With the Steam Deck upcoming, what do we think the chances are that Valve will reveal a new game to go along side it?
One thing that Valve didn't quite get right for Steam Machines was a new game (and a lack of games overall). It's not quite the same with the Valve Index, since it was a very different form of gaming and so they did put out Half-Life: Alyx to showcase what a big game would really be like with it (although it came later). So what about the Steam Deck?
Half-Life: Alyx has reinvigorated Valve with game development, and Valve did confirm previously that they had multiple games in development - the question is will we see an announcement this year? There's not all that long until the Steam Deck releases at the end of this year but like with the Valve Index it could come some months after. Valve have multiple teams doing different things too, so it's not like all the work going into the Steam Deck would take away from people involved with game development. The point is, Valve are once again a games company, not just a service company with the Steam store.
After playing through and completing Half-Life: Alyx myself live on our Twitch Channel, We're very keen to see what other games Valve can come up with, it proved they've still "got it" (unlike Artifact, which they gave up on). If they do, what shape would it take? What series would it be part of it, or would we see something entirely new?
This time around, it's not like they actually need to produce a new game. The Steam Deck hardware should speak for itself on what it's capable of based on what's been shown, along with Steam Play Proton enabling thousands of Windows-only games from Steam's back catalogue to run on SteamOS 3 (and the ~8,000 native Linux titles) they've definitely solved one of the biggest hurdles in doing new hardware but still - we can't help but want a new Valve game.
So there might be no actual need to make one but they might be a bit silly not to. At this point, it seems like it's already something of success. Everyone is talking about it and most people seem very excited by it both inside and outside of Linux circles. Reservations took down the Steam store, and even when it came back up there was so much traffic that their payment system for it went down and orders took a long time - so we know there's genuine interest. Should Valve capitalize on that? Absolutely.
What do we actually want from a new Valve game though? Left 4 Dead 3? Half-Life 3? Portal 3? A new Counter-Strike? Or something entirely different perhaps? They have a number of good titles there that are ripe for picking up once again and bringing them in an updated form to the desktop and the Steam Deck.
I think they would be a bit silly to do Left 4 Dead 3 right now, considering how Back 4 Blood is releasing in October with it being widely reported as a spiritual successor and Turtle Rock Studios are the original developer of Left 4 Dead. Half-Life: Alyx definitely put that series back into the spotlight, and with the incredible ending there's a lot they could do with it although it might be weird to carry that from VR into traditional gaming. Portal also has Portal Reloaded and Portal Stories: Mel for people who want more of that. Difficult to say what they would / should do. Doesn't stop us wanting more from Valve though.
What do you think: will Valve announce a new game late this year or early next year? Or perhaps it's still far away?
Article taken from GamingOnLinux.com.
Some you may have missed, popular articles from the last month:
The comments on this article are closed.
Philadelphus Jul 23, 2021
Quoting: CatKillerHmm, what about 5% less Valve fee on every Linux purchase only? Then developers have incentive to make a good Linux version and to get people to buy it on Linux, without Valve necessarily having to play gatekeeper. Players can vote with their wallets and refund if they don't like it. Hearing devs begging players to buy on Linux would be amazing.Quoting: subIf Valve is serious about Linux, I'd still propose charging like 5 % less Valve fee if the published game features a Linux build.That wouldn't help.
Sure, it would encourage them to press the "build for Linux" button for some free money, which is more than many devs do, but it wouldn't encourage them to do any testing or provide any support. At all.
"But," you might say, "the discount should only apply to proper Linux versions, not those other ones," and suddenly Valve has to be a gatekeeper, creating lots of uncertainty for devs as to whether they'll have their funds withheld, and Valve are having to do (a lot) more work in exchange for less money.
Of course, the time to have done something like that is a few years ago, since any purchases on an unmodified Steam Deck will be a Linux purchase anyway, which would skew the numbers somewhat once it comes out (I think that's how it works even if you play on Proton, right?). But maybe that'll make developers more interested in a Linux version if the fraction of Linux purchases goes up over time even without any direct monetary incentives on Valve's part…
5 Likes, Who?
Quoting: PhiladelphusQuoting: CatKillerHmm, what about 5% less Valve fee on every Linux purchase only? Then developers have incentive to make a good Linux version and to get people to buy it on Linux, without Valve necessarily having to play gatekeeper. Players can vote with their wallets and refund if they don't like it. Hearing devs begging players to buy on Linux would be amazing.Quoting: subIf Valve is serious about Linux, I'd still propose charging like 5 % less Valve fee if the published game features a Linux build.That wouldn't help.
Sure, it would encourage them to press the "build for Linux" button for some free money, which is more than many devs do, but it wouldn't encourage them to do any testing or provide any support. At all.
