ARK: Survival Evolved switches away from Linux Native to use Proton

Quoting: subImho bad ports are not an argument against native versions.

It's going the way lots of us expected with Proton.

can you name GOOD linux ports which dropped linux support because of proton?

you still have new linux games as you can read on this site every day. there are still games like Volcanoids, metro or valheim
i mean metro worked perfectly fine with proton. some here already played it with proton and still they made a linux port
same goes with amnesia and many other games

and there also are devs who dropped linux support before proton exists. WITCHER 3 I AM LOOKING AT YOU!!!! or phoenix point

so i dont think we LOSE native games. we lose crappy linux ports and still can play the game in all its beauty with proton

Quoting: GuestValve should be pursuing GNU+Linux native games and Vulkan, however they're the largest vendor of Windows games, so nothing will change going forward.

Maybe it's time to reignite the "No Tux, No Bux" movement?

did this "movement" ever worked on any game? imho devs just ignored it
what they do NOT ignore is the steam deck and proton. very old games get a PROTON fix out of the sudden

i do NOT think valve should force devs to make linux ports. i think valve should lower the cut for games with VULKAN. because vulkan works better with proton. (you all know the benchmarks with vulkan games. they run on linux like on windows. sometimes even better) and that saves battery life and the environment

the steam deck made devs support linux/proton. (who would have thought, that we can play an EA online game like APEX on linux in 2017)
next step is to make them use the OPEN API
and the we can talk about native linux games


Last edited by mylka on 12 July 2022 at 7:17 pm UTC

Quoting: Guest

Quoting: TheRiddickIt's a shame the developer didn't move to Vulkan API for the game.

If you are only targeting Windows, you'll keep developing with DirectX as it makes no sense at all to switch to Vulkan.
And that is a huge issue that people saying "I don't care if it's native or proton" don't seem to understand or, like Liam and Gardiner Bryant for example, understand but choose to ignore, hoping it goes away "once market share blah blah blah"...

I myself am in that latter camp, because I think market share is indeed going to blah blah blah . . . or at a minimum, has a much better chance of blah blah blah than we ever had without Proton. But right now with the Deck, which could not exist without Proton, we are already beginning to see market share blah blah blah.

Quoting: Guest

Quoting: skinnyraf

Quoting: GuestValve are fully responsible for the current situation as they require every game sold on the Steam Store to have a Windows executable, as per their developer documentation.

Ok, are you suggesting that Valve is the blocker for studios releasing Linux builds of their games?

If said game doesn't have a Windows executable, Valve will not allow it on the Steam Store.

That's not what was asked. But you know, I think there actually was one game on the Steam Store a few years ago that was initially Linux-only. So I find myself wondering if you're actually right about that. Frankly, it wouldn't be the first time you said something about Valve that was simply inaccurate.

Not that it matters much--essentially nobody was ever going to be releasing games that weren't Windows, 'cause it's a monopoly. If the rule you're claiming exists, its intent was probably "No console games" or something.

Quoting: Guest

Quoting: subImho bad ports are not an argument against native versions.

It's going the way lots of us expected with Proton.
Instead of supporting games without native binaries,
fewer and fewer developers are willing to port their games.
This is a problematic dependency on Proton.

I'd rather see the awareness AND SKILLS for Linux grow in developer studios.
This is quite the opposite. :/

Valve are fully responsible for the current situation as they require every game sold on the Steam Store to have a Windows executable, as per their developer documentation.

They've pushed Proton to the point of it effectively becoming middleware.

Then of course there's Microsoft, who set the standards for gaming with DirectX and other technologies. And what happens when Microsoft make it so that Windows games APIs can no longer be translated by Proton?

Valve should be pursuing GNU+Linux native games and Vulkan, however they're the largest vendor of Windows games, so nothing will change going forward.

And then you have James Ramey, head of Codeweavers who said (on record) that Proton would pave the way for GNU+Linux native development. He has nothing to worry about though, as he's profiting from the money Valve throw at his company.

Maybe it's time to reignite the "No Tux, No Bux" movement?

That kind of strategy nets you no games on linux. The combined amount of "bux" wielded by linux users is insignificant compared to the rest of the market.

Linux needs MARKET SHARE before it will be worth a developer's time to make native linux titles. Proton is the stepping stone to break the chicken and egg catch-22 problem of no native linux titles because no linux market share, no linux market share because no native linux titles.

It is to Valve you owe gratitude for getting thousands of games playable on linux, and for growing their market share, and they've only just begun with the latter. Being a member of the Khronos group, Valve is also partially responsible for Vulkan. I cannot understand the lack of gratitude.


