There's a lot of blog posts and news articles being written right now centred around Microsoft's plans for updates to Windows 11, and potential kernel changes, with some thinking this means big things for Linux gaming.
Sorry to say, but I'm here to bring a more realistic take and to help keep all your feet on the ground.
This comes from a Microsoft blog post titled "Taking steps that drive resiliency and security for Windows customers", which is as a result of the recent CrowdStrike incident where an update took down millions of Windows PCs due to it running at the kernel-level inside Windows.
One that has been really doing the rounds lately, especially across Reddit and other social media is from Notebookcheck, with a rather sensational article title of "Microsoft paves the way for Linux gaming success with plan that would kill kernel-level anti-cheat".
Here's the thing: Microsoft don't actually say they will kill off kernel-level access, and if they tried that (again - they tried with Vista before), they will no doubt again face some pretty serious push-back from both cybersecurity vendors and regulators across various countries. Something that would likely be more hassle than its actually worth. What Microsoft do actually talk about, is providing additional options that are outside of kernel mode - a whole new platform to "meet the needs of security vendors".
This new security platform, if vendors chose to actually go ahead and use it, could mean the opposite for Linux gaming, and cause a whole bunch of new headaches when it comes to supporting it regardless of it being via Native Linux games, or Windows games through Wine and Proton. So if anything, I would say that rather than paving the way for Linux gaming to get better, it's just going to be another hurdle. As annoying as that is.
Just because some things may move out of the kernel-level, also doesn't mean things will suddenly work on Linux (or get any easier to support via Wine / Proton). There will be various ways for developers to detect Linux, and continue to block it.
Just look at Destiny 2 as the easy and simple example here, they very clearly check for and completely block Linux platforms from playing Destiny 2 via Proton with no way around it. From the official Bungie website:
Steam Deck and Destiny 2
Destiny 2 is not supported for play on the Steam Deck or on any system utilizing Steam Play's Proton unless Windows is installed and running. Players who attempt to launch Destiny 2 on the Steam Deck through SteamOS or Proton will be unable to enter the game and will be returned to their game library after a short time.
Players who are not accessing Destiny 2 through Windows and attempt to bypass the SteamOS/Proton incompatibility will be met with a game ban.
You could expect to see more of that.
Then there's another easy example, Rust from Facepunch. Garry Newman has been pretty outspoken in the past about it, and how when they last had Rust supported on Linux, another Facepunch developer noted it caused more cheating issues for them to have to deal with.
How about Fortnite? That's pretty much a "lol no" event too, it's not like things being client-side will suddenly mean Fortnite would work on Linux, it would absolutely continue to be blocked. At least, not until Linux / Steam Deck has tens of millions of users according to Epic's Tim Sweeney.
Roblox is an additional easy example here to really make the point. Their latest anti-cheat is not kernel level, and completely blocks Linux. Something doesn't need to be in the kernel to block Linux-based systems. This caused projects like Sober to appear to run the Android version.
There's really no easy answer to the anti-cheat problem for Linux / Steam Deck gaming right now, aside from perhaps developers having things done server-side where the platform you're playing on is less of an issue, or cloud gaming where the game isn't even on your machine. That's not to say it will be a problem that will never be solved, just don't expect changes to the way Windows handles things like security, anti-tamper, anti-cheat and so on to be in any way beneficial for Linux.
As usual, over to you in the comments: what are you thinking?
Article taken from GamingOnLinux.com.
But that's not what's happening. Sony isn't merely ignoring Linux.Exactly. Actively sabotaging something is completely different to “not supporting” something.
And Tim Sweeney can move to Canada and get lost.So… was this about his infamous tweet where he compared installing Linux because Windows was garbage to moving to Canada or was it completely random?
It would be even better if Windows switched to an immutable base file system. That may actually already be in the works. This kernel change would be a step towards that direction.
I'm starting to see the possibilities here. Can we throw in Pierre Poilievre?And Tim Sweeney can move to Canada and get lost.
If you do that we will send you Justin Bieber!
Destiny 2 is not supported for play on the Steam Deck or on any system utilizing Steam Play's Proton...Players who are not accessing Destiny 2 through Windows and attempt to bypass the SteamOS/Proton incompatibility will be met with a game ban.
As I don't play online multiplayer games, I'm going to ignore the main point of the article and rant about one of my pet peeves:
That is not what the words "not supported" mean!
