exclusive to other platforms hurts Linux (and other competing platforms). If there were no exclusives Linux as a platform (and other platforms) would benefit.

8. Choose whatever platform/OS suits your needs best. If that is Windows, then use Windows. However Linux often suits people the best aside from one aspect. For many that aspect is gaming. Therefore I suggest not hindering Linux as a gaming platform with more exclusives and stick to the free and open source ideology.

1. My Point was, that it is a different thing and calling it exclusive misses that. If some developer/publisher just so happens to develop for a certain platform (and only that platform) there is no harm done. If a different platform is prohibited from being developed for the platform inevitably becomes worse due to not offering that game. Whether it is Nintendo or whoever else is besides the point.

2. My point was not a game not being on a certain platform will make it impossible from succeeding but rather will make it worse of a platform and therefore hinder it from being more competitive. To the downside of the platform and its users (therefore being anti-consumer)

3. Linux and mac exclusive Software can surely be a reason to use these OSs but the OSs themselves do offer benefits over Windows that would justify using them. However when talking about games there is little to no exclusives on those OSs.

4. If Linux is not an option for you wouldn't you like that supersoftware that would get people to use Linux to be on windows and Mac as well so you could use the software regardless of what OS you use and just choose the OS, that suits you best. Then it would just be a question of what OS is actually better, not what software can I use on that OS. and everyone can just choose the best OS for themselves.



5. A) I'd like to know where you got those numbers from. B) If Linux or any free and open source software would start with exclusives that would not be free and open source anymore as you wouldn't be able to freely change and redistribute it on e.g. Windows.

6. Currently it is exclusives that sell a console. The point was that it shouldn't be that way. A console should offer a better experience in other ways. Platforms should be competing on features, price, performance etc.

7. You mention that people stop using Linux due to a Lack of Software availability (games in particular). The point is games being exclusive to other platforms hurts Linux (and other competing platforms). If there were no exclusives Linux as a platform (and other platforms) would benefit.

8. Choose whatever platform/OS suits your needs best. If that is Windows, then use Windows. However Linux often suits people the best aside from one aspect. For many that aspect is gaming. Therefore I suggest not hindering Linux as a gaming platform with more exclusives and stick to the free and open source ideology.

1.you dont get it, did you? by making exclusives, you increase the number of users for the platform, by increase the number of users, you increase the the support from thirdy parties, and as an result, the platform become an beter and viable option for everyone.
And look at hat microsoft and sony are doing, they are relasing their exclusive titles for windows anyway.
temporary exclusives make no harm to the end user and solve the problem of lack of marketshare.

2.there will always be exclusives, the thing is, if didnt happen because one company paid for exclusivity, it will happen because the competition paid, its an utopy to think that no one will try, and even if that happens, what will happen is that the platform that has most of the users will get exclusives anyway, so what is the point of continuing this strategy?

3.so as long as they arent games, its ok?

4.yes except that i rather not, i rather not help an company like microsoft that sabotage their competition doing things like changing the user default browser, without consent from the same or from the browser vendor (not to mention the other things)
but looks like i dont have an choice here.
plus, i like linux, being able to customize stuff and so on, but its feels like too little compared to have more tools to create content, or modify games and so on.

5.
a)vg charts
b)except that , thats already happen, there are plenty of softwares that are easy to install in one distro, but almost impossible in another one, to the point of making people giving up on either the software or the distro.
i never was able to install openmortal on ubuntu for example. (not that i care that much, the game was bad, but still, its not freedom if we dont have standards, web standards allowed we to run any page, web game or web aplication in any browser from any vendor in any os, linux desktop on the other hand, the things often break backward compatibility wich means there is no guarantee of foward compatibility or compatibility with other distros)

6.it should, but other strategy dont work, making an mistake is being human, insist on it is madness.

7.but that will not change, it dont matter why its happening, what matter is its happening and what we can do to change that.

8.dual boot is too much of a headeach, life is too short to reboot.

finally, i would like to sugest another strategy that everyone will like:
if we cant have exclusives, we should instead, be the first ones to break exclusivity from other platforms.
in other words, lets joint the comunity arround an project like ps3 emulation, make sure we fund it more than the windows users fund, so the linux version will get more optimization and as an result, linux will be remembered as the number 2 place to play ps3 games (the number one, being ps3 itself)
that shall bring new users to linux, and they will fund it thenselves, so we could move foward for another project, like funding an dreamcast emulator, wiiu emulator, switch emulator and so on, making sure linux is aways the best option to play then, one by one.

either we do that, or there will be no hope.
stadia failed, steam machines failed, its time to give all we have in this strategy or give up.


