Steam goes Linux

By MegaVolt Posted May 11, 2008 15:05:39External Link

See the attached link. The Source engine will probably be ported on Linux, which means that there will most likely be a Linux version of Steam.

I have boycotted Steam because of the DRM it implements for now but if it is ever released for Linux I sure will buy Valve products. This will make Valve and Steam very popular in the "nerd" scene.

I hope StarDock will go a similar route and open up to multiple PC platforms instead of caging itself in by only developing games for windows. Your move

0 Karma 9 Replies 7 Referrals

I hope StarDock will go a similar route and open up to multiple PC platforms instead of caging itself in by only developing games for windows. Your mov

DirectX is only for windows. So until they decide to use OpenGL in a game, they're stuck with windows.

Same goes for the Source engine that - until now - had been dx only

Steam is already very popular in the nerd scene.

Also, the 'cage' that StarDock and Valve have been holding themselves in is a very large cage. In fact, the cage encompasses almost all of the world, except for the small, jail cell-sized areas that Mac and Linux occupy outside of this cage.

(Note: I run Linux, but unlike many other open-source advocates, I don't have an inflated view of the significance of the Linux market to game developers.)

No kidding, until my dad can run linux without him pestering me to death over the phone it isn't a viable platform for entertainment developers. Let's face it they need to appeal to a broader market. Not to mention the simple fact that DirectX is light years easier in terms of development. The bottom line? OpenGL needs to grow up, and linux needs to move beyond its "I don't pre-can squat" attitude.

True, the Linux market is quite small. And also true, OpenGL has some serious issues. I really miss some big developer taking charge there and bringing it up-to-date in the gaming section (for "professional" 3D development it is by far superior to DirectX ... that's the main problem: OpenGL wasn't made for games).

However, even if the additional market is quite small, as long as the cost to get there is not too high (which it is not, ID software has only one man writing their linux clients (I think)) it shouldn't matter. In addition to that we have the biggest nerds (most vocal people in online communities) who fancy Linux - meaning the mouth-to-mouth-propaganda impact of a Linux version is much bigger then it's potential customer base (e.g. Linux fans like me suddenly liking Steam instead of hating it and therefor recommending it to their not-so-nerdy friends who then use it on Windows).

Chicken and egg scenario.
There aren't many gamers on Linux because there's no games.
There's no games on Linux because there aren't many gamers.

Not to mention that most people who have Linux also have Windows, so it's a hard sell to sell a separate Linux version of a game (though most games that support Linux generally do it at no extra cost). Not to mention that Wine does a pretty good job on a heck of a lot of games.

Honestly, I think it would benefit the gaming industry in the long run if game developers took the hit now and ported their games to Linux. At the very least, work with Wine (or Cedega's new program) to try to ensure compatibility.

Funny enough, Steam and many of its games already work pretty well under Wine, and Stardock and its games aren't half bad as well. (though not on par with valve's stuff under wine)

Anyhow, Steam is probably coming to Linux for 2 reasons:
A significant enough number of people (probably a few percentage points) were identified as using Wine through valve's hardware profilers and...
They already had to rewrite their engines in OpenGL to port the Orange Box to PS3.

OpenGL for gaming sucks. Linux for gaming sucks. Mac for gaming sucks. Even most advocates of all the above mentioned garbage consider Windows to be at the least a Gaming Console.

Windows isn't a cage, it just happens to be an excellent option for gaming. I hate that Linux fanboys, and Mac fanboys act like Windows is nothing, and worthless, and dismiss the fact that %92+ of the world uses Windows for a reason. A lot of reasons. And games are made on it for another reason.

Stardock made a good choice going for the Games for Windows entitlement. Though I wish that they had used the Live support as well as ICO.

Microsoft certainly doesn't do everything right, and often not even most of it. But they do do a lot of things well. They just have to do it well for everyone at the same time or they get flak. Apple and Linux have to appease a tiny percentage of diehard fans. Microsoft has to appease those guys, and everyone else with every step. Or else they get labeled as a terrible company. I have to say, if they are a poorly run and operated company, I wish I was that inefficent as to be that successful.

1. Reading the article it's the Source engine they're looking to port. Not Steam. This means we could see a linux compatible version of Half Life 2 at some point. Not necessarily that we will see a Steam client for Linux.

2. Games supported under WINE/Transgaming etc. aren't usually done by the game developer themselves. Specifically in the case of Cedega, they have to patch in game-specific support.

As a part-time linux user myself, I've come to accept the fact that linux is not destined to be a gaming OS. Until either developers abandon DirectX, or someone figures out a 100% painless DX port for linux, you won't see a big move on linux games. Why? Because transitioning from a DX based engine to an OGL one is not in the least bit trivial. iD can do it because I believe their games are done in OpenGL to begin with, so getting it to run on Linux is a much simpler task for them (by comparison). UnrealEngine is built for both DX and OGL.

To get developers porting games to linux, there has to be a guarantee on the return on investment. If it takes 1 full time developer a year to port some game, then that game has to at least sell enough copies to cover the cost. To make it actually worth the time though it would have to make a lot more money than the cost to develop, otherwise it's a better value to have that developer work on the Windows version which is a better financial bet.

The platform needs a few big-name champions to make it viable, but in a market where a big-name game can cost in the millions of dollars to develop, that's a risk not many companies are generally willing to take.

VaultDweller

Note: I run Linux, but unlike many other open-source advocates, I don't have an inflated view of the significance of the Linux market to game developers.)

That's where I am. I have 6 computers in my house. Two run Windows: My wife's laptop, and my gaming rig. If games ran on Linux, I'd ditch Windows on that machine - but only because I have the ability to support my machines. Linux is not a mainstream OS, and won't be for a long time, if ever.

Fox451: Funny enough, Steam and many of its games already work pretty well under Wine,

There-in is the problem. "Pretty" well. I hear that argument from my fellow linux users all the time. I don't know bout you, but when I spend $50+ on a game, I want it to run perfectly, not just "good enough."

I had some games installed through Wine on my laptop for use on the road, and you know what? I said "screw it" and put a Windows partition on it just for games. It's easier and works better.

Zoomba: To get developers porting games to linux, there has to be a guarantee on the return on investment.

Ah, and there-in lies the rub: The culture and development of Linux apps is geared towards an open-source and -more often than not- free system. This makes it even less likely that a developer will see an ROI for Linux games.

Bottom line - I use Linux for much of my day-to-day computing, but for games I stick to Windows. Getting ticked that Linux doesn't have more games is like getting pissed at Wii for not having as many FPS as Xbox. They're two different cultures, and were designed for two different purposes.

Einlanzerous: OpenGL for gaming sucks. Linux for gaming sucks. Mac for gaming sucks. Even most advocates of all the above mentioned garbage consider Windows to be at the least a Gaming Console.

People might be more receptive if you didn't attack so openly. Just my 2 credits.