I would add a third option to the poll: Useless.

Quoting: dubigrasuI would add a third option to the poll: Useless.

I'm not sure I can edit a poll

No Tux No Bucks: good (good habit)
Being a jerk: bad (bad habit)

In my case even before I completely switched to Linux (which in my case was a bit more than a decade ago) I had reduced my gaming quite a lot. In fact I have been gaming a lot less on windows than on Linux or ms-dos.

Then when I stopped using windows at all until 2013 I was just playing some free games, browser games and old scummvm/dosbox games.

At 2013 I just said, ok I will start buying a few new games again but obviously only Linux games, only games that looks interesting to me, only on sales, and bundles (in case of bundles not all games need to pass the criteria and I activate all of them), only on steam and drm-free (humble bundle/gog). That sure is very restring, no?

And fast forward today I have more than 500 games only on my steam library... Since I already have a huge backlog what is the point buying any game on a platform that I do not even have? So it is not for me that much of a principle as just a practical rule.

Quoting: ScooptaGiven you're talking about free software I assume that nvidia card is from a while ago and you haven't had a chance to upgrade.

Exactly, it costs resources and money. I don't intend to throw it out because it still works. My config is not perfect, but trying the open source driver is on my TODO list.

I agree with @dubigrasu that it is kind of useless or insignificant due to the very small number of Linux players. That said I always favor native and otherwise use Steam Play only since it will go into the books as sold for Linux. I think that no one on any board of a bigger developer/publisher will notice some lonely Linux user posting on a forum that he will refuse a game due to not getting a Linux version, but I do think Linux may get some attention if it (unexpectedly) shows up in selling charts. Even more when there is a rising line. The visibility of Linux is more important to me than DRM thoughts.

In practice this results in me haven't touched e.g. Shadow of the Tomb Raider, I'm really looking forward to Feral's version and will buy it on day one in their store. Though my conscience felt absolutely fine when buying Resident Evil 2 Remake and probably soon Hitman 2 using Steam Play.

I would say it's less about punishing bad devs (that don't support Linux), and more about rewarding good devs (that do support Linux). If you're just as likely to give a bad dev your money as a good dev, where's the incentive for devs to be good?

Bad devs are unlikely to notice or care if Linux gamers boycott them or not (it's a drop in the ocean to them), but good devs notice if they end up getting little or no return for their efforts.

I want devs to be good, ergo I support devs that port to Linux. I don't want devs to be bad, ergo I don't support devs that don't port to Linux.

No tux, no bucks.

I think it's a very helpful ethos for our community to adopt.