Quoting: Guest

Quoting: Anza

Quoting: GuestI wonder if the Steam Deck is going to be a great success if Mr. Sweeny would change his mind. Just give it some time Linux is the future of gaming, we are seeing the change, keep in mind android (while heavy modified) is still Linux.

Just question yourself this:

Why can't tripple A studio's make things work on Linux with a 100+ employers studio's, while an single indie developer can make there game enjoyable and perfectly work with either Proton or even Native.

Example: Splitgate the "equ8" AC isn't build for linux but they managed to get it working for Linux without issues. And there are more examples, instead of investing is "Epic Exclusives" they should put there money in evolution.

I think this was discussed under some other article already. I guess short answer is: bureaucracy, custom engines and libraries. Which in turn means that if Linux doesn't make enough money, it won't happen unless somebody high up wants to have a Linux port. When experienced developers are allowed to spend time doing things like porting engine to have Vulkan renderer, things will happen. For example that's what happened when Google was distributing some Stadia money. Stadia just happens to be closed system, so there's no need to worry about multiple Linux distributions and support costs. Which in turn means that native Linux port might never leave Stadia. Even there doing some cost saving by just during the bare necessity means that profits are higher.

Smaller studios have more to gain. Article on GamingOnLinux (and maybe on few other Linux sites) can generate enough sales that Linux numbers are inflated. Extra publicity could totally be worth it. Indie studios are also more idealistic, so they might do Linux port just because they can.

I can remember reading an article where a game developer said that Linux users are more likely to give helpful feedback and sometimes even fixes, so I don't get why Big Corps. aren't seeing this.

But I Personally believe that the Steam Deck is going to change Linux Gaming for the better in the long run, just look at how far we already are, new games are playable from launch 80% of the time. Maybe not perfect but playable none the less.

In big corporations support and developer are not the same person. Developer might never see the support request. As for big corporations at least have to be lot more careful with copyright. There's possibility that they have prepared for user submissions if it's mentioned the EULA. My impression is that fan fixes usually live their own separate life, though I have vague memory that there are some exceptions.

It's interesting to see sure how much impact Steam Deck actually has. Now it's bit hard to see if developer actually support Proton. Valve will patch things for sure, but there's going to be bit of delay after each update in the game.

As for the topic itself, I guess Epic backup plan could be that if things go south with Microsoft, they could just pick up everything that Valve has done and bootstrap their Linux store that way. Valve doesn't have the same luxury as if they drop Linux, that's going to be quite big blow to the market and their backup plan will not be as viable. Sure Wine won't go away, but it wouldn't stay as good as its now.

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Quoting: GuestI wonder if the Steam Deck is going to be a great success if Mr. Sweeny would change his mind. Just give it some time Linux is the future of gaming, we are seeing the change, keep in mind android (while heavy modified) is still Linux.

Just question yourself this:

Why can't tripple A studio's make things work on Linux with a 100+ employers studio's, while an single indie developer can make there game enjoyable and perfectly work with either Proton or even Native.

Example: Splitgate the "equ8" AC isn't build for linux but they managed to get it working for Linux without issues. And there are more examples, instead of investing is "Epic Exclusives" they should put there money in evolution.

I think this was discussed under some other article already. I guess short answer is: bureaucracy, custom engines and libraries. Which in turn means that if Linux doesn't make enough money, it won't happen unless somebody high up wants to have a Linux port. When experienced developers are allowed to spend time doing things like porting engine to have Vulkan renderer, things will happen. For example that's what happened when Google was distributing some Stadia money. Stadia just happens to be closed system, so there's no need to worry about multiple Linux distributions and support costs. Which in turn means that native Linux port might never leave Stadia. Even there doing some cost saving by just doing the bare necessity means that profits are higher.

Smaller studios have more to gain. Article on GamingOnLinux (and maybe on few other Linux sites) can generate enough sales that Linux numbers are inflated. Extra publicity could totally be worth it. Indie studios are also more idealistic, so they might do Linux port just because they can.

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Quoting: Nocifer

Quoting: Doc Angelo

Quoting: NociferThat's not correct. Some holes can indeed lead to privilege escalation and thus provide full access to the whole machine, while other holes are more or less limited in what they can do. It's not a given that a bug/exploit will lead to total foobar. It's as you say at the end: it really depends.

Exactly. I said it depends. You're essentially agreeing with what I said, yet you're stating that what I said is incorrect.

No, I'm disagreeing with you because you contradicted yourself. "It really depends" agrees with "the malware capabilities will be limited by the size of the hole", a statement with which you disagreed in the rest of your comment. If it does depend on the "size of the hole", then it also does make sense in the digital world to talk about holes and sizes.

