- Joined
- Jan 8, 2008
- Messages
- 9,786
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
- 9,786
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:
DukenukemX
[H]F Junkie
- Joined
- Jan 30, 2005
- Messages
- 11,744
Because Valve's goals are aligned with Epic's. Valve wants more users on Linux because they fear what Microsoft would do with Windows, while Epic is moving to Linux since they see a shift in marketshare. Valve could blow off Epic because they hold a personal grudge, or work with them because it's just good business.
I don't believe if they blow them off it would be personal at all. Turning Linux into windows isn't the solution Valve is looking for. They didn't want Microsoft to have sway over their store. Why in the world would they want Epic to have sway over their store instead? Allowing Epic to approve or not approve your kernel, I mean how is that different from allowing MS to do the same. This type of power over the Steam store is exactly why valve created an windows escape hatch to begin with.
I mean play it out lets say EAC2 works well enough, and every game using unreal engine switches to it. Lets say Epic does a "good" job of making it easy to implement on other games as well. You think Valve wants to be in a situation in 3 years where 30% of the popular games on their store would stop working if Epic decides NA we're out? Or you know what EAC2 games ONLY launch in Linux from the Epic Launcher?
This is the exact scenario Valve saw happening in windows which is why the created steamos. Where MS was going to force people to their own store.
Back up Mazz. NO one said the derivative distros would work.
Ubuntu proper will get approved sure Its Canacodial they will go along with most things that might result some how in them making money. Dell being able to sell ubuntu gaming laptops sounds good to them.
Derivatives however would need to be approved by Epic on their own. I'm not saying many or all won't be, lets just not assume that because Ubuntu LTS is approved a distro that isn't Ubutnu LTS but uses it as a base will be. I'm sure KDE neon that your using probably will be as they make no real changes and use the standard kernel. Other distros are going to be a * maybe depending.
I mean realistically anyone running say mint right now can make EAC2 work probably but it will be a mess. If they didn't have secure boot on and have been on mint for a year. Mint as a distro maybe makes some edits, but if not users are going to have to edit stabs to add lsm=lockdown,capability,landlock,yama,bpf type things. I think a lot of specifically Mint and Pop OS users are going to see this news and think yay I'm good to go... then realize they are NOT good to go. Cachy is doing this as a separate kernel and boot, and for Cachy that makes sense. Are all these ubutnu derivitaves going to start offering alt boot EAC kernels with the hardened flags and such? I think the Ubuntu derivative user base is going to be the most frustrated by this implementaion.
Last edited:
DukenukemX
[H]F Junkie
- Joined
- Jan 30, 2005
- Messages
- 11,744
The problem is having Epic approve of kernels. I'd imagine Valve would rather have a 3rd party do it instead, as that would be the most fair way forward. The Linux Foundation makes the most sense to act as the ones who approve of secure kernels.
That is a solid idea. Would the Linux foundation care to be pulled into this? I don't know. Your right though the main issue here is Epic holds the keys. If someone else holds them, maybe. Is Epic ok with not having the control? I doubt Epic is willing to give up the ultimate control.
Any distro based on Ubuntu LTS is going to use a signed kernel, if it doesn't use a kernel supplied by Canonical, it's not really based on Ubuntu LTS. KDE Neon is only 'just' based on Ubuntu LTS due to it's roiling DE.
No one's "turning Linux into Windows". As Linux users, we still have the superior less invasive anticheat solution compared to that used under Windows due to the fact that Windows has a half baked ebpf implementation. Once more: Epic are not approving kernels; the kernel is signed, which in most cases is enough to meet the requirements outlined by Epic, which many kernels do already.
I did it in the span of about half an hour, it's really not that hard. Certain distro's are supplying scripts with the signed kernel to automate the process, I'm sure users will create and make available such scripts in the case the distro maintainer doesn't. There's nothing messy about it as these are features already built into Linux.
Epic aren't approving kernels, only CachyOS needs one feature removed in order to meet the requirements of EAC v2 that many don't use anyway. Every other distro simply runs a signed kernel as opposed to a non signed kernel. In almost all cases these are not 'custom kernels' used to run EAC v2.
Last edited:
Sure ok your probably ok with KDE. My point is a lot of Ubutnu based distros are not as vanilla. There is going to be a TON of Mint users specifically that are going to expect this to work on their year or two Mint install that are in for a lot of frustration. Mint as an example of a widely used Ubuntu LTS based distro does not by default setup in anyway that is compatible with EAC2. The solution is going to likely be second grub boot options for EAC2. The average mint user is going to crash out hard trying to make their systems work. Probably end up pouching their installs in the process. I'm not talking about Linux heads, I'm saying the average Mint user that is using mint cause they did a google search "easy Linux distros".
