Stadia Pro subscribers get 5 new games on June 1

Quoting: TheRiddickMy main concern comes down to VALUE and longevity of the project.

If Stadia came out tomorrow and explained what they can do for you if a game gets removed off their platform (which you bought) and also allow people to download the game to your home PC as either backup or offline play then that be great(like how steam works).

I don't see the issue except for they see these games you paid full price for (ignoring sales) as THEIRS and not YOURS, that's a HUGE red flag IMO.

BTW I understand this is how Steam and EGS DRM works, but at least with Steam they have offline play which they can extend at time of death of a game (or you can do it yourself indefinitely) so given that, yes you do OWN the games bought on steam! IN FACT Exodus is DRM free on GOG and apparently also on Steam.

WITH these DRM offline play compatible games (online parts need an account somewhere obviously) you can install on ANY CLOUD BASED GAMING SYSTEM and play for the BASE FEE of using that cloud service.. no mumbo jumbo buying the game 2 or 3 times!


PS. I try to make my comments to the point, with the least amount of double speech as possible, and not dance around huge gaps in the argument like some other people are doing!

Have you actually tried to do this, though? I've been a DRM-Free linux gamer from 1999 to about 2019. I joined Steam around November '19. Prior to that, my kids got on it when they became teens. I have a LAN setup in my basement and we tried Steam offline a few times for games like Killing Floor, L4D 2 and some others over the years (have not done it again since 2017, though). A good amount of the games my kids liked to play just did not work all the time offline or Steam would not open. In the end we had to stick to boxed games, Desura games, GOG games, freeware and open source stuff because the Steam offline method would flake out. When it did work there would be other issues the games sometimes could not see each other or not open at all. I did the 2 month check in for those machines but after while it would flunk. Another good example would be a game like Tekken 7 where your save would gets corrupted and reset you back to day 1 and you would have unlock everything again UNLESS you saved your game save separately and do some edits which defeats the purpose/convience of Steam clouding saving. Reconnecting it online would edit your cloud save weather you liked it or not. Now this list - https://steam.fandom.com/wiki/List_of_DRM-free_games - here actually works for all of the games in which I purchased or got for free using either the extraction method or editing files for some and they work outside of Steam. Which is how when I joined Steam I went about making my choices to collect and play for the most part. Still hands down GOG, Humble Bundle and itch.io are just the best choices for those looking for DRM-FREE gaming.

I've seen a few linux supporting companies come and go and outside of those final months where they uploaded stuff on their blogs and/or via of email there was no talk of helping users move on to another platform or getting access to their game binaries prior or in advance.

Yes I've tried it, and there are software already to force steam games into offline mode even without the client. (Not hacks but API work-around).

This is similar way Valve would do it however, and the fact its been tested and proven to be easily achieved gives credence to Valves VERY OLD claims that if they ever went away it would be trivial to remove the base DRM (except for multiplayer, that would be handed over to the developer to handle, either via releasing dedicated server client tools etc...)

The samegame issue is related to cloud based saves, which are optional and can be turned off to force use of local save files. End User control at that point..

DRM-Free is a tricky topic because not all devs or pubs are willing to do that, and some of those release HUGE games nobody wants to miss out on. The thing with Steam is they give them a option to do it or not, there is no rule on steam that says if your game isn't stacked full of nasty DRM you can't sell it!

EVEN NOW GOG Galaxy 2.0 has DRM online only games on it! In some situations its just not practical to go full DRM-Free, and some gamedevs/pubs may want DRM on for a limited time to reduce piracy (I doubt it has much impact to be honest).

The only DRM types I'm 100% against is Denuvo, its malicious malware that can even install on the kernel, NASTY ON ALL LEVELS! (and can eat %30 of your performance logging your computers entire data)


Last edited by TheRiddick on 31 May 2020 at 5:44 am UTC

Quoting: Linuxwarper

Quoting: Liam DaweThe thing is here though, Google funded Gylt development. It's no different than Valve or any other store/console funding their own games and keeping them to their store.

Did they? From what I gleaned it seemed like a partnership and less about Tequilla Works becoming a studio under Google.

Right from the source:

QuoteRubio says this began a "very open and honest dialogue" with Google, as the tech giant financed and produced the project. In fact, under Google he adds, Gylt had the "smoothest production for a Tequila Works game ever."

