Are Commercial Games Finally Going To Make It To Linux?

colinneagle writes "Those of us who actively promote Linux as a viable desktop alternative to Windows are often greeted with the following refrain: 'Nobody will use Linux because there are no good games.' The prevailing wisdom is that the abundance of high-quality, commercial video gaming is a key factor in the market-share dominance that Microsoft Windows enjoys. And, in all reality, this is somewhat true. So, then, the obvious course of action is to convince the video game publishers and developers of the world that Linux is a viable (if, perhaps, a bit niche) market. And by 'viable' I mean one thing and one thing only – 'profitable.'Luckily, there have been three high-profile recent examples of Linux users going absolutely nuts over video games, forking over their hard-earned cash in the process: the Humble Indie Bundle (drawing in huge numbers of sales — for a DRM-free product, no less — with sales numbers by Linux users consistently beating out sales to MacOS X users); Canonical's Ubuntu Software Center (where video games make up the top 10 paid software packages); Valve's announcement that it is bringing the Steam store, and community portal, to Linux desktop (specifically Ubuntu). Will the indie game developers (along with Valve) reap the bulk of the rewards that releasing games on Linux is offering...or will some of the big publishers realize what they're missing out on and join in the fun?"

Comments

Sure!

[pietromenna]

But only when they see that it makes sense and it will not require too much technical work to allow some! Ahhrg by the way! First post!

Re:Sure!

[DragonTHC]

here's the text for lazy people.

Here is my prediction for the next big thing in PC games.
live DVDs. You’ll get your game on a live DVD that runs a custom operating system or perhaps Linux to make it easy. A huge portion of the overhead costs for games involves support. If publishers could control the environment their software runs in, end-user support costs drop dramatically. The real hurdle to overcome? Driver support. Though, when publishers cross the live DVD bridge, I’m sure hardware manufacturers will jump onboard and sure up some unified driver technology like Nvidia and ATI already have.
This all makes it much easier to play games and easier still to troubleshoot them. What about copy protection you ask? CD keys still work for online play. Why not have a game run its own operating system from a usb thumb drive? this allows the publisher to add dongle-type hardware to the usb thumb drive if they so choose to add that level of copy protection.
You heard it all here first.

Valve thinks so.

[Nyder]

Seems like the case.

http://www.engadget.com/2012/07/16/valve-makes-steam-for-linux-official/

http://www.pcgamer.com/2012/09/13/steam-linux-client-release-looks-imminent-games-and-beta-spotted/

http://tech2.in.com/news/pc/steam-greenlight-lists-games-for-linux/435732

Re:Valve thinks so.

[lowlymarine]

The problem is, the Source engine already exhibits a lot of really bizarre performance behavior. They say that on Linux with OpenGL they're seeing performnace improvements over Windows with DirectX (with no mention of IQ), but on Windows the OpenGL engine is slightly slower (~10%), and on OS X the OpenGL engine is about 65% of the speed of the DirectX implementation on Windows and has noticeably lower image quality. Source also has wildly different performance on otherwise comparable AMD and nVidia cards. I've even had systems that used to run TF2 just fine a year or so ago, and now are a stuttery mess with the same settings on the same maps with the same number of players, for no readily apparent reason. And of course we're dealing with framerates in the 300+ FPS range for the Source engine on high-end hardware these days, where huge differences can be the result of otherwise tiny factors, as actual GPU performance is marginalized next to things like driver overhead; that wouldn't be the case for, say, Unigine or UE4.

I think if we're honest, Valve's big complaint about Windows 8 has nothing to do with "performance" or expected sales, it's more about "waah we were about to launch an application store but now thanks to Microsoft's we won't have a virtual monopoly on that for Windows."

Re:Valve thinks so.

[Sir_Sri]

And they're porting to linux as a hedge against a massive failure of windows 8 and an abandoning of the Microsoft platform.

For the vast vast vast vast majority of developers the added overhead of a mac version, let alone a linux version isn't worth the investment at this time. Activision is even cutting out windows XP support (and that still has `12% of the PC game marketshare: http://store.steampowered.com/hwsurvey for august). If you look at overall operating system marketshare, windows has about 91% of the overall market, Mac around 7, Linux 1, and then you're into the margin of error on reporting. Linux just isn't a market worth investing in unless you can count on a few tens of thousands of copies or you're looking at it as an investment in a future platform.

What this tells us is likely that valve is looking at doing a linux console (sort of like the PS3), but based around steam, as a potential future product, especially if windows 8 is as much of a disaster as it seems to be *and* windows marketshare starts to tank. I could also (or instead) see them using a steam cloud of linux servers streaming content, rather than selling you a box too, it is still easier to run a huge linux server farm than windows server farm (especially given the licensing issues with doing that with windows). That doesn't mean anyone else wants in on this plan particularly, but for Valve, who are trying to keep themselves relevant in a world of windows App stores and consoles that have their own clouds they need to be trying all sorts of stuff to keep people using Steam. They can make money on a half life 3, portal 3 etc, but keeping Steam afloat in a Windows 8/9 world presents some serious challenges.

