Valve -Steam Machines and Linux Gaming NOT Dead

Merc1138 said:
I already pointed out there is a difference between user count, and marketshare.

Pointing out that the margin of error for the polling data is likely higher than the listed marketshare for linux users is not a "bias".

Pointing out another statistic that has effectively been a flatline for over a decade is not a "bias".

Asking you to post some sort of data to back up the idea that Valve's published data is somehow flawed is not a "bias", however your refusal to do so could be shown as evidence of your own bias.

Pointing out that it requires a polling error of an entire order of magnitude to make the marketshare within Valve's published statistics actually be a meaningful percentage is not a "bias".

The fact that you've actually done the childish thing of stating that you're not even going to bother reading my post that you're replying to, because I'm the one being immature? You pull some 150,000 user figure out of nowhere, based on an assumption gathered from who knows what, and you claim to have made a point? I point to statistics, and you just make up random numbers yeah... I'm pretty sure the number of people who would consider that "valid" would still likely be a higher percentage than what Valve is claiming the percentage of their users running linux happens to be.
Click to expand...

150,000k was an example, I have to use an example as accurate user base figures direct from Valve are not available. Sorry, but I can't see the issue here. Not having accurate user base figures to bring meaning to pointless percentages is far from showing any form of bias.

You're still replying like you're on the defensive, can't you reply in a friendly manner? Fact is, developers are still releasing titles under Linux so they must see some value in the platform beyond the percentages shown in the Steam statistics. This is undoubtedly a great thing for all PC users and bringing Windows into the discussion will not change that.
 
It's like you're trying to convince everyone that Windows is still the ducks guts of gaming operating systems by bringing Windows discussion into a discussion about Linux. The problem is that no one's disputing this fact, nor do they care if they've already made the decision to use Linux as a gaming platform.

Such discussion is so pointless.
 
Mazzspeed said:
It's like you're trying to convince everyone that Windows is still the ducks guts of gaming operating systems by bringing Windows discussion into a discussion about Linux. The problem is that no one's disputing this fact, nor do they care if they've already made the decision to use Linux as a gaming platform.

Such discussion is so pointless.
Click to expand...
I didn't bring windows into the discussion, that was someone else. Apparently you really haven't been reading posts. In fact, my direct response to you telling someone not to turn this into a windows discussion was to specifically discuss Linux and the marketshare numbers posted by Valve, which is definitely on topic for the thread.
Valve -Steam Machines and Linux Gaming NOT Dead
In fact, I even specifically stated in another post:
Merc1138 said:
I'm not against gaming on linux, it'd be great if there were more platforms to game on. But to think that the userbase really matters in the grand scheme of things when it's not even half a percent? Come on..
Click to expand...

That is not me parading around the benefits of Windows. Microsoft has more than enough money and market share, that they don't need me shilling for them. I even pointed out further along in that response that the OSX numbers were higher than Linux, which is again not shilling windows. It's discussing operating systems and their market share, specifically not windows. Yet you've thrown insults at me and made accusations simply because I posted references to available information, and the only reason that makes any sense about you claiming that I have some sort of bias is if you're a fanboy.

No, you don't get to simply make up a number out of thin air when people are discussing numbers from sources and expect your made up numbers to mean anything in a discussion. There's nothing valid about it, nor did you make any sort of point. If you had used some sort of data or at least polls/surveys that people here might not have been aware of to back up your claims(which no one ever said you couldn't and were actually asked and encouraged to do), that would be how you could make a point that someone might consider "valid".
 
ChadD said:
Its not about Linux, its about open gaming.... and being prepared for the eventual end of windows as you know it. Its why a lot of the big game engines have baked in Linux support. Unreal didn't bake Linux support in because hey look its 0.22 and it grew to 0.23 this month lets get support done.

Everyone is waiting for the eventual shoe to drop and its simple... that would be Google.

ChromeOS is a toe in the water and a shot at the cloud os. Its only a matter of time before Google decides to go after the last end user platform they don't control from the silicone up. (the PC) That could be a ChromeOS + with some form of gaming support... or more unlikely it could be a more tradtiional Linux distro such as the one Google has been using internally for years. However if you think game developers who plan game launches 5-6 years out in some cases aren't thinking about how they change gears if need be your crazy. Valve has been laying the tracks. Some developers are already seeing the fruits of that sort of with Vulcan being used now for a ton of high end Android games, Valve R&D money is helping that along.

Will Linux as we know it ever over take Windows on a PC for average buy it at Best buy type folks. Nope I doubt it... as always those types of machines need a name recognized OS to sell to plebs. I have no doubt MS has been trying so hard to make a Cloud / store locked version of windows a thing... as they see the real battle coming. ChromeOS right now is painfully cloud based, but there is nothing stopping Google from adding more local Linux bits and pushing it out to OEMS for use on higher end hardware.

Anyway my point is simple... Linux market share is mostly irrelevant to Valves long term plans imo. Steam machines haven't sold like crazy no... but I wouldn't bet against ChromeOS+ Steam approved gaming laptops down the road.
Click to expand...

I hope you are absolutely wrong about this. The worst thing that could happen right now for the Open desktop is Google to become dominant.
 