"But," you might say, "the discount should only apply to proper Linux versions, not those other ones," and suddenly Valve has to be a gatekeeper, creating lots of uncertainty for devs as to whether they'll have their funds withheld, and Valve are having to do (a lot) more work in exchange for less money.
Of course, the time to have done something like that is a few years ago, since any purchases on an unmodified Steam Deck will be a Linux purchase anyway, which would skew the numbers somewhat once it comes out (I think that's how it works even if you play on Proton, right?). But maybe that'll make developers more interested in a Linux version if the fraction of Linux purchases goes up over time even without any direct monetary incentives on Valve's part…
I kind of like the sound of that, but I feel like it's somehow illegal? Like selling petrol cheaper if you drive a Ford? Some kind of favouritism that I suspect regulators would take a dim view of.
0 Likes
Quoting: scaineQuoting: PhiladelphusQuoting: CatKillerHmm, what about 5% less Valve fee on every Linux purchase only? Then developers have incentive to make a good Linux version and to get people to buy it on Linux, without Valve necessarily having to play gatekeeper. Players can vote with their wallets and refund if they don't like it. Hearing devs begging players to buy on Linux would be amazing.Quoting: subIf Valve is serious about Linux, I'd still propose charging like 5 % less Valve fee if the published game features a Linux build.That wouldn't help.
Sure, it would encourage them to press the "build for Linux" button for some free money, which is more than many devs do, but it wouldn't encourage them to do any testing or provide any support. At all.
"But," you might say, "the discount should only apply to proper Linux versions, not those other ones," and suddenly Valve has to be a gatekeeper, creating lots of uncertainty for devs as to whether they'll have their funds withheld, and Valve are having to do (a lot) more work in exchange for less money.
Of course, the time to have done something like that is a few years ago, since any purchases on an unmodified Steam Deck will be a Linux purchase anyway, which would skew the numbers somewhat once it comes out (I think that's how it works even if you play on Proton, right?). But maybe that'll make developers more interested in a Linux version if the fraction of Linux purchases goes up over time even without any direct monetary incentives on Valve's part…
I kind of like the sound of that, but I feel like it's somehow illegal? Like selling petrol cheaper if you drive a Ford? Some kind of favouritism that I suspect regulators would take a dim view of.
if that was illegal, then epic would be in serious trouble, since they charge 5% on games made on unreal, 12% on games sold on epic store, but if you make an game on unreal and sell it on epic store you only pay 12%
3 Likes, Who?
Quoting: HoriQuoting: elmapulYou really want Valve to become so toxic as to make people bully other companies?Quoting: Liam Dawe......Quoting: TeodosioI would like to see a new game from Valve, released on GNU/Linux only.Exclusives are bad.
i would love to see valve make something exclusive and ask gamers to direct their anger toward sony/nintendo/microsoft for locking mac/linux users out of their content for so long, be mad at then, not us, if they stop doing it, we will stop.
.......
Do you think that would be good for anyone?
And... if you bully someone because they also bullied you... then expect to also get the same treatment in return, because by your "logic" you deserve it.
Gee... the internet is become more toxic every day. Nothing we didn't already knew but I thought the (Gaming on) Linux community was at least a little bit better than that.
toxic? toxic is seen gamers treat microsoft as if they were the heroes here, i call it stocolm symdrom.
microsoft forced people to use their system to play games for far too many time, now microsft started to port their own games to pc and people see then as heroes, as if they were fighting against exclusives, but they completely ignore that those games are avaliable for windows only, they see pc and windows as the samething and pc as an open platform.
people say they are against exclusives, but if sony and nintendo didnt made exclusives, then everything would be windows exclusive, if people were really against exclusives they should have supported an platform like linux that didnt did exclusives (aside from things that are impossible to do on windows like changing the desktop enviroment)
but no, they say they are against exclusives because they want to own an system and play anything, but they are unwilling to break the exclusivity of their own system by supporting another system until it grow its marketshare enough to have support from the thirdy parties.
its easy to say you are against exclusive when you already dominated the market, as microsoft pretend they are doing, they know that in an world without exclusivity deals, the company who have the biggeset marketshare will get exclusives by sheer market dominance, so they pretend they are against it because that would benefit then.
if some one is against it, they should prove that its possible to win, to get support from thirdy parties and users without it, but it has been proven again and again that it isnt, so i dont see why we should be the only ones to suffer from that.
valve should do what epic is doing, pressure microsoft into being consumer/developer friendly, in exchange for they doing the samething.
"do the right thing and we do the samething"
and even that would be too nice of valve, they have no obligation of doing it after developing an solution to break that lock-in that microsoft refused to break thenselves.
2 Likes, Who?
Quoting: MohandevirTalking about games...
https://www.pcgamer.com/valve-says-it-hasnt-found-a-game-steam-deck-cant-handle/
Should we take for granted that these tests have been done on SteamOS 3.0?