Like Mac, the linux numbers are going to under-report 'gamer' types, because people who play games switch to windows right now, even if they would rather game on Linux. But it's still a very very small market to try and serve, especially when games usually work under Wine so why do any work for 'native' linux when you don't have to? The Eve guys gave up because they couldn't match Wine performance after all, and while WoW runs on Linux they also have an infinite pile of money to throw at the problem, and something like steam, they want to be everywhere in case the PC business completely transforms overnight.

Re:Valve thinks so.

[symbolset]

No, they're porting to Linux as a hedge against the success of Windows 8. Valve has an app store they get a huge fraction of their income from. Since Windows 8 will have its own Windows Marketplace app store, Microsoft is unlikely to be friendly to Valve's store. In fact, Independent Software Vendors with valuable markets in Windows that Microsoft decides to want tend to start having issues running in Windows at all. Microsoft has decided they want Gaben's Steam marketing revenues - and probably the games money too now, and Gaben knows that once they decide that the party is over in Windows - they cannot be dissuaded, negotiated with, or convinced. He knows this because he used to work there.

So Valve needs a new platform for their game engines, games and game store to run on because Windows 8 is not going to work. Since Apple has the same app store issues and Linux doesn't, Linux it is.

Re:Valve thinks so.

[Sir_Sri]

Even future Windows Updates will break Valve's game engine for no good reason.

That doesn't even make sense. Much as I have been trying to persuade them, microsoft is not interested in making or selling game engines. There's a big difference between the directx API and a game engine, and MS isn't in the latter business at all, despite the fairly compelling case for there to be some serious software companies selling game engines at tiered pricepoints with tiered support.

I can now safely say that Valve isn't going to get the early access to Windows 9 they would need to stay competitive.

Again, that doesn't make any sense. Anyone who pays for MSDN access can get early access to windows 9, and, somewhat surprisingly, directx 8 code still works on windows 8, so there's not real reason to believe that source engine games are suddenly going to stop working any more than anything else could suddenly stop working.

Except for anti-malware/antivirus vendors. Those folk really have nowhere else to go

They're usually security companies, not just AV companies. There's still a market for intrusion detection, forensics, recovery etc. There is even a place for malware protection on linux and mac if they ever pick up market share, and there's a place for AV on mobile devices these days too.

You're talking a lot of nonsense unfortunately.

Maybe

[Sycraft-fu]

It'll depend on two big things:

1) The willingness of Linux users to pay for software. Big name games are not going to go OSS, they are not going to be free, they are not going to function off of donations. They cost too much money for that. When you sink $10-30 million in making a game, you have to have a way to make it back. Unfortunately I've met more than a few Linux users who think all software should be no cost, they are just unwilling to consider paying for something. Others will pay, but only a small amount. So we'll have to see how many people are willing to pay, if it is enough to cover the costs of porting and supporting.

2) Linux getting a better graphics setup. Right now there's a real problem with regards to using modern features of GPUs. The binary nVidia drivers provide OpenGL 4.2 and are fast and stable, but that is about it. So if a game wants to use new technology, and more and more do, then there's a real issue with what you support. Ask Mozilla about the problems they had with GPU acceleration under Linux. It was a case of "It works well with binary nVidia, but has X crashing bugs with anything else." That isn't a setup that will be ok for many game companies, particularly if the expectation is that they scale things back or do tons of work and hacking to support various chips/drivers, since that'll increase the cost of doing it.

It'll all come down to money, as it always will in business. The desktop Linux market is not that large so there isn't a huge amount of people to tap in to. Thus how with it it will be will depend on what percentage of people will pay, and what it costs to support. If a high percentage of people are willing to pay for the games, and ports are rather easy, then you probably will see it on the uptick.

I mean if I'm running a publisher and the finance people say "For about $50,000 in development testing and support we can add Linux as a platform and even conservatively we can expect $500,000 in additional sales, and $1,000,000 is fairly realistic," well I'll do it. Why not? Even if I'm looking at $100,000,000 in sales on other platforms a small investment with a good reward is a great idea.

However it is is more along the lines of "It'll cost us at least $500,000 to get everything working and there will still be bugs with AMD cards, and at best we could see maybe $600,000 in sales, but realistically probably half that or less," then I'll say no. It is not worth the risk of lost money for a small potential of a small reward. Just stick with the other platforms.

So at this point, we really can't say. We'll have to see how Valve does, and in particular some of the Kickstarted games. The Linux people were very, very vocal so many games added a Linux port. However we'll have to see what it ends up taking to make, how well it works, and how Linux sales of it goes. That'll likely determine if those companies try Linux again, and other companies will see their success or failure and decide what to do.

Re:Maybe

[symbolset]

Gabe Newell used to work at Microsoft. He knows about Stac and Sendo, WordPerfect, Novell, Lotus, Aldus, Borland, Netscape and the entire litany of other companies Microsoft decided had had enough time to develop an interesting basket of customers to steal. He knows Microsoft has now decided to have his share, and he cannot defeat them while working on their operating system. That strategy always fails because Microsoft deliberately makes the operating system incompatible with their victims' software. Always. He knows he cannot win on Windows in the long term.

That doesn't mean he's abandoning Windows immediately. Of course not. The money's still coming in and there's no reason to throw it away. But right here in this thread are the first trickle of "increasingly glitchy, unreliable, unstable..." that eventually will become a flood not because Valve suddenly forgot how to write code, but because the ware cannot transcend an OS that deliberately undermines it. It is just not possible . It's not Gabe that's going to take Valve on Windows away from you: it's Microsoft, who will make it work worse and worse until you uninstall it.

So the man has no choice. It's this or fold your tent and retire to your private island.

Linux has no advantage over windows....

[blahplusplus]

... when it comes to games. If linux made a performance distro FOR games that was significantly faster then windows in terms of framerates/etc only then would people think of changing.

Re:Linux has no advantage over windows....

[FunPika]

Valve has been getting faster FPS (but not by a huge amount) in Linux than in Windows.

Windows (DirectX): 270.6 FPS
Windows (OpenGL): 303.4 FPS
Linux: 315 FPS

Re:Conventional wisdom is wrong about why Windows

[moj0joj0]

I began using Microsoft operating systems in the late 1980's. I used them every single day that I used a computer until about a year ago when I decided to give Ubuntu a try.

I now use Ubuntu every single day I use a computer, I do reboot occasionally to use Windows for games, aside from that I do not use Windows at all.

The only shortcomings I have come across is my dependence upon Photoshop (yes, I now run PS in wine) and that of my games. Aside from that, every other thing for which my computer is used, Ubuntu just works, and does works with more stability that Windows has ever shown in more than 2 decades of use.

So when you say "runs circles around those same offerings on Linux" I will have to disagree, in fact, that statement is only partially true under some circumstances for specific applications, the exception rather than the rule. As a Linux n00b, I have more stability, better response, less overhead and an all around better experience than Windows.

Re:More problems than that

[pnot]

A big problem is just the concept of source distribution and the command line.

"Source distribution"? "Command line"? Where are you posting from, 1995?

as long as a legit response to a problem is "Oh just recompile your kernel," then it is forever destined not to be the everyman's OS

Good thing that stopped being the case about ten years ago, then...

Re:Wrong question

[Tastecicles]

HP is very well covered on Linux. As is Oki and Brother.
Disclaimer: I use all three, on SuSE 9.2 Pro.
Or are you talking about toy printers (Lexmark, Canon) with ink that costs more than premium champagne?

Ya but you can't do that

[Sycraft-fu]

The thing is that OS overhead on Windows isn't all that high. It offers pretty efficient access to the GPU, particularly if you use DX10 or newer (which games are starting to do more and more). So there isn't huge gains to be made in Linux. Even if you designed the most optimized path possible, it just wouldn't offer 2x improvement. It might not even offer a 5% improvement.

As it stands right now I don't know what if any improvements it would offer. Valve has a small improvement, however you have to remember that is with very old code on Windows, and a new port on Linux. If they went back and optimized their Windows renderer the difference might shrink, vanish, or even go the other way. We need more information to see generally if there is any performance improvement and from this data point if there is, it is probably quite small.

I highly doubt it

[Sycraft-fu]

I see a few big problems:

1) Hardware/drivers which you touch on, but is bigger than you think. I am going to be all kinds of pissed off when I buy a new graphics card and instead of just working with all my games, but faster, as it does now, it works with nothing because none of them have drivers. I then have to wait for each and every game to update, which many, particularly old ones, won't do. This is a really major issue, PC gamers are not going to accept the concept of having to stick with the same hardware forever to play games, and having to give up games when they do change.

2) Multi-tasking. Part of the reason to own a PC is to be able to do more than one thing at once. This includes in games. With my PC I can chat on Teamspeak, listen to MP3s, and play a game all at the same time. With a live DVD I couldn't do that, unless all the programs I happened to want were included.

3) Game size. Many games are pushing past one DVD in size now. If you are doing a live system, there are interesting challenges to trying to have swappable DVDs.

