Steam, Left 4 Dead 2 headed to Linux

Ever since Steam made its way to OS X (along with several Valve games), we’ve been hearing the odd rumor about a Linux version of the digital distribution-cum-social gaming client. Valve unequivocally shot down the rumors two years ago. However, in a surprising turnaround, the company announced yesterday evening that work on a Linux port is underway after all.

Valve says it formed a Linux team in 2011—so, the year after denying the rumors. The team was made up of only a "few people," and it was tasked with looking into the feasibility of porting Steam and Left 4 Dead 2 to Ubuntu Linux. Valve targeted Ubuntu not just because of its popularity among Linux users on the desktop, but also because "working with a single distribution is critical when you are experimenting." Considering the sheer number of Linux distros out there, I can see where Valve is coming from.

Anyway, here’s how Valve’s efforts have progressed since last year:

We’ve made good progress this year and now have the Steam client running on Ubuntu with all major features available. We’re still giving attention and effort to minor features but it’s a good experience at the moment. In the near future, we will be setting up an internal beta focusing on the auto-update experience and compatibility testing.
Since the Steam client isn’t much without a game, we’re also porting [Left 4 Dead 2] to Ubuntu. This tests the game-related features of the Steam client, in addition to L4D2 gameplay on Ubuntu. Over the last few months, excellent progress has been made on several fronts and it now runs natively on Ubuntu 12.04. We’re working hard to improve the performance and have made good progress (more on that in a future post). Our goal is to have L4D2 performing under Linux as well as it performs under Windows.

Ubuntu 12.04 and Left 4 Dead 2 are only the start. "Based on the success of our efforts around Ubuntu," Valve continues, "we will look at supporting other distributions in the future." The firm also intends to port "additional Valve titles." It doesn’t say which games are on its short list, but I’d be willing to bet Team Fortress 2 is somewhere near the top—Linux users surely have to be introduced to that game’s lucrative hat-based economy.

Just over two years have passed since Steam’s Mac debut. Today, the Mac wing of the Steam store is rife with casual games, indie titles, and a number of major releases like Assassin’s Creed Brotherhood, Star Wars: Knights of the Old Republic, and The Walking Dead. Linux might be a harder sell for third-party game publishers, since it does, after all, have a smaller installed base on the desktop. (Net Applications’ latest data shows a 1.05% usage share for Linux on the desktop, compared to 6.72% for OS X.) Still, the presence of a major distribution vehicle like Steam on Linux may well spur interest in the platform.

Comments closed
    • stmok
    • 7 years ago

    Another game title coming to Linux!

    [b<]Serious Sam 3 Ported To Linux, Running On Ubuntu[/b<] => [url<]http://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?page=news_item&px=MTE0MjU[/url<]

    • dlenmn
    • 7 years ago

    I hope this gets AMD to produce some better linux video drivers. As it stands, they have [url=http://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?page=article&item=amd_r600g_compete12<]much better[/url<] 3D performance than the open source drivers, but I also find them supper buggy: many non-game programs have rendering problems with them (e.g. Chrome), they leak memory like a sieve, etc. In contrast, the open source drivers work great for me in normal usage, but it doesn't look like they'll have the performance to handle games. Just putting things in perspective for windows users who aren't familiar with these problems.

    • kamikaziechameleon
    • 7 years ago

    I tried out ubuntu about 4 or 5 years ago, Thought it was the best thing since sliced bread. Ironically most of the genious in it has been copied by OSX or windows in that time. Ubuntu’s main issue being absence of natively support software, as a designer and gamers I need my creative suite, solid works, and auto cad along with my love of games…

    Funny thing being that if say my parents wanted a new OS I’d be inclined to give them ubuntu over win 8 since all they do is look at photos, web browse and skype.

    Seeing this though I’m inclined to dual boot my pc with ubuntu again, its just such a nicer experience IMHO than windows generally speaking. I just wish it had more software that ran natively. Luckily between steam, html, flash games and facebook games I can play real games on linux now.