Last edited by elmapul on 5 February 2020 at 12:13 pm UTC

1.you dont get it, did you? by making exclusives, you increase the number of users for the platform, by increase the number of users, you increase the the support from thirdy parties, and as an result, the platform become an beter and viable option for everyone.
And look at hat microsoft and sony are doing, they are relasing their exclusive titles for windows anyway.
temporary exclusives make no harm to the end user and solve the problem of lack of marketshare.

2.there will always be exclusives, the thing is, if didnt happen because one company paid for exclusivity, it will happen because the competition paid, its an utopy to think that no one will try, and even if that happens, what will happen is that the platform that has most of the users will get exclusives anyway, so what is the point of continuing this strategy?

3.so as long as they arent games, its ok?

4.yes except that i rather not, i rather not help an company like microsoft that sabotage their competition doing things like changing the user default browser, without consent from the same or from the browser vendor (not to mention the other things)
but looks like i dont have an choice here.
plus, i like linux, being able to customize stuff and so on, but its feels like too little compared to have more tools to create content, or modify games and so on.

5.
a)vg charts
b)except that , thats already happen, there are plenty of softwares that are easy to install in one distro, but almost impossible in another one, to the point of making people giving up on either the software or the distro.
i never was able to install openmortal on ubuntu for example. (not that i care that much, the game was bad, but still, its not freedom if we dont have standards, web standards allowed we to run any page, web game or web aplication in any browser from any vendor in any os, linux desktop on the other hand, the things often break backward compatibility wich means there is no guarantee of foward compatibility or compatibility with other distros)

6.it should, but other strategy dont work, making an mistake is being human, insist on it is madness.

7.but that will not change, it dont matter why its happening, what matter is its happening and what we can do to change that.

8.dual boot is too much of a headeach, life is too short to reboot.

finally, i would like to sugest another strategy that everyone will like:
if we cant have exclusives, we should instead, be the first ones to break exclusivity from other platforms.
in other words, lets joint the comunity arround an project like ps3 emulation, make sure we fund it more than the windows users fund, so the linux version will get more optimization and as an result, linux will be remembered as the number 2 place to play ps3 games (the number one, being ps3 itself)
that shall bring new users to linux, and they will fund it thenselves, so we could move foward for another project, like funding an dreamcast emulator, wiiu emulator, switch emulator and so on, making sure linux is aways the best option to play then, one by one.

either we do that, or there will be no hope.
stadia failed, steam machines failed, its time to give all we have in this strategy or give up.

->1. Exclusives do hurt other platforms just only temporarily. For the exclusivity period the excluded platforms will be less attractive. Increasing the number of users for the sake of increasing the number of users is not beneficial. If anything users will be turned down by that just like it is with console-only games that people would much rather play on PC.
->2. Call it utopian but if nobody buys exclusives then there is no incentive to make software exclusive.
->3. Nope. Never said that. Never meant that. I was saying that there are reasons to use MacOS/Linux over Windows other than software availability.
->4. Thats what I am advocating for. Competition on what OS is better. I see no benefit in Linux-software not being available on Windows too.
->5. a)Can't find anything about there being more gamcube users than Linux users. b) Again: Developing/not developing for a certain platform/distro is one thing. Actively paying for some platform/distro to be excluded is a different thing. I do not ask for every software to run on anything. I just advocate that nobody pays money to hinder other competing platforms/distros.
->6. Well the only way to change the status quo is to despise exclusives not to encourage them.
->7. Again: the only way to change Linux being excluded is to despise exclusives not to encourage them.
->8. Here I 100% agree. Without funding community projects Linux will have a hard time to thrive (not limited to gaming tho). We can already see this with AMDs Drivers totally neglecting OpenGL performance. On Windows you are stuck with the crappy OpenGL performance. On Linux the open source community drivers far outperform the windows drivers. For a long time the WiiU emulator CemU only had OpenGL and using it on Linux with wine was still way faster than using Windows for AMD GPU users (now CemU has Vulkan and windows has decent performance as well). Linux also has a superior scheduler for multi-threaded workloads. And We do now have the new ACO shader compiler for AMD GPUs.
This is how Linux can get more marketshare, by being the superior platform.