Recently, we had the news that Rockstar updated Grand Theft Auto V to include BattlEye anti-cheat, and they have not enabled the Linux / Proton support that BattlEye offers. With that change, the online mode is now broken for Linux / Steam Deck. This just highlights an ongoing problem with the Steam Deck verification system.
Grand Theft Auto V was rated as Steam Deck Playable by Valve. It would have actually been fully Steam Deck Verified if two issues were solved: the launcher being a nuisance, and setting the correct resolution by default. It even had a special Steam Deck Most Played banner on the Steam store page, because it was constantly in the top most played list every month. In this case, since it’s such a high-profile title, Valve did at least react quite quickly to change the Steam page to note it’s Unsupported a day later.
Pictured - How the Steam page looked until September 18th
Therein lies the problem. Steam Deck Verified is all Valve, it’s nothing to do with the original developers of the games that are being checked.
Developers cannot opt out of it (as far as we’ve been told so far) with the ratings getting automatically published after a while. Some developers, to their credit, are updating their games for Steam Deck support, it’s something we cover here on GamingOnLinux almost every day.
What this means though in reality is that even with a Steam Deck badge of approval, you’re technically buying a game on an unsupported platform, unless the developers themselves are clearly saying it’s supported.
Pictured - Valve's new Steam Deck Unsupported status for GTA V
So with that in mind, even if developers are giving zero support for Linux-based platforms, they’re still going to end up with a verification badge of some sort with people buying them and playing them. That is, unless they specifically block Linux / Steam Deck, like Bungie does with Destiny 2.
The thing is though, when you think about how it's being sold, the "blame" (if we wish to use that word) is on part both on Valve and Rockstar here. Valve for putting up the rating when the developer isn't giving it any support, and Rockstar for not blocking it and just taking the purchases. Rockstar would have been well aware it got given a rating.
GTAV is far from the first example of its kind. Looking back on it we’ve also had issues with:
- Battlefield 1 went from Steam Deck Playable to Unsupported, due to EA anticheat.
- Battlefield V went from Steam Deck Playable to Unsupported, due to EA anticheat.
- Plants vs. Zombies Garden Warfare 2: Deluxe Edition went from Steam Deck Playable to Unsupported, due to EA anticheat.
Before people bring them up in the comments: Battlefield 2042 is also broken, but it never worked to begin with, as even when it had Easy Anti-Cheat (that supports Linux platforms) it was never enabled. Now it has EA anticheat too. EA SPORTS WRC is similar, it was rated Unsupported but it did actually work and now it doesn’t due to EA anticheat. So while these two aren’t part of this specific topic right now, they do continue to highlight the ongoing anti-cheat issue.
And while Apex Legends works currently, there’s been repeating issues when the anti-cheat has been broken following updates, and a couple of times where Steam Deck / Linux players got banned and had to wait to be unbanned due to false flags there. Eventually, Apex Legends may even end up swapping from the Linux-supported Easy Anti-Cheat to EA anticheat like other EA published titles and break as well.
Single-player games largely aren’t a problem, although some have poor performance and yet somehow still get a Playable or Verified rating, which Valve do seem to be a bit inconsistent on.
To highlight the above a bit more. There’s a pinned post in the official Steam Deck forum for people to report errors with the Steam Deck Verified program. That post has now accrued 1,060 replies with a big mixture of complaints about Verified games from poor overall performance, to the games completely crashing the Steam Deck system, some have completely broken textures, various videos not playing and the list goes on. It also shows a few posts talking about games that clearly deserve a higher rating than what Valve gave. So it's not just about broken games, but games that people see zero issues with rated incorrectly by Valve too.
All that said, it’s not to say the whole idea of Steam Deck Verified is broken, but in many cases, Valve definitely need to work more closely with developers rather than just sticking up a rating and calling it done. This is especially true for games that have online multiplayer, or if it’s the only mode the game has. I don't have any good solution in mind though, Valve obviously have people a lot smarter than me working on all this, but something should be done to prevent such negative headline-grabbing issues in future for the Steam Deck as a gaming platform. I obviously want to see it succeed probably more than most people.
You may at this point be thinking, but hey I read a fancy article recently that said Microsoft are banning kernel-level anti-cheat, so this will be all solved right? Well, no. GamingOnLinux has an article going over that for you to read. In short: Microsoft have not said they’re doing so, just making a “new” platform for security. And again, developers can and do block Linux regardless of having kernel-level tomfoolery or not (Hi again Roblox).
