Valve publishes their own Linux Distribution

[Red Storm]

But the SteamBox will have no steam. (Yes, a pun!) They won't have a large library. They won't have any exclusives. They won't have the big multiplatform games like CoD and Madden, and if they do, the average CoD and Madden console player don't know who of what Valve / Steam is and are unlikely to go out on a limb and buy some console from them. Console gamers care a lot about exclusives. Valve has none. PC gamers say they consider getting a SteamBox, but why? For the same price, they can build a perfectly capable PC and play all their PC games on it in the living room.

If Valve, read as Gabe, tucked tail between legs and offered MS like $500 million and $25 for every console sold to license their DX libraries on whatever OS they put on it, it would by far be the best console ever released. However, they won't do this and it is in MS interest to not even accept the deal.

I remember all the doubters when Valve launched Steam. Look at them now. If anyone can do it, and by that I mean get developers to develop for Linux, it's Valve.

 

[smackababy]

I remember all the doubters when Valve launched Steam. Look at them now. If anyone can do it, and by that I mean get developers to develop for Linux, it's Valve.

Except this isn't some kind of software delivery platform. This is an OS (that already has a total of 15 non enterprise users world wide) with no traction in gaming. Game developers don't care about Linux and won't care about Linux unless Steam magically distributes millions of copies of their OS without any real apps on them.

 

[OVerLoRDI]

Because Valve actually gives a damn about gaming whereas Microsoft doesn't? While Valve continues to work on Steam and improving the experience Microsoft attempted to force a bloated DRM on us and charge PC gamers for online services, which they laughably failed at, and for the past few years they've done just about everything in their power to push PC gamers to the Xbox?

Why should gaming be tied to Windows? It's a bloated OS that costs money compared to a Linux distro that's much cheaper, light-weight, and secure. There is no reason at all why any gamer should be happy that Windows has a near monopoly on PC gaming.

Well driver maturity/availability is one primary concern. However, if the enthusiast crowds moves over, I'm sure AMD/NVidia will follow suit. It is the motherboard and accessory vendors I'm worried about (just like when Vista was released)

 

[OVerLoRDI]

I'm pro linux, but a couple of the biggest obstacles to linux gaming being a serious contender to Windows is:

1. A ridiculously large back catalog of content. I'm still able to play games from the Win9X days and XP days on the latest Windows versions with little to no difficulty. Steam is it's own worst enemy here because even though it's making a noble push into linux, the vast majority of it's content is for Windows and 5 years from now people will still maintain Windows as long as the content they purchase today stays functional. For many people, moving away from Windows now is like literally throwing away all the cash they've spent on Windows software since forever.

2. DirectX provides a full suite of capabilities for developers for sound, control, graphics, etc. Linux is decentralized. OpenGL is nice and can compete with Direct3D, but it is only one part of a larger equation. Microsoft gaming didn't appear in a vacumn and whether they get credit or not, MS via DirectX has done more for gaming stability than virtually any other platform. Maybe MS has been pushing Xbox more in recent years, but it is the latest Direct3D combined by attrition by numbers that pushes GPU evolution. In economics, it matters more where the money is than the virtue of any particular applicaiton.

I do believe linux will have a larger role in the future, but if anyone is expecting some sort of revolution I wouldn't hold my breath over it. There are many steps that have to be taken before Linux would be viable for the average mainstream user.

Dead on. Linux hasn't matured as a gaming platform nor are the drivers quite there yet.

It is going to be a pretty massive up hill battle.

 

[Maximilian]

Ugh what is with these people who hate on valve and everything they do...

They are clearly not pc gamers yet they have somehow ended up in the pc gaming sub-forum

 

[Imaginer]

Ugh what is with these people who hate on valve and everything they do...

They are clearly not pc gamers yet they have somehow ended up in the pc gaming sub-forum

It isn't hating on valve, it is that I feel that there is alot to overcome both from my perspective and from an overall use perspective, and implementation. Not to mention, it is reinventing the wheel all over again for both the game developers out there and hardware developers making for a platform.

 

[Imaginer]

In fact, if I hated Valve, I wouldn't have purchased over many games on their distribution store.

 

[slayernine]

so you want it to go from one monopoly to another?

Valve is the peoples monopoly.

 

[Jodell88]

Dead on. Linux hasn't matured as a gaming platform nor are the drivers quite there yet.

It is going to be a pretty massive up hill battle.