Emphasis mine.

Quoting: LinuxwarperFurthermore, Rubio heavily implied that Gylt will come to other platforms based on his answers to questions asked by Eurogamer. The fact Google has funded development justifies Google's actions yes, but I don't see how it invalidates my point. Gylt would have been available on Steam and other platforms and playable through Proton if it wasn't for it's exclusivity deal regardless of how it would have turned out without Google's funding.

I'm not trying to invalidate anything you say, I'm just making a point that this is just how it works. Again, like I said earlier, Google funded it and so it's no different to Valve or others doing their own games on their own store. In this case, Gylt may still yet go to other stores later, they've not said it won't.

Quoting: Linuxwarper

Quoting: drlambThis is pure conjecture. Nvidia themselves have admitted they needed to work out licensing with publishers. Streaming is a new territory.

Pure conjecture, really? DOOM are among the games removed from GeforceNow. It's known Bethesda are a key player for Stadia. Yet those very same games can be streamed through Remote Play. It's not exactly the same, as you use your own PC, but ultimately you have paid for those games and with Geforce Now you are paying for a service to be able to stream them. Clearly there is licensing to be done, but it seems this became a issue mostly with arrival of Stadia.

And so I disagree. Saying what I said about Stadia making devs remove their game from Geforce Now is pure conjecture because there is licensing issues isn't convincing argument. Because of timing I pointed out, and because publishers and devs can redo their licensing. Except many of them likely won't. Why? Because Google and Stadia will be more lucrative to them than allowing gamers the freedom to stream their games through Geforce Now, a service they aren't currently getting money from.

It is still pure an absolute conjecture. There are no facts at play here because a lot of games removed from GFN have not given statements as to why. Don't ever act like speculation is a fact, it doesn't make a good argument. There's a reason why GFN has moved to an opt-in basis now, because their original model was clearly not sitting well with a lot of developers.

Quoting: LinuxwarperI did not bring up Windows to try persuade you to use Windows. What differentiates Linux and Windows more than anything? FOSS. It's not in line with FOSS principles or Linux spirit to remove games from a streaming service so that another one dominates. I'd argue Stadia isn't Linux gaming either. It's Google gaming. Just because Stadia is powered by Debian it does not make it FOSS. If it did, we would have seen Google being proactive about persuading developers to release their games locally too on Linux. Choices, that's another word that sums up Linux.
But Google has not encouraged or funded developers to release their games locally too. Their intention is clear; streaming is way they want it. That's choice your given, take it or leave it.

We're not talking about FOSS though. Steam is not FOSS, the majority of games we play are not FOSS. This is not a FOSS vs proprietary argument. GOL is also clearly not a FOSS-only website, the majority of what we cover is actually proprietary, just something to keep in mind there.

You used a good word there though: choices. Stadia is a choice, another one, and clearly for some people (me included) one that works quite well.

Google doesn't need to fund or encourage developers to release games locally and on Linux, why would they? That is entirely besides the point and frankly nonsense to bring up into the argument your trying to make. They run a streaming service, they're obviously focused on that. I guess you were trying to use that to back up your argument here but it's an obvious point about their business model so it fell quite flat.

Quoting: LinuxwarperJust because Google is contributing to Linux kernel/open source it does not mean they are proponents of Linux gaming. They are of Google/ChromeOS gaming. There lies the difference. Should I start thinking Microsoft is good for desktop Linux simply because they use Linux and are contributing software (open source) to areas that benefits their business? No, they are in it for their own interest, just like Google.

You have a point there of course. Google are not "proponents" of Linux gaming and I do agree, anyone saying so are wrong. They are now proponents of actual gaming as a whole though, and their service happens to work on Linux and be built with Linux.

Also, wrongly watering down your point with this:

Quoting: LinuxwarperStadia is streaming only service for similar reason many Microsoft apps are not on Linux, and DirectX is only available for WSL2.

Entirely different situations, business models and mechanics of how they work. Why did you even slot Stadia and Microsoft apps in the same pont? That makes absolutely no sense.

I tested PSNow yesterday evening, I installed it with Lutris:
https://lutris.net/games/playstation-now/
You can try it freely during 7 days.
I played Spiderman 4, Last of US and a lot of others PS1,PS2,PS3 et PS4 games as I was on the console, but on my Linux :), it was very pleasant.