If Valve do ever plan to launch a Steam Deck 2, they’re going to need to overhaul the rating system anyway right? So, now is the time to get Steam Deck Verified tweaked and improved before more issues come up with a second-generation, and before more titles end up having to go from Playable or Verified to Unsupported because the developer wasn’t supporting it at all to begin with, as Rockstar have made plainly clear with their FAQ entry for GTA V.
Even if you’re not into GTA V or any other title that’s been broken and don’t care: you really should. Each game being broken is a loss for overall support of the platform as a whole. It’s not a good look and it reduces choice for gamers.
I emailed Valve to talk about this issue with the verified program and they have not replied yet.
Before some comments come along to try and wriggle this into a “Native Linux is better” type of argument, that’s just nonsense. We’ve seen numerous games remove their Native Linux builds completely, or drop support for them, heck I wrote about one such case earlier today. Native vs Proton is not the issue, platform support is, regardless of how the games are made to work.
On another note, while we’re on the subject of Steam Deck gaming, Proton and the rating system. Given how far Valve’s Proton has come to where it now runs tens of thousands of Windows games without a fuss, perhaps it’s finally time for Valve to allow developers to officially list their games as supported via Proton for Linux-based platforms (regardless of Desktop Linux or Steam Deck). I did also email Valve to enquire about that back in August, and did not receive a reply.
Over to you in the comments: what are your thoughts?
Article taken from GamingOnLinux.com.
Unknown - Hasn't been checked
Unsupported - The developers has specifically stated their game does not support Proton. (This can be added by Developers or by Valve after talking directly with a company)
Unplayable - Valve is working on making this game playable with Proton
Playable - This game may need manual tweaking to work properly
Verified - This game works from start to finish, with any and all middleware for the game, out of the box
Supported - The Developers have stated they are openly supporting Proton. (Developers can turn this on themselves or Valve after talking with a company directly)
This would allow for the existing system to still be effective at giving Deck and Linux players an idea of how a game would run on their system while also ensuring there are no false notions on how supported a game is. In this system, GTA V would have still had "Playable" but with a footnote that R* had not officially stated they support Proton. That way expectations could be set.
What I mean is, I think the solution to the problems of the Valve verification system are very expensive if not unfeasible. Like the article says, it's all on Valve, so to add more work to it on their side (for example, periodically re-test games or after every patch) is a little difficult to imagine, what's even more difficult and basically impossible to imagine is developers themselves supporting and testing for Proton, I've come to the conclusion that none of the big players care that much for the Steam Deck, sure they'll fix a bug or two, but that's as far as it goes. New game patch is out, but it breaks something on the Deck? Good luck getting that fixed any time soon, this'd basically require an internal team designsted to Steam Deck, which again, I don't think any of the big name developers will bother. The Deck is just too small of a platform for them to care for. Indie games will support the Deck/Proton if not make a Natibe build altogther, so no worry about those.
Vortex_Acherontic Sep 21
Single-player games largely aren’t a problem, although some have poor performance and yet somehow still get a Playable or Verified rating, which Valve do seem to be a bit inconsistent on.
Well, yes. The other thing Valve needs to work on is clarity regarding what it actually means to be Verified or Playable. Because the reality of the situation is that to be Verified you just have to meet the not especially strict requirements of a small checklist and not much more; it was never and has never been a guarantee that a rated Verified game will run 100% perfectly at 30/60 FPS consistently on specific settings or what have you. It just means it reaches the bare minimum of what Valve consider to be playable, regardless of how well it runs or not.
I would even get a step further for the verification. A game should pass the playability test in most common configuration. Like hooked up to a tv and with external controllers and in handheld mode.
There are a few games (Halo Spartan Assault and Spartan Strike) which are verified, for a good reason but completely break if you attempt to play them docked with an external controller.
I think, as this is a valid use case for a steam deck they should include things like this as well.
Spartan Assault at least isn't verified - https://store.steampowered.com/app/277430/Halo_Spartan_Assault/?curator_clanid=4777282
They do have a rating box for cases where external controllers don't work, not sure why they didn't mark it, but guessing whoever tested it didn't try it.
My bad thought both where verified.
That's exactly what I wanted to say, the who ever tested didn't tried, I feel like their internal checklist of dos and not to dos needs a significant re-work.
If Proton is there forever and Valve does nothing to shift publisher behavior then we are all just waiting for Proton and Steam Deck support to inevitably die due to the failure of Valve's subsidy. Then the carriage which brought Steam Deck users to the dance will turn back into a pumpkin and the entire Linux gaming market, now hollowed out by the exodus to Proton, will disappear as the entire Steam audience switches to Windows on some small device suspiciously shaped like a Steam Deck.
