Slashdot Mirror
Street Fighter V Announced For Linux and SteamOS
An anonymous reader writes: Capcom has announced that their upcoming Street Fighter V game, one of the most anticipated games for 2016, will also be available for SteamOS and Linux. Already in place is support functionality for the Steam Controller, Valve's game controller that was recently updated with some new features. Ever since Valve launched Steam for Linux, the number of native Linux games has positively exploded. But will it be enough for gamers to choose a Linux distribution as their gaming platform?
Now we are talking serious games shit for my Linux. We rule! FINALLY!
Meh, you really need a 6 button controller for Street Fighter. The 6 button Genesis was the best hand held controller ever.
I play games on Linux. I loved the Portal games, and I'm spending more time than is perhaps good for me in Kerbal Space Program. Got XCOM waiting for me once I take a break from KSP. On my laptop I play FTL, and I've slowly playing through Baldurs Gate; something fun to do during business trips.
If I didn't have these games on Linux, I would not be playing on Windows. Dual-booting is completely impractical, since you'd have to close your work and shut down just to play a game. I'd not use Windows; I'd probably just get a game console instead. Or be content with the games I can play on my tablet. Without Linux games, I would not be playing PC games at all.
Trust the Computer. The Computer is your friend.
they're not over extending themselves too much by making a version for linux, unreal engine 4 makes it easier for them to do this
That's funny. I need to use linux to play old windows (and DOS) games. They just don't work with windows any more.
I can just hear the slogan:
Linux - 30 year old gaming. today.
Seems about accurate.
> But will it be enough for gamers to choose a Linux distribution as their gaming platform?
That's not the point of putting a game on Linux. What this means is that, if you are running Linux, you can play this game. This is GREAT news. The issue facing Linux gamers isn't that there are no good games- it's that of the games made, many never get a Linux version. This is a great game that is getting a Linux version. That's seriously cool!
Most gamers have at least one game that they can't make work on Linux- this means that Street Fighter V will NOT be one of those annoying games. Solid.
> When it comes to ease of use, performance and backwards compatibility, Windows kills Linux all day long. And it always will.
Windows requires a massive multistep procedure to not leak data like crazy to Microsoft. Fixing it requires command line garbage, scripts, etc. Linux doesn't require any of that configuration- out of the box it just works. Windows you have to dick around with the wusa package manager and that binary registry just to get a fraction of the security and privacy that Linux has for free.
But lets go further:
Performance- Linux outperforms Windows at almost every task an OS does. The exception is if you write a game just to support Windows APIs, as many games do. Microsoft didn't do anything to make their platform perform better- far from it. They have a large userbase, so many developers jump through hoops to support it. The same thing applies to drivers- Microsoft didn't write those, third party companies did, and if the Linux version is ever less than the Windows version at something, it's the fault of those companies.
Backwards compatibility- I'm really not aware of older Linux programs failing to work on modern Linux. Maybe, somewhere, that's true- I certainly don't see it though. Linux comes packed in with standard utilities dating back to the damned 70s for fucks sake. Windows struggles just to support shit from the Windows XP era. Linux is vastly more backwards compatible than Windows- hell, it even supports programs written for stuff from prior decades BEFORE IT EXISTED.
It always will- Nothing you've said is true. What Windows has is a big user base. That's the limit of its power. It can't even run fucking bash and it's 2015- every real OS has supported that for over a decade. It's a joke of an OS with holes at every level, unreadable binary bullshit for config files, random hex strings in random places a mile deep in a HKEY_CURRENT_BULLSHIT, a terrible command line package manager, a shitty shell that tries to look like DOS and fails, random idiotic access controls that protect viruses but not users, and an entire industry built to find and remove the malicious shitware that infests the platform. Linux runs MOST windows programs, and MANY windows games. Windows can't run a single fucking Linux binary without a goddamned VM!
Here's what Windows has: a big userbase. This means that some developers just make Windows versions of shit, and never even compile a Linux version- this means that there are many windows only programs, games especially. But that's not something Windows did. Microsoft doesn't write all those games. Microsoft doesn't even write all the goddamned drivers.