Quoting: Liam DaweIt is still pure an absolute conjecture. There are no facts at play here because a lot of games removed from GFN have not given statements as to why. Don't ever act like speculation is a fact, it doesn't make a good argument. There's a reason why GFN has moved to an opt-in basis now, because their original model was clearly not sitting well with a lot of developers.

Do you really think most developers will come out and say they have removed their game from Geforce Now because of Stadia? In the case of Bethesda, do you really think they will come out and say anything about favoring Stadia over Geforce Now? So why is it necessary for statements from developers before it becomes fact? If Nvidia solves issues devs have, which they have and are doing, will games like DOOM come back to Geforce? Most likely not and because of what I said. Time will tell if I am entirely wrong or not. I disagree that it's pure conjecture and leave it at that.

Quoting: Liam DaweWe're not talking about FOSS though. Steam is not FOSS, the majority of games we play are not FOSS. This is not a FOSS vs proprietary argument. GOL is also clearly not a FOSS-only website, the majority of what we cover is actually proprietary, just something to keep in mind there.

I guess bringing FOSS into the picture did not good for point I was trying to make. Though I like FOSS I'm not against proprietary software.

Quoting: Liam DaweYou used a good word there though: choices. Stadia is a choice, another one, and clearly for some people (me included) one that works quite well.

Better than that would be the choice to be able to play the games locally as well as by streaming it. But that does not fit into what Google is pushing with Stadia and ChromeOS. Most Chromebooks seem to be low spec and not well suited for local play.

Quoting: Liam DaweGoogle doesn't need to fund or encourage developers to release games locally and on Linux, why would they? That is entirely besides the point and frankly nonsense to bring up into the argument your trying to make. They run a streaming service, they're obviously focused on that. I guess you were trying to use that to back up your argument here but it's an obvious point about their business model so it fell quite flat.

They don't and I don't expect them to do either.

Quoting: Liam DaweYou have a point there of course. Google are not "proponents" of Linux gaming and I do agree, anyone saying so are wrong. They are now proponents of actual gaming as a whole though, and their service happens to work on Linux and be built with Linux

That my point, which I replied to drlamb who made it seem like Stadia will only help Linux gaming. I disagree and the fact Google is persuing only streaming is proof they want to grow their own gaming space. Which I believe will be Chromebooks running ChromeOS, not Linux.

Quoting: Linuxwarper

Quoting: Liam DaweIt is still pure an absolute conjecture. There are no facts at play here because a lot of games removed from GFN have not given statements as to why. Don't ever act like speculation is a fact, it doesn't make a good argument. There's a reason why GFN has moved to an opt-in basis now, because their original model was clearly not sitting well with a lot of developers.

Do you really think most developers will come out and say they have removed their game from Geforce Now because of Stadia? In the case of Bethesda, do you really think they will come out and say anything about favoring Stadia over Geforce Now? So why is it necessary for statements from developers before it becomes fact? If Nvidia solves issues devs have, which they have and are doing, will games like DOOM come back to Geforce? Most likely not and because of what I said. Time will tell if I am entirely wrong or not. I disagree that it's pure conjecture and leave it at that.

You can't put speculation down as any form of fact. Simple. You can repeat it as much as you like, doesn't make it true. I'm not saying it's not entirely true, it may be in some cases, we simply do not know and acting like it's what's happening is just not a good argument when we have no clue in reality.

Quoting: Linuxwarper

Quoting: Liam DaweYou used a good word there though: choices. Stadia is a choice, another one, and clearly for some people (me included) one that works quite well.

Better than that would be the choice to be able to play the games locally as well as by streaming it. But that does not fit into what Google is pushing with Stadia and ChromeOS. Most Chromebooks seem to be low spec and not well suited for local play.

I just don't get the point of constantly reiterating the same argument about local play though? Stadia was never designed for that and likely never will offer it because ~95% of "PC" gamers wouldn't be able to use what it offers (Linux builds).