Last edited by wit_as_a_riddle on 12 July 2022 at 6:59 pm UTC

It would seem to me, that regardless of whether it's a native port or only supported through Proton, some of these games are eventually going to face regressions. Native is no guarantee of reliability, as seen in ARK's case. Buying games to play on Linux is inherently unreliable because the platform is unstable. Even Proton, which is more stable than Linux as a platform, still faces regressions like Deep Rock Galactic did last month.

No Tux, No Bux makes no sense in this context. No one, save for a handful of indie developers, cares that much about making sure their games keep working on Linux. A native port is a poor indication of which developers care, as in the case of ARK.

It's not hard to see why everybody likes Proton. Game developers don't have to put much, or any effort into supporting a Linux playerbase who naturally doesn't expect their support. Linux users don't have to rely on the developers to support them to continue playing the game. It's a win-win. Being a Linux user means accepting that 99% of the time, the vendor expects you to be using Windows or macOS, and you have to find a workaround to get it working on Linux—they're used to this shit.

Valve have built-in a workaround that has a very low amount of friction most of the time, which is impressive, but I don't think that any amount of duct tape will be able to obscure the indifference of developers toward Linux.

Quoting: GuestValve didn't try hard enough getting developers to code GNU+Linux native games as they're selling Windows games. Heck it's telling when the Steam Machines actually shipped with Windows installed because Valve are inept and cannot be trusted to actually deliver or maintain a GNU+Linux based distro.

Just look at the mess that is SteamOS 3.0, shipping with out of date packages and security holes big enough to drive a truck through.

The SteamOS 3.0 security holes suck, yeah. Especially with retbleed out there right now. That's a good thing to bring up.

But "Valve didn't try hard enough getting developers to code GNU+Linux native games as they're selling Windows games", Do you honestly, with 100% conviction, expect any company that has a platform as big as steam, to go "hey let's suddenly lock this store away from 98% of our userbase because we really don't like windows"?

The only other notable storefront most people know about that even supports linux at all is itch.io, yet you're acting like even after everything they did, valve just doesn't care about linux or something, even though they released a whole PC form factor with their own spin of arch.

Don't get me wrong, valve is a company, they're not our friends, they're not a big sibling, so this isn't a "how dare you not be grateful to [company who tried to push paid mods with only a 25% cut for the actual creators of said mods at one point and is currently selling TF2 lootboxes]" fanboy post, I'm just genuinely perplexed at what you exactly expected them to do that they're not already doing.

Quoting: wit_as_a_riddleLinux needs MARKET SHARE before it will be worth a developer's time to make native linux titles. Proton is the stepping stone to break the chicken and egg catch-22 problem of no native linux titles because no linux market share, no linux market share because no native linux titles.

The real world problem I see with this argument in the current situation is that if we would reach a much higher market share by devs just using Proton, they "learned" that it's not really worth investing additional resources in native ports and just stick with the Proton way.

Quoting: GuestHow about not aggressively pushing Proton as the perfect solution to both developers and end-users.
Dropping the requirement that every game sold on the Steam Store has to have a Windows executable.
Make it so every game sold has to have a GNU+Linux native executable.
Mandate all games use Vulkan for their graphics API.
Stop farming out 90% of the work to outside parties.
Ban third-party launchers.
Mandate all games use SIAPI for control inputs.
Ban games that switch to an Epic Exclusivity agreement.

Shall I continue?

That's not realistic, all that would do is piss off developers and make them go to other stores like epic and for longer.
The only thing they basically can do is offer a higher cut to developers who make linux versions, which would be nice, but even that is kind of pie in the sky stuff, and outside of that most of the stuff that you're suggesting is like a child's view of how game development, storefronts, and publishing work, or at the very least "It would be so cool if I had a billion dollars"-tier wishful thinking.

The only valid part of your post that is actually realistic is dropping the outright requirement of needing a windows executable which does seem like something that isn't really necessary, if the dev wants to deal with review bombs from ignorant windows users that can't run their game they should be allowed to.

Quoting: subif we would reach a much higher market share by devs just using Proton, they "learned" that it's not really worth investing additional resources in native ports and just stick with the Proton way.

This is ***quite possible***.

However, I know for a fact there will be continue to be a dearth of native linux titles without good market share. Devs and studios need incentive and it's just not going to happen without the market power.

Valve has a lot of levers to pull, and if they can get some reasonable linux market share with Deck and perhaps other systems, they will get a very big lever to yank on. I'm gonna hope for the best 🤞🏻

QuoteMake it so every game sold has to have a GNU+Linux native executable.
Mandate all games use Vulkan for their graphics API.
Stop farming out 90% of the work to outside parties.
Ban third-party launchers.
Mandate all games use SIAPI for control inputs.
Ban games that switch to an Epic Exclusivity agreement.

Shall I continue?

So either this is a parody or you want Valve to go out of business. I refuse to believe you don't understand the real world repercussions of making moves like that. Or wait, maybe you work for Epic??

It is quite the list, please continue 🤣🤣🤣