The point is, none of this matters. Simpleton user doesn't care for privacy, never opens a command line, doesn't give a shit about registries and is not interested in running decades old software.
The superficial part of windows is working in such a way that simpleton user can get by for years without ever opening a settings screen or troubleshoot beyond "going to the steam forums and search for the same sort of crash i am experiencing"
Linux has a very thin superficial layer - Yes, you can run windows programs; but getting them is almost never only a doubleclick. Yes it can run decades old software - but in certain cases it involves something simpleton user doesn't want to do: work it. Yes it has mighty shells in form of bash and the like - but simpleton user is not interested in using a black box of text when he can just click on things.
And the performance part? Yes, linux is stronger in that part, too - but mostly in cases that are irrelevant to simpleton user. Most games i have crosstested on Linux s. Windows performance DO run better in windows. That starts with configuration stuff like just plugging in a controller and start gaming without ever needing to touch anything and ends with framerates and fidelity.
And guess what? Simpleton user is the main demographic for computers these days. The pros get by with opensource and pirating anyway, so why pander to them?
Backwards compatibility- I'm really not aware of older Linux programs failing to work on modern Linux. Maybe, somewhere, that's true- I certainly don't see it though. Linux comes packed in with standard utilities dating back to the damned 70s for fucks sake. Windows struggles just to support shit from the Windows XP era. Linux is vastly more backwards compatible than Windows- hell, it even supports programs written for stuff from prior decades BEFORE IT EXISTED.
You are mixing two different concepts and thus comparing apples and oranges: you're comparing source-level backwards-compatibility on Linux to binary-level compatibility on Windows. Yes, you can take old source-code and have it compile happily on a modern Linux-distro, but you're not running an old binary then!
It can't even run fucking bash and it's 2015
http://win-bash.sourceforge.ne... or https://www.cygwin.com/ -- Poof, bash on Windows.
Linux runs MOST windows programs, and MANY windows games. Windows can't run a single fucking Linux binary without a goddamned VM!
Another apples-to-oranges comparison. Linux does *NOT* natively run Windows-binaries, you have to run them under Wine. There is nothing stopping one from making a similar translator for running Linux-binaries under Windows, and there isn't that much of a difference between Wine and a full-blown VM.
But will it be enough for gamers to choose a Linux distribution as their gaming platform?
For some gamers, no. Not at all.
For some: If this generates additional FPS, then, yes. Will they replace Windows? Nah. But will they boot up Linux to confirm reports that they can get superior performance? If so, then yes.
Doesn't matter whether they will actually be able to see a difference from the FPS. If reports say there's something better, then some gamers will spend the time to try it out.
Gamers are, in the main, a tech-savvy crowd. Isn't Linux ideal for them? They can tweak it to their hearts content, ripping that last bit of speed out of things. Saying that Linux is too technical for them does seem a little insulting given that a lot of PC gamers build their rigs from scratch.
So, imo, there has to be something else going on. Such as MS's stranglehold on the OEMs who produce the graphics cards and drivers. That's about the only substantial reason why games weren't that popular on Linux.
This does seem to break a barrier, so I'm thinking that graphic card manufacturers are producing better graphics drivers for Linux. Maybe a back-swash from the uptake of Android machines? Once someone has produced a graphics driver for Android, it wont seem that far-fetched to produce a Linux driver for other Linux distributions out there.
I don't know enough about the subject to make a properly informed guess but it seems a better approach than some of the comments I've seen above.
Capcom is "too mature for this kind of shit" right now.
As in acting like 13 year olds trying to prove to their friends that they're already grown ups, so it will take a while until the company fully mature to go back to the fun stuff.
Backwards compatibility- I'm really not aware of older Linux programs failing to work on modern Linux.
That's because you obviously don't play games on Linux. I give you loki_compat.
Linux is vastly more backwards compatible than Windows- hell, it even supports programs written for stuff from prior decades BEFORE IT EXISTED
NO. It supports source code like that. It doesn't support executables like that, or at least, not well. Compatibility problems abound.
What Windows has is a big user base. That's the limit of its power. It can't even run fucking bash and it's 2015- every real OS has supported that for over a decade.