If so, what major breakthrough have they been able to achieve, with Proton, that they didn't share with us, yet? If not, what a major let down!
They're only talking about performance, not compatibility.
I bet this has been done on Windows.
1 Likes, Who?
Mohandevir Jul 23, 2021
Quoting: EikeQuoting: MohandevirTalking about games...
https://www.pcgamer.com/valve-says-it-hasnt-found-a-game-steam-deck-cant-handle/
Should we take for granted that these tests have been done on SteamOS 3.0?
If so, what major breakthrough have they been able to achieve, with Proton, that they didn't share with us, yet? If not, what a major let down!
They're only talking about performance, not compatibility.
I bet this has been done on Windows.
That's what I'm affraid of... They will sell the thing with SteamOS 3.0 pre-installed and then testing the hardware with Windows? Think about the potential customer that know nothing about OS installation and who doesn't have any clue that the tests were done with another OS...
0 Likes
Philadelphus Jul 24, 2021
Quoting: scaineI kind of like the sound of that, but I feel like it's somehow illegal? Like selling petrol cheaper if you drive a Ford? Some kind of favouritism that I suspect regulators would take a dim view of.I can't think why that particular example would be illegal*, though I can immediately think of why you might not want to do it: instant bad will with all non-Ford drivers. Which might be a reason Valve hasn't done anything similar. Maybe you could get away with it if Ford drivers were 90%+ of your buyers and you didn't care about anyone else, but if they're only 10% you'd probably be in trouble.
*obviously there are a lot of criteria that should be illegal, like price discrimination on the basis of race or sex or whatever, but I can't see why it should be in the case of voluntary choice of non-essential consumer product.
2 Likes, Who?
slaapliedje Jul 27, 2021
Quoting: PhiladelphusWouldn't really work, as the purchase is multi-platform. People would install a Linux VM, buy it for 5% off, then play it on Windows...Quoting: CatKillerHmm, what about 5% less Valve fee on every Linux purchase only? Then developers have incentive to make a good Linux version and to get people to buy it on Linux, without Valve necessarily having to play gatekeeper. Players can vote with their wallets and refund if they don't like it. Hearing devs begging players to buy on Linux would be amazing.Quoting: subIf Valve is serious about Linux, I'd still propose charging like 5 % less Valve fee if the published game features a Linux build.That wouldn't help.
Sure, it would encourage them to press the "build for Linux" button for some free money, which is more than many devs do, but it wouldn't encourage them to do any testing or provide any support. At all.
"But," you might say, "the discount should only apply to proper Linux versions, not those other ones," and suddenly Valve has to be a gatekeeper, creating lots of uncertainty for devs as to whether they'll have their funds withheld, and Valve are having to do (a lot) more work in exchange for less money.
Of course, the time to have done something like that is a few years ago, since any purchases on an unmodified Steam Deck will be a Linux purchase anyway, which would skew the numbers somewhat once it comes out (I think that's how it works even if you play on Proton, right?). But maybe that'll make developers more interested in a Linux version if the fraction of Linux purchases goes up over time even without any direct monetary incentives on Valve's part…
0 Likes
Quoting: slaapliedjeQuoting: PhiladelphusWouldn't really work, as the purchase is multi-platform. People would install a Linux VM, buy it for 5% off, then play it on Windows...Quoting: CatKillerHmm, what about 5% less Valve fee on every Linux purchase only? Then developers have incentive to make a good Linux version and to get people to buy it on Linux, without Valve necessarily having to play gatekeeper. Players can vote with their wallets and refund if they don't like it. Hearing devs begging players to buy on Linux would be amazing.Quoting: subIf Valve is serious about Linux, I'd still propose charging like 5 % less Valve fee if the published game features a Linux build.That wouldn't help.
Sure, it would encourage them to press the "build for Linux" button for some free money, which is more than many devs do, but it wouldn't encourage them to do any testing or provide any support. At all.
"But," you might say, "the discount should only apply to proper Linux versions, not those other ones," and suddenly Valve has to be a gatekeeper, creating lots of uncertainty for devs as to whether they'll have their funds withheld, and Valve are having to do (a lot) more work in exchange for less money.
Of course, the time to have done something like that is a few years ago, since any purchases on an unmodified Steam Deck will be a Linux purchase anyway, which would skew the numbers somewhat once it comes out (I think that's how it works even if you play on Proton, right?). But maybe that'll make developers more interested in a Linux version if the fraction of Linux purchases goes up over time even without any direct monetary incentives on Valve's part…
Who says the cut is forwarded to the customer?
It should be an incentive to the dev/publisher imho.
That's why I suggested to lower the fee for all platforms if the publisher provides a Linux build.
