A Year Later, Linux Game Publishing Is Still Irrelevant
Phoronix: A Year Later, Linux Game Publishing Is Still Irrelevant
This coming week marks one year since there was the big shake-up at Linux Game Publishing where Michael Simms, the founder and CEO of twelve years, stepped down. A new CEO stepped in, and there were promises of future work, but so far there's been any major announcements and LGP continues to fade away...
I would definitely ask the question who really cared about GNU/Linux-Gaming, if it currently wasn't about losing our freedom.
Steam and other proprietary gaming-platforms are deliberately opposing software-freedom and thus might be even more damaging to GNU/Linux-Gaming, if it existed, than the "lack" of real software-titles.
We really should think about the motives for Steampowered to port their platform and if it is worth it; I don't think they do this in a non-self-serving way and thus rather in the interest of making the GNU/Linux-Users solely dependent on commercial interests when it comes to games.
I don't know what you think, but I am not begging them to steal our freedom as many people in the GNU/Linux-community (including Michael) sadly do.
You might call me purist, but going the other way is not that different from Microsoft's and especially Apple's direction concerning respecting the users' freedom.
Last edited by frign; 01-27-2013 at 01:47 PM.
it's sad to see Linux Games
just fade away
Valve hasn't really brought many titles so far.
The fact is the majority of people using Linux are productive people and they rarely play games. When they do want a break and get a game, the offerings are too weak. The number one genre for Linux users would be RPGs in my opinion. Other games that would be successful are children games, and maybe puzzle games for the general audience that aren't into tech field.
Steam is being developed for Linux but they are still to push above and beyond to promote the platform. Example 'The Cave' was said to be coming to Linux on release date. I'm yet to see the game in Steam to purchase. The games listed available for Linux is pitiful, therefore I have no need to keep Steam running or spend money. I also have to run the Windows version in Wine to update or play games I have installed for Wine use. Steam really needs to make the Linux client able to push(exec) windows library items to Wine and allow updates for Windows items whilst running the Linux version.
Last edited by e8hffff; 01-27-2013 at 02:06 PM.
Also consider many Nations are in or going in to Austerity. This economic reason will cause a lack of production from creation houses, but may spur on homebrew.
It's always fascinating to see the way people can abuse language to completely distort reality.
Originally Posted by frign
Thanks for bringing in meaningful arguments instead of bashing one by the means he uses language.
Originally Posted by johnc
I don't have any particular argument for or against the topic at hand. What I criticized is the way that you abused language to put forward a proposition that's clearly contrary to the truth. And what's worse is that you heaped a calumny on a group of people who simply do not fit the allegation.
Originally Posted by frign
Somewhere in your diatribe you probably had a valid point to make, but you ruined it by making ridiculous claims. Perhaps you were just engaging in hyperbole to the nth degree.
I agree to most of your points, so there is no reason to turn aggressive.
Originally Posted by BO$$
Concerning Steam, the case is a little bit more complicated than you tried to explain it: Buying a game of steam just gives you the limited (for the time of Steam's existence), exclusive and non-shareable permission to play their games. It is a dramatic loss of freedom, because the user does not have control about the software any more. With older titles at least it was possible to share them with friends and circumvent unreasonable copyright-measures to play those, but since the days of Digital Restrictions Management began, things turned out to be different.
The only one brainwashed is you, because you did not understand the concept of Free Software actually being compatible with the corporate sector (Quite ironically, RMS was the first to point that out and exactly those companies contributing to the Linux-kernel are proof of concept).
The fundamental difference between Steam and the Linux Kernel is the fact that the developed code is distributed under the GNU-GPL and not kept behind closed walls. So, how do you explain that?
It is not only about obtaining the source-code, which would just be the interest of the "Open-Source-Movement", it is also about preserving the users' freedom over using, modifying and sharing the software they use. In almost any aspect, Steam violates these principles.
I do fully understand, though, that the assets for games are rather of a nature to be published under a CC-license. And as you might already know, two of the six CC-license-models are free software-licenses. Making money is not evil, it is evil to exploit the users by doing it.
Nevertheless, you are perfectly right with your statement that companies and individuals are free to choose under which license they publish their source-code.
We on the other hand are all free to choose the software of preference.
But free software should not be regarded as an unrealistic vision. Free Software is "happening" and more and more people are using it, more and more companies focus on developing free software for the public sector or other companies and earn lots of money with it.
I myself don't play any games, but it is obvious, that Steam is an unsuitable platform when one is interested in preserving his freedom, just as GNU/Linux is an unsuitable gaming-platform.
Maybe you might first read the statement above before we talk about this sensitive topic.
Originally Posted by johnc