- Joined
- Jan 8, 2008
- Messages
- 9,785
Yes, so why is the general thought that they'll agree to work with Epic Games when Tim Sweeney is constantly trash talking Valve, Steam, & Gabe Newell?
![[H]ard|Forum](/styles/hardforum/xenforo/logo_dark.png){kind=logo}
EAC v2 and Fortnite coming to Linux
- Thread starter Mazzspeed
- Start date
Because the players they target with their devices want to play all the games and blocking your users from doing so isn't 'freedom'.
- Joined
- Jan 8, 2008
- Messages
- 9,785
Freedom by strong arming from one company to another? That doesn't track from the origination point of this "freedom". Freedom to choose must also have a justified foundation to base said ethos upon.
Valve have worked hard with a number of parties to bring gaming to Linux, more secure anticheat implementations are an evolution regarding gaming under Linux. I fail to see why people believe that Valve will refuse to support a more secure anticheat solution from a company that already provides one of the most used anticheat implementations under the platform.
Tim's a whiny little figurehead, he's gonna say stupid shit. But business is business, and should Valve not work with Epic to support EAC v2 on their products, I have little doubt the users of those products will be very vocal in disagreement about it. Valve know this, so I find the possibility that Valve aren't working with Epic on EAC v2 unlikely, and I doubt we'll hear much in the way of updates from Valve on the subject for possibly another few months yet. Understand, Gabe isn't phoning Tim directly in haggling out the finer details of EAC v2.
Quite possibly, the only strong arming I can imagine is the case here, is gaming studio's telling Epic a better anticheat solution is needed under Linux or we're going to pull the ability for users to run our titles under the platform. You have choices, if you don't like EAC v2, avoid it and everything required to run it.
Because Valve likes money and Epic likes money and more people playing more games has a very curious side effect of generating money
Everyone understands they are a company and making money is the goal.
At the same time. At about 100 different junctures now, when most companies would have chose to close source X or Y bit or call it proprietary. Valve has done the opposite and make it open.
Think about it Maz. What company in the world would work on making something like foveated rendering work for VR.... then OPEN SOURCE it? Not only did they do that, they decided to use Qualcomm hardware on the Frame, and they PUSHED Qualcomm to open source everything for their CPU and GPU.
The list goes on. Are they our friends? I don't know I would say Thirteen years of continual Linux development ALL of it out in the open. Pushing and pulling Qualcomm, The HDMI forum and others into the open source world the proper way. Pushing game developers to adopt Linux friendly anti cheats. Funding projects directly. Randomly adding developer hours to countless open source projects. Never once taking anything and closing it up. Which is what any other company would do. They haven't even bull dozed their way into ONE project to take control of it via open source development methods. They didn't take over arch, they funded them and helped with code. They didn't say hey Fex guys we like what your doing we are going to fork it, or hey DO As we do. They have never once done that. They aren't MS saying we like GIT, we use GIT lets buy it and run it like a MS thing. I don't know at some point you have to start looking at what they are doing and judge them. Are they consumer friendly, are they Linux friendly? They are more then Linux friendly at this point. YES they are our friends >.<
I don't really care if people think saying so makes me a Valve booster. I am. As a Linux user I can see what they have done. I was as skeptical of Valve as anyone else 10 years back. Even a few years ago, I was still a little skeptical when they moved to arch and started throwing money around. At this point I'm really not skeptical anymore. Valve has proven over and over that they are all in on 100% open source, that they aren't looking to muscle in on projects and steer them. They aren't looking to hire good developers away from projects to do "Valve" things. They just want Linux to GO. The Right way. Now we can all argue about what the "right" way is. I thnk its pretty clear at this point Valve sees the "right" way as the fully OPEN the consumer owns this way. I mentioend it take the recent HDMI on AMD changes. Valve COULD have made high bandwidth HDMI work on their cube easily with no issue. All they had to do was include some locked down hardware blobs and make it work. They could have done that. They didn't. They fought with the HDMI Foruim for months and clearly won. Next Kernel AMD Full open HDMI support is mainline. Valve didn't need to take on that fight, they choose to.
Epic has not build any where close to that level of trust. I'm not saying Epic is our enemy, they aren't our friend either.