I see the point with the gatekeeper argument, but if it turns out to be required (wouldn't start with it),
then okay. I mean Apple is checking apps in their store, so is afaik Google.
1 Likes, Who?
slaapliedje Jul 27, 2021
Quoting: subOh, I misread. Yeah that's much better. I'm hoping with the Steam Deck, developers will actually start to make Linux more of a primary concern than the 'also runs on' that some of them have been doing. As much as Unity and Unreal try to make things easy to just export to Linux, some stuff works for a while, then the developers run into some bugs and just give up. Supraland comes to mind...Quoting: slaapliedjeQuoting: PhiladelphusWouldn't really work, as the purchase is multi-platform. People would install a Linux VM, buy it for 5% off, then play it on Windows...Quoting: CatKillerHmm, what about 5% less Valve fee on every Linux purchase only? Then developers have incentive to make a good Linux version and to get people to buy it on Linux, without Valve necessarily having to play gatekeeper. Players can vote with their wallets and refund if they don't like it. Hearing devs begging players to buy on Linux would be amazing.Quoting: subIf Valve is serious about Linux, I'd still propose charging like 5 % less Valve fee if the published game features a Linux build.That wouldn't help.
Sure, it would encourage them to press the "build for Linux" button for some free money, which is more than many devs do, but it wouldn't encourage them to do any testing or provide any support. At all.
"But," you might say, "the discount should only apply to proper Linux versions, not those other ones," and suddenly Valve has to be a gatekeeper, creating lots of uncertainty for devs as to whether they'll have their funds withheld, and Valve are having to do (a lot) more work in exchange for less money.
Of course, the time to have done something like that is a few years ago, since any purchases on an unmodified Steam Deck will be a Linux purchase anyway, which would skew the numbers somewhat once it comes out (I think that's how it works even if you play on Proton, right?). But maybe that'll make developers more interested in a Linux version if the fraction of Linux purchases goes up over time even without any direct monetary incentives on Valve's part…
Who says the cut is forwarded to the customer?
It should be an incentive to the dev/publisher imho.
That's why I suggested to lower the fee for all platforms if the publisher provides a Linux build.
I see the point with the gatekeeper argument, but if it turns out to be required (wouldn't start with it),
then okay. I mean Apple is checking apps in their store, so is afaik Google.
1 Likes, Who?
Quoting: slaapliedjeQuoting: subOh, I misread. Yeah that's much better. I'm hoping with the Steam Deck, developers will actually start to make Linux more of a primary concern than the 'also runs on' that some of them have been doing. As much as Unity and Unreal try to make things easy to just export to Linux, some stuff works for a while, then the developers run into some bugs and just give up. Supraland comes to mind...Quoting: slaapliedjeQuoting: PhiladelphusWouldn't really work, as the purchase is multi-platform. People would install a Linux VM, buy it for 5% off, then play it on Windows...Quoting: CatKillerHmm, what about 5% less Valve fee on every Linux purchase only? Then developers have incentive to make a good Linux version and to get people to buy it on Linux, without Valve necessarily having to play gatekeeper. Players can vote with their wallets and refund if they don't like it. Hearing devs begging players to buy on Linux would be amazing.Quoting: subIf Valve is serious about Linux, I'd still propose charging like 5 % less Valve fee if the published game features a Linux build.That wouldn't help.
Sure, it would encourage them to press the "build for Linux" button for some free money, which is more than many devs do, but it wouldn't encourage them to do any testing or provide any support. At all.
"But," you might say, "the discount should only apply to proper Linux versions, not those other ones," and suddenly Valve has to be a gatekeeper, creating lots of uncertainty for devs as to whether they'll have their funds withheld, and Valve are having to do (a lot) more work in exchange for less money.
Of course, the time to have done something like that is a few years ago, since any purchases on an unmodified Steam Deck will be a Linux purchase anyway, which would skew the numbers somewhat once it comes out (I think that's how it works even if you play on Proton, right?). But maybe that'll make developers more interested in a Linux version if the fraction of Linux purchases goes up over time even without any direct monetary incentives on Valve's part…
Who says the cut is forwarded to the customer?
It should be an incentive to the dev/publisher imho.
That's why I suggested to lower the fee for all platforms if the publisher provides a Linux build.
I see the point with the gatekeeper argument, but if it turns out to be required (wouldn't start with it),
then okay. I mean Apple is checking apps in their store, so is afaik Google.
I am, ofc, not against lower prices for customers but the incentive for devs/publishers to get more from each sale will profit us more in the long run, imho.
Even with AAA, the shareholders might ask: If you could get 3-5 % more money out of each sale, no matter what platform, what does it costs you to get out a Linux build and maintain it (keep it synchronized with the Windows version)?
1 Likes, Who?
Patreon
PayPal
See more from me