      • lilbuddhaman
      • 7 years ago

      [quote<] .... facebook games I can play real games on linux now. [/quote<] 0_o

      • Deanjo
      • 7 years ago

      [quote<] Ironically most of the genious in it has been copied by OSX [/quote<] Oh please enlighten us as to what OS X copied from Ubuntu. I think you have that backwards.

    • jackbomb
    • 7 years ago

    Pingu is pleased.

      • willmore
      • 7 years ago

      Wait, what?
      [url<]https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pingu[/url<] Edit: Oh, because it's a penquin.

    • chuckula
    • 7 years ago

    SHUT UP AND TAKE MY MONEY.

      • willmore
      • 7 years ago

      Reasons to use Windows:
      [s<]Office/productivity apps[/s<] [s<]Software Development[/s<] [s<]Web Browsing[/s<] [s<]Games[/s<] odd CD/DVD burning apps.

    • Game_boy
    • 7 years ago

    When it launches they’ll just be pages and pages of driver incompatibility complaints, because AMD refuses to open up fglrx and let devs get its features up past 1998 or so.

    • McRuff
    • 7 years ago

    This is great news with Microsoft turning to the Dark Side with Metro.

    In a few years Linux may be the only option left to users who want to be able to use a Desktop without living in a walled garden.

    The more applications and games ported to Linux the better.

      • Mourmain
      • 7 years ago

      Yup, if this works, it will hit right at one of Microsoft’s current pillars: gaming on the PC.

      There’s still the little problem of DirectX being a lap or two ahead of OpenGL, of course.

        • TakinYourPoints
        • 7 years ago

        DX being ahead of OpenGL is the big stumbling block at the moment. That said, Source game performance in OS X which was [i<]abysmal[/i<] in 2010 is about at parity with Windows at the moment. I understand that Blizzard eventually reached that point with WoW, and the 1.5 beta of SC2 is supposed to bring it close as well (I haven't tested it myself, but 1.3 inexplicably lowered performance compared to prior versions). Valve said that their intent is to get L4D2 performance on Ubuntu up to the level it is with Windows, and based on their work on OS X I believe they can do it.

          • l33t-g4m3r
          • 7 years ago

          Only with drivers. OpenGL supports the same features as DX, and is more customizable. This isn’t a linux problem, but graphics companies choosing not to put decent resources behind it. I’ve heard intel is doing pretty good though. Valve isn’t going to be able to improve performance without working directly with the driver teams of amd and nvidia.

        • BobbinThreadbare
        • 7 years ago

        Rage, one of the most technologically advanced graphics engines, runs on OpenGL.

        The problem is drivers and that’s about it.

          • Geistbar
          • 7 years ago

          DirectX is far more than just a 3d rendering interface. When a developer uses DirectX, they get Direct3D, Direct2D, DirectSound, DirectInput, and all the [url=http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Directx#Components<]other components bundled in[/url<]. Even if OpenGL was directly comparable or even modestly superior to Direct3D, DirectX would still be a superior option to the developer because of all of the other headaches it helps solve. Beyond that, that something technologically advanced can be designed for OpenGL does not mean that OpenGL is comparable to DirectX. If coding it for DirectX would have taken half as much effort to get the same result, then OpenGL is a far worse solution. Is that the case? I honestly don't know (though if it is, it likely isn't such a huge time difference), but it is pertinent to remember that Carmack has spent a lot of time with OpenGL.

            • BobbinThreadbare
            • 7 years ago

            Direct3D and 2D – replicated by OpenGL

            DirectSound – whatever, it doesn’t do anything as of Vista since they killed off accelerated audio, OpenAL exists too (and ironically can do accelerated audio in Windows)

            DirectInput – Microsoft has been killing this off in favor of Xinput, which only supports 360 controllers and not 3rd party ones. I don’t think anyone has trouble getting user input in Linux

            Also, remember every cross platform engine today has an OpenGL port to run on the PS3.

