181–190 of 202 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
They are fully dependent on Windows Games developed for Windows. They are only working really hard not to pay for Windows OS licences. The day they actually support native Linux games, instead of doing Windows API translation is when I believe they are actually serious about Linux games, and not saving OS licenses.
Are you suggesting they aren't serious about Linux unless they stop selling games without a native Linux version?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
They are fully dependent on Windows Games developed for Windows. They are only working really hard not to pay for Windows OS licences. The day they actually support native Linux games, instead of doing Windows API translation is when I believe they are actually serious about Linux games, and not saving OS licenses.
What are you talking about? Practically every Valve game has a native (non-Proton) Linux port. Every Counter-Strike, every Team Fortress, every Half-Life (even Alyx), every Portal, DOTA 2, Artifact.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The point is about the large majority that runs on top of Proton.
Feels like you're moving the goalposts. You said: > The day they actually support native Linux games They do, and have for a long time now, for nearly all of their own releases. There's not much more they can do than that; they don't control what platforms other companies want to port to.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The point is about the large majority that runs on top of Proton.
Sorry, but are you saying you believe Valve is responsible for the development of every game on their store? In case you're just genuinely unaware, games are developed by a variety of people and studios completely separately from Valve.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The people I mentioned in my comment clearly disagree with you, and frankly they have more of an incentive to be well informed about the situation. See the twitter link I posted to your comment's sibling for Ethan Lee's impressions from three years ago. Also, I never argued against Proton having been a boon for Linux gamers, but I tried to present an opposing point of view that usually does not get taken into account…
In your opinion, why is the "trust in Proton" not considered "developing for Linux"? Is your argument specifically about the game developer's mental model for Linux's priority, or something core about the Proton abstraction layer? All software runs on some abstraction. So specifically, if the game developer prioritized a Linux port by explicitly testing Proton, would that be enough for you to consider the game "devel…
Regarding games, that is a binary that targets the ubuntu based Steam Linux Runtime. That's what I meant when I said that devs should be able to target it as a regular console SDK.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Silly argument, Vulkan also isn't available on Xbox or Playstation, yet dedicated game console platforms clearly care a lot about gaming. There's also only a handful of Vulkan games, supporting D3D11 and D3D12 on macOS would make a lot more sense. But in reality, porting to a different 3D API isn't what makes or breaks a game port.
I see nothing silly about it. Bringing other bad examples of lock-ins doesn't excuse Apple in the least. Personally I'd stay away from the above too. > There's also only a handful of Vulkan games There are a ton of games that are Vulkan games through vkd3d-proton and dxvk. Which was the above point.
If Apple would implement Vulkan support on macOS it would be a layer on top of Metal (same as their GL implementation or MoltenVk). Running through two translation layers (D3D => Vk => Metal) doesn't make a lot of sense.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I see nothing silly about it. Bringing other bad examples of lock-ins doesn't excuse Apple in the least. Personally I'd stay away from the above too. > There's also only a handful of Vulkan games There are a ton of games that are Vulkan games through vkd3d-proton and dxvk. Which was the above point.
So if Apple would provide a similar D3D shim on macOS, all D3D games would suddenly become "Metal games"? If Apple would implement Vulkan support on macOS it would be a layer on top of Metal (same as their GL implementation or MoltenVk). Running through two translation layers (D3D => Vk => Metal) doesn't make a lot of sense.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Are you suggesting they aren't serious about Linux unless they stop selling games without a native Linux version?
Yes
Even as someone who tries to predominantly buy games with a native Linux version, it's not something I really want. If I have some desire to play a game from 2008 again, I'm glad Steam will still offer me the Windows version.