This feels a bit too pessimistic don't you think? I don't think it will ever come to that. Just seriously doubt it.
Last edited by Leahi84 on 21 September 2024 at 7:56 am UTC
perhaps it’s finally time for Valve to allow developers to officially list their games as supported via Proton for Linux-based platforms... Forcing Devs to commit: "Do you support or not Proton and/or the Steam Deck" and create an easy to see filter, in the store pages for the devs that support Proton officially. Free advertising to these devs and make them first class citizens, above and before the Steam Deck verified program.
I think they could also incentive devs who commit to the Steam Deck with a special cut on their share. Let's say to the dev they have to do the Steam Deck testing on their own but they get the Steam cut lowered to 25% or 20% instead of 30%... That would surely boost Steam Deck and Linux support.
Rockstar loses max. 1% of users on Steam. So maybe a maximum of 0.5% in total. This is apparently only enough for an FAQ entry at the moment. Three years ago, Rockstar would have completely ignored Linux. Even now they only write about the Steam Deck.
2) Valve only tests a game once, and then usually never again, which is problematic because proton keeps getting better, but also like pointed out, DRM and anti-cheat get added to games. At the very least they should add the proton version this was tested with
that is wrong, there are tons of games they tested again and again to see if its working now.
you can check it by yourself making an list of unsuported games that you wan to play on checkmydeck.ofdgn , then checking if something changed, i have a list with 153 titles that were unsuported but now 49 of then are playable/verified
For developers it's simply cost vs benefits. How many decks have been sold and how many of those decks are pure deck users (so have no windows for gaming) and how many of those are interested in buying this game vs how much does it cost me to get the game working now and in the future.
If you're into online games then you will always be having potential issues as online cheating evolves so do these anti cheating tools so tbh I feel that buying online games for the deck is simply a risk you either are willing to take or not.
And the more windows based handheld get released the less interested developers will become in steam deck,
So what Vale does now is probably as good as it gets for single players, as for online it should always be unsupported unless de developer says otherwise.
Caldathras Sep 22
If Proton is there forever and Valve does nothing to shift publisher behavior then we are all just waiting for Proton and Steam Deck support to inevitably die due to the failure of Valve's subsidy. Then the carriage which brought Steam Deck users to the dance will turn back into a pumpkin and the entire Linux gaming market, now hollowed out by the exodus to Proton, will disappear as the entire Steam audience switches to Windows on some small device suspiciously shaped like a Steam Deck.The flaw that I see in your pessimism is something you are clearly overlooking: Proton is Open Source. In fact, Proton is a fork of WINE, another very active project for running Windows binaries in Linux. Both projects already share ideas between one another. There is also the contributions of CodeWeavers (CrossOver) to both Proton and WINE. Even if Valve disappeared tomorrow (heaven forbid), their open source projects and developments will live on and continue in the Linux community.
Another point I want to make is the often overlooked flaw in the whole Native thing. Linux evolves and changes all the time. As a relative newcomer to Linux gaming, I have already encountered numerous old native games that simply will not run on modern Linux configurations -- the libraries and technologies they depend on are no longer there. And, I am just thinking of the FOSS games & applications. Then there are the commercial native software that their developers no longer support -- they suffer from the same problem. So, how is running natively any better than utilizing Proton/WINE? At least Proton/WINE provides a mechanism to support the old dependencies that the Windows binaries rely on.
Consider EagleDelta's point from another thread -- link
Honestly, I get really annoyed by the "Proton/WINE isn't native" arguments. If WINE or Proton were Emulation tools, I'd agree, but where emulation tries to mimic hardware and other aspects that simply can't be done "natively", WINE and Proton's other tools are actually rebuilding the Windows and DX APIs for use within Linux. As such, Proton/WINE are absolutely native but the very definition of what an API does. I'm speaking of this as a Software Dev myself that works with various APIs every day. I've said it before and I'll say it again, if WINE/Proton isn't "native", then no API is native.
As EagleDelta points out, the flaw in the thinking of the Native vs Proton debate is the misunderstanding of what Proton/WINE actually is. It is an API that allows Windows binaries to run natively in Linux. Additional features of Proton/WINE making old dependencies/libraries available to these binaries is a huge benefit that old or forgotten GNU/Linux binaries often don't receive. In my opinion, there really shouldn't be a Native vs Proton debate -- we don't need just one or the other. Both are complimentary approaches to running games natively in Linux. Let the developer choose which approach works best for them.
Last edited by Caldathras on 22 September 2024 at 6:46 pm UTC
That said, I would find it very useful if the Steam Deck had stricter requirements on what is their top tier of Steam Deck support. Some things really need to be included in Verified (e.g. Cloud Saves support or at least per-Steam ID save directories. I think a developer self-reported "We test updates on the Steam Deck before rolling them out" could be a good addition.