Mazzspeed said:
It's like you're trying to convince everyone that Windows is still the ducks guts of gaming operating systems by bringing Windows discussion into a discussion about Linux. The problem is that no one's disputing this fact, nor do they care if they've already made the decision to use Linux as a gaming platform.

Such discussion is so pointless.
Click to expand...
Hate to break it to you but this isn't a discussion about Linux, it was a discussion about steam machines, these things just happen to run linux.

BTW you're purposely ignoring the real facts to make your point....Windows is the biggest OS share on steam vs linux. You can't deny the stats that were collected just because it doesn't agree with your view.
 
ChadD said:
As is the case with most Linux steam users... I ain't never been asked to take no survey. So as I say BS... and even if we really are only 1% of all the gamerz in de world... who cares. The one and only time I got a request for a survey was when I was logged in on the wives windows box. lol
Click to expand...

Who cares about the size of a market? LOL! Here's the thing, Valve knows the exact numbers on platform usage WITHOUT the survey, they have to know who is logging into their service and the platform being used in order to sell games. I don't see why Valve would publicly publish platform numbers that they know are way off, especially if those numbers would discourage developers to create Linux versions of their games when that's kind of the idea behind Steam OS and Steam Machines.

And these numbers have been confirmed independently from multiple cross platform developers and this is coming from Phoronix, as pro-Linux as it gets.

ChadD said:
Bottom line is as has been discused by Valve themselves the idea is to foster openness in the gaming industry. Having an entire industry developing software with 3-5 year dev cycles for ONE API that is closed sourced and can be locked off at any time is beyond stupid. EVERYONE windows gamers included should be thankful that Valve spends the cash they do keeping full time Linux code monkeys around pushing cross platform open API gaming tech. Sure we can wish Valve would spend more of their warchest on the effort. Regardless facts are facts they are the only major player spending money on Specific Linux game tech development. The only other major companies contributing in that field are the GPU / CPU companies and most of that work is indirect as their efforts are mostly aimed at Pro compute/3D pipes. (Linux is the superior OS when it comes to pro OpenGL software... and that is the market that most of the non Valve development money goes)
Click to expand...

I've never said that Valve shouldn't do these things. I've been a big supporter of Steam over the years with my money and I understand why they don't want be completely dependent on Windows. I just don't think the state of Linux gaming is all that great five years into this. Yes it has improved and I appreciate Valve's role in that. But things have also improved for Windows independent of Linux. I probably wouldn't have gotten into VR without Valve's support for it.
 
ChadD said:
Will Linux as we know it ever over take Windows on a PC for average buy it at Best buy type folks. Nope I doubt it... as always those types of machines need a name recognized OS to sell to plebs.
Click to expand...

It's not about name recognition, it's about support for gaming. A person who goes into Best Buy and buys a gaming level laptop to play games has the expectation of being able to play the games they want on that device the same a DIY PC gaming rig builder has.
 
heatlesssun said:
It's not about name recognition, it's about support for gaming. A person who goes into Best Buy and buys a gaming level laptop to play games has the expectation of being able to play the games they want on that device the same a DIY PC gaming rig builder has.
Click to expand...
That's actually a very valid point. No one walking into Best Buy with the intent of getting a prebuilt gaming machine gives a crap which OS it's running... except for one factor.

"Can it run GTA 5? Can it run the latest Assassin's Creed? Can I play PUBG on it?"

And of course "well if you configure WINE then maybe but you're still dependent on..." isn't going to sell a $2000 prebuilt gaming machine.

And from the developers of PUBG: https://www.heise.de/newsticker/mel...ds-soll-10-Jahre-bleiben-3811939.html?seite=5
heise online: Wird es eine Linux-Version geben?

Greene: Es gibt einfach nicht genug Linux-Spieler. Das gleiche gilt für Mac. Wir haben dafür derzeit einfach nicht genügend Ressourcen. Steht bei uns nicht auf der Roadmap. Tut mir leid.
Click to expand...
Which apparently translates to... there aren't enough Linux users(or Mac users) to bother. So a company that makes money hand over fist off of a single game can't be bothered to spend money porting their game to a market segment that small, or even put it on a roadmap they're willing to publicly discuss. But according to some people in this thread, even they must have bad numbers that aren't representative of the actual community even after pulling in over 700 million in revenue(likely gross) in 2017.

Even Bethesda who has managed to release Skyrim 6 times, not including 2 full priced VR mods for existing platforms(Playstation VR, and Windows PC VR), to the point of being the butt of jokes about porting Skyrim to run on everything under the sun just so they can sell a few more copies, can't be bothered to port it to Linux.
 
SomeoneElse said:
BTW you're purposely ignoring the real facts to make your point....Windows is the biggest OS share on steam vs linux. You can't deny the stats that were collected just because it doesn't agree with your view.
Click to expand...

I'm not ignoring anything, this is a discussion about Steam Machines and Linux, specifically Linux, and for some obscure reason people feel the need to highlight Windows gaming in the discussion almost like they fear Linux. In comparison I haven't highlighted any preference for any particular OS - My most used device these days is a Pixel C.

To quote myself:

Mazzspeed said:
It's like you're trying to convince everyone that Windows is still the ducks guts of gaming operating systems by bringing Windows discussion into a discussion about Linux. The problem is that no one's disputing this fact, nor do they care if they've already made the decision to use Linux as a gaming platform.
Click to expand...