Maybe the confusion here is coming from the fact that with vulnerabilities, size is not used as a term. What is probably actually meant is severity. Severity is roughly based on risk. Remotely exploited vulnerability that gives full access to the system is high on the vulnerability scale.

Security hole is used as a term, but speaking about sizes can be bit awkward. Logically bigger exploit would need bigger hole in order to fit in...

What we were actually talking about? Oh! Anti-Cheat. From security perspective they're awful. I'm not sure I need to elaborate. Gamers might not have lot of options here though.

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Quoting: slaapliedje

Quoting: NanobangFlashy, fast, and flexible. Yeah, I can see why Valve might've chosen it for the Steam deck.

I'm strangely thrilled that the Discover upgrade will be including version dates.

I think knowing a version number may be helpful, but knowing the age of that version is immediately useful when I'm considering a bit of software.

Kudos KDE!

Yeah, I think more and more developers are realizing that arbitrary numbers for their software is kind of pointless. I think that the trend toward YY.MM.patch_level is quite useful. On the other hand, you have people who misinterpret what CentOS was doing with their 7.9.2009... as that's Major.Minor.YYMM. Someone tried to explain to me that they don't have point releases anymore and just use the year/month... Doesn't help that RHEL doesn't follow that versioning... Anyhow, just a bit of a rant as I've ran into this...

I would think most of the software uses something sensible one as that's easier than to invent something new. There are quite odd ones though. TeX for example adds digits to π. Also can't even assume that version number increases. Wikipedia mentions SmartEiffel that has decreasing version number.

FreeBSD has actually mechanism that can be used when the whole scheme changes

No wonder we need a dialog that displays also date

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Quoting: GuestIt’s great that it runs with proton, but I’m not buying it full price unless it’s released for linux.

I'm not used to that kind of price either as I mostly buy indies.

It would be nice if there's at least semi official stance if Techland is willing to support Proton or not.

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Quoting: Guest....also don't worry, there's been plenty of desktop innovation that Microsoft never could match. Like virtual desktops. So much so that projects such as LiteStep were created to bring desktop flexibility to Windows.

Never is not true anymore for virtual desktops, they have been available for Windows for a while without any extensions. I haven't just found real use for them with my work computer as far as I know there's no way to save the layouts. There's keyboard shortcuts (has been since Windows 7) to first ten applications, so mostly virtual desktops are not needed. I just would need direct access to more applications, ten is not enough.

Flexibility might still be something that Microsoft doesn't want to implement fully. Linux is much better suited for experimentation, but if some experiment gets too popular, nothing is stopping Microsoft from implementing it. It just might take roughly decade like with virtual desktops.

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Quoting: Purple Library Guy

Quoting: AnzaIf they work with ScummVM, then Roberta could work too. That way they more or less look like native games and can be launched from Steam. I don't know if there's packaged version of Roberta somewhere, which would make the installation easier.

Maybe not as such, but that "Proton-Up QT" thing Liam mentions in the article apparently also acts as an installer for Roberta; also Luxtorpeda and Boxtron.

Oh, thanks. I didn't remember that. It's actually mentioned in the linked ProtonUp-Qt article.

View this comment - View article - View full comments

If they work with ScummVM, then Roberta could work too. That way they more or less look like native games and can be launched from Steam. I don't know if there's packaged version of Roberta somewhere, which would make the installation easier.

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Quoting: Liam Dawe

Quoting: lectrodeOut of curiosity, regarding the Desktop "Window Manager Only":

• 1) what software does that cover?


• 2) Why would those be put into a single bucket vs having an option for each one like the rest?


• 3) With that now being in 3rd place, does it make sense to split it up into the individual options?

It's been so long I don't remember the reasoning exactly. I believe some people don't use an actual "desktop environment" like Xfce, KDE, GNOME Shell etc but use some sort of special window manager directly like i3 or something else. We probably need to do something better with that to be clearer. Open to suggestions.

I'm thinking that if possible, add new choice if Window Manager Only is chosen. That would list maybe few most popular window managers (would have to figure what those are, I haven't looked at any statistics). For the statistics they could be displayed separately as they could take lot of space if all possibilities are listed.

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Quoting: LanzIt's ridiculous that small indie dev teams with 1-2 developers can publish Linux native but bigger studios have to rely on Proton.

AAA studios have money to buy third party libraries, which in turn don't support Linux. It's also rare that they keep Linux in mind from the beginning, so native Linux build will need just enough work that it will cost more than Linux sales would yield. Something like Stadia might momentarily give enough financial incentive so something might happen.

Indies on the other hand use whatever is free. Godot, Unity, even Unreal are few more can make native builds. Even some former AAA developers might move back to indies and give one of the more indie engines a try.

View this comment - View article - View full comments