Slashdot Mirror


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.

23 of 108 comments (clear)

  1. Better late than never by ledow · · Score: 5, Insightful

    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.

    1. Re:Better late than never by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Funny

      I hope Valve is paying you. If not they really should be.

    2. Re:Better late than never by sheehaje · · Score: 4, Interesting

      I hope Steam Machines take enough of a foothold to attract the major studios for developing native Linux games. Right now what is missing is a critical mass. You say you have 88 titles working on Linux - most of them are indie - which is great, but I want 90%+ of my current library to be natively supported. It's going to be an issue if I buy a steam machine and can only get a handful of the titles I play the most working. While streaming may be nice, I will be purposely buying a steam machine so my kids aren't taking over my gaming rig anymore - or just the opposite, so I can play while they are on my gaming rig. So streaming, while a nice option, isn't always going to be of use because you can stream and play from the same machine.

      With that said - I have great hope this will work. Valve will take it's time - and a $700 steam machine in 2014 will cost half that in 2016. So if Valve is willing to stick it out for the long haul - this can really cut into Microsoft and Sony (and Nintendo to a lesser degree)... I'm also eagerly awaiting their controller.

      Now - as far as Valve on the LF - that's just icing on the cake. Any wins for Valve at this point will be wins for Linux in general. And if anyone has used Microsoft's lastest abominations of OS's, that's a win for the PC. Funny thing is, a console may be the best thing for finally seeing Linux on the Desktop.

    3. Re:Better late than never by ledow · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Make a good product, make a good customer out of your customers, and you don't have to pay people to advertise it.

      Probably spent more on Steam than I have on my last few PC's combined. And my first purchase took nearly a year after they shut WON down, and I only created the account to carry on playing CS 1.6 online.

      Fact is, make a good enough product and treat your customers well and you don't have to buy ANYONE, they'll give you a positive review and backing all of their own accord.

    4. Re:Better late than never by sheehaje · · Score: 4, Interesting

      I don't really fully get your gripe. Why would Valve release SteamOS/Machines with just their games in mind? This is not what they've stated at all - and besides games they say there will be streaming media services available too (Maybe Netflix for Linux is finally coming)... There are already some developers lining up to produce triple A titles on the console - I'm just wondering how many.

      While Valve has dragged their feet on their games they haven't done so with the Steam platform. In fact, just this past year they've introduced Big Picture, Steam for Linux, Family Sharing (in beta) and a slew of updates. They definitely aren't standing still and making empty announcements.

    5. Re:Better late than never by sl4shd0rk · · Score: 2

      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

      That's called "innovative". Proprietary systems try their best to keep you from innovating by locking you out and selling you a 'black box'. This way, they are the only innovators and you stay the customer paying yearly maintenance contracts. Good for Valve.

      --
      Join the Slashcott! Feb 10 thru Feb 17!
    6. Re:Better late than never by TWiTfan · · Score: 2

      Now they just need some games. My suggestion is that they convince whatever studio did "Portal 2" to port that over to Linux, for example.

      --
      The cow says "Moo." The dog says "Woof." The Timothy says "Thanks, valued customer. We appreciate your input."
    7. Re:Better late than never by exomondo · · Score: 2

      Major studios will absolutely develop for native linux. Or at very least people who are developing for the PS4. Both X86 platforms, both running a variant of a Unix kernal. PS4 using a FreeBSD kernal, while obviously SteamOS Linux kernal based but the cross over should be very simple.

      But the kernels are different, firstly one is BSD-based and the other is Linux. It's foolish to think there wouldn't be significant optimizations in areas like the scheduler on the PS4 kernel to target the predominantly single-task gaming focus of the console, not to mention the differences in drivers and the different (and sometimes proprietary) frameworks used like libgcm and psgl. That they're both operating systems with unix-based kernels does very little for application portability.

    8. Re:Better late than never by realityimpaired · · Score: 2

      You say you have 88 titles working on Linux - most of them are indie - which is great, but I want 90%+ of my current library to be natively supported.

      As of this writing, there are 408 Linux titles in the Steam library.
      http://store.steampowered.com/browse/linux/

      I agree that they need more titles, but they are working on it. More are added every day. And yes, much of it is indie titles, the same holds true for the Windows and Mac libraries of games too. And some of the titles that are out on Linux are AAA titles... the latest incarnation of the Metro series (4A, formerly a THQ title) is available on Linux, as is the latest incarnation of Sega's Football Manager series, just to name a couple. Steam for Linux is gaining traction, and has the attention of some of the bigger names in gaming. It'll be a while before studios like EA take notice, but once they do, it won't take them long to jump on the bandwagon... Porting their titles from PS3 to Linux is probably easier than porting to Windows. ;)

      Anecdotally? I've spent more on gaming in the last 6 months than I have in the last 3 years, and every single title I've bought has been a Linux-native title though Steam. I realize that the plural of "anecdote" is not "data", but I doubt very much that I'm the only one who feels this way.

    9. Re:Better late than never by ildon · · Score: 2

      It's not shilling and it's not astroturf. Millions of gamers feel this way about Valve and Steam simply because they like the products and services they've been provided, and they like the general corporate attitude they've seen from Valve.

  2. They have the clout to make GPU vendors play nice by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

    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.

  3. Not a kernel problem by Daniel+Hoffmann · · Score: 4, Interesting

    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.

  4. Re:Games on linux by mark-t · · Score: 2

    Right... like it took DVD's centuries to knock VHS off.... oh, wait. No it didn't.

    When an alternative presents enough advantages over what may have formerly and for all practical purposes been a monopoly in any given sector or industry, it doesn't take that long for the public to realize it and switch.

  5. Does this change where the future of Linux is? by Mister+Liberty · · Score: 3, Funny

    I kinda grew fond of it being on the Desktop.

    1. Re:Does this change where the future of Linux is? by RazorSharp · · Score: 3, Funny

      The future of Linux: on all devices. You should check out my toaster.

      --
      "From the depths of my skeptical and rationalist soul, I ask the Lord to protect me from California touchie-feeliedom."
  6. Re:Games on linux by David_Hart · · Score: 2

    Maybe we can completely get rid of windows in the future if all games are playable on GNU/Linux.

    The answer is: No...

    As I see it, the Steam eco-system will be no different than the current consoles (XBox, PS4). The Steam boxes will have the advantage over the consoles of higher-end graphics, game controllers, etc. Windows boxes not only support higher-end gaming but also a wide variety of applications. A gaming rig can, and usually is, also used for gaming, photo editing, finances, and many other applications. Much like tablets, it's all about the apps...

    Don't get me wrong, I'm happy to see the expansion of gaming. However, Steam is not the savior of the Linux desktop. In my opinion, It will be just another console...

  7. Are there any decent Linuxgame authoring tools? by mark-t · · Score: 3, Interesting

    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.

  8. Re:Games on linux by timmyf2371 · · Score: 3, Interesting

    DVD replaced VHS because it offered vastly superior video playback quality as well as many other advantages.

    Linux does have some advantages over Windows, but the reverse is also true. Windows also has an entrenched position in workplaces as well as in the home.

    Having first tried Linux on the desktop about 14 years ago and having continued to follow its development, along with the progress of Windows, I don't see any evidence which suggest Linux is suddenly going to acquire so many advantages over Windows any time soon.

    --

    Backup not found: (A)bort (R)etry (P)anic
  9. Re:Games on linux by RazorSharp · · Score: 4, Insightful

    I believe what he was trying to say is that corporate America is unlikely to wean itself off of the Microsoft monopoly anytime soon, but Microsoft's stranglehold of the consumer market is vulnerable if gaming is taken away. Apple has dug deep into one important niche -- the non-gaming, high-end users -- and Steam on Linux has the potential to knock off the gaming niche. This is important because those two niches are where the high dollars are spent.

    So while you're right, that the consumer market has the potential change quickly, I think he's correct in pointing out that corporate America will largely remain latched on to Microsoft for the foreseeable future. Two centuries is a bit of a hyperbole, but corporations are much slower to change up the technologies they depend on than individuals. An individual has to set up a new computer. A corporation has to set up thousands of new computers, write software, train people, etc. In the long term, I see specialized Linux systems becoming the standard in most corporations, but it's also probably the stranglehold Microsoft will keep within its grasp longer than any other.