False, Linux has been ready for games for years and Valve's own games work faster on Linux than windows.

 

[Anteaus]

False, Linux has been ready for games for years and Valve's own games work faster on Linux than windows.

It's not that hard when all of your games are based on the nearly ten year old source engine.

If Valve really wants prove Linux is a legitiment platform for the future, they need to step up and develop a new game that not only uses the latest 3D technology but is also completely free of DirectX and runs well on the average linux machine. Getting Half-life 2 to run well on Ubuntu is a joke as it ran well on most Windows PCs at release in 2004.

Valve's back catalog might be enticing to current linux users who haven't used a Windows machine in many years, but for current Windows users no one is going to change platforms over some old games that they've already played to death.

Of course this is only based on the premise that Steam is trying to get non-linux users to adopt linux.

 

[BladeVenom]

Except this isn't some kind of software delivery platform. This is an OS (that already has a total of 15 non enterprise users world wide) with no traction in gaming. Game developers don't care about Linux and won't care about Linux unless Steam magically distributes millions of copies of their OS without any real apps on them.

15?

Tens of millions of people use Linux. That's not even counting Android Linux. You start counting Android, and Linux is actually more popular than Windows. Windows computers are on the decline.

You're just out of touch. Just look at Kickstarter. Most of the good crowdsourced games are going to support Linux:
Wasteland 2
Shroud of the Avatar: Forsaken Virtues
Project Eternity
Double Fine Adventure
Battle Worlds: Kronos
Torment: Tides of Numenera
Shadowrun Returns
Dreamfall Chapters: The Longest Journey
Broken Sword - the Serpent's Curse Adventure
The Banner Saga
Leisure Suit Larry
Carmageddon: Reincarnation

Kickstarter alone raised $83 million for game development last year.

Mobile is what's gaining the most popularity, and most of those developers are going to put their games on as many platforms as possible. So most casual and mobile games will have Linux support.

Independent developers are also starting to support Linux.

Old decaying dinosaurs like EA Games may keep on crapping out their endless sequels only for Windows computers, but almost all the developers I love are working on Linux games now.

So if you want to play Call of Duty 10, you're probably going to need Windows. If however you prefer to play intelligent games and indie games, then you'll have plenty of choices on Linux.

 

[blurredvision]

Tens of millions of people use Linux. That's not even counting Android Linux. You start counting Android, and Linux is actually more popular than Windows. Windows computers are on the decline.

Why would you count Android? Mobile games shouldn't even be considered in the same argument as desktop games.

 

[PhatoseAlpha]

If Valve is going to be successful like Android has been, they'll need to do what Google has done: Insulate the end users from Linux and the Linux community as much as possible.

 

[Jodell88]

It's not that hard when all of your games are based on the nearly ten year old source engine.

So ten years of optimizing a game engine for Windows and the OpenGl renderer destroys it on both Linux and Windows and you dismiss it.

If Valve really wants prove Linux is a legitiment platform for the future, they need to step up and develop a new game that not only uses the latest 3D technology but is also completely free of DirectX and runs well on the average linux machine.

This is not difficult since OpenGl and DirectX has feature parity. The only thing is they have more experience with DirectX than OpenGl.

Getting Half-life 2 to run well on Ubuntu is a joke as it ran well on most Windows PCs at release in 2004.

This statement is patently false.

 

[Red Storm]

15?

Tens of millions of people use Linux. That's not even counting Android Linux. You start counting Android, and Linux is actually more popular than Windows. Windows computers are on the decline.

You're just out of touch. Just look at Kickstarter. Most of the good crowdsourced games are going to support Linux:
Wasteland 2
Shroud of the Avatar: Forsaken Virtues
Project Eternity
Double Fine Adventure
Battle Worlds: Kronos
Torment: Tides of Numenera
Shadowrun Returns
Dreamfall Chapters: The Longest Journey
Broken Sword - the Serpent's Curse Adventure
The Banner Saga
Leisure Suit Larry
Carmageddon: Reincarnation

Kickstarter alone raised $83 million for game development last year.

Mobile is what's gaining the most popularity, and most of those developers are going to put their games on as many platforms as possible. So most casual and mobile games will have Linux support.

Independent developers are also starting to support Linux.

Old decaying dinosaurs like EA Games may keep on crapping out their endless sequels only for Windows computers, but almost all the developers I love are working on Linux games now.