As stated earlier, I'm not interested in discussing Windows in a thread specifically aimed at Steam Machines running Linux and it's highly unlikely anyone that's already made the decision to switch to Linux as a gaming platform gives two hoots about gaming under Windows - It's a pointless argument that achieves no more than trowing discussion off topic.

Once again, I used 150,000 as an example, a figure I plucked out of the air, as there are no accurate user base figures to give the Steam percentages any actual meaning - They're largely useless.

Now if you'll excuse me, I've recently been diagnosed with hereditary diabetes and the high blood sugar levels have attacked my retinas so I literally cannot see these posts without an extreme amount of effort, so highlight how awesome Windows is amongst yourselves as replying to this thread just takes way too much effort.
 
Mazzspeed said:
I'm not ignoring anything, this is a discussion about Steam Machines and Linux, specifically Linux, and for some obscure reason people feel the need to highlight Windows gaming in the discussion almost like they fear Linux. In comparison I haven't highlighted any preference for any particular OS - My most used device these days is a Pixel C.

To quote myself:



As stated earlier, I'm not interested in discussing Windows in a thread specifically aimed at Steam Machines running Linux and it's highly unlikely anyone that's already made the decision to switch to Linux as a gaming platform gives two hoots about gaming under Windows - It's a pointless argument that achieves no more than trowing discussion off topic.

Once again, I used 150,000 as an example, a figure I plucked out of the air, as there are no accurate user base figures to give the Steam percentages any actual meaning - They're largely useless.

Now if you'll excuse me, I've recently been diagnosed with hereditary diabetes and the high blood sugar levels have attacked my retinas so I literally cannot see these posts without an extreme amount of effort, so highlight how awesome Windows is amongst yourselves as replying to this thread just takes way too much effort.
Click to expand...
And again, no one here is shilling for Microsoft(quite the opposite). Sorry you can't handle facts. Again, find facts to support your claims instead of proclaiming that surveys are meaningless just because you don't like the result while just making things up on your own and attempting to present them as some sort of counter argument.
 
Merc1138 said:
And again, no one here is shilling for Microsoft(quite the opposite). Sorry you can't handle facts. Again, find facts to support your claims instead of proclaiming that surveys are meaningless just because you don't like the result while just making things up on your own and attempting to present them as some sort of counter argument.
Click to expand...

Not really sure what some here a complaining about. The reason this thread exists is because of the perceived failure to date of Steam OS/Machines. The post from Valve was all about reassuring Linux folks that Valve wasn't giving up on Steam OS/Machines. You can't ignore the competition when the underlying subject is about failure. I think that's kind of a problem with Linux particularly when it comes to gaming.

Ok, one makes the decision that that don't want to use that OS I won't name and wants to play games on their PC and sees the catalog of 4400 Linux compatible games on Steam and thinks how awesome. If one is actually more interested in playing games on their PC that viewpoint is irrelevant.
 
Merc1138 said:
And again, no one here is shilling for Microsoft(quite the opposite). Sorry you can't handle facts. Again, find facts to support your claims instead of proclaiming that surveys are meaningless just because you don't like the result while just making things up on your own and attempting to present them as some sort of counter argument.
Click to expand...

I'm not disputing any facts, no idea what makes you think I can't handle them. The problem here is a lack of facts as a result of no official user base numbers, a fact that you appear to be avoiding.

Steam machines didn't fail, Steam machines never took off, at all, and were never intended to 'succeed'. However gaming titles under Linux are growing so developers see something that you refuse to acknowledge due to percentages that mean *Nothing* Without official user base figures direct from Valve themselves.

I'm not disputing facts, you're creating an argument over a point that has no place in this discussion based around percentages with no metric to base them on. You really need to accept that the Steam survey essentially sucks balls. Sure, you can use it as a comparative tool, but it tells you absolutely nothing about just how many users are gaming under Linux, or Windows, or OSX - And the fact remains that no matter how much you fear Linux and feel the need to being Windows discussion into a thread based around Linux, it's just not going to mean anything at all to those that have already adopted the platform, therefore comparisons are pointless and childish.

As stated many times earlier - Your argument is outrageously pointless. That's the only fact you need to understand. Steam machines failed because PC hardware is too complicated and expensive compared to consoles, technology the average person can handle.
 
Mazzspeed said:
I'm not disputing any facts, no idea what makes you think I can't handle them. The problem here is a lack of facts as a result of no official user base numbers, a fact that you appear to be avoiding.
Click to expand...

Steam publishes official numbers every month. Steam HAS the exact numbers on platforms connecting to their service and the games and platforms in purchases without this survey. Why would Steam publicly publish numbers every month it would have to know are accurate or not? Plus the platform numbers in the Steam survey have been independently confirmed directly from developers by PRO-LINUX folks. I'm not saying the Steam survey numbers are spot on but there's not much doubt that currently Linux users comprise less than a percent of Steam's users.

Again, if that's not the case, Valve would have to know, that data has zip to do with the survey. Why would Valve publish numbers it knows are wrong as they obviously discourage developers working on Linux clients? It doesn't make sense that Valve would willfully discourage Linux game development if while it's trying to establish it.
 
