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?
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.
And yet right now, on Windows, the SF5 beta is crashing for me. There's even less I can do because there are no messages at all.
Worse, Ultra Street Fighter 4 randomly crashes out on me. No errors, no messages. Just up and vanishes mid-game. Other games give me, occasionally, random crash dialogs. So I doubt the troubleshooting situation can truly be worse on Linux.
You seem to confuse SteamOS with Steam runtime. Steam runtime is, as you noted, a common set of libraries, while SteamOS I'd a distribution, so it unifies everything, from the kernel, through libraries, a compositor, to the unified user interface.
Yes, just having a standard set of libraries is not enough, this is why Valve removed Tux icon or the whole Linux platform support concept from their store: they just cannot guarantee that a game will work on any weird Linux setup out there. Even Ubuntu (ie the only officially supported distribution) proved to be a moving target.
> 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.
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.'"
Mighty No. 9 looks promising.
Last post!
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
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