Valve Joins the Linux Foundation
probain sent in this excerpt from Engadget "In case Valve's multi-tiered investment in Linux gaming weren't clear enough from SteamOS, the Steam Controller, and Steam Machines, the company's also joining the ranks of The Linux Foundation membership. Valve Linux head Mike Sartain calls the news, 'one of the many ways Valve is investing in the advancement of Linux gaming;' he sees the move as yet another step for Valve toward its bigger goal of popularizing accessible Linux-based gaming."
Cloudius Systems and the HSA Foundation also joined the Linux Foundation today.
Though I have to say that their announcements are 10 years too late, I feel that Valve's experience of their investing their system in this minority platform must be paying off. Why would they continue otherwise.
They get a viable console OS platform, for "free", with community support. They get a reputation as being "the" Linux gaming vendor (like transgaming etc. were). They get to bring their games to new platforms and push driver issues through Intel etc. cooperation to get themselves some influence in the industry from multiple angles.
And they are obviously seeing that their investment in Linux and even small things like SDL (which I believe is the backend of much of the Steam client, not to mention the browser components they use) is paying dividends for them.
Good on them, I say. It *is* a niche platform, but they are driving it hard and seeing what it can do for them, rather than just waiting until it has 25% market share before they do anything about it (which is the standard attitude among software and hardware companies). And they are doing lots of things they don't NEED to be doing. They've pretty much held off the Windows marketplace junk, so they don't need that 1% of Linux users jumping on board, nor would they make a huge difference even if they hadn't shielded themselves against the Windows Store.
I have used the Linux Steam client. It's just like Steam, but on Linux. I have played some of my games on Linux (88 supported out of 500+), and they work just like they do on Linux (even though that's much more dependent on the software developer, but the Valve titles are especially nice). Big picture mode was needed once we all started having widescreen TV's with HDMI, and it delivers. The next logical step is to make a box that just plays Steam and goes out on HDMI and if you have that kind of backing and prior success on Linux, why pay for Windows (even if that's only true for the first few revisions of the hardware)?
But they've taken it further - rather than just bash out a cheap PC-clone console, they are redesigning controllers, reprogramming their games around them, looking into the new VR trend, and trying to make it a machine that not just they can build. That's going above-and-beyond, as far as I'm concerned, so they deserve recognition for it, even if they are doing it purely for profit reasons.
The only downside is that people have been saying for 10 years how this should have been started on, and it took too long to get there. But we're there now.
Well done, Valve. Looking forward to buying a Steam console next Christmas when all these XBox and PS crap that I've never touched are just memories.
Maybe we can completely get rid of windows in the future if all games are playable on GNU/Linux.
Agree with Steam's business model or not, having Valve of all companies pushing gaming on Linux is going to reap enormous benefits for completely unrelated features.
I did not post the parent comment. Just so you know.
A Steambox will be a worthy addition to our home entertainment system. I trust Valve to put together a compelling experience.
With Valve's commitment to the Linux Foundation more game houses should see interest in Linux as a gaming platform, and more manufacturers will hopefully look to bring the unique benefits of their products to this growing ecosystem. This can only be good for competition.
Help stamp out iliturcy.
I imagine a massive influx of new kernel developers. Let's be honest -- most gamers will probably tweak and recompile their kernel to eek out a few cycles of improvements on tcp, memory allocation, graphics performance, context switching etc. Some of them will probably keep their patches to themselves (it's all about the frags) but some will probably get involved. I just hope Linus and other maintainers can avoid being total douchebags.
Do you even lift?
These aren't the 'roids you're looking for.
I don't think it is not a problem of kernel level. I believe most devs that do multi-platform use multi-platform SDKs that support xbox360, ps3 and windows only (soon to be xboxOne, ps4 and windows only). That is the reason they don't do Mac either even though macs have a pretty big userbase. What Valve needs is not to get the devs, but the SDK makers.
By SDK I mean the tools, the havok physics engine, the unreal engine, the cry engine and so on.
I kinda grew fond of it being on the Desktop.
The only one that I can think of right offhand, Unity3D, might export to a Linux-playable format, but does not actually provide any environment that can be run within Linux. There is, as far as I am aware, absolutely no intent to change this anytime soon. This design decision carries some problems with it that inherently make it highly unlikely to expect it to significantly increase the Linux mind-share in the world of gaming.
File under 'M' for 'Manic ranting'
I would switch on my upcoming desktop from Windows to Linux if all my games would work on it, and also some other things like Adobe tools. I'd much rather have Linux for work-related reasons than Windows on my desktop.
