• Deceptichum@kbin.social
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    7
    arrow-down
    8
    ·
    11 months ago

    No.

    He wants the Steamdeck user base to be 10 million, so it’s large enough to support a player base that can generate revenue if targeted.

    And frankly it’s not a him problem. Nearly every dev refuses to release on Linux (and Mac) because of its small user base.

    • Annoyed_🦀 @monyet.cc
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      11
      ·
      11 months ago

      Support for Steam Deck != support for Linux version. Steam Deck use Proton to run Windows game on linux seamlessly.

      Their direct competitor, Apex Legend, is steam deck verified. Big games like Monster Hunter World/Rise, Cyberpunk, Baldurs Gate 3, Elden Ring, etc etc, all steam deck verified. Check out this page for more info

      It’s not a Linux problem, it’s a Tim Sweeny problem.

      • MinekPo1 [She/Her]@lemmygrad.ml
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        11 months ago

        Support for Steam Deck != support for Linux version.

        You are correct , however proton ( and the upstream project wine ) is made for linux not the steam deck , ie a game which works on the steam deck will work on linux in most cases .

        proton / wine can also be used to run a lot of non game software made for windows ( though proton is made explicitly for games ) , though I will admit steam has the best ux around running software using wine or proton .

        but yes it is a Tim Sweeney problem , not a Linux problem .

        something I will also add is that they have at least part of the game running on linux already , unless they are paying a fortune in both licencing and lost performance by running the games servers on windows .

    • ShortN0te@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      9
      ·
      11 months ago

      10 million is just an arbitrary number he will not honor when it is reached.

      Valve has sold ‘multiple millions’(source) already. The 10 million will probably be reached soon. Not even to mention all the Linux users.

      And frankly it’s not a him problem. Nearly every dev refuses to release on Linux (and Mac) because of its small user base.

      Yes it is. He does not have to release for Linux. He just needs to allow the anti cheat to run on Proton. This is a simple config change not more. Fortnite will probably run fine on Proton.

    • macniel@feddit.de
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      6
      ·
      11 months ago

      It’s one thing to not release for Linux (thanks to wine and proton it’s no Biggie) another thing is to actively sabotage it to run on Linux which some Developers who can’t check a fricking Checkbox in EAC do.

      • sugar_in_your_tea@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        11 months ago

        Not preventing Linux use is implicit support, and it opens up another platform for cheaters to exploit. So if it works and your entire game is based on the online, MP experience, you need to QA on all possible platforms to stay on top of cheaters.

    • stardust@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      11 months ago

      With that mind set explains why Epic was so late into trying to get into PC distribution.

        • stardust@lemmy.ca
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          11 months ago

          And look how late they were when it came to launching their own digital platform. I’m not taking about games being on PC.

          This is a company that saw consoles more worth putting resources towards and didn’t see it worth it too start their own Steam competitor even back in 2008.

          https://news.softpedia.com/news/Tim-Sweeney-Says-the-PC-Is-Dead-for-Games-80714.shtml

          They had many chances to become the go to digital platform for PC.

          • Deceptichum@kbin.social
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            3
            arrow-down
            4
            ·
            11 months ago

            Every gaming company basically thought the PC was dead for gaming, only to be relegated to nerd paying high prices for hardware to play niche nerdy shit.

            Honestly I still don’t know what changed, even Japanese devs are releasing on PC again, it’s a weird time.

            • ampersandrew@kbin.social
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              3
              ·
              11 months ago

              PC gaming has only had a slow, steady rise since Steam entered the scene. But perhaps one other catalyst might have been the Games For Windows initiative (not “Live”) that standardized controller support, added some extra marketing oomph, and gave more incentive to make the same game on PC and console rather than making two entirely different games (sometimes with the same title, like Ghost Recon Advanced Warfighter).

            • stardust@lemmy.ca
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              edit-2
              11 months ago

              Well apparently Valve didn’t get the memo. By the time PS3 came out and the further into the Gen it got it became clearer that digital was the way forward. And you’d think a company with PC roots would have gotten their own digital distribution platform started once steam sales caught on.

              The whole everyone thought pc was dead excuse is a poor one because Epic took until 2018 to bother with their own distribution platform. That’s a hell of a long time and too many years from the PC is dead excuse.

              That’s what I mean by many many many missed chances. They had over a decade to enter as it became more and more obvious the money there was to be made from PC gamers.

              • sugar_in_your_tea@sh.itjust.works
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                11 months ago

                Why should they have a distribution platform? Pretty much every game except Gears of War had a Windows release, and at least I never considered a digital distribution platform as a kid since boxed games worked just fine. I didn’t have a Steam account until Steam came to Linux, yet I played plenty of PC games in the meantime on both Windows and Linux. I bought a mixture of boxed games and online downloads, I didn’t need a launcher to do that for me.

                Yes, they missed the boat, but it wasn’t obvious that the boat was going where they wanted to go. Valve took that risk and won big, but other large studios didn’t and were absolutely fine focusing on game dev, and it wasn’t until recently that they wanted in.

          • stardust@lemmy.ca
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            3
            ·
            edit-2
            11 months ago

            Yes that’s correct. They seemed dismissive of it even back in 2008 seeing more cons than potential in the market. It’s like the Windows approach to smartphones entering in after Android and iOS established themselves. Except even later with years and years passing as it became clearer PC gaming was becoming more accessible and it’s own formidable market. They missed a lot of earlier chances to enter.

            https://news.softpedia.com/news/Tim-Sweeney-Says-the-PC-Is-Dead-for-Games-80714.shtml