Mazzspeed said:
I'm not disputing any facts, no idea what makes you think I can't handle them. The problem here is a lack of facts as a result of no official user base numbers, a fact that you appear to be avoiding.

Steam machines didn't fail, Steam machines never took off, at all, and were never intended to 'succeed'. However gaming titles under Linux are growing so developers see something that you refuse to acknowledge due to percentages that mean *Nothing* Without official user base figures direct from Valve themselves.

I'm not disputing facts, you're creating an argument over a point that has no place in this discussion based around percentages with no metric to base them on. You really need to accept that the Steam survey essentially sucks balls. Sure, you can use it as a comparative tool, but it tells you absolutely nothing about just how many users are gaming under Linux, or Windows, or OSX - And the fact remains that no matter how much you fear Linux and feel the need to being Windows discussion into a thread based around Linux, it's just not going to mean anything at all to those that have already adopted the platform, therefore comparisons are pointless and childish.

As stated many times earlier - Your argument is outrageously pointless. That's the only fact you need to understand. Steam machines failed because PC hardware is too complicated and expensive compared to consoles, technology the average person can handle.
Click to expand...
I need to accept that the steam survey sucks balls, purely because you don't like the results of the survey and still cannot produce any sources of your own to counter that when repeatedly asked to do so?

Additionally, you can keep claiming that the linux user base is growing. No one has stated differently. However there is a difference between a slowly growing number of installed users, and marketshare. As I've stated, these are the same things we've seen repeated for 25+ years now with regards to linux and desktop users, and if anything over the past 10 years the linux desktop user marketshare has shrunk compared to the others. It's not as if people are abandoning linux to go to windows, it's that the market is growing faster than the linux desktop userbase. Of course you can use it as a comparitive tool, and developers and publishers need to consider which market segments to focus their efforts on to turn a profit.

In addition to your insults, your refusal to post sources to your claims, your nonsensical numbers that you admittedly pulled out of thin air, you're going to tell me that I "fear linux"? Why would I fear linux? Even if I did, why would I fear something that has less than half a percent of the marketshare with regards to the steam userbase? What exactly is there to fear from linux? Do you think I'm being paid by microsoft? I'd love to get a check from microsoft just to point at the steam survey figures, but that's not happening. Yet you keep going on about how we "fear linux" and our "need to bring up windows"(because ignoring 96% of the market is a bright idea?), it's making you sound like a conspiracy nut who has their tinfoil hat on too tight.

Dispute facts with facts. Stop throwing a tantrum because you don't like facts and can't be bothered to discuss any of your own when asked. That's not how grownups have a reasonable discussion regarding topics they disagree on.
 
I dunno, linux users almost sound like crypto miners. "No no, it is going to be big!!" And when it falls for months and months at a time, it is just a hiccup. And windows users we just submit lol.

I really wanted the steam machines to take off, I would love for linux to be a viable gaming platform, but I also like the ease of clicking a game in steam and clicking install and then play. I know that by primarily using windows I contribute to the success of it but what am I supposed to do? I also don't have the same level of free time I did when I was younger sadly.

The steam machine like any product needs to be able to solve a problem or a need, and I don't think it did that. It is a difficult niche. Your linux users 'typically' are computer savvy and would not just buy some pre-configured box off the shelf to play games, and your less experienced gamers would be scared off by the lesser level of game choices. Your console gamers, have a strong level of brand loyalty, so that might be a rough crowd too. If you are a windows gamer, well that wouldn't entice you either.

I think for a living room entertainment box it has a place but I feel like it would exist as an 'in addition to' whatever gaming platform you already use and then would likely only be the lower end model.

I have no facts, just my personal opinion on it. I guess I feel like, what solution to a problem was it working into that already cheaper/better options don't already exist?
 
Darunion said:
I dunno, linux users almost sound like crypto miners. "No no, it is going to be big!!" And when it falls for months and months at a time, it is just a hiccup. And windows users we just submit lol.

I really wanted the steam machines to take off, I would love for linux to be a viable gaming platform, but I also like the ease of clicking a game in steam and clicking install and then play. I know that by primarily using windows I contribute to the success of it but what am I supposed to do? I also don't have the same level of free time I did when I was younger sadly.

The steam machine like any product needs to be able to solve a problem or a need, and I don't think it did that. It is a difficult niche. Your linux users 'typically' are computer savvy and would not just buy some pre-configured box off the shelf to play games, and your less experienced gamers would be scared off by the lesser level of game choices. Your console gamers, have a strong level of brand loyalty, so that might be a rough crowd too. If you are a windows gamer, well that wouldn't entice you either.

I think for a living room entertainment box it has a place but I feel like it would exist as an 'in addition to' whatever gaming platform you already use and then would likely only be the lower end model.

I have no facts, just my personal opinion on it. I guess I feel like, what solution to a problem was it working into that already cheaper/better options don't already exist?
Click to expand...
Have an opinion is fine, everyone has one and they're entitled to it, including Mazzspeed(it's just that you aren't posting your opinion as if it were fact).

The steambox seemed to fit some idea that there were people in between $300/system console gamers and $2500/system PC gamers, and a machine that plays games could fill that niche. Of course we know that the reality is the console guys weren't going to blow $1300 on a machine that can't play the latest games their console could, even if it could play some indie titles at higher resolutions and framerates.

