Just to be clear, Michael Larabel completely butchered the objections to Steam. I'm a huge fan of for-pay games, proprietary software, and DRM in addition to open source. I hope you read my other post.
Originally Posted by jan1024188
That's not fair. I'm ecstatic about all the big proprietary companies bringing AAA games to Linux this year and will pay full price for many of them. I just don't think that Valve has this righteous position as the universal rent collector on all games that are completely developed and funded outside of Valve. Even my favorite game developer, Rockstar Games, doesn't deserve this rent seeking privilege.
Originally Posted by Rexilion
Linux has never taken off in the past because:
Originally Posted by enfocomp
- work/school productivity users were predominantly tied to Win/Mac.
- basic functionality was a mess in the past.
- Game development has been so heavily tied to either consoles or Windows.
- Desktop and game dev sdks have been a mess.
Linux has turned a corner on the first two. Android/iOS have completely blown the third item out of the water. The fourth one is making progress as well. Valve has had some contribution, but it's been minor and these things would have happened without them.
Last edited by DanLamb; 04-08-2013 at 02:28 AM.
I agree with what you are saying as it applies generally, and as Michael Larabel misframed the argument against Steam, it sounds ridiculously idealistic.
Originally Posted by Alejandro Nova
Linux needs better game APIs, it needs closed source AAA games, it needs better visibility, it needs an auto-patching service that works across all games like the regular Synaptic-type repos have. Linux doesn't need Steam. Steam isn't practical. The best thing that Steam can contribute is hype and credibility, but these can be gained through other means.
This is the same issue with all digital distribution services isn't it?You either agree or don't use the service. Its not reason enough for me to worry.
Originally Posted by GreatEmerald
If valves linux steam box is successful, we may actually start seeing more physical disk based games in all those shops selling xbox/pc/wii/ps3 games
How cool would that be i could finally find game disks sold, compatible with steam console and GNU/linux DE, along side pc/xbox/ps3 titles. That would really be the year of linux gaming
Last edited by DDF420; 04-08-2013 at 03:18 AM.
And since these did not come in the last 15 years will come in the future from somewhere else because?
Originally Posted by DanLamb
Stuff like this will make it work: http://alienware.com/ubuntu/
The story with a headline ending with question mark is usually tendentious and over-sold. Which is the case for this moronix article as well.
Not if they don't include DRM by themselves. In that case you download the installer and you're good to play the game forever, no matter if the distributors go out of business or not.
Originally Posted by DDF420
Yeah, right the most of your $30+M figure goes into game engine coding. I call it bullshit.
Originally Posted by Dodger73
Btw there are thousands of professional game devs. But how many of them are actually using/contributing to open source game engines? What if there was a game engine equivalent to linux? Something that could easily compete with UE and CryEngine middleware. A modular and advanced game engine as a result of professional game devs collaboration. Yes, I know I must be kidding to even think about it...
Has Linux been able to compete on desktop *before* Windows 8? Just sayin...
Originally Posted by log0
Sorry, I should have been more exact. With linux I've meant linux kernel.
Originally Posted by ворот93
And even so, has Linux *kernel* been able to attract third-party developers? For years has it been a couple of middle-size giants plus "community" but no mainstream.
Originally Posted by log0