            • l33t-g4m3r
            • 7 years ago

            Yup, Microsoft has been cutting features out of DirectX left and right. They don’t have the advantage they used to, that’s for sure. Games used to work flawlessly with all sorts of logitech controllers, but now it’s the 360 or nothing.

            • l33t-g4m3r
            • 7 years ago

            Linux has SDL. You can’t directly compare directx to opengl, since linux takes a different approach. The end result still gets you graphics and sound.

    • CuttinHobo
    • 7 years ago

    *Obligatory Windows 8 comment*

    Valve might be right on time to increase the viability of Linux (or at least the most mainstream distros like Ubuntu) at the same time that Microsoft is alienating a good chunk of its most technical users – the users most able to make the switch.

    I’m quite satisfied with Windows 7, but I admit that Linux has been steadily becoming more and more viable in my mind.

    • Martian
    • 7 years ago

    I am waiting for the moment when opensource people realize the number of incompatible distributions accomponied by an everunstable kernel development approach is a major setback for the platform… might never come do…

      • bcronce
      • 7 years ago

      The only thing “unstable” about the Linux kernel is the driver interface. This issue goes away when source is provided.

      As for distributions, I agree, there is a lot of fragmentation making it hard to have one installation work on them all. It is slowly getting better.

      I wouldn’t mind FreeBSD Steam, but that’s much smaller.

        • derFunkenstein
        • 7 years ago

        That’s honestly a pretty big stumbling block in the world of 3D graphics when proprietary changes and closed source are what vendors want, because they don’t want to give away all their performance secrets in source.

          • ew
          • 7 years ago

          You can keep up with the constantly changing latest and greatest or you can keep using one of the kernel’s that has long term support. There are 7 branches of the kernel that are currently getting support. The oldest one was released in October 2008 and got a minor bug fix update in March this year.

          [url<]http://kernel.org/[/url<]

            • sweatshopking
            • 7 years ago

            7 branches is TOO DAMN MANY

            • ew
            • 7 years ago

            Any reason why?

            • sweatshopking
            • 7 years ago

            because it’s confusing.

            • Bensam123
            • 7 years ago

            Sadly, a very simple, but understandable answer. That pretty much sums up Nix as well.

            • Washer
            • 7 years ago

            To who? It simply doesn’t matter for the average user, the person who would be confused. Just tell them to keep Ubuntu up to date and they’ll never run in to an issue.

            • ew
            • 7 years ago

            Yeah, Linux kernel versions are something only very few developers need to keep up on. Unless Valve has some sort of kernel level DRM module they probably don’t even care.

        • Sahrin
        • 7 years ago

        [quote<]The only thing "unstable" about the Linux kernel is the driver interface.[/quote<] Also the guy who invented it...

        • bjm
        • 7 years ago

        No, there are more issues to Linux than the just the unstable Linux kernel driver interface. While the driver interface is the most prominent issue, the userland itself has many incompatibilities. All of which is a detriment to proprietary software. “But just open source your software, problem solved!” Nope, not going to happen. Both the kernel and userland have issues for gaming.

        On the kernel side, even when things are open source, they aren’t even usable for gaming. AMD’s own open source driver is lagging embarrassingly behind AMD’s fglrx proprietary driver. If you’re using open source drivers, you’re not gaming. Or if you are, you’re gaming at 30% the performance of your system’s potential. nVidia’s proprietary drivers under Linux are great, but you wouldn’t get that impression from Linus, who recently bashed the best drivers under that operating system for gaming.

        On the userland side, if Valve is compiling against the native glibc under Ubuntu 12.04, then good luck running those applications on the next version of Ubuntu’s LTS. glibc recently went under a new steering committee so new and incompatible changes *will* come in the future LTS of Ubuntu. And that’s just glibc — what about when GTK3 updates, or QT — or whatever other GUI API Valve may have used? You think they those API devs will think “Hey, if we make this change, it may break a product on Steam. Hmm, let’s implement it a different way to remain compatible!”? Hah, good luck!