Wrong again, chuckles. I give you Cygwin, and also [the now discontinued] Services For Unix, under which it was possible to compile bash.
a shitty shell that tries to look like DOS and fails
No, Windows now has three shells. One that looks like dos and succeeds brilliantly (command.com), one that is the original shell for NT (CMD.EXE) and one that's object-oriented and lends itself to typing commands several lines long, Powershell. Powershell does numerous things Unix shells don't.
Linux runs MOST windows programs, and MANY windows games.
Nonsense. You certainly can't use the wine compatibility guide as evidence, because Wine is THE poster child for regressions. I have never had a Windows game of any complexity work through more than a couple of Wine updates. I get it working, under some version of Wine, then I update my system and it breaks again. That's why I finally just gave up and built two totally separate PCs, one for Windows and one for everything else. Wine is awesome, and it is also shit.
Windows can't run a single fucking Linux binary without a goddamned VM!
And Linux can't run a single Windows binary reliably without a VM, which basically boils down to the same thing; either way, you need an OS in a VM for back compatibility.
Windows and Linux both have back compat problems, and pretending they don't is just bullshit. I've had to tweak programs' code for changes in the Linux kernel before, or libc, so suggesting that it magically supports old source code is also bullshit.
"You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
> When it comes to ease of use, performance and backwards compatibility, Windows kills Linux all day long. And it always will.
Windows requires a massive multistep procedure to not leak data like crazy to Microsoft.
Ubuntu much?
https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/...
If you post as Anonymous Coward, don't expect a reply.
Mighty No. 9 looks promising.
Last post!
Windows requires a massive multistep procedure to not leak data like crazy to Microsoft.
Ubuntu much?
In order to make Ubuntu not leak data, you turn off one switch. In order to make Windows 10 not leak data, you have to use the enterprise version and you have to do a bunch of stuff not exposed in the GUI and not documented by Microsoft. Updates have also been delivered to Windows 7 and 8 which add Windows 10-esque spying "telemetry" features; at least there it can simply be uninstalled, or not installed to begin with, but that requires that the user either have some foreknowledge of which patches to skip or substantial technical knowledge and the time to take the multi-click process to read all of the patch release notes. It is ignorant at best to suggest that Ubuntu is anywhere near as offensive a violator of privacy as Microsoft, especially when your own link makes it clear that this is not the case.
"You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
Performance- Linux outperforms Windows at almost every task an OS does. The exception is if you write a game just to support Windows APIs, as many games do. Microsoft didn't do anything to make their platform perform better- far from it. They have a large userbase, so many developers jump through hoops to support it. The same thing applies to drivers- Microsoft didn't write those, third party companies did, and if the Linux version is ever less than the Windows version at something, it's the fault of those companies.
Uh huh, Microsoft didn't do anything to actually make their platform better or popular they just won the lottery. It actually reads like a stereotype of an angry Linux nerd rant.
Microsoft has invested a ton in libraries, languages, IDEs like DirectX, C#, Visual Studio and so on to make it easy for developers. They offered kool-aid and the developers drank deep. Windows has infinitely better binary compatibility than Linux, which matter to all these developers who write propriatery code. And being able to install random binaries from dubious sources, particularly pirated versions is the source of most botnet/virus/trojan problems yet if Microsoft makes an app store and go signed apps only well that's the evil empire ceasing control.
There are only two things I'd want to be genuinely happy with Windows:
1) A mode that defaults to privacy and security. No, you will not automatically log me in online. No, you will not send any data or metadata anywhere except with explicit permission. No telemetry, no Cortana, no advertising ID, no sharing WiFi passwords, nothing. And that choice manages defaults for future updates too. I'd actually be cool with a no third party software default here too, like Android. Call it enhanced security mode or something.
2) Keep the "Last version of Windows" idea, stop the forced bundling of features and security updates. The primary reason people didn't upgrade is that it costs money, it won't be like XP. Now I'm clinging to my Windows 7 because I know how it will look in 2016-2019, with Windows 10 I don't know if you'll make some change I absolutely hate next month but since it's bundled with security patches I got no choice and no time to adjust. Let the apps do the version pushing, if they require a newer version of Windows then I have a choice.