    --
    "From the depths of my skeptical and rationalist soul, I ask the Lord to protect me from California touchie-feeliedom."
  10. Re:Just one gaming customer perspective by space_jake · · Score: 2

    From what I've read SteamOS is going to be a free standalone OS that you're free to customize and install on any device you want. 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. SteamOS is supposed to have the ability to stream Windows games from a running Windows box with Steam installed as well. Their new controller, while not likely to completely replace the keyboard and mouse looks pretty promising too. I wouldn't expect them to drive all gaming to controller / console style games.

  11. Re:Games on linux by GreatDrok · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Hmmm, mod points or comment..... Oh well.

    "The answer is: No...

    As I see it, the Steam eco-system will be no different than the current consoles (XBox, PS4). The Steam boxes will have the advantage over the consoles of higher-end graphics, game controllers, etc. Windows boxes not only support higher-end gaming but also a wide variety of applications. A gaming rig can, and usually is, also used for gaming, photo editing, finances, and many other applications. Much like tablets, it's all about the apps...

    Don't get me wrong, I'm happy to see the expansion of gaming. However, Steam is not the savior of the Linux desktop. In my opinion, It will be just another console..."

    At some point the market will decide there are too many choices. This happened back in the 1980s when there were loads of different types of home computer and eventually they got thinned out through the 90's until Windows PCs were basically it. Valve is likely to turn console gaming on its head if they can get a sufficiently console like experience in place (Big Picture is close but enough games don't work with it that I still have to keep a keyboard and mouse close at hand) and enough AAA games come to it. Certainly, the market is saturated with PS4/XBone and then SteamBox and of the three I wish the SteamBox most success because it already has a massive game library compared to the other two, plus you can upgrade your hardware and keep your games. That's a killer improvement.

    As for Windows, the main reason people use it is applications. When I talk to people about why they don't use Linux or Mac on the desktop there are largely viable replacements for the apps they use (especially true with the Mac) but games always come up as the main reason. Take that away and Windows is severely weakened in the market. Sure, it will hang on for a long time especially in corporate environments but these days home users have very little need for a PC when a tablet can do their social communications and a games console can do the gaming. I have a Mac and a PC (Win 7) at home and I barely use either because I have to actually go over and sit in front of them. Sure, I use my work Mac in the office all day but in my off time I don't want to sit at a desk. Steam on any computer is OK but it still can't be totally driven without a keyboard and mouse so maybe Valve's new controller can fix that (I hope so) in which case I'll leave my Windows box in Big Picture mode all the time and enjoy my games from the couch in full 1080p or more when I next upgrade and I won't lose my library. With SteamOS taking on more of the games I already own, a wipe to that is in the future for my PC and I'll keep the Mac for the boring stuff like work.

    MS is desperately trying to remain relevant but they're bouncing around taking shots at everyone in sight because all these little devices are pulling the eyes away from their platform. Windows 8 has done little to improve things because it looks and works so badly unless you tweak the hell out of it with Classic Shell to get rid of the nightmare modern interface and restore it to something that looks and behaves more like Windows used to.

    Sitting here at my Mac I have VMs for many different Linux distros, various versions of Windows too but I run OS X because I can run everything on it either native or via some form of emulation. Games aren't really the Mac's forte but that's OK as I don't want to sit in front of a keyboard to play games and I want a viable replacement for my current Xbox 360 (which I dislike more with every update) and MS just burned the Xbox platform by releasing the One without any backwards compatibility. Similarly, Sony's PS4 has no library and the price of games have gone up another 15-20% over the already outrageous prices so no sale there either as I can't pick up cheap back catalogue stuff to fill out the collection. Pity, I had hoped to play many of the PS3 exclusives and as it stands I'll likely buy a PS3 cheap at some point soonish to do that. I also just bough

    --
    "I have the attention span of a strobe lit goldfish, please get to the point quickly!"
  12. Re:Games on linux by David_Hart · · Score: 3, Interesting

    As for Windows, the main reason people use it is applications. When I talk to people about why they don't use Linux or Mac on the desktop there are largely viable replacements for the apps they use (especially true with the Mac) but games always come up as the main reason. Take that away and Windows is severely weakened in the market.