        Right now, you can install 10-year old games Windows 7. Sure, not all 10 year old games work, but many do. It’s hell of a lot easier to get backwards compatibility under Windows than under Linux because the APIs and ABIs are more stable. I said this previously in another thread: Valve will have to package all their essential libraries if they wish to remain compatible on future Ubuntu versions, let alone multiple distributions. That — or compile and maintain multiple versions of the same applications for multiple versions of Linux.

        The open source model is great when with open source software. But once proprietary software gets into the mix, then all hell breaks loose. And no, the answer isn’t no damned Stallmanesque “Open source everything!” If Linux wants any chance to break into the gamer market, it’s answer is to make things more easier for proprietary developers by developing against stable ABIs and APIs. Free/Libre zealots will decry that as going against their sacred ideals and sin #1 in their commandments, but hey — that’s why Linux is 1% of the gamer market.

          • Deanjo
          • 7 years ago

          [quote<]Right now, you can install 10-year old games Windows 7. Sure, not all 10 year old games work, but many do. It's hell of a lot easier to get backwards compatibility under Windows than under Linux because the APIs and ABIs are more stable.[/quote<] BS. I have several Loki games that still work fine, as do the UT and Quake games as well as NWN that run just fine on a cutting edge Linux install. Some of those are well over a decade old.

            • bjm
            • 7 years ago

            BS? I’ve troubleshot a few older Loki games and many of them require a specific version of libstdc++. Those that don’t, include them in the default install or have statically compiled against them. Honestly, do you mean to tell me those same Loki games you mention install without any modification at all to the default installer?

            Getting them to *run* after significant amounts of work does not make my statement BS. I install Freelancer and Asheron’s Call on Windows 7 and both run with very minimal amounts of work. Remember, whatever changes you made to those Loki installers are going to be distro-specific. Hell, all you need to do is Google “Loki Linux Install” and you’ll find all the nice and beautiful custom installers for those ancient games. Yes, custom installers for ancient games because Linux requires constant updates to remain compatible.

            Hell, there is a site just dedicated to it: [url<]http://liflg.org/[/url<] Updated installer != backwards compatible.

            • Deanjo
            • 7 years ago

            The most I have had to do is point them to a newer version of SDL which is as simple as putting in a symlink which is far easier to do then many older windows games that are looking for item like a specific DX library version. Many of which will not even get past the installer. I won’t even get into how many copy protection schemes only work with certian versions of windows.

          • DarkUltra
          • 7 years ago

          And the more interesting things will get once Steam has landed on Linux. Necessity is the mother of invention, maybe now the linux API and gui developers will learn to do what is nessesary to make it “just work.”

          Linux, with its open source nature, should have the best backwards compatibility I thought. Like how DoomLegacy lets me play Doom 1&2 with 7.1 directsound audio in Windows 7. Auzentech x-fi hometheater hd can serve openAL and HDMI out to a receiver and seven satellites. With room correction and dynamic loudness eq we can have a flatter frequency response and hear how it sounded to the audio engineer working on the game 10 years ago.

      • Washer
      • 7 years ago

      What makes you believe the Linux kernel development approach is unstable?

      The rest of your comment… philosophical differences.

      I’m still relatively new to the open source world and don’t intend to speak for it but what you’re getting at doesn’t seem to jive with the philosophy. Open source isn’t about selling software, it doesn’t even need to achieve a wide distribution. It’s more about sharing and when you start sharing a lot you come up with many different ideas. Sometimes those ideas can lead down incompatible paths. That’s great because all we’re after is better ideas.

      Not everyone involved with Linux feels the same way but I feel most of the open source crowd does.

      To me even the concept of “reducing” the number of Linux distributions or forcing them in to some certain strict compatibility is hilarious.