Let's look at a real example of a software developer not supporting something. Mozilla does not support building or running Firefox on FreeBSD. Mozilla employees do not test Firefox on FreeBSD. Mozilla typically does not make any changes to their code with FreeBSD in mind. If Firefox works on FreeBSD, cool: Mozilla doesn't care. If Firefox doesn't work on FreeBSD, too bad: Mozilla still doesn't care, because it's unsupported by Mozilla.
(On the other hand, the FreeBSD developers do support running Firefox on FreeBSD, and if it doesn't work, that's a bug you can report to FreeBSD.)
If Sony truly didn't support Destiny 2 on Linux, they would not test Destiny 2 on Linux, and they would not write any code that is specifically intended to apply to running it on Linux. It might be possible to get the game running under Proton, or it might not, but Sony wouldn't care if they were truly "not supporting" Linux.
But that's not what's happening. Sony isn't merely ignoring Linux. They are paying their programmers to do more work to write code specifically to break Destiny 2 on Linux. They are paying people to actively test Destiny 2 on Linux to make sure it is broken. Sony is supporting Linux, with the explicit goal of making it not work.
Sadly, we are not much in raw numbers to make pressure and cause a change, because that's active sabotage and discrimination.
Also I haven't bought any Sony game besides Days Gone, and since I read this, things are going to stay that way, because I have no guarantee they won't sabotage those games as well.
So… was this about his infamous tweet where he compared installing Linux because Windows was garbage to moving to Canada or was it completely random?
Apparently moving to Canada equals Linux support for him.
Last edited by Shmerl on 16 September 2024 at 1:39 am UTC
pleasereadthemanual Sep 16
Clearly they won't give up easily on the kernel-level anticheat thing, that helps them to keep a grip on Linux gaming to prevent (or try to) it to take off.I don't think Microsoft much cares one way or the other, but you'll need to pry kernel-level anticheat from the corpses of these corporations.
Cyba.Cowboy Sep 16
A big part of the problem is that companies like Epic Games are just Microsoft sheep and as such, are anti-Linux for no particular reason.
Well, if I had to take a guess, I'd say some "encouragement" cough cough financial incentives or bribes cough cough from Microsoft probably play a big part of the reason to blindly follow Microsoft and be so anti-Linux... But this is of course, purely speculative, even if it's probably right.
This said, It feels like the best solution that would give control to the devs, for Linux anti-cheat, is probably through a native linux client.
A lot of the anti-cheat systems already support Linux-based operating systems natively... It's just that developers - Epic Games being an obvious example - choose not to use them and thus not to support Linux-based operating systems.
Last edited by Cyba.Cowboy on 16 September 2024 at 2:45 am UTC
I'm starting to see the possibilities here. Can we throw in Pierre Poilievre?And Tim Sweeney can move to Canada and get lost.
If you do that we will send you Justin Bieber!
I can prepare a place at that bottom of the Baltic Sea for him, IF as payment we would get Skinny Puppy and Front Line Asembly.
pleasereadthemanual Sep 16
Yeah, but the thing is, as I understand it, a lot of the anti-cheat systems actually support Linux-based operating systems nativelyBut is the anticheat as effective as the Windows' counterpart? This has consistently been the reason companies provide for not enabling Linux support. And why both BattlEye and EAC make it optional—it's not as effective.
This article cites Rust developers experiencing more cheating after enabling Linux support.
So if the Linux equivalent is less effective and leads to an outsized impact on players compared to the marginal benefits more Linux players bring, why would you do it? If your choices are to upset the larger amount of players or a smaller amount of players, the majority wins every time.
I don't like it, but that seems to be the way it is.
Cyba.Cowboy Sep 16
But is the anticheat as effective as the Windows' counterpart? This has consistently been the reason companies provide for not enabling Linux support. And why both BattlEye and EAC make it optional—it's not as effective.
Well that's on the developers of said anti-cheat software, if it's not as effective... If the anti-cheat software is not as effective as under a Microsoft Windows-based operating system, then the developers just aren't putting in as much effort for the Linux version.
But is the anticheat as effective as the Windows' counterpart? This has consistently been the reason companies provide for not enabling Linux support.
It's also exactly what you'd say if you couldn't be bothered to do something for a small audience and had necessarily-secret software to use as an excuse.