Quoting: Linuxwarper

Quoting: Liam DaweYou have a point there of course. Google are not "proponents" of Linux gaming and I do agree, anyone saying so are wrong. They are now proponents of actual gaming as a whole though, and their service happens to work on Linux and be built with Linux

That my point, which I replied to drlamb who made it seem like Stadia will only help Linux gaming. I disagree and the fact Google is persuing only streaming is proof they want to grow their own gaming space. Which I believe will be Chromebooks running ChromeOS, not Linux.

drlamb is IMO correct though on what they actually said. More services that work on Linux will help Linux. That shouldn't even be a debate. Faced with working and not working, the service working is a clear advantage. It's pretty weird to think it wouldn't help. Not liking it or not liking how it does it, is different to it not helping Linux gaming further when you look at the whole picture. The same way Proton helps people not lose access to existing games, Stadia helps people play the same games on their various devices as they do on Linux through streaming.

I think I've made any point I care to at this time :)

For me, Stadia is an option that works and I use it often on top of local desktop Linux games and everything else. It's just another piece of the gaming puzzle.

Stadia I'm pretty sure is using in house wrappers? their not getting devs to make their games for Linux, their just pushing them to make them work with something similar to proton behind the curtain. At least from my understanding.

This also explains the issues they've had with performance and 4k quality stuff (lots of downsampling to keep fps up)

Quoting: TheRiddickStadia I'm pretty sure is using in house wrappers? their not getting devs to make their games for Linux, their just pushing them to make them work with something similar to proton behind the curtain. At least from my understanding.

This also explains the issues they've had with performance and 4k quality stuff (lots of downsampling to keep fps up)

Again you are misinformed, Google Stadia ports are native to Linux/Vulkan. While I cannot comment on all ports to Stadia there has been a disparity in performance likely due to a lot of these games being a studio's first foray into Linux game development. Games are getting updated and improved all the time (Edit: The Crew 2 Grid 2 for example recently got updated with 4K support).

Just like with other platforms there are different priorities for different games. (Performance versus Visual Quality).

Some games are in fact 4K60, while others are 1080P60Fps/1440P30Fps (Upscaled to 4K - Red Dead), 1080P60Fps/1800P60Fps (Upscaled to 4K - Doom Eternal), or only 1080P60Fps in the case of Destiny 2.


Last edited by drlamb on 1 June 2020 at 7:05 pm UTC

Quoting: Liam DaweI just don't get the point of constantly reiterating the same argument about local play though? Stadia was never designed for that and likely never will offer it because ~95% of "PC" gamers wouldn't be able to use what it offers (Linux builds).

drlamb is IMO correct though on what they actually said. More services that work on Linux will help Linux. That shouldn't even be a debate. Faced with working and not working, the service working is a clear advantage. It's pretty weird to think it wouldn't help. Not liking it or not liking how it does it, is different to it not helping Linux gaming further when you look at the whole picture. The same way Proton helps people not lose access to existing games, Stadia helps people play the same games on their various devices as they do on Linux through streaming.

The reason I bring up local play is because I believe Stadia could hurt Linux as much as it helps it. With ChromeOS overtaking Linux and halting the platform's momentum. Yes, it does help Linux with giving you choice to play games that are otherwise unplayable. By also further improving the ecosystem with patches and new development.

Local ports shows how Stadia diverges from what is good for Linux. So Google's intention seem not to help Linux gaming, and in long run Stadia could do alot damage. Linux isn't in a dire situation. Things are improving thanks to Valve and Codeweavers. So we might be risking Linux's chance to be adopted more by using Stadia. If I worked for Google I would use Stadia to sell Chromebooks without even blinking. And when Chromebooks becomes as widespread as Windows, then we will have another competitor to Linux. Google would likely continue to push streaming only game development with Chromebooks, which would also conflict with the idea of Linux becoming popular and having many native local ports.


Last edited by Linuxwarper on 1 June 2020 at 2:53 pm UTC

Quoting: drlambAgain you are misinformed,

This proves nothing, claims their LOOKING for native versions, but that doesn't mean they all are.

In fact people have compared Stadia performance to windows and found there seems to be some sort of performance overhead going on, much like what you see for things like WINE or PROTON.. or PORTS (not native).

So just because a couple games may have a native linux binary doesn't mean its not just a translation binary and doesn't mean all the games are native either.

Either way, these games are not on Linux Steam or anything for purchase, their inside the Stadia Eco-system so therefore are not helping Linux even if the backend is running on Linux. Until I see these so called native games running on Linux actually come to the stores for people to buy and not via a cloud, their dead to me.