So if you want to play Call of Duty 10, you're probably going to need Windows. If however you prefer to play intelligent games and indie games, then you'll have plenty of choices on Linux.

I forgot about Kickstarter, that's another thing that has helped push game development to also include Linux. Exciting stuff.

 

[BladeVenom]

Why would you count Android? Mobile games shouldn't even be considered in the same argument as desktop games.

Just because none of those mobile games appeal to you now, doesn't mean some in the future won't.

Games like Grand Theft Auto III, Minecraft, and even Baldur's Gate is being ported to mobile platforms. It won't be long until it's the other way around.

 

[blurredvision]

Just because none of those mobile games appeal to you now, doesn't mean some in the future won't.

Games like Grand Theft Auto III, Minecraft, and even Baldur's Gate is being ported to mobile platforms. It won't be long until it's the other way around.

I don't believe that for a second. Mobile games just cannot provide the breadth that PC/console gaming can provide. Going from PC/console to mobile is doable, with questionable controls and downsizing of the experience. But going from mobile to PC/console would be infinitely harder, especially considering the best and most well-known mobile games are ones that are specifically designed for touch. Porting a touch game to a keyboard or controller would either A) suck or B) not even be the same game.

I think you're living in a fairy tale world if you're hoping mobile becomes the lead platform any time soon.

 

[autoxerke]

Very interesting - the point that sticks out to me is that this isn't by itself enough to firmly establish Linux as a gaming platform for the general public, but that Linux would never be able to make that leap without some company with the deep pockets and commitment of Valve behind it.
With all the various distros of Linux out there, Valve having a 'Steamux' can turn to developers and say "make your game work on *this* platform and there will be a place to sell it"- what really needs to happen is the major engines need to work on the platform - get UE3/4 on it and that makes many games viable on the Steam Box.

TL;DR - necessary, but not sufficient

 

[ImpulsE69]

One thing you are forgetting is that if Steam releases it's own version of the OS, they will help be the support for the hardware (or steambox). One of the reasons Linux has never been that viable for gaming is because of all the splinter versions that require different drivers. A singular linux distro would solve much of that. How realistic it will be is another story...

 

[BladeVenom]

I don't believe that for a second. Mobile games just cannot provide the breadth that PC/console gaming can provide. Going from PC/console to mobile is doable, with questionable controls and downsizing of the experience. But going from mobile to PC/console would be infinitely harder, especially considering the best and most well-known mobile games are ones that are specifically designed for touch. Porting a touch game to a keyboard or controller would either A) suck or B) not even be the same game.

LOL at lumping console gaming in with PC gaming. What you're saying abut mobile gaming, has been said by PC gamers about console games.

Console games just cannot provide the breadth that PC gaming can provide. Going from PC to console is doable, with questionable controls and downsizing of the experience. But going from console to PC would be infinitely harder, especially considering the best and most well-known console games are ones that are specifically designed for gamepads. Porting a gamepad game to a keyboard and mouse would either A) suck or B) not even be the same game.

I think you're living in a fairy tale world if you're hoping mobile becomes the lead platform any time soon.

I'm not hoping it happens, it's just being realistic. Mobile gaming is where the fastest growth in gaming is happening. It will be the lead platform for some game studios.

 

[blurredvision]

LOL at lumping console gaming in with PC gaming. What you're saying abut mobile gaming, has been said by PC gamers about console games.

Let's be honest here, PC games and console games are essentially the same these days. They are often the same game, but either way, both offer bigger experiences and gameplay than what mobile can offer.

I'm not hoping it happens, it's just being realistic. Mobile gaming is where the fastest growth in gaming is happening.

You're looking a platform that is big for the simple fact that the vast majority of games are free, the rest are $0.99. Again, you can't compare this to the $40-$60 games on PC/console. If a developer wants a game to even have a chance at being successful on mobile, they need to offer it for $5 or, realistically, much less. Or, do the free-to-play method. Do you really think it would be viable to move those games to a PC/console with a much higher price point? The only other option is an XBOX Indie/Arcade/PSN type of store, where margins are low enough to where nobody really cares.

The day that mobile becomes the lead development platform is the day I bow down and kiss your feet.

 

[Anteaus]

One thing you are forgetting is that if Steam releases it's own version of the OS, they will help be the support for the hardware (or steambox). One of the reasons Linux has never been that viable for gaming is because of all the splinter versions that require different drivers. A singular linux distro would solve much of that. How realistic it will be is another story...

