Gabe Newell says Linux is the future of gaming, new hardware to come out

if Linux is the future of gaming then I'm going to be left out...I'll buy a PS4 or Xbox One before switching to Linux full time
 
pxc said:
Apparently after hitting the crack pipe really hard
Click to expand...

...you created this thread. relax I'm half joking. Half Life 3 timed exclusive for Steam on Linux is coming though. NVIDIA has also reportedly been pouring a ton of $ into pushing OpenGL further behind the scenes. I wouldn't make any naive assumptions about Steambox not being a potential game changer..
 
People were saying the same negative thing about Steam when it launched 10 years ago.

Valve is one of very few companies who could convince people to switch OSes.
 
bigdogchris said:
Valve is one of very few companies who could convince people to switch OSes.
Click to expand...

So far Valve has not done such a good job of that: http://store.steampowered.com/hwsurvey. Even Windows 8.1 showed up higher than any single version of Linux in the latest numbers.

I guess I can't entirely blame Gabe here though as many people think that the Windows desktop is going to go away, but I have yet to hear a compelling reason why it would as long as there are other desktop OSes out there link Linux and OS X. And of course I guess he's not so thrilled about Microsoft building a Windows Store and no doubt some day working on a Store that can deliver to apps phones, tablets, desktops and consoles simultaneously that won't be desktop apps. But boy competing in gaming with the PS 4. XBox One, Windows 8, iOS, Android, etc. with on OS that's never done anything in this space... It's going to be TOUGH, to say the least.
 
DX isn't particularly restrictive, nor is the Windows platform. While maybe a little slow to adopt new features into the DX API, it's not stalling behind OpenGL. Devs also have a lot more support.
 
LeninGHOLA said:
DX isn't particularly restrictive, nor is the Windows platform. While maybe a little slow to adopt new features into the DX API, it's not stalling behind OpenGL. Devs also have a lot more support.
Click to expand...

What does that have to do with this thread? What's on trial here is software distribution and the CEO of a software distribution company planning a few steps ahead by intending to diversify.

Ask a lot of people on Windows what the last if not only thing keeping them on Windows or keeping them from even trying another O/S: it's their Steam library. And guess what if Valve paves the way to another O/S with some killer launch games, it could not only pave the way for third parties but do so very quickly. If anyone could do it, its Valve.
 
Last edited:
bigdogchris said:
People were saying the same negative thing about Steam when it launched 10 years ago.

Valve is one of very few companies who could convince people to switch OSes.
Click to expand...

I've been Linux only for over 10 years now. Since Steam for Linux I've probably bought 10 games for myself and family.

I for one hope it continues to grow.
 
Due to the fact that Linux seems so much less demanding when it comes to hardware requirements I personally see this as a good thing and I for one am all for Valve pushing Linux as a gaming platform.

My Linux rig is an Unbutu 13.04 Core 2 Duo E6600 with 3gb of ram in dual channel and a baby NV card, the GT620. Running the latest NV drivers this is enough to play every game I've downloaded yet (source based games as well as others) at 60 fps with almost every setting cranked as high as it will go on a 19" monitor - In my mind this is amazing considering the rig cost me under $100.00!
 
in order for linux to be the future of gaming it would also have to be the future of PC operating systems. Most people probably don't care which OS they use as long as it does everything they need it to do.

I'm all down for linux the day it can run all my PC games, photo and video editing software, work with all my hardware, ect...

I don't see that happening while Microsoft is still a thing.
 
flu!d said:
Due to the fact that Linux seems so much less demanding when it comes to hardware requirements I personally see this as a good thing and I for one am all for Valve pushing Linux as a gaming platform.

My Linux rig is an Unbutu 13.04 Core 2 Duo E6600 with 3gb of ram in dual channel and a baby NV card, the GT620. Running the latest NV drivers this is enough to play every game I've downloaded yet (source based games as well as others) at 60 fps with almost every setting cranked as high as it will go on a 19" monitor - In my mind this is amazing considering the rig cost me under $100.00!
Click to expand...

All current source games are based on an engine that is now 9 years old. If my grandmother had wheels, she would be a wagon as Scotty would say.

Source 3 will be out and will push new hardware at some point...we just don't know when it will be released to the general public? HL3 perhaps showing up at E3 in 2014?
 
DPI said:
What does that have to do with this thread? What's on trial here is software distribution and the CEO of a software distribution company planning a few steps ahead by intending to diversify.

Ask a lot of people on Windows what the last if not only thing keeping them on Windows or keeping them from even trying another O/S: it's their Steam library. And guess what if Valve paves the way to another O/S with some killer launch games, it could not only pave the way for third parties but do so very quickly. If anyone could do it, its Valve.
Click to expand...