Steam machines aside, this really is a chicken and egg issue that has been going on for decades. "If you build it they will come" didn't work in this case, because those users weren't interested in prebuilt boxes and they were too expensive for others(or you just got the shitty $500 model that was likely worse than a $300 console).
 
Agreed. Something could even be said about marketing. I still run into tons of people that had no idea such a thing existed. PC gaming kind of sells itself. Consoles dump a ton of money into advertising. Steam boxes were a risk and I commend them on trying it because there was a lot of potential benefit to it becoming another major retail gaming option.
 
Merc1138 said:
Have an opinion is fine, everyone has one and they're entitled to it, including Mazzspeed(it's just that you aren't posting your opinion as if it were fact).

The steambox seemed to fit some idea that there were people in between $300/system console gamers and $2500/system PC gamers, and a machine that plays games could fill that niche. Of course we know that the reality is the console guys weren't going to blow $1300 on a machine that can't play the latest games their console could, even if it could play some indie titles at higher resolutions and framerates.

Steam machines aside, this really is a chicken and egg issue that has been going on for decades. "If you build it they will come" didn't work in this case, because those users weren't interested in prebuilt boxes and they were too expensive for others(or you just got the shitty $500 model that was likely worse than a $300 console).
Click to expand...

I really don't think the issue is that it can't play enough games...

Ask yourself if MS released a version of Windows and called it "Windows -X" and they removed W32 / The start button / The browser or the ability to install one ... and its only claim to fame was it could load and play games from the windows store and shipped with a nice Premium Game pad. Would you pay an OEM a $25-100 premium over the same machine running standard Windows ?

I doubt you would.... with that in mind I think its easy to see why they didn't fly off the shelves. Its not that the software was bad... its just if your going to charge PC pricing it needs to do more then just game, else just buy an actual Console, as there is no arguing a PS4/Xbox do a fine job of playing Joystick/Controller games.
 
ChadD said:
I really don't think the issue is that it can't play enough games...
Click to expand...

Of course it's an issue because not just about quantity, it's about CHOICE.

ChadD said:
Ask yourself if MS released a version of Windows and called it "Windows -X" and they removed W32 / The start button / The browser or the ability to install one ...
Click to expand...

They did and it failed.
 
heatlesssun said:
They did and it failed.
Click to expand...

There was a "windows machine" oh do tell. But ya if you talking about windows -s ... ya fell on its face true. But that wasn't about games. Even that OS did more then just game. Sadly ;) I would have to admit that even Windows -S made more sense then a steam game only version of linux did.

I do know of course the Steam Machine was never about eating MS Xbox or Sonys PS4 launch... it was about moving the game industry to less Windows Specific tools which Valve has achieved in a big way.
 
ChadD said:
I really don't think the issue is that it can't play enough games...

Ask yourself if MS released a version of Windows and called it "Windows -X" and they removed W32 / The start button / The browser or the ability to install one ... and its only claim to fame was it could load and play games from the windows store and shipped with a nice Premium Game pad. Would you pay an OEM a $25-100 premium over the same machine running standard Windows ?

I doubt you would.... with that in mind I think its easy to see why they didn't fly off the shelves. Its not that the software was bad... its just if your going to charge PC pricing it needs to do more then just game, else just buy an actual Console, as there is no arguing a PS4/Xbox do a fine job of playing Joystick/Controller games.
Click to expand...
Me? No. The average guy who would walk into Best Buy and get a prebuilt gaming machine?

The problem is that people like you and I are not the mass market who would be buying prebuilt machines, and neither are the linux enthusiasts who didn't buy a steam box. As far as the windows store in your scenario goes, even with the windows store alone that would be a better selection of "AAA" games than what you can get from a linux box, however you're still talking about a $1000+ system which I doubt holds any appeal to console gamers. Just look at the xbox one x, even if 100% of the titles for that system were on the windows store(some of them are, a lot aren't) I seriously doubt MS could sell a $1500 box to run 1080@120 or 4k@60 as a minimum performance target and actually see much in the way of sales volume.

Back to the steam machines, yes it really does boil down to what games it can play. Linux as a whole, not so much. But I don't know anyone who primarily plays console games that would drop $1000-$2500 on a steam machine to play 1/10th of the available library of "AAA" titles they could get on a ps4 or xbox one for a fraction of the system cost.
 
  • Like
Reactions: ChadD
like this
ChadD said:
There was a "windows machine" oh do tell. But ya if you talking about windows -s ... ya fell on its face true. But that wasn't about games. Even that OS did more then just game.
Click to expand...

I thought he was referring to Microsoft Bob, myself. Cortana is just Bob in a dress, after all! ;)
 
  • Like
Reactions: ChadD
like this
ChadD said:
There was a "windows machine" oh do tell. But ya if you talking about windows -s ... ya fell on its face true. But that wasn't about games. Even that OS did more then just game.
Click to expand...
That OS did do more than just game, but it still ran into a similar problem, except that was with applications. It doesn't matter if there's Office, a couple browsers, etc. it needed to let people run the applications they want to run(which can include games). For example, there's not a chance in hell we could have gotten away with deploying Windows-S where I work, because other than Office, none of the other programs used to get things done by employees here, were available to run on it.
 
  • Like
Reactions: ChadD
like this
ChadD said:
There was a "windows machine" oh do tell.
Click to expand...

There's tons of "windows machines" targeted for gaming on the market.

ChadD said:
But ya if you talking about windows -s ... ya fell on its face true. But that wasn't about games. Even that OS did more then just game. Sadly ;) I would have to admit that even Windows -S made more sense then a steam game only version of linux did.
Click to expand...

Windows 10 S isn't a specific SKU anymore but a mode, I was really talking about Windows RT. ​

​
ChadD said:
it was about moving the game industry to less Windows Specific tools which Valve has achieved in a big way.
Click to expand...

Not sure what your definition is of in a big way means. Sure there's a lot going on here but the large majority of PC games are on DX 11 still. Of course I get your point about three plus lead times for development cycles and would expect more Vulkan games to come along but we're still a ways off from knowing how that's really going to turn out.
 
heatlesssun said:
There's tons of "windows machines" targeted for gaming on the market.

Windows 10 S isn't a specific SKU anymore but a mode, I was really talking about Windows RT. ​

Not sure what your definition is of in a big way means. Sure there's a lot going on here but the large majority of PC games are on DX 11 still. Of course I get your point about three plus lead times for development cycles and would expect more Vulkan games to come along but we're still a ways off from knowing how that's really going to turn out.
Click to expand...

There are windows gaming machines sure but you can still load Chrome Firefox or whatever else you want on them is my point. SteamOS does one thing and one thing only. It is Linux based sure but its doesn't let you load up other PC software. As an OS I never really understand SteamOS as a real consumer product to be honest. Its only value is as a target for the gaming industry to hit. You always talk about fragmentation being a Linux negative... while Valve offered the solution. Aim for SteamOS and be done let the 1001 distros worry about how to integrate things from there for their own distros. Which is what is happening and it works very well. SteamOS used a nice solid LTS Ubuntu base which is easy for developers to target. If the solus people or fedora or suse ect ect want perfect steam operation they can easily add that on their end, by replicating those basic LTS ubuntu packages or ensuring theirs are 100% compliant... or in some cases they keep lists of games and install specific libraries for specific games known to need them ect. (point is the developers don't have to worry about any of that anymore)

And yes I get what version of windows you where getting at. My only point is MS has never tried to sell a true "this only plays games" version of windows, it would be a bad idea. MS doesn't have to aim the software industry at DX and other windows tech they where already using all that stuff.

The next few years should be interesting in general. DX12 I am sure has some more games in the pipe... as does Vulcan. Right now they both seem to be picking up around the same amount of support from developers. For both Vulcan and DX12 though the next year or two should tell us if either is going to gain much traction. A lot of the other work Valve has been doing behind the scenes with developers is likewise still in the pipe for now... I am not expecting some massive flood don't get me wrong, still around 1000 games a year have been hitting Linux, and I do expect that to jump to 1500 in the next year or two. No it won't be over taking windows, still more and more its a viable option for gamers. As I have said before the type of games I tend to buy personally are for the most part already ending up on Linux... 90%+ of my steam list has Linux versions, and until a year or so back I was still running windows for games and had no issue buying a windows only game if I really wanted to play it so I wasn't cherry picking. Of course that's me... if your into the FPS style games and the GambleBox style AAA shit shows that are Windows only for now, I guess Linux isn't an option. ;)

Anyway I guess we about exhusted this convo. We can disagree on how useful or successful the Valve Linux push has been. I think we agree the steam machine was always a fail product and was never going to sell in huge numbers. IMO Valve new that was going to be the case going in... and it was all about giving software developers a solid single target to develop Linux games for... I don't work there though I could be wrong and Gabe is crying over his lost machine sales. (I doubt it though) :)
 
Darunion said:
I really wanted the steam machines to take off, I would love for linux to be a viable gaming platform, but I also like the ease of clicking a game in steam and clicking install and then play. I know that by primarily using windows I contribute to the success of it but what am I supposed to do? I also don't have the same level of free time I did when I was younger sadly.
Click to expand...

Darunion, nothing against you, but when I read this I know you haven't tried native gaming under Linux.

Merc1138 said:
I need to accept that the steam survey sucks balls, purely because you don't like the results of the survey and still cannot produce any sources of your own to counter that when repeatedly asked to do so?
Click to expand...

No, you can't accept the fact that your percentages are baseless, they're worthless and they measure nothing in relation to user numbers - Nothing, at, all. Nothing. I've reiterated a few times as you appear to be struggling on your crusade. If Linux is failing, why the need for the Windows advocates to rant on about Windows in a thread devoted to the topic of Steam Machines under Linux.

Note the full stop at the end of the sentence - That was a factual statement, not a question, don't waste your time trying to justify it.

Merc1138 said:
Additionally, you can keep claiming that the linux user base is growing. No one has stated differently. However there is a difference between a slowly growing number of installed users, and marketshare. As I've stated, these are the same things we've seen repeated for 25+ years now with regards to linux and desktop users, and if anything over the past 10 years the linux desktop user marketshare has shrunk compared to the others. It's not as if people are abandoning linux to go to windows, it's that the market is growing faster than the linux desktop userbase. Of course you can use it as a comparitive tool, and developers and publishers need to consider which market segments to focus their efforts on to turn a profit.
Click to expand...