I also think that they should either roll in proper docking support into the verification or have a separate "Great on Dock" badge. I would love for games to have the optimal settings for a docked experience on most common TV resolutions with the right mix of Gamescope resolution, game resolution and things like FSR out of the box. A lot of my games can handle much higher resolutions and look far better on my 4K TV when I change things, but ideally someone (the developer in a perfect world) would be figuring that out once and all of us could just plug and play. Controllers also seem a bit hit and miss. Sonic Mania is Deck Verified and has "Full Controller Support", but as far as I can tell only supports a controller for player 1 and the second player has to use a keyboard.
Unfortunate as it is, this is why Linux native actually is better. Socially and economically, it is the only reliable way publishers indicate actual support for Linux. They don't just throw out some software and let Valve put a checkmark on it. If they use a wrapper, it is part of their internal build, and doesn't appear to be a "Proton game." And all this was entirely predictable from the beginning. If any Linux user says "I won't pay for games that aren't actually supported on my computer" then other Linux users routinely ridicule them on sites like this.
If Proton is there forever and Valve does nothing to shift publisher behavior then we are all just waiting for Proton and Steam Deck support to inevitably die due to the failure of Valve's subsidy. Then the carriage which brought Steam Deck users to the dance will turn back into a pumpkin and the entire Linux gaming market, now hollowed out by the exodus to Proton, will disappear as the entire Steam audience switches to Windows on some small device suspiciously shaped like a Steam Deck.
except that many linux games that did supported linux natively stoped working after a few time because linux dont have an strong comitment to backward compatibility, meanwhile wine/proton do.
its much easier for the linux comunity and companies like valve to put effort into ensure that wine/proton never break than ensuring every game in the world never break.
for an company, porting to linux means wasting 10% or more of the income of the game into porting to an platform that would generate 1% more money, wich means they wasted more money than earned, it was possible to make a profit when linux had no games, because the developers had no competiton, but that is not sustainable when we do have competition.
if we relied on native ports without finding any way to expand the market we would be doomed to fail just like we failed in the past, where we did had some AAA games in the doom era, but not much more than that.
with the current strategy at least we have a chance.
valve is in a much better position now than in the past, they didnt had enough money to convince everyone to port their games, and companies had little incetive to do it thenselves.
now its different:
1)valve can expand the market, by creating an new market (portable pcs)
2)valve can expand the market by targeting regions that were unlikely to buy games on pc but likely to buy on handhelds (eg: japan)
3)on linux, valve barely have any competition, wich means that most of the games sales on the deck would be on steam, at the same time, if solutions like heroic, lutris, and others evolve or if other companies start supporting linux, then valve will lose sales but at the same time microsoft will lost dominance.
4)the cost of porting games is too high, there is no economic of scale in doing that, if most companies use the same game engines then the cost of those engines to support linux is more feasible, but still valve (and us) would have to count on the engine developers to treat linux as an first class citizen, so writing translation layers is the only feasiable solution, it has economics of scale because it affect all games, so even if it cost more than the profits of an sigle game its still viable.
now... there is this... sabotage if you ask me...
but i hope that isnt enough to kill our momentum, maybe people can use something like geforce now to keep access to this games, afterall, they already need an internet connection.
if the worst came and valve realize they cant compete without those online games, then they will have to make exclusivity deals/exclusive games, a lot of people will complain and they arent likely to do that, but it will be that or the death of linux gaming.
Cyba.Cowboy Sep 24
Another point I want to make is the often overlooked flaw in the whole Native thing. Linux evolves and changes all the time. As a relative newcomer to Linux gaming, I have already encountered numerous old native games that simply will not run on modern Linux configurations -- the libraries and technologies they depend on are no longer there.
How is this any different to <insert operating system>?
There are loads of "native" titles for Google Android operating systems that simply won't run if your handset manufacturer hasn't upgraded the firmware of your cell phone... Whilst both Apple macOS and Microsoft Windows operating systems have "broken" countless games over the years; many games won't even run under "modern" Windows operating systems without tweaks and work-arounds.
But your argument, nobody should make a "native" title of anything, ever.
Then there are the commercial native software that their developers no longer support -- they suffer from the same problem.
Again, not exclusive to Linux-based operating systems... I have an entire iPhone full of games and applications which are no longer supported by developers and before I left Google Android back in 2017-ish, the list of "unsupported" games and applications I had installed on my cellphone was MASSIVE.