It has everything to do with this thread. Developers are not going to move to Linux because there is no compelling reason to. Consumers aren't going to move to Linux, because there is no compelling reason to. Windows is not a closed platform, regardless of Gabe's misplaced anger.


People are sticking with Windows because of their Steam library? Where are your statistics for this? I've never heard anyone (educated) say that.
 
All current source games are based on an engine that is now 9 years old. If my grandmother had wheels, she would be a wagon as Scotty would say.
Click to expand...

Not disputing this fact. However the fact remains that the same PC running Windows the same games run as a slideshow.
 
longblock454 said:
I for one hope it continues to grow.
Click to expand...

But Steam on Linux isn't growing in user numbers, it's actually shrinking according to Steams own numbers.

I'll never get how people can call Windows 8 a catastrophe and yet after well over a decade of Linux going nowhere on the desktop think that somehow now, after all these years and with the desktop war having been over long ago, that now, Linux on the desktop will now do what it's never been able to do, in an era where the desktop market is shrinking and more and more effort is going to mobile.
 
flu!d said:
Not disputing this fact. However the fact remains that the same PC running Windows the same games run as a slideshow.
Click to expand...
I'd absolutely to love to see some hard data on this. From a locked 60 fps in Linux to a "slideshow" on Windows doesn't jive with any reality of which I'm aware.
 
LeninGHOLA said:
Developers are not going to move to Linux because there is no compelling reason to. .
Click to expand...

Not only is there no compelling reason to, but there are reasons against. Developing a modern game for Linux is a pain. A big part of the problem is there is no standardization. There are tons of distros, and all of them do things a little different, some a lot different. So having anything near universal support is hard. You have to pick what you are going to support and no matter what you pick, you'll piss some people off.

Then there's the issue of 3D. It is a mess right now. The binary nVidia drivers work great, as good as their Windows drivers, fast, stable, and feature complete. However they are pretty much it. The OSS nv driver isn't very good at all, the binary AMD drivers are problematic and the OSS ones are worse. X is a gigantic mess of layers on layers that create issues. So if you want all the shiny modern features you either have to demand only nVidia cards and only the binary driver (which most distros don't use because it is "tainted") or you have to do a ton of hacking and debug work, and maybe use older versions of GL.

This isn't to mention sound or other issues.

To see some of it, have a look at Shadowrun Returns. They promised and designed it for Windows/Mac/Linux due to Kickstarter demand. To that end, they used the Unity game engine, which is available for those platforms. However at launch, they had only Windows and Mac out. They are still working on the Linux version, hoping to have the beta out next month. This is starting with an existing engine, that supports the platform, and not really making use of much in the way of high end graphics (it uses 3D hardware, but just to do projection and effects on the 2D objects). Despite that, they are still having a lot of technical issues getting their Linux port up and going.

So there are good reasons for developers to say "nope" to Linux. It isn't like it is a quick and easy thing to support. So unless there's some pretty substantial dollars to be made supporting it, that's a good reason to give it a miss. After all, if it costs you $200,000 to port your game to Linux and test it properly, and you get $10,000 in additional sales, that is not a winning situation.

If the Linux situation gets more cleaned up then maybe there'll be more interest in porting to it from major developers. After all, if it is real simple to make a port and it costs next to nothing, then hey you do it because you only need a few sales to make it worthwhile. However if it remains a non-trivial feat, I don't think you'll see a ton of interest.
 
Sycraft said:
Not only is there no compelling reason to, but there are reasons against. Developing a modern game for Linux is a pain. A big part of the problem is there is no standardization. There are tons of distros, and all of them do things a little different, some a lot different. So having anything near universal support is hard. You have to pick what you are going to support and no matter what you pick, you'll piss some people off.
Click to expand...

FWIW, Valve isn't looking to run Steam on every Linux distro. Obviously. They're targeting *one* distro for Steambox, if not their own "Steam Linux" distro. Same with NVIDIA based on the files showing up in the repo. It wouldn't take a tremendous amount of work for Valve to repackage Ubuntu in such a way for example—Linux Mint is already just such a repackaging. Ofcourse that wouldn't mean it couldn't be made to work on any other debian-ish distro, but prob wouldn't be supported.

And if Valve is serious about getting more platform-specific games to Steam-linux then they're going to make it financially worth the developer's while.
 
Last edited:
I don't see it, with traditional PC games. The target audience of linux users is so small compared to windows.

The only way I would could see this happening if things like Half-Life 3 and future Call of Duty games became exclusive to linux. I can't see a company even Valve releasing their game on a platform with such a small audience.

Gabe can say what he wants, but I can't see him saying steam is going to be for linux only and we don't want a cut of the games sold on a "closed" platform.
 
DPI said:
Ask a lot of people on Windows what the last if not only thing keeping them on Windows or keeping them from even trying another O/S: it's their Steam library. And guess what if Valve paves the way to another O/S with some killer launch games, it could not only pave the way for third parties but do so very quickly. If anyone could do it, its Valve.
Click to expand...
Valve is becoming irrelevant as a gaming company. Hope that works out for Linux in some way!
 
DPI said:
FWIW, Valve isn't looking to run Steam on every Linux distro. Obviously. They're targeting *one* distro for Steambox, if not their own "Steam Linux" distro. Same with NVIDIA based on the files showing up in the repo. It wouldn't take a tremendous amount of work for Valve to repackage Ubuntu in such a way for example—Linux Mint is already just such a repackaging.

And if Valve is serious about getting more platform-specific games to Steam-linux then they're going to make it financially worth the developer's while.
Click to expand...

There isn't much monetary gain to be had going that route. Many games Linux people want to play will already work with compatibility layers.

A Steambox would be nice, but 90% of the games already on the market wouldn't run at all without that emulation.
 
Many newer game engine tools allow you to export the game to any OS variant you can imagine. Building games for Linux really has no barriers now other than a small pool of customers. Steambox will change that and Valve will lead the way by porting most if not all of their library over to Linux. With Steamplay, many of your titles that get ported to Linux, you should get for free.
 
LeninGHOLA said:
There isn't much monetary gain to be had going that route. Many games Linux people want to play will already work with compatibility layers.

A Steambox would be nice, but 90% of the games already on the market wouldn't run at all without that emulation.
Click to expand...

How many games already on the market will run on the PS4 and Xbox One?
 
Sycraft said:
Not only is there no compelling reason to, but there are reasons against. Developing a modern game for Linux is a pain. A big part of the problem is there is no standardization. There are tons of distros, and all of them do things a little different, some a lot different. So having anything near universal support is hard. You have to pick what you are going to support and no matter what you pick, you'll piss some people off.

Then there's the issue of 3D. It is a mess right now. The binary nVidia drivers work great, as good as their Windows drivers, fast, stable, and feature complete. However they are pretty much it. The OSS nv driver isn't very good at all, the binary AMD drivers are problematic and the OSS ones are worse. X is a gigantic mess of layers on layers that create issues. So if you want all the shiny modern features you either have to demand only nVidia cards and only the binary driver (which most distros don't use because it is "tainted") or you have to do a ton of hacking and debug work, and maybe use older versions of GL.

This isn't to mention sound or other issues.

To see some of it, have a look at Shadowrun Returns. They promised and designed it for Windows/Mac/Linux due to Kickstarter demand. To that end, they used the Unity game engine, which is available for those platforms. However at launch, they had only Windows and Mac out. They are still working on the Linux version, hoping to have the beta out next month. This is starting with an existing engine, that supports the platform, and not really making use of much in the way of high end graphics (it uses 3D hardware, but just to do projection and effects on the 2D objects). Despite that, they are still having a lot of technical issues getting their Linux port up and going.

So there are good reasons for developers to say "nope" to Linux. It isn't like it is a quick and easy thing to support. So unless there's some pretty substantial dollars to be made supporting it, that's a good reason to give it a miss. After all, if it costs you $200,000 to port your game to Linux and test it properly, and you get $10,000 in additional sales, that is not a winning situation.

If the Linux situation gets more cleaned up then maybe there'll be more interest in porting to it from major developers. After all, if it is real simple to make a port and it costs next to nothing, then hey you do it because you only need a few sales to make it worthwhile. However if it remains a non-trivial feat, I don't think you'll see a ton of interest.
Click to expand...

It's nowhere near as bad as you make it sound. There are some small kernels of truth there that you kind of took and ran with to make it seem worse than it is.
 
Can't wait to see the bitching linux will cause. If the majority of people in this forum are too stupid to figure out windows 8 linux will probably cause aneurysms in the rest of the population
 
Makes sense if Steam box console is really in the works. Users would only use it to play games, and only that. Everything else: nope.
 
It's a good move. MS has proven that you can't trust MS for PC gaming e.g. Microsoft Gaming Zone, Games For Windows Live. Microsoft will keep stabbing Windows gamers in the back to promote the Xbox. If you thought MS was bad for gaming now, wait till they get desperate when the PS4 destroys the Xbone in sales.
 
Microsoft started with DOS and slapped a GUI onto it many years ago. Valve is doing the same with Linux and slapping the Steam GUI onto it. I think Gabe can pull this off. I know that I would give Linux a try if I was sure of how to set it up properly. If Gabe keeps it simple so that anyone can do it then I'm all aboard. If it works great and I get more performance I'd dump Windows for Linux just for the ability to tinker with my stuff.

I hope the initial launch goes well enough. Time to try some Linux!
 
I could easily see Valve announcing their own build of linux with Steam being the "app store" for the platform. If they can convince developers it will work.

The only reason I'm still on Windows is gaming. If my games worked on linux I would have dumped Windows already.
 
BladeVenom said:
It's a good move. MS has proven that you can't trust MS for PC gaming e.g. Microsoft Gaming Zone, Games For Windows Live. If you thought MS was bad for gaming now, wait till they get desperate when the PS4 destroys the Xbone in sales.
Click to expand...
I really don't believe that Microsoft is bad for PC gaming. In the past couple years, they've practically washed their hands of it. Not being a part of it isn't bad for it: it's just not impactful either way.

You could argue, potentially, that a lack of API (DirectX) evolution has hampered the rate of progress, but OpenGL hasn't exactly been screaming along either, and the situation on the audio and input side of the open, cross-platform API world is still absolutely awful. Despite being proprietary, DirectX is still far and above the most straightforward way to build games for Windows, and there are few signs of that ever changing.
 
SilverSliver said:
I will buy a PS4 before I have Gabe shove Linux down my throat.
Click to expand...

I always find these threads interesting. Microsoft is often accused of not listening to customers but it's really hard to see where customers beyond a niche group of desktop Linux advocates and Microsoft haters have any interest in a Linux based console because it's a Linux console. It's often said by some that Windows 8 has been a disaster but Steam on Linux truly has been a disaster to this point. It's gone absolutely nowhere in 9 months, in fact it looks like it's contracted, the tiny percentages of the various distros don't even add up to 1%, Windows 8.1 was already half that number last month.

However I can see Gabe's concern here if indeed the Windows desktop is to go away. I don't see how that will ever happen as long as there are other desktop OSes out there but it's not an impossibility. But it's hard to see how desktop Linux can every grow to the point where it can gain much traction. OS X is 7 times the market of Linux and it's still hapless as a gaming platform. And now you have a whole new generation of mobile devices, a Windows tablet and touch market that's probably already bigger than Linux and the ability to leverage DX on those devices and market mobile games. The math of a Linux gaming console and desktop Linux gaming is daunting at best.
 
cageymaru said:
Microsoft started with DOS and slapped a GUI onto it many years ago. Valve is doing the same with Linux and slapping the Steam GUI onto it. I think Gabe can pull this off. I know that I would give Linux a try if I was sure of how to set it up properly. If Gabe keeps it simple so that anyone can do it then I'm all aboard. If it works great and I get more performance I'd dump Windows for Linux just for the ability to tinker with my stuff.

I hope the initial launch goes well enough. Time to try some Linux!
Click to expand...

+1 Tried Linux like 7 years ago and couldn't get it to work properly, if Valve can make it easier and simplify everything then I could see them bringing in more users and I would probably make the jump.



Why would they come out so late in the year after everyone spent their money pre-ordering a Ps4/Xbox1?
 
Last edited:
HardLiner said:
Why would they come out so late in the year after everyone spent their money pre-ordering a Ps4/Xbox1?
Click to expand...

My guess, because Valve is realistic and has a more long term plan (3, 7, 10 yrs down the road) that doesn't necessitate dropping billions on buying themselves into the console market overnight like MS did with the first XBOX, and that means a slow roll start, without delusions of trying to be a meaningful third horse in this winter's two horse race.

Think of a linux based Steambox more like termites in Microsoft's attic once it gets going and they start multiplying :)
 
Last edited:
Gabe...you want more people to play games on Linux?

Make Half-Life 3 a Linux exclusive. Endgame!
 
Cod said:
Gabe...you want more people to play games on Linux?

Make Half-Life 3 a Linux exclusive. Endgame!
Click to expand...
Yea, I think another company tried that with Vista and that also failed. ;)
 
pxc said:
Valve is becoming irrelevant as a gaming company. Hope that works out for Linux in some way!
Click to expand...

Yea, steam going to linux only, or running a specific linux only os (for games i guess) would be suicide. Developers will still cater to where they make money and thats where a majority of the people are currently. Outside of hardcore gamers people dont pick their os just to play games.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top