    I agree that the creation of a gaming eco-system for Macs would make the choice between Windows and OSX much more even. However, there are still a number of apps, especially for tracking finances and stocks, that are not available for OSX. Granted, you can run parallels or VMs (like you do), but your average computer user wouldn't know that. Also, while Steam may work to create a gaming device infrastructure, there is no guarantee that Apple would provide support. After all, they do try to keep their eco-system relatively closed.

    Sure, it will hang on for a long time especially in corporate environments but these days home users have very little need for a PC when a tablet can do their social communications and a games console can do the gaming.

    If that's all a user does, then I would agree with you. However, a lot of people do use their PC's for more than just social communication.

    I have a Mac and a PC (Win 7) at home and I barely use either because I have to actually go over and sit in front of them. Sure, I use my work Mac in the office all day but in my off time I don't want to sit at a desk. Steam on any computer is OK but it still can't be totally driven without a keyboard and mouse so maybe Valve's new controller can fix that (I hope so) in which case I'll leave my Windows box in Big Picture mode all the time and enjoy my games from the couch in full 1080p or more when I next upgrade and I won't lose my library. With SteamOS taking on more of the games I already own, a wipe to that is in the future for my PC and I'll keep the Mac for the boring stuff like work.

    MS is desperately trying to remain relevant but they're bouncing around taking shots at everyone in sight because all these little devices are pulling the eyes away from their platform. Windows 8 has done little to improve things because it looks and works so badly unless you tweak the hell out of it with Classic Shell to get rid of the nightmare modern interface and restore it to something that looks and behaves more like Windows used to.

    Sitting here at my Mac I have VMs for many different Linux distros, various versions of Windows too but I run OS X because I can run everything on it either native or via some form of emulation. Games aren't really the Mac's forte but that's OK as I don't want to sit in front of a keyboard to play games and I want a viable replacement for my current Xbox 360 (which I dislike more with every update) and MS just burned the Xbox platform by releasing the One without any backwards compatibility. Similarly, Sony's PS4 has no library and the price of games have gone up another 15-20% over the already outrageous prices so no sale there either as I can't pick up cheap back catalogue stuff to fill out the collection. Pity, I had hoped to play many of the PS3 exclusives and as it stands I'll likely buy a PS3 cheap at some point soonish to do that. I also just bought a WiiU because Nintendo is still innovating and it plays my current Wii games so we already have stuff to play along with the couple of WiiU games we got and you can pop them off the TV onto the controller screen. That's cool. PS4 and Xbox One? No back catalogue, expensive games, sub-PC graphics and all that lovely DRM. Nope, don't think so.

    The reasons that you stated are why I prefer PC gaming to the consoles, though I have the WII, XBox 360, and PS3. With the PC I do not lose my gaming library. As for gaming in front of the TV, I bought the Microsoft PC wireless gamepad controller adapter for my desktop. This allows me to sit on the couch and game using my PC.

    I haven't made up my mind about getting the new consoles yet. It'll depend on what my brother-in-law decides to do as we share video games. Today, he has the PS3 and is planning on sticking with it.

  13. Game mods on consoles by tepples · · Score: 2

    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.

    1. Games for Steam OS may support community-created game mods to a greater extent than games for Xbox One and PlayStation 4.
    2. On the other hand, Steam pretty much requires cable or DSL. Disc-based consoles work even if the only Internet access offered to homes in your area is satellite or cellular with a cap of 5 to 10 GB up+down per month, which is smaller than a single layer of BD-ROM.
    3. I'm not sure how easy it is for a startup to get a game greenlit on Steam and to keep it patched, but the major consoles have had problems with this in the past: Bob's Game denied due to home office, The Binding of Isaac denied due to religious subject matter, excessive charges for Fez patches, etc.
    4. I haven't seen solid evidence one way or the other about whether Linux-compatible games not sold through Steam can be loaded onto a machine that ships with Steam OS. Makers of traditional consoles, on the other hand, have since 1985 been building their entire business around console owners not having a counterpart to Android's "Unknown sources" checkbox.