Who cares about 25 years ago? I certainly don't.

I don't believe I ever claimed anything about the Linux user base growing and I fail to see how market share is relevant regarding an operating system that's free? I stated the number of titles is growing under Steam, no more. Market share only applies to an operating system you don't own and the one you don't own was just put on life support. You are babbling and Linux desktop market share has more than doubled in the last 10 years if you trust Netcounter, which I certainly don't since their last apparent 'mistake'.

Once again, the only fact you need to understand is that Windows discussion has no place in this thread, no matter how you try to twist it. You've successfully highlighted the arrogance of Windows users by forcing your cause here, no more. You certainly haven't convinced anyone with half a brain of anything related to your cause.

I would really like a friendly discussion with no Windows talk in a thread devoted to the topic of Linux, is that possible?
 
Mazzspeed said:
I would really like a friendly discussion with no Windows talk in a thread devoted to the topic of Linux, is that possible?
Click to expand...
It's about as possible as it would be with a topic about just Windows. Sorry bub, but Linux advocates do it too, just how it goes around here.
 
Void said:
It's about as possible as it would be with a topic about just Windows. Sorry bub, but Linux advocates do it too, just how it goes around here.
Click to expand...

So I've noticed, seems difficult for peeps to act impartial here. Thanks for the heads up Void. ;)
 
  • Like
Reactions: Void
like this
Facts as follows:

- The number of gaming titles under Linux on Steam are still growing and Valve has highlighted their continued commitment to Linux, gaming under Linux is not in any way dead.
- Graphics drivers under Linux have improved out of sight in the last couple of years due to commitment from Valve and are now pretty much on par with their Windows counterparts where a common, native API is used.
- Games under Steam on Linux are installed identically to games under Steam on Windows, there is nothing even remotely difficult about installing games under Steam on Linux.
- Steam survey percentages are worthless without accurate user base numbers direct from Valve to relate them to, they are no more than a very rough comparative tool at best and tell no one anything about actual Linux, OSX or Windows user numbers under Steam.
- Linux usage has more than doubled in the last 10 years that we're able to measure and Netcounter's statistics are dubious when you consider the Linux percentage debacle last year that was quickly covered up and the fact that shortly after the statistics for Windows XP, 7, 8 and 10 were all lumped into one category titled 'Windows'. It seems someone doesn't want people working out Windows 10's sluggish adoption statistics.
- I'm impartial, I don't care a hoot what operating system people use. In fact when it comes to Linux I believe Windows users should stick to what they know best.
- The only time I even mentioned Linux adoption is where it was wrongfully stated that Linux adoption had declined in the last 10 years. I really don't care what the Linux adoption figure is, partially because I know there's no real accurate way to even measure it.
- I believe that anyone that attempts to force a point due to personal preference needs to take a long hard look at themselves.
- Windows usage statistics under Steam have no place in a thread based around Steam Machines under Linux as Linux users couldn't care less about Windows usage statistics for obvious reasons.
- Everyone is well aware of Windows dominance under Steam, it'd want to be dominant considering the headway it's got on every other platform wouldn't it? No one is debating Windows dominance.
- Both Windows and Linux users overstate the capabilities of their preferred operating systems at times, but only a shill would understate the real thread Linux poses to Windows - Especially when the sole developers interest in the operating system is waining. Obviously Microsoft know something no one else wants to accept.
- I have not posted opinion as fact.
 
Mazzspeed said:
Facts as follows:

- The number of gaming titles under Linux on Steam are still growing and Valve has highlighted their continued commitment to Linux, gaming under Linux is not in any way dead.
- Graphics drivers under Linux have improved out of sight in the last couple of years due to commitment from Valve and are now pretty much on par with their Windows counterparts where a common, native API is used.
- Games under Steam on Linux are installed identically to games under Steam on Windows, there is nothing even remotely difficult about installing games under Steam on Linux.
- Steam survey percentages are worthless without accurate user base numbers direct from Valve to relate them to, they are no more than a very rough comparative tool at best and tell no one anything about actual Linux, OSX or Windows user numbers under Steam.
- Linux usage has more than doubled in the last 10 years that we're able to measure and Netcounter's statistics are dubious when you consider the Linux percentage debacle last year that was quickly covered up and the fact that shortly after the statistics for Windows XP, 7, 8 and 10 were all lumped into one category titled 'Windows'. It seems someone doesn't want people working out Windows 10's sluggish adoption statistics.
- I'm impartial, I don't care a hoot what operating system people use. In fact when it comes to Linux I believe Windows users should stick to what they know best.
- The only time I even mentioned Linux adoption is where it was wrongfully stated that Linux adoption had declined in the last 10 years. I really don't care what the Linux adoption figure is, partially because I know there's no real accurate way to even measure it.
- I believe that anyone that attempts to force a point due to personal preference needs to take a long hard look at themselves.
- Windows usage statistics under Steam have no place in a thread based around Steam Machines under Linux as Linux users couldn't care less about Windows usage statistics for obvious reasons.
- Everyone is well aware of Windows dominance under Steam, it'd want to be dominant considering the headway it's got on every other platform wouldn't it? No one is debating Windows dominance.
- Both Windows and Linux users overstate the capabilities of their preferred operating systems at times, but only a shill would understate the real thread Linux poses to Windows - Especially when the sole developers interest in the operating system is waining. Obviously Microsoft know something no one else wants to accept.
- I have not posted opinion as fact.
Click to expand...
Haven't posted any opinion as fact? Let's highlight those opinions with bold then.
Failed to define "par" for drivers.
Opinion about survey because you refuse after being asked multiple times to show data that says otherwise.
Claims to be impartial and says windows users should stick to what they know best. This is entirely opinion.
You believe people need to take a long hard look at themselves, that's opinion... follow your own advice.
Your opinion is that the windows stats don't matter, because you don't believe the linux stats and cannot show anything that says otherwise. More opinion.
Talking about some threat again... which is again opinion. Can't post marketshare data, refuses to ignore any posted marketshare data because it doesn't fit your beliefs, this does not make your opinion fact.
Haven't posted opinion as fact? Funny you ended your post that way, because you claimed everything in your list was fact when out of your 12 points, 7 of them, more than half are just opinions stated as fact with nothing to qualify any of the statements after you've been asked to and refused to post any data of your own to back up your statements. That last "point" of yours also makes you a liar.
 
