Slashdot Mirror
Steam Not Coming To Linux
dkd903 writes "A rumor has been going around for about four months that Valve was working on a Linux version of Steam and this had a lot of people in the Linux community very excited. But, Valve has now officially killed the rumor. And it is not what people wants to hear – there is no Linux version of Steam in development. Doug Lombardi, the Marketing VP of Valve Corporation, in an interview, has put an end to all the rumors by saying that they are not working on Steam for Linux right now."
It's not really a surprise. To begin with 99% of commercial games don't even have a Linux version, so there's nothing to sell to Linux gamers. You can't really rely on emulation either, if you sell the game as a Linux version you really have to do a native build. Then there are hundreds of different Linux distros and configurations which all work a little bit different. Also, just imagine the outcry about DRM and Valve not open sourcing Steam or it's games. The whole open source and everything-must-be-free mentality goes against businesses. You can already read here on slashdot how some people refuse to use Steam because it might go down in 50 years. This thinking is 100x worse with Linux users.
I think the problem with Linux is that those who develop it push their philosophy too much and refuse to give room for other philosophies, along with way too much spread ecosystem (distros, configurations, all the problems). There's a reason why we still haven't seen the year of Linux on desktop and probably never will. As much as I dislike Apple, if you want an UNIX based desktop OS you get a Mac.
Linux is for serious business. If you want to goof around, buy a Mac
Sure it's not a total loss, but that sort of thing is part of why OS/2 died and Windoze prevailed. OS/2 2.x+ had excellent Windows compatability up to the Win32s API's, which gave many developers little reason to target it with native versions of their code.
I don't see how much overhead it would take a developer to do a couple of tests against Wine for Linux targetable games. Wine is stable now and works pretty good. I have quite a pile of Loki ports and to be honest, the windows version usually works better with Wine on my modern linux system.
For non-free software, a binary is a binary is a binary, as long as it works I don't really sweat the API they've developed to.
Games require fast access to 3D, audio and controls. Having dozens of distros all doing things their own way is a PITA.
And the last time I heard someone talk about X, he was saying it's two decades behind in terms of what games require.
Like it or not, there has to be a single Linux distro with a single specific setup if you want companies to support Linux at all.
It would take just as long as testing on windows, and they'd sell a handful of additional copies as a result of that effort.
And that, in a nutshell, is why they won't bother.
I can't seem to follow this, nor get it straight in my mind.
It all started as rumors such as this one.
But, then, they announced that it was official and that Valve had announced that it would be launching a Linux version. I do not recall seeing any actual Valve announcement, but this news hit Slashdot like a "Microsoft-is-dead!"-news-issue: http://www.linuxjournal.com/content/its-official-steam-coming-linux
And they say:
We recently touched on one way of being a Linux gamer. Recent news that Valve Software will soon be releasing a Linux client promises to provide another option for Linux gamers. The news could not come at a better time as the world will shortly focus on gaming with the upcoming, industry-only E3 conference, the crown jewel of the gaming industry.
While there are still no details on the list of game titles that will be available, the announcement alone is reason for any Linux gamer to get excited. Steam is a content delivery system for gamers which allows you to buy and download game titles and related media, once you have the client installed.
So, how do we go from announced to "not happening". Was this "announcement" a fake? It seems like it was...otherwise someone is BS me...
Have you heard about SoylentNews?
Who is "They" and how many is a "lot"????
I use closed source nvidia drivers with no particular ethical issues.
Most linux users (more than 50%) would be perfectly happy if their favorite game
worked on linux whether it was closed source or open source, native linux or WINE.
As a linux user I will say his "holiness" Richard Stallman does not speak for me.
The reason your programs all work is that everybody is forced to live with the limitations and don't actually make the kind of programs that would have big problems with the different distros.
Like, for instance, closed-source modern games.
A contradiction in terms? On what do you base that claim exactly? Someone who has a crime on their record is a criminal, regardless of whether they're actively breaking the law or not. If you've ever paid a speeding ticket rather than (successfully) contesting it in court, you are by definition a law-abiding criminal.
Similarly, Anyone who takes any form of game seriously would meet the definition of 'serious gamer;' professional sports come to mind, as well as the 'serious business' gaming crowd. And one can be dedicated without being serious, just as one can take something seriously without being particularly dedicated to it.
"No, it isn't. You target SDL, OpenAL, et cetera. They work fine on the popular distributions, i.e. the ones you have to care about."
What about reliable unified sound support, hows that comming along?
What about reliable unified sound support, hows that comming along?
Uh, that's why you target SDL and OpenAL. Using the power of libraries, they take care of that for you.
Pirate Party UK
Seriously, Linux users cling to that as their one and only piece of proof that they pay, not realizing how pathetic it is. There are some major, major problems with that:
1) People made it a cross platform thing, they went out of their way to give more to "Show how good $platform is!" Fine, but that has nothing to do with their normal purchasing habits. They gave more this one time but that doesn't mean they regularly spend money on games.
2) More importantly, all the numbers are totally pathetic. Linux users paid $13 for 5 games. That is $2.60 per game. Are you fucking kidding me with that? That is supposed to show it as a valid market? Yes, Windows users gave less. Why? Because only the cheapskates were buying. Everyone else owned the games they wanted. I bought World of Goo back when it launched for $20 and considered it a deal. I paid more for one single title in that pack than Linux users paid for the whole damn thing. $20 is also a budget game title, I regularly pay more, as much as $50 for top tier titles.
So all it really shows is that Linux users are willing to spend a very small amount of money to try and "Prove there's a Linux market." Sorry, not buying the bullshit. You want to impress me? Show me that Linux users would pay retail for each of those games ($40-50). Yes I realize that's above the Windows price since they are indy, however that shows that the market is so hungry for games, they'll pay a lot. Also show me that they'll pay when they just want a game to play, not when they are specifically trying to have a content to make Linux look good.
You can't sell software to freetards
If you're wondering why you were modded "troll", your flaming the FOSS community in a Linux thread begs for a downmod.
After all, "INFORMATION WANTS TO BE FREE" is the freetard mantra
Free as in speech, idiot. You know what? Almost every Linux user has bought at least one copy of Windows, even if it was pre-installed and they wiped it.
BTW, a "freetard" is someone who is too retarded to understand the concept of freedom. That's you, son.
Free Martian Whores!