        • Malphas
        • 7 years ago

        Richard Stallman would agree with you. Linus Torvalds would probably disagree vehemently. It’s funny how often his opinions are basically the opposite of your typical hardcore FOSS nerds. The typical Linux zealot prefers the nerdy technical distributions like Slackware and Debian, whilst Torvalds dislikes them and prefers Ubuntu and Fedora. Linux zealots like Gnome, Torvalds hates it and uses KDE, etc. etc.

        It’s interesting to me how the less time and experience a user has had with Linux (like you admitted about yourself) the more into the whole nonsense FOSS philosophy side of things they are rather than practical realities.

          • Deanjo
          • 7 years ago

          Torvalds hasn’t used KDE since 4.0 was released. Instead he fixed a bunch of slop Gnome code and started using it since.

          • Washer
          • 7 years ago

          You listed Torvalds preferences and threw lame insults… Great job!

          So, how again does Torvalds ability to choose among the open source projects he likes prove he disagrees with the core of sharing ideas in the open source community? Where would he be if there wasn’t a choice between Gnome or KDE?

          Torvalds prefers the less popular open source Project X over the more popular open source project Y, therefore he must not like the open source at all!

          • BobbinThreadbare
          • 7 years ago

          “Linux zealots like Gnome”

          Since when? I see an awful lot of rage over how Gnome is becoming “mac like.”

            • Malphas
            • 7 years ago

            Yes, I was talking more historically rather than bang up to date trends, and admittedly making generalisations. But my point remains, it’s new Linux users like Washer than buy so vehemently into this idea they have of what FOSS is about, rather than people who’ve been around for a while (besides the likes of Stallman) who actually think a degree of standardisation is sometimes a useful thing.

            • Washer
            • 7 years ago

            You were attempting to throw bad insults. I was speaking relatively in terms of my experience, I’ve been using Linux off and on for 4 years plus now a year using it exclusively (both at home and work). I’m pretty versed at this point but I’m new compared to the guys I work with.

            The FOSS movement isn’t sustained by new people any way. It’s sustained by the long term desires of a large community. It wouldn’t be possible otherwise.

            Even more, I fail to see where I said standardisation was a bad thing. It’s good but you can’t force people to use that standard or not expect a lot of alternative solutions to still arise because people have the tools to make them. That’s the thing, there will always be alternatives and as long as Linux is open source (and I don’t see that changing) there will always be tons of weird, mostly useless distros.

            Get over it. It really does not matter at all. Your mom will never even know about Slackware or Gentoo because you installed Ubuntu on her laptop.

      • provoko
      • 7 years ago

      All my Linux distros stay up longer than any Windows OS. Win 7/vista definitely upped the ante on uptime, but still doesn’t beat the uptime of my Linux distros.

        • TakinYourPoints
        • 7 years ago

        Yup, same applies with my OS X uptime. The only reason I keep a Windows 7 installation is for games. Otherwise it has a much inferior desktop environment for working in, one that is getting worse with Windows 8 (I couldn’t get rid of the release preview soon enough). And as you said there is no contest with stability compared to Linux.

        If Blizzard started supporting Linux then I’d have little reason to keep Windows on my DIY PCs any longer.

        • Firestarter
        • 7 years ago

        Consumers on Windows 7 don’t care about uptime anymore, because it just works.

      • Deanjo
      • 7 years ago

      Kernels rarely kill compatibility. You may have a new revision of an API but those usually are accompanied with a compatibility library or come with a prepackaged library with the application. Not unlike how windows games come with DX redistributables / openAL redistributables / framework redistributables etc.

      • shank15217
      • 7 years ago

      Yea well it runs your world in many other aspects so I don’t think it really matters what what the desktop crowd thinks. Linux has the market cornered in mobile devices and server space, the only place left is the desktop, laptops and possibly tablets (its closing in fast there)

      • Flatland_Spider
      • 7 years ago

      Haha! There are only three companies you have to worry about Canonical, Redhat, and Suse. 🙂 Just target the commercial stuff.