If Steam could get Linux Support for a lot of games, it could put Windows between rock and the hard place with gamers. They seem to be making this SteamOS to be something like playstation, but I hope they could also bring it to the desktop (even if it's a custom-installation). I hope the games they make, also support desktop-based Linux gaming. Playing straight console ports on PC is not worth it. I have no problem with consoles though, but they serve a different style of games.
Although if Apple started shipping some customizable Mac's without double the price of PC hardware (allow proper customization) and Mac supported bigger number of games, I would use Mac over either Linux or Windows on desktop. The perks of Mac just aren't good enough if I have to pay even 30% more for hardware, that is not very suitable for games (I don't need Xeon for gaming), when I can buy a decent PC and OC with 20% of the price tag. Maybe Apple has bad rep among gamers but I think they'd have low-hanging fruit if they started focusing on beating Windows on desktop without catering to some niche market of over-priced furniture buyers. Maybe the money is moving away from PC market but it still seems like a low-hanging fruit for me. Gaming on desktop is still on another level compared to other platforms (some of which are complementary rather than rivalry).
But the devil is in the details, and there's a lot of things that could fail which would make me switch back to Windows in an instant. Something as a simple as inability to turn v-sync off etc. would be major problems for me, but probably not for most of the gamers. Also I imagine any company could fail a lot of things when making an operating system (I'm waiting for C++-esque rant by Torvalds). I hope they bring the right people on board.
That's really cool! I will finally be able to replace my notebook S.O, only reason i still keep the windows around is to play some games.
Likely to be pushed out of sight by the Elite:Dangerous kick starter that was successful earlier this year, which has David Braben working on it.
As yet, it's all pretty pictures and talk, but they got £2m just from the kickstarter. Star Citizen, in comparison, is something I'd never heard of until you linked it - and seems to have been running for longer.
(P.S. $2.5m stretch goals to add "an additional flyable ship"?)
Not that I'm knocking either - hell, I probably want both - but it's going to be a struggle and neither are going to be ready for YEARS.
PlayStation 4 is based on parts of FreeBSD, but so is OS X. There might be as little userland-facing code shared between a typical FreeBSD with X11 operating system and the PlayStation 4 operating system as there is between FreeBSD and OS X, or between Android and X11/Linux.
Direct Android compatibility.
(Potentially)
I don't see how. The OpenGL on desktops isn't the same as the OpenGL ES on devices that ship with Android. The input is too different, requiring the entire game to be rebalanced for a touch screen. And in my experience owning three Android devices, audio latency ranges from laggy to unplayable. If all that mattered were the kernel and components close to the kernel, every PS4 game would run on a Mac just because both systems use pieces of FreeBSD.
I was under the impression that it took a lot more work to remaster a game for a new platform than to remaster a movie for a new video format. Video conversion is essentially automated once you have the lossless or nearly lossless source data. Game conversion, on the other hand, may need an emulator, and entry-level Steam OS devices might not have enough CPU power to run one.
As I see it, the Steam eco-system will be no different than the current consoles (XBox, PS4).
I see up to four potential differences.
If you can manage to write a Windows game and then a Mac port or an Android app of it, then chances are you can target any platform you like as easily as anything. If you didn't, the problem isn't lack of tools to do so.
And one of these problems is input, which is probably the biggest practical difference among a PC, a console, and a "mobile" device. For example, even if you can port your desktop game's game logic, graphics output, and audio output to Android, that doesn't mean the resulting game's input will make any sense unless you're on an OUYA. I tried playing platformers in an NES emulator on a Nexus 7 tablet, and pretending a flat sheet of glass is a gamepad is not fun. A Steam Controller will probably handle like a Triax Turbo Touch 360 given the pictures I've seen of it.
Elite Dangerous may have raised 2.5 million on the kickstarter, but Star Citizen was 6 million during the kick starter campaign. Funding has continued and Star Citizen is now up to 34 million dollars at the time of this writing and climbing fast. I'm sure you've heard of Wing Commander? Freelancer? Privateer? All Chris Roberts games, who is leading Star Citizen. Might be time to pay a little attention.
The Steam Machines Valve will be selling aren't consoles under lock and key, they're just PCs with a form factor more fitting for a living room.
Valve is also selling a very limited number of Steam Machines. Other manufacturers, such as iBuyPower, will be selling Steam OS devices to the public. Is there evidence either way as to whether these will let the user install and run X11/Linux games obtained other than through Steam, such as free software and other games that one can get without charge in a typical X11/Linux distro?
SteamOS is supposed to have the ability to stream Windows games from a running Windows box with Steam installed as well.
But does this include games that were obtained other than through Steam? Say I'm developing a game, and it isn't quite far enough along for me to seek Greenlight approval. Will I be able to stream daily builds?
I've seen this with Windows too, Microsoft gets things in their UI working half right and then someone over there in Redmond gets a brain fart and the whole thing falls apart again.