I also have a small number of programs under macOS which are no longer supported, and there are quite a few programs I bought pre-2012 (when I abandoned Windows operating systems for good) that are no longer supported on the rare occasion I use our only Windows-powered PC, my daughter's laptop.
Once again, your argument against "native" titles is just silly.
So, how is running natively any better than utilizing Proton/WINE?
Performance.
When developers actually take the time to optimize their games for Linux-based operating systems, the performance is always going to be better... And the same could be said in reverse - any game written natively for macOS or Windows is going to perform better when written natively, if a developer has taken the time to optimize it.
for an company, porting to linux means wasting 10% or more of the income of the game into porting to an platform that would generate 1% more money, wich means they wasted more money than earned, it was possible to make a profit when linux had no games, because the developers had no competiton, but that is not sustainable when we do have competition.
if we relied on native ports without finding any way to expand the market we would be doomed to fail just like we failed in the past, where we did had some AAA games in the doom era, but not much more than that.
Well if Valve Software actually released the Steam Deck to the world instead of just "select regions", they'd have FAR more than 1% of potential customers.
In saying this, I'm not so naive to deny that it is the old "chicken and egg" scenario, which Proton helps to mitigate, though not completely resolve... But Valve Software isn't helping by ignoring some HUGE gaming markets, like Australia, purely because they're too lazy to be bothered / put the idea into the "too hard" basket.
Last edited by Cyba.Cowboy on 24 September 2024 at 5:53 am UTC
dirkdierickx Sep 24
perhaps it’s finally time for Valve to allow developers to officially list their games as supported via Proton for Linux-based platforms
indeed, valve needs to put a special rating in place for games where the developer 100% supports & guarantees steamdeck playability! it should have been there from day one, i'm not sure why valve wanted to do this all by themselves, it is basically impossible with the amount of games that are on steam.
perhaps they will need a little persuasion to get developers to support the steamdeck, many possibilities here, ranging from extra exposure or a discount on the percentage valve takes on the sale of a game, etc.
Caldathras Sep 24
Whilst both Apple macOS and Microsoft Windows operating systems have "broken" countless games over the years; many games won't even run under "modern" Windows operating systems without tweaks and work-arounds.
I agree completely. I have had more luck getting old Windows games to run stably under Proton/WINE than under Windows 10. And, frankly, many of them run better under Proton/WINE than Windows. Apple is infamous for having broken old game support. I don't use many "non-stock" Android apps but, you're right, I've encountered the problem here too. I certainly wasn't trying to imply that it was a problem that was unique to Linux.
But your argument, nobody should make a "native" title of anything, ever.I never said anything of the sort. There is no need to view the world in black and white. Please reread what I wrote. Specifically,
In my opinion, there really shouldn't be a Native vs Proton debate -- we don't need just one or the other. Both are complimentary approaches to running games natively in Linux. Let the developer choose which approach works best for them.
The point I was trying to make with my examples was that there is very little difference between the benefits of native or Proton/WINE at this point. Certainly not enough to be so polarized on choosing one or the other.
Once again, your argument against "native" titles is just silly.As I made no argument against native titles, this comment is just silly.
If anything, I argued in favour of expanding our view of what is native software on the Linux platform. In terms of the Native vs Proton/WINE debate, I don't believe that one is superior to the other.
(And yet, I am going to appear to contradict myself in the second paragraph below -- but when I've chosen the Windows binary, I have had no concerns with its performance under Proton/WINE.)
When developers actually take the time to optimize their games for Linux-based operating systems, the performance is always going to be better...Well, you took my question out of context but I suppose I could have phrased it better. I meant based on my examples...
Given the choice, I often take the native Linux version of the game -- unless the reviews have given it a bad reputation for being out of date, poorly supported or poorly optimized. I can't comment further here as I don't usually take the trouble to compare against the Windows version.
any game written natively for macOS or Windows is going to perform better when written nativelyIf you mean "installed" natively -- at the development level that Proton/WINE is at these days, I have not found this to be true. Many of the games I've installed under Proton/WINE outperform their native Windows installation. I was quite startled when I noticed this. Not sure what that says about their (or is it Windows'?) optimization...
--
My chief point in the latter part of my comment was to reinforce my agreement with EagleDelta's assertion that Proton/WINE is an API that allows Windows binaries to run natively in Linux. As Proton/WINE continues to improve, the optimization you laud in a native binary may cease to be the benefit you consider it to be.
Any way, despite the misinterpretation of the point I was trying to make, it has been nice conversing with you.
Last edited by Caldathras on 24 September 2024 at 7:27 pm UTC
Patreon
PayPal
See more from me