Maybe it isn't as effective; maybe it could be made as effective with sufficient effort; maybe they're repeating what their software vendor who can't be bothered told them. "We can't be bothered to do things because reasons" isn't by itself trustworthy.
pleasereadthemanual Sep 16
then the developers just aren't putting in as much effort for the Linux version.(which wouldn't be the first time we've seen this)
It's also exactly what you'd say if you couldn't be bothered to do something for a small audience and had necessarily-secret software to use as an excuse.That's certainly true. I don't know enough about how it works to say whether an as-effective solution is feasible.
then the developers just aren't putting in as much effort for the Linux version.(which wouldn't be the first time we've seen this)
It's also exactly what you'd say if you couldn't be bothered to do something for a small audience and had necessarily-secret software to use as an excuse.That's certainly true. I don't know enough about how it works to say whether an as-effective solution is feasible.
As far as I know, kernel anti-cheat is ineffective even on Windows, so I'm not sure what the devs are complaining about and what they are smoking.
So not today, not tomorrow, but kernel tampering will eventually become a non accceptable practice.
I know there is a lot of Microsoft hate here, and I dont blame anyone, but my dream is that Microsoft goes full Linux, let there services like microsoft 360, cloud and other services be behind a license.
Windows becomes free. From what Iv heard Windows is only a small % of there income.
I work as a software engineer in Net and Microsoft really know what they are doing with C# and .NET .
.NET also works like a charm on Mac and Linux, and we even run our services and software on Red hat machines, we used to run them on Windows servers but it was just time consuming and slow, and the apps and services goes a lot faster on Linux.
I imagen that valve pushes gaming so hard that Linux is the first option for gaming, Windows loses market share so they have to go full Linux in order to continue there profit and market share. 🤷♂️
Microsoft is already half there. As you mentioned, most of its revenues are coming from the multiple services their now offer (SaaS).
Think of Office 365/OneDrive, the multiple CoPilot (AI hype), Azure, even the new Outlook is web-based now.
Indeed, Dotnet Core is completely portable and open-source, even SQL Server is installable on Linux.
When you think more than 50% of the servers are running Linux on Azure, it’s hard to deny the success of Linux on the server side.
Microsoft is already a service company. What is holding game companies to make games on Linux is the Linux market share. The Linux market share is still low right now, but slowly growing...
Linux is still too hard for the non-technical people to use; it’s better than it was, but not quite there yet.
Cheers o/
-- A fellow C# professional C# developer
Cyba.Cowboy Sep 16
Ihmo security incidents on windows will keep repeating and sooner or later it will become obvious to the masses as well the dangers of running stuff inside the kernel.
Nothing will change.
Microsoft Windows operating systems have been the inferior choice when it comes to security for as long as Windows operating systems have been around, yet people still use them... Then also consider that for the last few "Windows" operating systems, Microsoft has been tracking pretty much everything its users see or do on "their" computers, throwing privacy completely out the window (no pun intended); and again, people continue to use Windows operating systems en mass.
Irrespective of what Microsoft do from here, their operating system will continue to be a poster boy for being insecure and anti-privacy, with tens of millions of sheep continuing to use it, regardless of these flaws.
Linux is still too hard for the non-technical people to use; it’s better than it was, but not quite there yet.
Ugh. I hate it when people parrot this claim.
Many modern Linux-based operating systems are just as easy to use as a typical Microsoft Windows operating system these days (certain distros could probably even claim they're easier to use!), and one can get by without ever touching Terminal or doing anything unusually "technical"... The option is still there of course, and many Linux users (myself included) prefer to use Terminal and things like that; but in 99% of cases, you can get by just fine without ever going down that path.
What needs to happen is that the Linux Community needs to shakes this "It's so technical most everyday users can't use it" reputation, because it's a reputation that's simply not true anymore.
Last edited by Cyba.Cowboy on 16 September 2024 at 8:19 am UTC
Many modern Linux-based operating systems are just as easy to use as a typical Microsoft Windows operating system these days (certain distros could probably even claim they're easier to use!)
Way easier. Linux is what you give your parents so that you don't need to do Windows tech support.
Many modern Linux-based operating systems are just as easy to use as a typical Microsoft Windows operating system these days (certain distros could probably even claim they're easier to use!)
Way easier. Linux is what you give your parents so that you don't need to do Windows tech support.
If Nvidia gave 1.5 shits and make a not-embarrassing driver, I would say the experience across the board would infact be piss easy, plug and play.
Last edited by Pyrate on 16 September 2024 at 10:16 am UTC
Patreon
PayPal
See more from me