4) Access time. A big advantage of PC gaming is having low load times. Things stream fast of a HDD, and lightning fast of an SSD. DVDs crawl by comparison. People are not going to want that.

5) Launch time. Right now, if I want to play a game on my system, I just run it. I can be in game in seconds. No big commitment, I don't even have to close whatever I was doing, just come back to it after. With a live DVD I have to shut down everything, reboot my system, and a slow reboot at that since it is off DVD, just to play the game.

6) Now the biggie: The rise of digital distribution. Gamers and game companies are all about the concept of direct downloads. That really doesn't work with live DVDs. Nobody is interested in downloading an ISO, burning it to DVD, and rebooting their system. They are interested in downloading and playing. Heck companies are working (with some success in the MMO market at least) on letting you stream in assets so you can play before the download completes. It is all about less cost for the companies, more convenience for the consumer.

The window for this idea is long past.

Re:Well that's wonderful

[pnot]

I'll make sure to let our Linux support lead know. He's been bashing his head against a wall trying to get SimpleScalar to compile on our systems for a class to use.

Right. Let's just recall what you were asserting here: that the "everyman" won't use Linux because he finds the command line "scary". Now your "everyman" (who, it suddenly turns out, is also your Linux support lead) wishes to install SimpleScalar, a "system software infrastructure used to build modeling applications for program performance analysis, detailed microarchitectural modeling, and hardware-software co-verification". Despite his evident technical acumen, Everyman is terrified by the notion that he must run a compiler to perform detailed microarchitectural modelling.

"Sod this" says Everyman. "I'm going back to Windows!".

Then he discovers that, on Windows, you also have to build SimpleScalar from source. Poor old Everyman! He should never have applied for that job as Linux Support Lead.

Re:Wrong question

[vlueboy]

I looked around for Linux printers, but realized nothing out there fit the small space that my currently uncooperative Lexmark takes up. I was facing the same rarity issue as those seeking 14 inch 4:3 LCDs. Single function color inkjets are going extinct, and my space fits were a dubious Canon Mobile an HP 100 Mobile I had vaguely seen online at some point. one. Paid $300 for the HP and my old jam-loving Linux-hating clunker will get canned when it runs out of ink.

I still do not understand why HP keeps Linux support hidden from us savvy shoppers, despite supporting MacOS X and including a whole addendum sheet about some post-print MacOS 10.7 gotcha inside the box. I was forced to use my smartphone to google the Linux support bit at the store before approving my purchase --salesperson had no clue because their stickers and even site has no clue, of course. Confirmation came straight out of the HP site in a google search, even. What gives? That's just like the nice surprise of IPv6 support in my 2009 high-end home router... maybe they don't want to cut into their own business-tier profits? But HP OfficeJets are supposedly already in the business tier.

Gnome 3 and Unity had turned me off, so I froze Ubuntu at 2010 versions until the laptop died this year. I thought I'd just keep linux in VM's forever in the new one, so my newfound Linux support allows me to give Linux another chance as a main OS in a dual-boot setup.
Pro-tip: Skip HP's urge to install their printer utilities by skipping autorun and manually using the Windows Add Printer wizard. I think the utils make sense only if you want new-fangled e-mail printing, or if you need control of scanner and fax features after buying some 20"x10" desk hog whose special features are best left for your office. My Oracle VM had no trouble letting Mint find and use the printer with no fuss.

Re:Wrong question

[donaldm]

I still do not understand why HP keeps Linux support hidden from us savvy shoppers

I could not agree more, it's almost if the company is embarrassed by this and I used to work for HP at one stage, however I never had any issues with printing from a Linux machine via CUPS and that includes low and high end printers, colour and black and white, so I always recommend HP printers although I would think that most brands would work as well.

Normally when adding a new printer to CUPS under Linux I let the software download the correct drivers and from personal experience all the important printing features just work. I have found that HP printers have a very good web interface that allow you scan or fax (if supported by the printer) and since Linux has support for many web browsers the controlling and extracting info from or even too a printer is intuitive and simple to do.

Re:Conventional wisdom is wrong about why Windows

[Gnulix]

I actually hear this allot however I would normally reply "Use the GIMP" which IMHO is just as good as Photoshop.

No, GIMP is not as good as Photoshop. It is however quite competent for the things that most people need to do with an image editing program. For everyday users I would recommend GIMP, but for professional artists and photographers Photoshop is a better choice.

Wine

[hobarrera]

Why do people keep forgetting wine? Every day, more and more games work out of the box. Several high end big commercial games just worked perfectly out of the box the day they were release in recent months with no issues at all (ie: Mass Effect 3).

I think what's still missing is promoting wine if you want people to game on linux.

However, I should point something out; if you care about FLOSS, you then you wouldn't promote stuff like Steam (DRM-infested), which goes completely against FLOSS.