Merc1138 said:
Haven't posted any opinion as fact? Let's highlight those opinions with bold then.
Failed to define "par" for drivers.
Opinion about survey because you refuse after being asked multiple times to show data that says otherwise.
Claims to be impartial and says windows users should stick to what they know best. This is entirely opinion.
You believe people need to take a long hard look at themselves, that's opinion... follow your own advice.
Your opinion is that the windows stats don't matter, because you don't believe the linux stats and cannot show anything that says otherwise. More opinion.
Talking about some threat again... which is again opinion. Can't post marketshare data, refuses to ignore any posted marketshare data because it doesn't fit your beliefs, this does not make your opinion fact.
Haven't posted opinion as fact? Funny you ended your post that way, because you claimed everything in your list was fact when out of your 12 points, 7 of them, more than half are just opinions stated as fact with nothing to qualify any of the statements after you've been asked to and refused to post any data of your own to back up your statements. That last "point" of yours also makes you a liar.
Click to expand...

How many different ways can one interpret the word 'par', my beliefs have nothing to do with the fact that Linux usage is notorious for being impossible to quantify due to an obvious lack of retail sales figures, my point regarding Steam statistics is factual and I cannot show this 'data' you request as Steam do not release user base numbers - A point you continue to miss?

And you're still hammering home the point that Linux users aren't the only ones that act arrogant in public forums. This is ridiculous, that's not an attack upon yourself - That's a factual comment. ;)
 
This discussion actually highlights something I was thinking just the other day:

Normally I'm dead against any form of data collection, although I stand my ground when I state that I am completely impartial when it comes to operating systems. But when I read that Ubuntu were collecting data on Linux usage I actually thought it was an outstanding idea, the only true way we can finally see actual Linux usage statistics free from manipulation! A great idea if you ask me.

Not all data collection is bad.
 
Mazzspeed said:
How many different ways can one interpret the word 'par', my beliefs have nothing to do with the fact that Linux usage is notorious for being impossible to quantify due to an obvious lack of retail sales figures, my point regarding Steam statistics is factual and I cannot show this 'data' you request as Steam do not release user base numbers - A point you continue to miss?

And you're still hammering home the point that Linux users aren't the only ones that act arrogant in public forums. This is ridiculous, that's not an attack upon yourself - That's a factual comment. ;)
Click to expand...
Is that you BulletDust? The statement about not being able to track Linux cause of lack of retail sales is exactly what he would say. Hmmmm. :D
 
Void said:
Is that you BulletDust? The statement about not being able to track Linux cause of lack of retail sales is exactly what he would say. Hmmmm. :D
Click to expand...

No idea what you're on about, everyone knows Linux isn't sold in retail channels, that's the meaning of free.

Why is it seemingly implied that I use Linux?
 
Mazzspeed said:
No idea what you're on about, everyone knows Linux isn't sold in retail channels, that's the meaning of free.
Click to expand...
I know but he was the only one who used to actually feel the need to repeat it over and over. :D
 
BloodyIron said:
If you call hundreds of thousands of sales none, then whatever.
Click to expand...

That's not how it works, the average PC title doesn't generate hundreds in thousands of sales. Let's take a hypothetical example. A developer creates a cross platform game on Steam with Windows, macOS and Linux clients. The game costs $20 and sells 100,000 copies over a year thus the total revenue is $2 million. The percentage break down of sales by platform is 92% Windows, 6% macOS and 2% Linux. These are realistic numbers as multiple developers who have reported sales breakdown numbers by platform have reported numbers very much like this example.

So Windows accounted for $1.84 million of total revenue, macOS $120,000 and Linux $40,000. The margin on the Linux version is going to be much thinner regardless and the Linux version might very well not be worth the effort depending on the Linux specific costs. So that's why I do get the point of cross platform tools to leverage development costs and in particular to make it worth while to develop for smaller platforms. But the numbers for Linux are so small that even using such a development process Linux specific costs could easily make a Linux version unprofitable.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top