You actually make an interesting point, but not directly. A singular distro would solve many problems, but it flies in the face of what linux represents. If all linux users were funneled into one distribution just to have access to mainstream software, then I don't see how that's any better than using Windows or OSX, even if cash isn't traded for the OS itself. It would be dependent on proprietary drivers and proprietary software integrated into a proprietary distribution of a nonproprietary platform. Linux experts will be able to integrate Steam into their systems, but most mainstream users are simply going to take the easy route.

Basically it means that users get the same experience but developers make more money on the back end. This would be a lateral shift at best, although for many sticking it to MS is worth the effort lol.

My guess is that linux is going to continue as it always has. Power users are going to continue using whatever distros they prefer and of those users many will continue to believe in running pure GNU systems which means not adopting any of this.

I do believe that Linux is going to enjoy a larger install base, but of predominately mainstream distros such as Ubuntu. I know some linux users personally who don't mind distros like Ubuntu because it means getting more people into it, but deep down they hold it in contempt because it often serves the least common denominator of users. They automate the crap out of it to not scare people off, but the second it breaks people run back to Windows with their tails tucked. That behavior is why I'm skeptical of Linux becoming a major player unless some serious advances in usability are made.

 

[WaitingForNehalem]

I've been using Linux for years. In High School I built a server running CentOS and Samba for the engineering department complete with roaming profiles, group enforcement polices, and proper shared file permissions for the different users. I also built my own mail server, have used dozens of distros including DeLi Linux (based on Slackware, ultra barebones), and program in Linux on a daily basis. I am writing ARM assembly in Linux as we speak. However, there is absolutely no comparison between Windows and Linux as a desktop OS. Windows is far superior mainly because it is backed by a commercial entity. Without Google backing Android and having a clear vision, Android would get nowhere. It would still be using the terrible and obsolete X11 server with Compiz tacked on. Forget about a buttery smooth experience and say hello to tearing and frame rate drops.

In fact there are so many problems facing Linux that I couldn't name them all. However, this article does a good job of outlining most of them: http://linuxfonts.*********/why.linux.is.not.ready.for.the.desktop.current.html

I am so sick of reading comments by people that think Linux >> M$ Windoze just because they installed Ubuntu on their laptops. It amazes me how people could like Ubuntu and hate Windows. Ubuntu even has built in advertising from Amazon where all of your searches on the desktop are parsed in order to send back advertisements. Ubuntu is a joke and anyone that loves Linux for what it is will hate Ubuntu. Don't forget, without Windows we'd still be using the OS that shipped with our PCs, which is exactly what Apple still does now.

TLDR: Linux is terrible for the desktop and great for servers.

 

[Jodell88]

In fact there are so many problems facing Linux that I couldn't name them all. However, this article does a good job of outlining most of them: http://linuxfonts.*********/why.linux.is.not.ready.for.the.desktop.current.html

I have a major problem with the link you posted. Linux's shortcoming are well documented along with the reasons for them. The author only focuses on saying that it's bad but not why it's bad. He bashes the open source drivers for Nvidia and AMD but he does not say that the Nvidia drivers are reversed engineered or stuff of the like.

That is just one example and I could go on, but I don't want to derail this thread any further.

 

[theevilsharpie]

Why move your dependency from Microsoft over to Valve? Valve has innovated steam at a snails pace and has far fewer resources than Microsoft.

From an end-user's perspective, there's really no good reason. Windows works well enough, and while it has some shortcomings compared to Linux (and vice versa), moving to Linux isn't going to represent a fundamental shift in their experience.

From a developer's perspective, it's about survival.

Right now, Windows game developers are utterly dependent on Microsoft. Microsoft provides the libraries, the operating system, the development tools, everything. If Microsoft decides to take their software in a certain direction, game developers have no choice but to follow or exit the market. Up until Windows 7, this relationship has been been beneficial to developers, as Microsoft has served as a generally benevolent steward of the Windows platform by pushing the feature envelope while maintaining solid support and backwards compatibility, and developers have benefited from the stability that Windows has provided. However, Windows 8 has changed that relationship, as Microsoft is not only doggedly pushing Windows in a direction that consumers are rejecting, but they have also signaled a strong desire to move away from Windows' past open ecosystem to a walled garden with Microsoft as the sole gatekeeper.

