Valve launches Deck Verified, to show off what games will work well on the Steam Deck

Quoting: Salvatos

Quoting: damarrinThe SD has ABXY buttons, but not RB/LT etc. For some reason, Valve decided to take these from Playstation and they’re L1,R2 and so on.

Interesting. That suits me fine as RB/LT mean nothing to me, whereas "left 1/right 2" is pretty self explanatory.

Just to complete the roundabout, "left 1/left 2" means nothing to me other than "left". Which is 1 and which is 2? Are we counting top-down, bottom-up, by increasing/decreasing size? There's no immediate logic to it for me.
I had trouble with "LT/LB" as well until I figured out that "B" is "button" - there's only one of the two shoulder things that clicks, so that's the button, done.
At least "LT/LB" can be figured out, "L1/L2" has to be taught.

Quoting: CybolicAt least "LT/LB" can be figured out, "L1/L2" has to be taught.

The PlayStation controllers (and I think the Steam Controller, but it's upstairs and I can't be bothered to go and check) have the numbers embossed on the buttons.

Just so you know, they're counted from the top as you're holding the controller, although the 2 buttons are bigger than the 1s. 3 is pressing in the sticks. That numbering scheme continues with the Steam Deck, with 4 and 5 running down the back.

Quoting: Eike

Quoting: ArehandoroFor me, the key point is here:

"System Support - If running through Proton, the game and all its middleware should be supported by Proton. This includes anti-cheat support."

Emphasis is mine.

Does that mean a game can be verified for Windows on Steam Deck but not Linux/Proton? If that's the case, I don't see that going down too well...

No, it means they still can be Linux native.

Thanks, that makes sense :)

By the way, following this, We need a new method for reporting PROTON games compatibility... ProtonDB is a mess.
Only official PROTON should be allowed in the reports with only three options:
*Out of the Box.
*Playable after some manual workarounds..(legal workarounds)
*Unplayable

Quoting: CatKiller

Quoting: CybolicAt least "LT/LB" can be figured out, "L1/L2" has to be taught.

The PlayStation controllers (and I think the Steam Controller, but it's upstairs and I can't be bothered to go and check) have the numbers embossed on the buttons.
Just so you know, they're counted from the top as you're holding the controller, although the 2 buttons are bigger than the 1s. 3 is pressing in the sticks. That numbering scheme continues with the Steam Deck, with 4 and 5 running down the back.

Ah, you're right, the Steam Deck is labelled! I don't care what they call them then :)
The Steam Controller isn't labelled BTW, but the bindings editor calls them "LT/LB / RT/RB".

Quoting: Guest

Quoting: Solitary

Quoting: BielFPs

Quoting: SolitaryHow can it be "mark of shame" if the publisher releases the game only for Windows and does not care about some other (new/different) platform? Do you expect that they will lose Windows users because of this new platform that the game isn't even running on?

Publisher might take some flak from users, just like they do if users demand controller support, bugfixes or hell... Linux support. Same is going to be with Deck support. But that's all between users and the dev/publisher.

Try to imagine the developer / publisher side situation: You're selling your game in a store which bites 30% of each sale you do, and suddenly your game is now advertised with the mark of shame in the store because of the lack of support for a OS that you didn't intended to support (for whatever reason), and this can give the idea for some customers that there's "something broken" in your product (even if this does not affect you like windows players), because you can't expect every consumer on steam to know what that mark means.

The least developer can expect from a store that takes 30% of your profit is to not officially give "bad publicity" about your game, doesn't matter if it's true or not. (different from users review btw, which are customers opinion)

So I imagine Valve can face the following dilemma:
-They make this information public to every client, and risk to face backlash from some developers / publishers claiming Valve is making "bad PR" of their products

-They make this information available only to steam deck users, and risk people asking for refund (deck) after discover that "games are not working in this console". In my opinion this also defeats the purpose of having all this work to do verification.

Of course I'm not confirming that any of this will happen, but it is all in the realm of possibility.

You keep calling it mark of shame and your whole argument stands on it. Calling it "Unsupported" is maybe a shame (for the user), but hardly shameful. Valve quite deliberately chose the ratings so it doesn't have negative connotations and just states the obvious truth, they don't even claim it doesn't run, it's just unsupported. Valve also never really says that it's the games fault (maybe with the exception of anticheat), they for the most part take that responsibility on themselves. I would agree with you if it was "borked" or "broken" (ProtonDB), there you could make the argument much easier.

It's not the exact wording that matters, it's the impression given to customers. If a game is advertised as working, without consent of the publisher/developer, and then a patch breaks it completely: people will blame the publisher/developer even though they never supported the platform in the first place.
That kind of thing is really the key issue, not what words Valve are using. People generally don't look up a dictionary before deciding to hate on a game publisher.
Valve will have to make it pretty damned clear that a game isn't officially supported on the Deck if they're going start advertising such things without publisher approval, and that the responsibility and culpability lies with Valve, and Valve alone, when seeking support.
Quite honestly that's not a support burden that Valve have a good track record with.