My guess is if they say anything at all it will be.
SteamDeck/Cube are not locked devices they are open always have been. IF you want to install another distro that requires Secure boot... go head. Its your hardware.
As I've stated, I'm in no way interested in arguments based on speculation, I'm going to add that I'm also not interested in arguments based on paranoid delusion. I am remaining open to the implementation, my opinion is reserved until the implementation has been released and the kinks have been ironed out.
I am certainly not interested in the FOSS only argument, I never have been across a number of Linux based threads now. I trust the Linux community to keep Epic honest.
As long as the user has the option to run EAC v2 on the Steamdeck, even if it involves installing something other than SteamOS, that's an acceptable solution.
So they want to be a unified launcher like Heroic, I can't see anything overly underhanded here - Obviously people are going to keep using Steam as at this point in time it's simply hands down the better launcher for most games.
I am certainly not interested in the FOSS only argument, I never have been across a number of Linux based threads now. I trust the Linux community to keep Epic honest.
As long as the user has the option to run EAC v2 on the Steamdeck, even if it involves installing something other than SteamOS, that's an acceptable solution.
I missed this comment. EGS scans your library of installed games (so, files stored locally on your PC), it doesn't specifically scan Steam accounts.
So they want to be a unified launcher like Heroic, I can't see anything overly underhanded here - Obviously people are going to keep using Steam as at this point in time it's simply hands down the better launcher for most games.
Last edited:
That has never been an issue. You can install windows on the deck if you want. The hardware belongs to the people that bought it. That has always been Valves stance. They were up front from day one selling hardware. If you want to install windows go ahead. If you want to wipe steamos and put cachyos on it go ahead. It is your hardware. I don't expect they are going to compromise their OS. Nothing they have done in 13 years of releases suggests they would go along with Epics solution. In fact it suggests they will go the opposite route. No one was ever locked into SteamOS. At anytime a deck owner could have chosen to install windows on their device and play fortnight.
Yeah, I just don't see it. Valve are primarily a game distribution platform and they had no problem supporting the current implementation of EAC. Valve make money out of games; whether that be game development, game distribution, or gaming hardware. Should Valve choose to ignore EAC v2, users of their products will turn against them, and Valve will know this to be true.
I don't see any evidence suggesting Valve will ignore EAC v2, but I guess we'll wait and see what happens in good time.
2 weeks of silence. Yes we'll see what happens. I don't think they fought with HDMI forum and shipped the cube with out fully functioning HDMI because they were unwilling to include a closed source blob for HDMI. Just to say a few months later ya ok lets lock this fucker down for forenight.
Agreed we'll see.2 weeks of silence. Yes we'll see what happens. I don't think they fought with HDMI forum and shipped the cube with out fully functioning HDMI because they were unwilling to include a closed source blob for HDMI. Just to say a few months later ya ok lets lock this fucker down for forenight.
You mean "two whole weeks"!
Honestly Chad, it's not like anyone stated specifics in relation to time frames here. As for HDMI 2.1, it took Valve around six months to get support running AMD under Linux. If we consider the whole debacle from the beginning, it took 2 years or more to get support running AMD hardware under Linux.
I'm actually impressed we've got two of the most unlikely distro's advancing with EAC v2 support just two weeks after announcement.
Last edited:
It took Valve a couple days to make 2.1 work. It took 6 months for them to break the HDMI Forum to allow it to ship. It's not like it was hard to do or something. The HDMI forum was just a no. That is my point Valve was willing to ship new hardware without 2.1 rather then cave and include non open bits even HDMI firmware.You mean "two whole weeks"!
Honestly Chad, it's not like anyone stated specifics in relation to time frames here. As for HDMI 2.1, it took Valve around six months to get support running AMD under Linux. If we consider the whole debacle from the beginning, it took 2 years or more to get support running AMD hardware under Linux.
I'm actually impressed we've got two of the most unlikely distro's advancing with EAC v2 support just two weeks after announcement.
I am surprised anyone is on board as well.
Er...Yep. As stated, it took Valve 6 months to get HDMI 2.1 support, running AMD under Linux. It didn't take Valve two weeks to get HDMI 2.1 support, running AMD under Linux. There was 6 months of negotiation, really no different to what any reasonable person not praying for failure would expect regarding EAC v2.