Live today, because you never know what tomorrow brings
Programs from the 70s that run on linux still are updated and maintained, though.
Try to run something that uses GTK1 (xmms was a good example), or some other wildly outdated library, or perhaps even something that will only work with libfoo-1.4 and not libfoo-1.5 : it won't run or compile.
And let's lightly address your other arguments. Performance - nope there is no substantial difference between Windows and Linux on the same hardware. They're both mature operating systems and unsurprisingly they're both very efficient. The place you most likely see a difference is in things like graphics drivers and more often than not it is Windows that enjoys the performance advantage as this comparison demonstrates.
Backwards compatibility. Oh please. Windows is not perfect by any means but chances are extremely high that any 32-bit application / game software you have will work, even if you have to run it with some compatibility flags. Even when you have 64-bit Windows. If you want to run older software on Linux you'd better have the source code and hope it recompiles because chances are you're going to suffer badly otherwise. To bring it around to games I suggest you dig out some old Loki game ports and see how you get on installing them. Maybe you'll be lucky, but I doubt it and will be scrabbling around making fake roots with the deps it wants to make it happy.
User base. And here's the rub. Windows does have the user base and it looks on continuing to be that way. Developers chase the biggest platforms to recoup their investment and that means consoles and PCs. They may think of porting to SteamOS / Mac, assuming the money's there to make it worthwhile but they may not. Perhaps SteamOS will take off but I rather suspect Valve are just doing it to seed the market a bit for some streaming / cloud initiative and have little interest in fat clients let alone other Linux dists.
And just because SteamOS is Linux based doesn't mean some random game will work on some random Linux - I threw about 6 games onto an old laptop running Fedora Core 23 recently - 4 ran okay, one printed up a bunch of diagnostic bullshit about stream controllers and one (Goat Simulator) managed to hardcrash the PC. Not very promising. It points to some devs lacking the inclination or resources to test their games on Linux to the extent that they should.
Actually you do not run them under wine, wine is an implementation of the windows API, your windows binary runs natively on the hardware.
That's like saying you don't run Linux-apps under Linux or Windows-apps under Windows since they run natively on the hardware.
Programs from the 70s that run on linux still are updated and maintained, though.
Those have absolutely nothing to do with backwards-compatibility, and many of them run under Windows, too.
When launching a Steam game, namely the old Counterstrike it launches on the left monitor instead of the right one. Wine + Warcraft 3 launches on the monitor I want to use - but with that one, don't dare trying alt-tab!
See, I don't really want to spend $500 on new hardware and risk ending up with the same bugs, while not being able to play fun games I know about (like say, Painkiller which is old but was fun except for the slow downs. Or games like Crysis 1 and Stalker which seemed good but were too slow)
For the record, I use dual monitor with the primary monitor on the right, not left. I won't change that unless I move all furniture around I guess (not even, then).
The desktop environment just got a setting to choose a primary monitor! Mate 1.12, released late 2015 (also known as Gnome 2 before year 2012)
Counterstrike is alt-tab friendly so not all is bad. It's merely bad enough I won't play it (lack of old school servers too). Not only secondary monitor is smaller and lower quality, it's not right in front of me like the primary is.
"And being able to install random binaries from dubious sources, particularly pirated versions is the source of most botnet/virus/trojan problems yet if Microsoft makes an app store and go signed apps only well that's the evil empire ceasing control."
Windows and Linux both have their roots in an age before sandboxing of executables. It's an all-or-nothing thing: If you allow a program to run, there's almost no restriction on what it can do. Contrast with something like, for example, Android - an OS which allows quite fine-grained control over what each individual program is able to access. If Windows or Linux worked like that you could just right-click your dodgy keygen program, select 'run with restrictions' and untick the boxes for writing to a file, changing system configuration or accessing the network.
It's being developed for a non-DirectX *nix based platform with common architecture compared to the PC. Makes me wonder why more PS4 games don't make it to Linux? Probably because it costs money, but surely it's easier than bringing PS4 games to Windows. I guess we just need a larger Linux/SteamOS install base.
Twinstiq, game news
Windows requires a massive multistep procedure to not leak data like crazy to Microsoft. Fixing it requires command line garbage, scripts, etc. Linux doesn't require any of that configuration- out of the box it just works. Windows you have to dick around with the wusa package manager and that binary registry just to get a fraction of the security and privacy that Linux has for free.
The majority of computer users don't care. If they did, they'd stop clicking on every "you won" e-mail that enters their in-box.
I'm a technical user, and *I* don't care either, for what it is worth.
Performance- Linux outperforms Windows at almost every task an OS does.
Meh, not in the ways most people care about. Does Linux run MS Word faster in some way that an end user will see over Linux? Oh yea, Word doesn't run there. :) It actually might, given the new direction MS has taken, but it hardly matters, Word is "fast" enough on just about any hardware.
Windows struggles just to support shit from the Windows XP era.
No it doesn't, it actually runs the vast majority of XP programs just fine. Some early ones and some poorly coded ones perhaps not, but the mainstream stuff works fine. The stuff that doesn't likely has had 10 new versions released since then and no one longer cares.
Some games do have trouble, largely because they were poorly coded, but a whole lot of early games run fine. My son loves playing Star Wars Galactic Battlegrounds on Windows 10. Other than the resolution limits, it works fine, but that is the game's fault, not Windows.
Linux runs MOST windows programs, and MANY windows games.
No, it does not.
No there isn't, not by a long shot...
Android doesn't count, unless it is rooted and something else installed. What Samsung puts on their phones isn't remotely "Linux".
Funny story. My brother and I tried to set up an ad-hoc wifi network to play some multiplayer games. I run Linux, and was able to create the ad-hoc network easily (just by "clicking on things", of course) and the game ran flawlessly in WINE. My brother could run the game, but guess what? Windows 8 takes a big step back and shits all over the concept of ease of use, because it doesn't let you connect to or create ad-hoc networks without opening a command prompt and invoking a set of arcane powershell commands.
So, there's my little anecdote. WIndows has a very thin superficial layer of usability, but when you want to do anything marginally difficult (even things that were easy in a previous version), Windows makes it next to impossible. Meanwhile, it's easy for any simpleton user to do the same thing in Linux.
the d3d layer is wrapped by opengl. This is what hurts performance most of the time.
His argument still stands. Just because there are more of X than Y doesn't mean there's 0 chance you'll ever see Y.
The problem with Windows is Windows.
It's a great ecosystem (driven by a monopoly only mindset) that has computing history's single biggest turd sitting right in the middle of it.
This is why most people would rather use ANY thing other than a general purpose desktop PC to do their gaming.
A Pirate and a Puritan look the same on a balance sheet.
The most popular operating system in the world is called "Android" and it is a Linux distribution. Windows and Microsoft are irrelevant
What's the most popular operating system that can display more than one window on the screen at once? I'd guess almost nobody wants a calculator to fill a monitor bigger than that of a phone. But the last time I checked, stock Android ran apps maximized. And even on those few Android devices that support multiple windows, Android application developers had to opt in to non-maximized window management policies in each application's manifest, and few did.
How should developers of an Open Source game keep the roof over their heads and food on their tables? Historically, the business models for free software have applied far better for programs to that act as a platform or infrastructure for other applications than to games.
> Ubuntu much
No, incorrect, and FUCK YOU.
Here's the "no" part:
It's trivial to turn off the ONE place that Ubuntu can send your searches from. It's a search bar that defaults to an internet search. Microsoft has that too, and it's trivial to turn off- and no one cares that Microsoft does it. I suspect most OSes have a bar that can be set to do an internet search, or a local search.
Here's the "incorrect" part:
Ubuntu is turning this off as a default feature, based on feedback.
Here's the "FUCK YOU" part:
Fuck you for making this false equivalence. Ubuntu is not all of Linux, and even if their one goddamned thing that they fucked up was impossible to turn off or meant to be damaging, it wouldn't matter because Ubuntu isn't even the most common distro- Mint is. Bitching about Ubuntu is like bitching about the shitware that comes on a Lenovo- Lenovo is not Windows, and Ubuntu is not Linux. Every time someone links this, I actually wonder if they are shilling, because there's literally no way that these things are equivalent. Read the Windows EULA, where it says that they get your keystrokes, voice input, file system, file DATA, contacts, phone calls, envelope information on all comms, envelope information on all use, which programs you run, when you run them. Go check out all the things you have to turn off to disable this- you set some stuff in the GUI, but you aren't even a quarter done. You gotta go in and turn off every other goddamned thing on the command line with wusa, you gotta go edit a bunch of registry stuff, you have to disable some services and remove some other services, and of course, you need an external router firewall to block packets that Microsoft makes ignore your firewall rules and hosts file. To fucking bring up a default-on internet search bar with a trivial opt out is disingenuous, to pretend that Ubuntu is all of Linux is retarded, and to compare this to Microsofts full use case harvesting is libelous.
Stop fudding.
> Uh huh, Microsoft didn't do anything to actually make their platform better or popular they just won the lottery.
I didn't say that at all. Can you find that? No. All you got is a straw man and a personal attack.
Microsoft has a massive userbase for several reasons. A giant part of that is the long period of time they had a functionality and usability advantage over the competitors. But that was a long time ago.
I'm not really convinced that the binary compatibility part is that accurate, but I can't dismiss it trivially. I will say Windows has issues supporting binaries from just a few years ago, but I just never seem to have the back portability problems on Linux that Windows has- but with so much of Linux being able to be recompiled to be optimized and perfect for whatever we're doing NOW, it's kind of a hard comparison.
Yes, of course you'd be happy with a version of Windows that could be attached to the internet safely, but now that it's not in Microsoft's interest to provide that, I guess you get to write letters or something until they finally decide to fix their shit. Maybe they will, but if they do, it will be entirely because people make noise about it. The joke is, if they DO this, you'll be like "see, they aren't so bad" to the very people who convinced them against their "better" judgment, and if they don't, you'll end up with some nest of scripts that you BELIEVE offers you privacy. Hell, right now your Windows 7 is leaking crazy amounts of data based on the telemetry updates pushed last spring that they only turned on in the summer- unless you wusa-ed them away, which you may or may not have done- it's possible to turn this shit off in 7 with only a few dumb steps, probably. Definitely not in 10.
> The majority of computer users don't care.
The fact that not everyone is an expert at every single thing doesn't give anyone the moral right to abuse the fuck out of them for that fact.
> Oh yea, Word doesn't run there. :)
Something not running under Linux is not the fault of the OS. It's a fucking WINDOWS PROGRAM. Made by the company that makes WINDOWS. It's Microsoft's fault that there's no Linux version of Word. The default assumption for a Windows program is not that it runs on every fucking OS. The fact that Linux even TRIES to support Windows programs, when Windows has no such support for Linux, is a giant argument for Linux, and against Microsoft. It's disgusting that you would imply that this is somehow a Linux issue. Just so foul.
> it actually runs the vast majority of XP programs just fine
Sure, and Linux runs the vast majority of Windows programs just fine, through WINE. But if you need or want a program that doesn't work, the bitching begins. I have no problem googling a bunch of people running a Virtual PC environment to make their XP era apps work, and some don't function even under that.
> No, it does not.
Sure it runs most things. Most is over half- an easy bar to straddle.
That starts with configuration stuff like just plugging in a controller and start gaming without ever needing to touch anything
If the connected controller is a standard HID joystick rather than the Xbox 360 Controller, then how does a game know in which order the buttons appear without asking the user to "press the button for jump", "press the button for attack"? Or do games report "zero controllers connected" if only standard HID joysticks, not Xbox 360 Controllers, are connected?
There is nothing stopping one from making a similar translator for running Linux-binaries under Windows
I seem to remember it having been attempted, but one project ran into the difficulty that the granularity of mmap is such that Linux can simulate Windows but not vice versa. Some Internet searching turned up Foreign Linux.
You need to relax. If I somehow offended you with a single sentence about Ubuntu, you're way to sensitive.
If you post as Anonymous Coward, don't expect a reply.