Valve was always rather clear that Proton support goes on their shoulders, but obviously if the devs do their own QA before updates, all the better. They even mention it in the video, the rating can change as developers release updates or the Deck software improves, which quite honestly admits that games might break. Yea, sure, its some throwaway comment in a video, but it shows where they are coming from. Also in the end Valve might be content with some possible friction between publishers... and are probably okay with bit of strong-arming and putting on peer pressure.

Quoting: MohandevirBefore worrying about the 100% compatibility mark, I would try to get the same tests on Windows 10-11 with Windows games... It might be lower than 90%.

Ex: My son was never able to run Batman Arkham Asylum on Windows... I did with Proton.

I mean... 100% support doesn't exist, even on Windows, so...

The difference to Windows is that they target one hardware platform. Steam Deck has one hardware configuration. That's doable. They've hired external testers and are hiring for their internal team to get that curated and to provide (according to valve) verification within a week.

A week is nothing in the time of game development.

I'm actually not wondering if they can test 50.000 games. I am wondering if they have the means to improve then when they find out 20 % are not running properly, since that will very likely be more intensive, and having 10k games to improve is for sure no easy task for a small team as Valve is. Except if the original game developers help on that, either paid or on their own accord.

I'm seeing a lot of proton based updates to games (not proton itself, but the actual games updating), so I think that devs are actively working on making their games run on the deck. That's a good sign and will help us all (unless the new settings and improvements only work on steam deck).

There certainly seems to be a lot of interest in steam deck by developers. They probably do that with their existing titles to have the skills for their next title to come, but still that's interesting. Game devs hardly every showed any interest in that.


Last edited by STiAT on 20 October 2021 at 12:08 am UTC

Quoting: Mohandevir

Quoting: randyl

Quoting: Mohandevir

Quoting: randylBatman_Arkham_Asylum_Game_of_the_Year_Edition/) works on Windows 11. I just tested it.

But it proves how random things are, even on Windows. The issue my son got, with this games, is largely documented on support sites... He is not alone. On my end, just turning on ProtonGE makes the game run. We have same spec computers (except for the GPU, both Nvidia though).

That's true for Linux users as well. A native game may or may not work on a given distro which is why Valve offers SLR (the Ubuntu container) because what Linux compat often means is just Ubuntu support. Proton doesn't work consistently either as you point out. You needed to install a Glorious Eggroll compile of Proton to make things work as intended. Gaming has always been like this since the days of DOS, Amiga, and OS2 before Windows and Linux.

You said, someone should test whether these things work on Win10/11 and then submitted a game you said doesn't work on Windows. I tested it, since someone curious asked, and it works for me. You know, like when you can't compile an app at work and the author shrugs and says, "It works on my machine."

It proves my point nonetheless... 100% compatibility on Windows doesn't exist. That's all I was saying. I never said it was better on Linux. Batman AA was just an example that I know is problematic for many Windows users. It works for you? Great for you!

If 90% of games are working on Linux being native or with Proton, it's probably in the same range than Windows games on Windows. We are not even talking about the fact that the Steam Deck is a dedicated hardware that will probably have more compatibility than any PC and it's millions of possible hardware combinations (software + hardware).

Windows users don't think games have 100% compatibility so I'm not sure where you got the idea that is a thing. Games age and stop working on newer OS versions just like Linux. I can tell you with absolute certainty that more games work on Windows overall and the experience is smoother, but there are some edge cases where they do work better through Proton. I don't think that's a great comparison or standard for Linux land to try and live up to. What's important is that the experience on Linux distros both through Proton and natively are satisfying. And most importantly for the Deck is that the games that are rated to play well do that, and I think they will.

Quoting: Mal

Quoting: randylThe only big drawback to the current base Xbox controller for Windows is that it uses AA batteries instead of a self-contained rechargeable.

Odd. That's the main reason why I don't like ds.

Yeah, it's my chief complaint about the controller. It does great on battery life and I love the feel and it has lasted a long time with a lot of use, but the battery thing bugs me. The Xbox Elite controller has a self-contained rechargeable battery. It's also $150 - $170. hahaha.

It's really interesting for us, small indies, who are not sure we will be able to provide native Win / Linux builds but would like to support Proton. It will be written. Right now, people only see "windows" even if we can guarantee 100% compatibility. (I'm not sure yet about a native build. Lots of issues, mostly time...)
Project : strandedinouterspace.chezjau.studio


Last edited by Jau on 20 October 2021 at 1:31 am UTC