In contrast to the Windows world, the building blocks of the Linux ecosystem are community controlled, and developers aren't beholden to a single entity. Also, since many of the fundamental components of a Linux desktop are licensed under the GNU GPL, the source code will forever be available to the community for as long as the community is willing to maintain it, which makes vendor lock-in impossible. Linux's open development environment, the ability to customize essentially every part of a Linux system, and the fact that you don't need a license to redistribute it are all big reasons why Linux the platform of choice for so many software "appliances" and embedded devices.

With respective to Valve, you could argue that the new boss (Valve) is the same as the old boss (Microsoft) with respect to locking in developers, and you would have a point. However, if a developer makes a Linux game and distributes it through Steam, moving to another distribution method would be technologically trivial. On the other hand, a developer would be absolutely screwed if they had a Windows game and needed to move away from Microsoft, as they would have to port the game to another platform, which they may not have the money, developer skill, or time to do.

1. A ridiculously large back catalog of content. I'm still able to play games from the Win9X days and XP days on the latest Windows versions with little to no difficulty. Steam is it's own worst enemy here because even though it's making a noble push into linux, the vast majority of it's content is for Windows and 5 years from now people will still maintain Windows as long as the content they purchase today stays functional. For many people, moving away from Windows now is like literally throwing away all the cash they've spent on Windows software since forever.

Linux can run Windows software via WINE. Granted, it's not a very good experience right now because most software developers don't support it, but it provides a viable path toward running older Windows software.

Before you laugh this off, consider the following scenario if Linux gaming does take off:

• New games are developed with Linux compatibility in mind, and will just work out of the box.
• Software distributors like Valve, GOG, etc. will have a strong interest in getting older Windows titles working, so they will have plenty of motivation to fund the development of WINE or a similar compatibility library. Legacy Windows titles would represent a static target, so compatibility would only improve as time goes on.
• Software developers will also have a strong interest in getting older Windows titles working, so they will have plenty of motivation to test their software with WINE or a similar compatibility library. Developers can package their software with known-good settings so that it works right out of the box, much like how developers package older DOS games today.

This is a hypothetical scenario, of course, but it serves to demonstrate that overcoming compatibility problems with Windows software is not as Herculean a task as it seems.

2. DirectX provides a full suite of capabilities for developers for sound, control, graphics, etc. Linux is decentralized. OpenGL is nice and can compete with Direct3D, but it is only one part of a larger equation. Microsoft gaming didn't appear in a vacumn and whether they get credit or not, MS via DirectX has done more for gaming stability than virtually any other platform. Maybe MS has been pushing Xbox more in recent years, but it is the latest Direct3D combined by attrition by numbers that pushes GPU evolution. In economics, it matters more where the money is than the virtue of any particular applicaiton.

Similar libraries exist for Linux, and Valve has hired a number of software engineers to continue developing those libraries. In this sense, Valve will serve the same role for Linux that Microsoft does for Windows.

I do believe linux will have a larger role in the future, but if anyone is expecting some sort of revolution I wouldn't hold my breath over it. There are many steps that have to be taken before Linux would be viable for the average mainstream user.

As has been mentioned before, Linux is already used by the mainstream user on many platforms. Tablets? Smartphones? Set-top boxes? Chances are it's either running Linux, some other type of UNIX clone.

The x86 desktop world is still dominated by Microsoft, but as has been clearly shown by Windows RT, Windows would not succeed on its own merits in today's market. The only thing keeping Windows relevant is inertia, and this can only go on for so long.

Look at today's market forces:

• Non-Windows platforms that use cross-platform libraries like OpenGL are becoming increasingly common, and developers are increasingly targeting multiple platforms to increase their potential market.
• Web applications are becoming more and more functional, and as rich web applications move away from Flash to HTML5, these applications are becoming inherently cross-platform.
• Tablets, smartphones, and other cheap computers are growing in market share, and as OEMs seek to decrease the cost of their products, Microsoft will be under increasing pressure to decrease the cost of Windows.
• As the market for full-priced Windows licenses shrinks, Microsoft will look for other means to generate revenue, which will provide a huge incentive to lock Windows applications into their App Store. If (perhaps when) this happens, developers will increasingly look to other platforms.

Microsoft is being pushed from multiple angles, and they are being pushed hard enough for them to stumble in the market after nearly 15 years of unquestioned dominance. While they undoubtably remain a giant in the x86 PC world, the market is in the process of tipping Microsoft over, and if Microsoft can't right themselves, they may wake up one day to find that Linux has reached the tipping point of mass acceptance.