And I never mentioned the word 'surprised', I specifically made the comment that I was 'impressed' - there is a difference.
Last edited:
Yes it is impressive that a hobbyist running a distro in his spare time is on board? I love Cachy think Peter does great work but lets not turn him into a titan here or something. He is a guy with a day job helming a Arch based distro, that gets just enough $ donated to pay for most of their server bills. My point on HDMI was simple. Valve stood their ground. THEY could have included the 32-128 kilobytes of closed firmware to make it work. Would not have been a big deal. Instead they choose to fight the HDMI forum until they won. Thinking they are going to jump in bed with Sweeney a guy who does nothing but rant about how Valve is stealing from cusotmers and developers and forcing horrible things on the inudstry and shaming them for loving robots... well anyway I don't think it seems logical. I don't thinik Fortnight is the cludgel Epic believes.
And yes I knew what you meant by impressed. Maz I was being a bit of a dick, sorry.
So far there is a lot of talk going on but no real action on any front. Peter has probably been moving on support EAC more then anywone else no doubt. Watching his GIT changes though its a lot of hoops to jump through frankly. And as I understand it we are still not at a point of Epic Signing and aproving of any distro yet.You can't really hate on companies you believe to be gatekeepers, while praising Valve, in the context of them being gatekeepers regarding gaming under Linux: "If Valve don't accept it, it's doomed to failure"... Which is a big "if", and even then it's not doomed to failure.
Valve's contribution to anticheat under Linux is a absolute fail. Epic are the only real player when it comes to anticheat under Linux, and it seems fairly obvious studio's want a better anticheat implementation under Linux if they are to allow their software to run under the OS of our choosing. I configured my system manually to support EAC v2, and I got it right first go. This isn't rocket science, and there are certain advantages to Linux moving into the modern age regarding secure boot.
Valve's contribution to anticheat under Linux is a absolute fail. Epic are the only real player when it comes to anticheat under Linux, and it seems fairly obvious studio's want a better anticheat implementation under Linux if they are to allow their software to run under the OS of our choosing. I configured my system manually to support EAC v2, and I got it right first go. This isn't rocket science, and there are certain advantages to Linux moving into the modern age regarding secure boot.
Epic has not approved any lists at this point. All anyone is doing is ground work. EAC2 doesn't exist yet. "Once it's working with a critical mass of distro maintainers, we'll bring Fortnite to Linux via the Epic Games Launcher." You can turn on everything you think you need to support EAC2, but the thing is it doesn't exist yet. Epic says they will turn it on, they haven't said when, or detailed what they consider a critical mass of distros. I don't know, are they turning it on for 2 distros? 3 distros? If Ubuntu is on board is that good enough? They have comitted to nothing.
We will just have to disagree on secure boot as well.
I think we're all fully aware of this Chad, and I think Epic will be going ahead with EAC v2 no matter what. Ubuntu were on board before EAC v2 was released, as a distro Ubuntu and it's derivatives already supported everything needed, the options simply needed to be toggled. Nobara are already onboard, GloriousEggroll actually seems to be on board with what Epic's bringing to the table, so I assume Bazzite will be onboard, and CachyOS are onboard.Epic has not approved any lists at this point. All anyone is doing is ground work. EAC2 doesn't exist yet. "Once it's working with a critical mass of distro maintainers, we'll bring Fortnite to Linux via the Epic Games Launcher." You can turn on everything you think you need to support EAC2, but the thing is it doesn't exist yet. Epic says they will turn it on, they haven't said when, or detailed what they consider a critical mass of distros. I don't know, are they turning it on for 2 distros? 3 distros? If Ubuntu is on board is that good enough? They have comitted to nothing.
We will just have to disagree on secure boot as well.
https://x.com/GloriousEggroll/status/2110404004115272038
The only distro really left is actual Fedora, and I doubt they'll sign their Nvidia drivers - so that's one distro out of many not including Valve's console distro, and I doubt Valve won't be onboard with this.
I agree with GE's sentiment: I want Linux to grow, I oppose people chasing growth out before the implementation has even been released and all the kinks ironed out.
Last edited: