Valve throws it's weight behind Vulkan.

[5150Joker]

For me personally, DX12 is literally the one and only saving grace of Win 10. If DX12 doesn't offer massive improvement (30%+ minimum) over the DX11 path, I won't "upgrade" to Win 10 even if Microsoft paid me to do so.

It's a solid operating system, it's just too intrusive for my tastes. That's why I'd really like to see Vulkan + alternative gaming operating systems take off with massive publisher support. Unfortunately ideal dreams like that never come true.

 

[Nobu]

@nilepez: Just fyi, Linux users on Steam number near 1%, not including those who spend more time on Windows than Linux. And that's not counting people who don't use it as a gaming OS (which, I'd argue, is a larger number). Still small, but worth mentioning. That puts them at about 1/3rd the number of OS X users.

The cheapest one is $449, I3, 4gb ram, 500mb hard drive and comes with Windows 8.1 and Xbox 360 controller. That is not encouraging. I also take it has a modified 750Ti in it as well, not clear on that respect. Anything decent is way more in cost yet has the same lower end graphics card. I just don't see this selling well compared to consoles but at least it is another option out there which some may find what they want.

Using a controller to control Win 8.1 , meaning you probably need a mouse and not forget about a keyboard as well. I have had Win 8/8.1 on our HDTV set with a 7970, FX8350 cpu (left over parts), this is nothing new and one could build a way better system for the prices they are asking. Win 8/8.1 is just not a very good couch operating system even with a wireless keyboard with a touchpad.

Yeah, it's not ideal, and I would build one myself personally, but the "Consumer Market" is a wild beast that I do not hope to understand. People will buy them, if only because they have money to spend. Moving the cursor with a joystick isn't as bad as it seems, btw (though I've not used Windows this way), and there are keyboard accessories for XBox and PS3/4 controllers.

 

[jwcalla]

I personally don't think Valve is interested enough in these Steam Machines to make them successful. Seems like after the announcement they pretty much checked out on the project. SteamOS is completely uninteresting since there's really no actual work that Valve put into it. It's just a really old version of Debian. Valve doesn't make games any more so that avenue of success is nixed also.

I think if Vulkan becomes big it will be because of Android. Android TV might end up being a bigger-selling "console" than Steam Machines.

 

[flu!d]

If they supported OS X, I'd see an advantage for this API. I know there are die hard users, but at 1-2% market share Linux is irrelevant (especially since only a fraction of those users are gamers)
Android has a much larger base, but the question is are games for the PC the same as games you play at home. The phone games I play are very different from home games.

Since most Android devices are running ARM architecture there's no doubt your gameplay experience would be different to the experience you enjoy on PC, it's basically a given assumption nothing is going to change here - Still doesn't in any way highlight any negatives in relation to a unified API.

The interesting thing, however, is that most of the Apple devices I've used with the exception of the stupidly expensive Mac Pro, are vastly underpowered GPU wise and therefore not at all suitable for responsive FPS gaming considering the resolution of their Retina displays, and these GPU underpowered devices are still stupidly expensive for what they are - Whereas a Linux based PC is as versatile as it's Windows counterpart, provided you stick with Nvidia at this point in time - The bonus is that it is a free alternative, virus/malware free as well as the monetary issues considering Windows as a gaming platform.

If you've never been a Linux user you really wouldn’t understand the exponential growth in relation to gaming that Linux has experienced in the last two years alone, Not only do we have a decent driver set from at least one manufacturer but the number of Linux titles in the Steam store are growing at the rate of roughly 300 titles every six months - At this rate with ~1500 titles for Linux and ~2000 titles for OSX, I can see Linux overtaking OSX as a gaming platform on Steam alone in the not too distant future.

Until recently Linux was also enjoying a reasonable amount of growth in the Steam hardware survey, granted this has dropped, but most believe it to be as a result of various new titles that have been released for the Windows platform, namely GTA V (I admit, I also had a dabble in GTA V on my Windows machine) - The hope is that over time this growth will once again resume. Don't forget, the popularity of Windows has everything to do with it's installation on almost every name brand PC sold worldwide, not due to a conscious choice by the consumer.

There are no negatives to a unified API, with the exception that Microsoft will no longer monopolize the PC gaming platform to their advantage.

 

[nilepez]

Since most Android devices are running ARM architecture there's no doubt your gameplay experience would be different to the experience you enjoy on PC, it's basically a given assumption nothing is going to change here - Still doesn't in any way highlight any negatives in relation to a unified API.

I'm not saying it's a negative. I'm saying it doesn't seem to provide an incentive to use that API.

The interesting thing, however, is that most of the Apple devices I've used with the exception of the stupidly expensive Mac Pro, are vastly underpowered GPU wise and therefore not at all suitable for responsive FPS gaming considering the resolution of their Retina displays, and these GPU underpowered devices are still stupidly expensive for what they are

I assumed that people could change the GPU for desktop units (though maybe the only non-iMac desktop is the Pro).

- Whereas a Linux based PC is as versatile as it's Windows counterpart, provided you stick with Nvidia at this point in time - The bonus is that it is a free alternative, virus/malware free as well as the monetary issues considering Windows as a gaming platform.

Doesn't change anything. An inconsequential number of people use Linux. Macs are already on the bubble at 8%. Linux is less than 2 and some measurements put at barely over 1%. I don't care how much enthusiasts like it, it's a niche market and those that game are willing to install Windows to play the games they want to play

I don't consider Malware relevant, since the lack of malware has more to do with who uses Linux and a small user base that makes malware development cost ineffective. I'd love to be proven wrong, but I've heard this argument for almost 20 years and the user base is about the same size.

 

[flu!d]

The Mac will never make it as a gaming platform. Running basically laptop hardware in a fancy display the imac just hasn't got the GPU power even with the Nvidia 755M. And the Mac Pro, at least here in Australia is ~$4500.00. The only other two configurations are the Mac Mini or the MacBook, neither of which offer any more GPU performance than their imac counterparts. Performance is hampered even more when you consider the retina imac models.

The Mac has a niche, and it isn't gaming I'm afraid.

I'm sorry, you're entitled to your opinion, but I just can't see how you can honestly claim there is no incentive to develop a cross platform API - As stated, in the 80's and early 90's the computer industry was incredibly segregated, the IBM PC was turned into a reverse engineered open platform and it flattened the lot of them, the ten ton gorilla in the room that was IBM was knocked on it's arse - I see absolutely no reason why this cannot happen again. Up until recently, when GTA V was released, Linux usage was increasing fairly quickly and up to ~3.5 - 4%, hopefully it picks up again in the not too distant future with the support of Valve. More choice is a good thing, even for Microsoft users.

When was the last time you ran a modern Linux distro? (Honestly).

 

[seanclayton]

Don't care as long as they refuse to produce AAA games. It's all about MOBA and nickel-and-dime business from Valve.

 

[DPI]

If they supported OS X, I'd see an advantage for this API. I know there are die hard users, but at 1-2% market share Linux is irrelevant (especially since only a fraction of those users are gamers)

Android has a much larger base, but the question is are games for the PC the same as games you play at home. The phone games I play are very different from home games.

Not sure what Linux share has to do with anything. You do realize Vulkan will support Windows7, 8 and 10, yes?

 

[flu!d]

Not sure what Linux share has to do with anything. You do realize Vulkan will support Windows7, 8 and 10, yes?

Which is more than you can say for DX12!

 

[DPI]

as for MS, I don't really think it needs to worry about Vulkan on the desktop since I still see most big devs sticking to DX 12, especially w/MS dollars flowing their way. Plus with Windows 10 being a free upgrade for Windows 7/8 users means it will gain traction really fast (I used it for both my notebook and desktop).

The thing is, devs with MS dollars flowing their way are generally building Xbox games, mostly exclusives. So for example if Halo 5 and Forza 6 are DX12, WGAF? Doesn't help PC gamers on Windows. As for Windows 10 being free that's debatable, and uptake is reportedly flatlining as the privacy issues have spread, but I disgress, that's a topic for the OS subforum. I'd agree though that Microsoft shouldn't worry about Vulkan. Just like they didn't worry about Google and search, Android, Apple, iPod, iPhone etc.

Cool thing for Windows gamers about competing API's is they'll live or die by their benchmarks, and MS will no longer have the luxury of only bothering to improve Direct3D for their redheaded stepchild gaming platform when they want to sell a new version of Windows. Win for consumers, no more corporate agendas artificially holding back graphics advancement on x86 for fear of their console falling too far behind.

 

[Pieter3dnow]

I personally don't think Valve is interested enough in these Steam Machines to make them successful. Seems like after the announcement they pretty much checked out on the project. SteamOS is completely uninteresting since there's really no actual work that Valve put into it. It's just a really old version of Debian. Valve doesn't make games any more so that avenue of success is nixed also.

I think if Vulkan becomes big it will be because of Android. Android TV might end up being a bigger-selling "console" than Steam Machines.

The idea of Linux is that you come up with something stable. In general it should not matter even if it is old. If steam machines get rolling they might want to update things and get that part going as well. The thing is any linux distribution will do as long as there are Vulkan drivers ....

I thought that even tho Vulkan would be portable it would require some different code for Android (mobile) devices. The mobile gaming market would change because you could run a lot of games that are now on the PC in the mobile space with some adjustments using Vulkan. It should not be to hard to have mobile games running almost the same amount of batches that the current games are using. But it would be very taxing on current hardware.

There is already a "console" out using this idea and it is not a winner.....

 

[cageymaru]

I personally don't think Valve is interested enough in these Steam Machines to make them successful. Seems like after the announcement they pretty much checked out on the project. SteamOS is completely uninteresting since there's really no actual work that Valve put into it. It's just a really old version of Debian. Valve doesn't make games any more so that avenue of success is nixed also.

I think if Vulkan becomes big it will be because of Android. Android TV might end up being a bigger-selling "console" than Steam Machines.

I think they are taking the AMD approach to new technology as both are very open with the technology that they allow you to tinker with. They make a whitepaper detailing what's available. They create a solid backend so that creators can experiment and shape the project to their liking. Then they take a step back and help create a few tools to facilitate whatever projects seem interesting to them or most popular. Perfect example is streaming to Twitch that was possible at the launch for the HD 7950 when content creators took interest in it. Another would be Bitcoin mining.

Other more closed companies will just create cool features but not really allow you to experiment with them. Personally I like the open approach. If you can think it someone can create a solution for it. Valve says that they are going to release their VR tools for all companies to use. This is most likely because they want VR games to work well for all Steam users. Thus generating more profit for them due to brisk sales of VR games.

Sort of how new consoles are only created to generate a buzz with consumers. The money made is always on the software side of things. If you want to see a feature in SteamOS, I would highly recommend going to the forums and creating a detailed post documenting as many facets of the feature that you would like to see added. The few times that I have done this for various ideas I've had; within a couple of months it was added to Steam.

In short I wouldn't be concerned with SteamOS support yet. I'd be more concerned with the way that Intel, AMD, and Nvidia protect their GPU driver technology. Valve is being held hostage by them more than anything else. Games need to be able to run at 60fps on a SteamBox. If it can't run 60fps stutter free on a SteamBox when it does so on a Windows machine; then the SteamBox is inferior.

SteamOS isn't just competing against the PS4 and XBOX One; there is a thing called Windows 10 that runs perfectly fine on Windows XP hardware. I have a Dell notebook that shipped with Windows XP. It can run Windows 10 on with ease. Windows 10 is so awesome on that Dell notebook that I don't see a point in replacing it. I had tossed it in the corner years ago because Windows XP was so sluggish on it. The same SteamBox can run Windows 10.

Is it really worth it to have a free OS if your games will run like crap due to the proprietary nature of the GPU vendors?

 

[chithanh]

I see one advantage using Win 10 - you get to play not only DX12, DX11, OpenGL titles but also Vulcan future titles.

I think that is what Microsoft had in mind when they made DX12 Win10 exclusive: Make Windows 10 more attractive as a gaming platform and give users reason to upgrade. However, that plan backfired and instead made DX12 much less attractive as a development target.

 

[Pieter3dnow]

I think that is what Microsoft had in mind when they made DX12 Win10 exclusive: Make Windows 10 more attractive as a gaming platform and give users reason to upgrade. However, that plan backfired and instead made DX12 much less attractive as a development target.

DX12 has a very slow adoption rate by making it exclusive to windows 10 did not solve anything. It requires people to upgrade but the games for DX12 are not something that is set in stone many many games will still be DX9.

If they made games for windows 10 DX12 only then they might have had something which would force developers to address DX12 now it simply does not matter.

 

[jwcalla]

In short I wouldn't be concerned with SteamOS support yet. I'd be more concerned with the way that Intel, AMD, and Nvidia protect their GPU driver technology. Valve is being held hostage by them more than anything else. Games need to be able to run at 60fps on a SteamBox. If it can't run 60fps stutter free on a SteamBox when it does so on a Windows machine; then the SteamBox is inferior.

SteamOS isn't just competing against the PS4 and XBOX One; there is a thing called Windows 10 that runs perfectly fine on Windows XP hardware. I have a Dell notebook that shipped with Windows XP. It can run Windows 10 on with ease. Windows 10 is so awesome on that Dell notebook that I don't see a point in replacing it. I had tossed it in the corner years ago because Windows XP was so sluggish on it. The same SteamBox can run Windows 10.

Is it really worth it to have a free OS if your games will run like crap due to the proprietary nature of the GPU vendors?

Are GPU drivers open on Windows?

Ironically, the only GPU vendor that has performance parity between Windows and SteamOS is the vendor with the closed-source driver.

 

[cageymaru]

Are GPU drivers open on Windows?

Ironically, the only GPU vendor that has performance parity between Windows and SteamOS is the vendor with the closed-source driver.

Compared to their Windows driver the performance is atrocious. So right now it makes more sense to just build a Windows PC instead of a SteamOS based PC. You will get better performance across the board. It's not even remotely close to the Windows performance. It just so happens that Intel's and AMD's GPU performance is much worse than Nvidia's in Linux. But Windows vs SteamOS? Windows wins 100% of the time.

 

[Kaori]

" Valve throws it's weight.."

*Sigh*

Half Life 3 delayed another year

 

[jwcalla]

Compared to their Windows driver the performance is atrocious. So right now it makes more sense to just build a Windows PC instead of a SteamOS based PC. You will get better performance across the board. It's not even remotely close to the Windows performance. It just so happens that Intel's and AMD's GPU performance is much worse than Nvidia's in Linux. But Windows vs SteamOS? Windows wins 100% of the time.

Wrong. In terms of the nvidia driver the performance is the same between Linux and Windows.

In CPU limited scenarios the Linux version will be a bit faster, but this is unlikely driver related but due to something else in the Linux stack.

 

[Nobu]

otoh, AMD's open source driver is king of the open source arena. ^_^
Can't wait until it supports Vulkan. :/

 

[DPI]

otoh, AMD's open source driver is king of the open source arena. ^_^
Can't wait until it supports Vulkan. :/

AMD already has a prototype Vulkan driver . Though they state it'll be closed source at first and open source "later". I reckon Nvidia will be similar.

So at least theyre not completely asleep on this one - Vulkan titles coming out with "Nvidia and Intel only" isn't a scenario they really want.

 

[cageymaru]

Wrong. In terms of the nvidia driver the performance is the same between Linux and Windows.

In CPU limited scenarios the Linux version will be a bit faster, but this is unlikely driver related but due to something else in the Linux stack.

You should read Phoronix more. According to them a 960 and a Titan X are about the same under Linux. Whenever the 960 tails off the 970 keeps the heat on the Titan X.
http://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?page=article&item=1080p-b-value&num=3

To me that's piss poor drivers. But compared to what Intel and AMD have put out for Linux it is the greatest thing ever. But compared to Windows? Trash. I'd rather have a Windows 10 box in my living room.

With that said I'll probably try Linux again.

 

[flu!d]

SteamOS isn't just competing against the PS4 and XBOX One; there is a thing called Windows 10 that runs perfectly fine on Windows XP hardware. I have a Dell notebook that shipped with Windows XP. It can run Windows 10 on with ease. Windows 10 is so awesome on that Dell notebook that I don't see a point in replacing it. I had tossed it in the corner years ago because Windows XP was so sluggish on it. The same SteamBox can run Windows 10.

Is it really worth it to have a free OS if your games will run like crap due to the proprietary nature of the GPU vendors?

I can assure you, that older hardware that runs fine on Windows 10 will, overall, run just as good if not better on Linux. And since when has the Windows platform not had propriety drivers from the likes of AMD/Nvidia? As far as I'm aware only Nvidia's drivers are closed source under Linux and ironically enough they happen to be the best performing drivers on the Linux platform.

Some of the newer titles do have a performance penalty under Linux (some of the older titles actually run faster under Linux), however at 1080p they're still pulling 60fps and perfectly playable even at high settings on decent hardware - Remember, it's only been ~2 years since Linux as a gaming platform became viable and one of the biggest issues is the developers buggy code under OpenGL - Nvidia actually sent an engineer to Valve to sort through the mess and optimise their drivers accordingly and attempt to cover up the buggy code, that's the main reason Nvidia perform better than AMD under Linux. The hope is that an open API, such as Vulkan, will rectify this issue.

It has to be said though, that while people oddly believe OSX to offer more potential in relation to gaming than Linux, every benchmark I can find (and there aren't many) shows Linux to be a far superior gaming platform on the same hardware.

While I doubt Apple will jump on board the Vulkan train due to the fact a closed off API suits their business practices perfectly, I see no valid reason why others won't jump onboard and support the idea of an open API - It just makes sense.

 

[jwcalla]

You should read Phoronix more. According to them a 960 and a Titan X are about the same under Linux. Whenever the 960 tails off the 970 keeps the heat on the Titan X.
http://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?page=article&item=1080p-b-value&num=3

To me that's piss poor drivers. But compared to what Intel and AMD have put out for Linux it is the greatest thing ever. But compared to Windows? Trash. I'd rather have a Windows 10 box in my living room.

With that said I'll probably try Linux again.

I visit that site about 10x a day. I don't think I could visit any more times. And Michael has been benchmarking these things for a hundred years and they always show that when comparing apples to apples (like Unigine Heaven OGL to OGL) Linux and Windows are just about identical.

I know that some of the newest ports like Shadow of Mordor have a lot of overhead in the translation calls so they don't perform as well (as DX), and aren't the best ports; and the Metro:LL benchmark you linked is probably CPU-bottlenecked, but those really aren't driver issues.

NVIDIA makes a metric shitton of money off of Linux, so of course they're going to have good drivers.

 

[Anarchist4000]

The hope is that an open API, such as Vulkan, will rectify this issue.

It won't be the "Open" part of Vulkan that fixes the linux performance issues. It will be the slim drivers required by Vulkan/DX12 style APIs. PowerVR having 2 guys write their vulkan driver in a couple weeks means quality drivers on any platform should be much easier for all IHVs. I'm really hoping that means Windows or better performance levels on linux. This should translate to more platforms than just linux as well.

As for linux drivers, I don't think anyone will argue that even on Windows AMD's driver performance isn't up to par. With the exception of the newer DX12 drivers.

 

[flu!d]

It won't be the "Open" part of Vulkan that fixes the linux performance issues. It will be the slim drivers required by Vulkan/DX12 style APIs. PowerVR having 2 guys write their vulkan driver in a couple weeks means quality drivers on any platform should be much easier for all IHVs. I'm really hoping that means Windows or better performance levels on linux. This should translate to more platforms than just linux as well.

As for linux drivers, I don't think anyone will argue that even on Windows AMD's driver performance isn't up to par. With the exception of the newer DX12 drivers.

Totally agreed.

 

[flu!d]

You should read Phoronix more. According to them a 960 and a Titan X are about the same under Linux. Whenever the 960 tails off the 970 keeps the heat on the Titan X.
http://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?page=article&item=1080p-b-value&num=3

To me that's piss poor drivers. But compared to what Intel and AMD have put out for Linux it is the greatest thing ever. But compared to Windows? Trash. I'd rather have a Windows 10 box in my living room.

With that said I'll probably try Linux again.

To quote the reviewer:

With Metro Last Light Redux, the higher-end NVIDIA graphics cards were getting CPU bound at just over 150 FPS, while the Radeon R9 Fury was tapping out at 76 FPS, similarly to the Radeon R9 290. The other Radeon hardware on Catalyst was running at just ~60+ FPS. For Metro Last Light Redux at 1080p, the GeForce GTX 970 or higher will do you well on Linux.

I think you need to actually read what your posting as the highlighted portion of the quote makes perfect sense.

 

[nilepez]

The Mac will never make it as a gaming platform. Running basically laptop hardware in a fancy display the imac just hasn't got the GPU power even with the Nvidia 755M. And the Mac Pro, at least here in Australia is ~$4500.00. The only other two configurations are the Mac Mini or the MacBook, neither of which offer any more GPU performance than their imac counterparts. Performance is hampered even more when you consider the retina imac models.

The Mac has a niche, and it isn't gaming I'm afraid.

I'm sorry, you're entitled to your opinion, but I just can't see how you can honestly claim there is no incentive to develop a cross platform API - As stated, in the 80's and early 90's the computer industry was incredibly segregated, the IBM PC was turned into a reverse engineered open platform and it flattened the lot of them, the ten ton gorilla in the room that was IBM was knocked on it's arse - I see absolutely no reason why this cannot happen again. Up until recently, when GTA V was released, Linux usage was increasing fairly quickly and up to ~3.5 - 4%, hopefully it picks up again in the not too distant future with the support of Valve. More choice is a good thing, even for Microsoft users.

When was the last time you ran a modern Linux distro? (Honestly).

I really don't follow your point about the PC being segregated up until the early 90s Compaq existed in 82, which is roughly a year after IBM entered the market and companies like Dell started in the early-mid 80s. Zeos, Gateway and Northgate were all in the PC business by the mid 80s (and I'm sure I'm missing countless others). If you wrote something for the IBM PC, it ran on a Compaq, Zeos, Northgate and Dell too.


But more than that, I cannot find evidence Linux users made up 3.5% (or even 2%) of Steam players. They were at roughly 1% in January and February of this year, as well as May of last year (all before GTA V) and the same is true for 2013. That pretty much matches the web stats for Linux. You can look for yourself in the internet archive.

 

[nilepez]

Not sure what Linux share has to do with anything. You do realize Vulkan will support Windows7, 8 and 10, yes?

Is it not a new API? If yes, does it support Xbox One? If not, are there more Linux gamers than Xbox One gamers? If not, isn't it more cost effective to write to DX over Vulkan?

 

[nilepez]

DX12 has a very slow adoption rate by making it exclusive to windows 10 did not solve anything. It requires people to upgrade but the games for DX12 are not something that is set in stone many many games will still be DX9.

If they made games for windows 10 DX12 only then they might have had something which would force developers to address DX12 now it simply does not matter.

They're at 17% after 1 month (we'll see what happens next week when the Sept survey comes out). Maybe we just have different definitions of slow.

 

[cageymaru]

TI think you need to actually read what your posting as the highlighted portion of the quote makes perfect sense.

It's like that in most Linux games. So all of them are CPU bound?

 

[atom]

Don't care as long as they refuse to produce AAA games. It's all about MOBA and nickel-and-dime business from Valve.

Yup, they are no longer a game maker, but a publisher and platform.

 

[flu!d]

I really don't follow your point about the PC being segregated up until the early 90s Compaq existed in 82, which is roughly a year after IBM entered the market and companies like Dell started in the early-mid 80s. Zeos, Gateway and Northgate were all in the PC business by the mid 80s (and I'm sure I'm missing countless others). If you wrote something for the IBM PC, it ran on a Compaq, Zeos, Northgate and Dell too.


But more than that, I cannot find evidence Linux users made up 3.5% (or even 2%) of Steam players. They were at roughly 1% in January and February of this year, as well as May of last year (all before GTA V) and the same is true for 2013. That pretty much matches the web stats for Linux. You can look for yourself in the internet archive.

First of all, I never claimed the PC was segregated at all, I claimed that the introduction of the reverse engineered open source PC platform was the beginning of the end of the segregation that plagued the computer industry as a whole in the 80's/90's.

Second of all, if you believe my statistics to be in error then I apologize, I did find the statistic somewhere, not sure where, perhaps I was in error. Doesn't change the fact that there isn't a single negative to a cross platform API - Well, with the exception that Apple will be even more behind the 8 ball as a gaming platform if they stick with their own propriety API on underpowered hardware.

~750,000 Linux gamers that we know of (remember, not everyone does the survey) on Steam isn't anything for developers to sneer at, especially if that figure keeps rising.

 

[Nobu]

Is it not a new API? If yes, does it support Xbox One? If not, are there more Windows and Linux and PS4 gamers than Xbox One gamers? If not, isn't it more cost effective to write to DX over Vulkan?

There, fixed that for you.

 

[noko]

Well are Linux users really willing to pay for software similar to Window users? I really don't think so. So if I was a developer, do I sell the Linux version cheaper to get the Linux user willing to buy it knowing he/she can get it cheaper then anyone else? Isn't one of the Motto's in Linux that software should be free . Developers have bills to pay, families to raise, hobbies to have fun in - I doubt many developers will want to spend hours, weeks, months or years on projects to give it away to a person who thinks all software should be free while smoking a joint.

That is why Valve was working on free software but a back door for profits by having content providers/store where people can support (really buy so the developers/producers make some money to pay the bills). This may still work - you buy a steam box, many games are really free. You just have to download them - all or most will have content not only from the developers but also from the users being part of making the game better selling tidbits (many tidbits do add up) where the store takes a percentage of the sells and gives it back to the developers. A very interesting model that could fit well in the Linux universe.

 

[noko]

The business model for the Steam Box is totally different from the console market and PC market. That model has to have a reasonable chance of success - look at Dotto2: World teams, competition (Tee-Shirts, advertising, mugs, think of Football team merchandise, game content store, open arena for users to make content) - That is so unique and looks to be a successful model. If the Steam Box takes off I think it will be on a totally different business model.

 

[Nobu]

Well are Linux users really willing to pay for software similar to Window users? I really don't think so. So if I was a developer, do I sell the Linux version cheaper to get the Linux user willing to buy it knowing he/she can get it cheaper then anyone else? Isn't one of the Motto's in Linux that software should be free . Developers have bills to pay, families to raise, hobbies to have fun in - I doubt many developers will want to spend hours, weeks, months or years on projects to give it away to a person who thinks all software should be free while smoking a joint.

...right. This last humble bundle:

Total payments:    $1,229,867.79
Number of purchases:    121,191
Average purchase:    $10.15
Average Windows:    $9.99
Average Mac:    $11.62
Average Linux:    $10.53

And most of those games don't even run on Linux.
This week's Weekly Bundle:

Total payments:    $48,710.39
Number of purchases:    9,965
Average purchase:    $4.89
Average Windows:    $4.64
Average Mac:    $5.82
Average Linux:    $5.83

And there have been bundles where Linux users have paid much more than this. I think you need a reality check.

 

[chithanh]

Is it not a new API? If yes, does it support Xbox One? If not, are there more Windows and Linux and PS4 gamers than Xbox One gamers? If not, isn't it more cost effective to write to DX over Vulkan?

There, fixed that for you.

Well we don't know yet whether PS4 will support Vulkan. It would be a logical move, but so far Sony did not say so.
On a semi-related note, we don't know either whether the Xbox One is going to support Vulkan.

Well are Linux users really willing to pay for software similar to Window users?

I have no data on this, but it appears to me that Linux users are indeed less willing to pay. Maybe this is why a F2P title like DOTA 2 is spearheading Linux/Vulkan support.

Isn't one of the Motto's in Linux that software should be free .

There is a group of people who say that software should be free as in "free speech", but that has nothing to do with the price.

And there have been bundles where Linux users have paid much more than this. I think you need a reality check.

But these numbers count only the Linux users who already decided to pay.

 

[Nobu]

What do you mean "only the Linux users who already decided to pay"? I don't understand what you're trying to say, exactly. They have paid, they're still paying, and it seems they are still willing to pay.

To quote the unnamed Humble Blogger, "Oh by the way, over the lifetime of Humble Bundle our Linux users pay $1 more than the average Mac user and $2.60 more than the average Windows user. Now that is something to humble brag about."

That was about a year ago, and they've been humbly bundling games for 5 years now.

 

[chithanh]

If you are going to estimate the average willingness of a Linux user to pay, you have to take into account those users who do not want to pay anything at all.
The Humble Bundle statistics do not include those.

 

[DPI]

SMH at some of these comments... "Linux users don't want to pay". You're completely missing the bigger picture. Vulkan is not just about SteamOS or Linux - that's not why there are 100 industry heavyhitters on board for this API. And SteamOS is not an effort to merely get Linux users to buy Steam games. Valve's goal with SteamOS is entering the TV-connected livingroom space, not replacing Windows desktops. As such, their goal isn't for gamers to necessarily know or care what's running under the hood of SteamOS's Big Picture 10' interface, any more than PS4 gamers give a shit that a modified FreeBSD is running their PS4. Thus what Linux users do or don't do isn't that significant in the grand scheme.

You wouldn't presume "PS4 will never take off cuz *nix has 1% marketshare on Steem and Linux nerds don't want to pay" yet that's the presumption about SteamOS, somewhat understandable. PS4 entered the market on the inertia of its predecessors plus hundreds of millions in blitz advertising to teenagers, whereas SteamOS consoles will enter the market in November with Valve's inertia and cache but in more of a "plant a tree and watch it grow" typical Valve fashion. You won't see it plastered all over mountain dews and happymeals.

So contrary to some belief Valve didn't suddenly get a hard-on for pushing "Linux and opensource" or making it "the year of Linux". Their interest was in diversifying platforms, and diversifying API's, so that their corporation's future was not completely dependent and inextricably linked to the whims and moodswings of another corporation (MS) with its own separate interests. Linux and Vulkan just happened to align with those goals. Linux as a whole will end up benefitting, a rising tide lifts all boats, but that'll be more side effect than anything.