Fina.... WTF
valve has some strange priorities...

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Quoting: Eike

Quoting: elmapul

Quoting: PatolaNo middle term? So how is Linux gaming in all of this?

by wich measure 1% of marketshare on the desktop is an middle term?

Well, to whom and by which measure, I would ask.
Linux gaming might not yield Valve as much money as they put into it, dunno.
It might still be a lever for Valve to avoid closing of Microsoft's ecosystem...

Valve is probably losing money to support us, its a long time investment the same way xbox was (the difference is, xbox at least sold enough and had enough support for thirdy party titles to build confidence in the brand)

other game companies are simply ignoring us (unless you count port houses like feral as game companies, but even they, when was their last annoucement?) and some even droped support for games that used to support.

and the user count didnt changed, i wouldnt call that an sucess, sucess is to expand the marketfrom 0 to tens of millions of units sold (or user count) in a single video game generation.

View this comment - View article - View full comments

THIS is what i'm talking about, things like this are what can actually change the marketshare.
this and an better performance on games.

View this comment - View article - View full comments

"which sounds awesome"
lol

"Additionally, the developer of Boxtron is also working on Luxtorpeda, another compatibility tool aimed at running certain games through native Linux game engines. Examples of this would be OpenXcom for X-COM: UFO Defense, ioquake3 for Quake III Arena and so on. This project is currently a work in progress, but also very exciting."

i had to do that to run an renpy game, i didnt knew about luxtorpeda but it was just a matter of realizing that the game was made on renpy and opening it as if its an project file.
the only other issue is that renpy from software center is old and broken, the developer didnt support this means of distribution so you had to download from their page instead.

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Quoting: PatolaNo middle term? So how is Linux gaming in all of this?

by wich measure 1% of marketshare on the desktop is an middle term?

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Quoting: const

Quoting: elmapul

Quoting: const...they will have a niche.

1)gpus are common for machine learning servers, i think google has an plan B in case stadia flops.
2)if you search for stadia on youtube, you will not find many videos talking good things about it, in terms of marketig, looks like it already failed.
or you are talking about atari?

I think in discussions about gaming platforms, failing is a very vague word. Do I believe a significant percentage of PC gamers will jump to Stadia? No. Do I think their "buy games for stadia at retail prices" idea will stand? No. They will have to adopt this or they are doomed, unless they give an additional download option. But all that doen't necessarily mean it will absolutely flop. For all those people who want to play this "one game" but don't have capable hardware (or OS), Stadia will be an obvious choice and unless their management is totally nuts, they will be abled to monetarize that niche.

there is no middle term, its either an total flop or an sucess.

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Quoting: orochi_kyoJust imagine saving your company in millions of dollars in licenses? It so easy to jump into the "Open Software wagon" once this software has the quality of a paid software, so what Epic and Ubisoft did wasnt some altruism towards "Open Software" is a way to save them millions of dollars in buying licenses, hiring developers and research technologies.
Wonder how for Tim Scammey Open Software is something cool but Open OSes arent that cool.

1)epic is not doing it for their own games only, they arent looking at the money that they will save in licences, but the money that the developers who publish games and assets on epic store will save, the cheaper it is for then with an better software the best the games and assets will be on it, so epic is not trying to save money on software licences at all.
yet, this move will help valve and other stores as well, so the only competitive advantage it will make for then is good publicity.

2)the ubisoft who is investing on blender is the animation sub dividsion, afaik you can watch an animation on linux.

3)is not about caring or not about open OSes they do care about Android for example, the issue is, its economically imviable to invest money on linux for most companies, ideology dont pay bills no company will bankrupt then selves to help linux and evne if epic and valve did it, it could be in vain, microsoft monopoly inst easy to break, even google wich has much more money cant break into it with chromeOS yet.

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Quoting: const...they will have a niche.

1)gpus are common for machine learning servers, i think google has an plan B in case stadia flops.
2)if you search for stadia on youtube, you will not find many videos talking good things about it, in terms of marketig, looks like it already failed.
or you are talking about atari?

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Quoting: x_wing

Quoting: Alm888I wonder, what Autodesk® had done to piss these guys off so much that they openly started undermining its dominance by supporting the direct competitor?

Usually, Big Bucks Companies stick to each other.

The only problem with Maya and 3DSMAX is their price. For indies/hobbyist Blender is the way to go and I think that Unity and Epic wants to reduce newcomers costs.

unity?

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Quoting: Mohandevir

Quoting: FaalagornHowever, if it'd be about the 30% cut itself, itch with up to 0% would be overflowing with AAA games already.

Please define... I'm not sure what you're implying... I see 2 possible meanings by this statement.

Edit: I'll add to this... If it's all about supporting the creators of a game, why then use a soulless and featureless storefront/launcher that takes a 12% cut when you may usually buy these AAA titles directly from the studio's own storefront and give them 100% of the price?

not every studio can make their own client and host servers to distribute their games.
only big studios can afford that bill.

if 12% is cheaper for those, they will publish on epic instead of their own store.

View this comment - View article - View full comments