Sorry turning Linux into windows of a decade ago. EAC2 is Linux users agreeing to start walking the path that leads to exactly where windows is today. Epic can distrust any signed kernel they want. I can't sign it myself can I? They have to approve the signing. Epic is keeping the list.
This isn't the painless thing you believe it to be Maz, and as you point out your using a distro that isn't setting out to make any major changes to Ubuntu. Sure no real friction there. Scripts to edit boot loaders, boot options... enroll keys. This is starting to get more and more haxy. We are talking about making Linux more widely used by people that just want to game. Again the typical Mint user or person that is using PopOS cause they bought a S76 laptop. Oh ya its just a few scripts, a bit of fstab editing. So you can add a second boot option to Grub.
I mean in the case of Pop this is another distro that by default disables Secure boot by default (valve isn't the only one selling Linux machines without secure boot). So if you bought a S76 laptop last year and just use PopOS EAC2 is not going to just work. Pop also uses unshimmed systemd boot which ain't going to work as I understand it. And again the way pop works even if someone comes up with "scripts" to add grub and ubuntu bits to make things work its going to be unstable at best and likely get broken by updates. System76 also has a bunch out out of tree drivers for duaghter boards on some of their laptops and stuff. None of that will work even if a user rips all the S76 stuff out and replaces it with Ubuntu. The only choice will probably be to run a completley different distro and say good by to any of the out of tree s76 stuff. Or run a completely dual boot, with a different distro that won't work with any of your S76 specific hardware. FUN
Last edited:
And you missed my point that should they not support Caninical's repo's for kernels/drivers, they're not based on Ubuntu LTS.
There's already a ton of frustrated Mint users, as a distro it sucks. However, Mint uses Canonical's GA or HWE signed kernels as well as drivers, and toggling a few options to make your OS EAC v2 compliant isn't rocket science - as stated, if users don't create scripts to automate it, I'm sure there'll be plenty of guides on the internet explaining each step in detail that even Linux newcomers can follow.
Why do you need a second Grub boot option? I'm not adding another Grub option. Just toggle the settings to make your system EAC v2 compliant and you're good to go, there's no downsides to doing so as most Mint users aren't swapping CPU schedulers on the fly.
Linux has to evolve, it's still nothing like Windows of 10 years ago.
The only reason Epic would distrust a key is if that kernel was used for nefarious purposes and EAC v2 picked up on it. Of course Epic is holding the list of signed keys, signing your own kernel would defeat the whole purpose of EAC v2 as a more secure AC implementation from the onset. The only requirement is that the kernel be signed and unmodified, Epic are not directly 'approving specific kernels'.
Except it IS, and as stated, KDE Neon is borderline Ubuntu LTS due to it's rolling Plasma DE, it's not as vanilla as you're trying to claim it is.
The scripts are stupidly simple, enrolling keys isn't rocket science and in the case of Nobara everything is explained in ways most can understand on their "Secureboot and EAC" page, and there's nothing haxy about enabling features that have been a part of Linux for quite some time now. As stated, you don't need to add a second Grub option in the case you're not swapping CPU schedulers on the fly (as is likely the case regarding PopOS and Mint users, bless their souls), and PopOS doesn't pull from Canonical's repo's in the strictest sense - PopOS isn't technically even based on Ubuntu LTS, EAC v2 is something the maintainers of PopOS are going to have to work out themselves.Scripts to edit boot loaders, boot options... enroll keys. This is starting to get more and more haxy. We are talking about making Linux more widely used by people that just want to game. Again the typical Mint user or person that is using PopOS cause they bought a S76 laptop. Oh ya its just a few scripts, a bit of fstab editing. So you can add a second boot option to Grub.
So: We have Ubuntu LTS and derivatives, Nobara, Bazzite, and CachyOS onboard regarding EAC v2. The only distro's remaining are base Fedora, PopOS, and Valve's console OS - and that's after only two weeks since the initial announcement, quite impressive. Lets give it the six months it took Valve to get HDMI 2.1 approved and mostly working under AMD desktop hardware and see how things progress. What's more, Epic does not have 'sway over Valve's storefront' as a result of EAC v2.
Last edited:
DukenukemX
[H]F Junkie
- Joined
- Jan 30, 2005
- Messages
- 11,744
Yes but Epic has to approve?
- Joined
- Jan 8, 2008
- Messages
- 9,786
Linux evolving based on Epic seems shackled & ironic.