      None of the commercial distros run a vanilla kernel. They’ve done a lot of Q&A testing to make sure everything is stable, and most of the kernel developers are paid to work on the kernel by large corporations such as Red Hat, IBM, and others. These guys aren’t in the business of selling unstable stuff.

        • Deanjo
        • 7 years ago

        Actually all of the above mentioned run vanilla kernels (it all depends on what kernel package you select). They do however add their own configs and additional patches for additional functionality as well as backport fixes to older kernels that are still under their support period.

    • ew
    • 7 years ago

    Based on Humble Bundle statistics I’d say LInux represents much more then 1.05% of the potential install base for people likely to buy games. [url<]http://www.humblebundle.com/[/url<]

      • l33t-g4m3r
      • 7 years ago

      Also, linux users pay more than windows. There is money in porting games to linux.

        • bjm
        • 7 years ago

        *sigh* This crap keeps getting repeated from some sensationalist blog who twisted the results of some statistics. Here’s the article which brought this all up:

        [url<]http://blog.wolfire.com/2010/05/Linux-users-contribute-twice-as-much-as-Windows-users[/url<] Despite the Linux user's paying twice as much each game sold, the total revenue for Windows purchases is still over 50% of the total revenue. For total contributors, it's 65%. Overall revenue for Linux is still below 25% for total revenue and even lower than that for contributors. Yet, when you read the headline, you would think it would be the reverse. Yep, sensationalism at it's best and again l33t-g4m3r is falling for it. How's your DX9 state engine drivers running? Edit: Click here for the new numbers [url<]http://www.humblebundle.com/#statistics[/url<] Windows is by far outpacing Linux and Mac in total revenue and sales.

          • grantmeaname
          • 7 years ago

          He didn’t say total. I think it was pretty clear that he meant “each”, as did the authors of every news site I’ve read’s coverage of the bundle, including this one. You’re twisting his words in order to disagree with him.

          • bjm
          • 7 years ago

          And I never said he said total. I said it was sensationalist crap. And it is. This small detail is always being brought up as some sort proof Linux has some sort of significant gamer market.

          Pitching that Linux users pay more than Windows users as if it has any sort of relevance given their marketshare, even for the Humble Bundle, without mentioning the full details is sensationalist. It’s being pitched in a good light now, but the moment a game company releases a Linux version with a higher MSRP than its Windows counterpart, the pitchforks will come out.

            • l33t-g4m3r
            • 7 years ago

            Right, because Linux isn’t a reason to charge more than MSRP, and nobody on any platform will pay more than MSRP if you could get it cheaper through a competitor. Is the MSRP for the PS3 higher than Xbox? No. If it was, you’d have less people on the PS3.

            I don’t know where you’re getting this higher than MSRP idea, but it’s bunk. Linux users may tolerate there being less sales, since I see a willingness to pay higher prices for games. It’s probably because of scarcity though, and if there was a decent selection available that willingness could diminish.

            One thing that might go over is some sort of kickstarter-esque pre-order donation model to help fund game development, as linux users will fund software they enjoy using. Make the business model similar to how linux users already fund software developers they like, including letting sponsors beta-test.

            I do believe games will start coming to linux one way or another in the near future. Valve could very easily make gobs of money with their near monopoly on the market. Otherwise, users could turn to kickstarter for games. Either way it seems we’ve hit the turning point for linux gaming. Desura and others are already there, and with Valve joining in, we’re going to start seeing a big shift towards making linux a viable gaming platform.

            • ew
            • 7 years ago

            For a long time Xbox and Ps3 games were $10 more than their PC versions. So I think there is precedent for charging different amounts for different platforms.

            • l33t-g4m3r
            • 7 years ago

            That’s only because the hardware/platform was being subsidised, and consoles fall under vendor lock in. PC users pay for their hardware and OS, it’s open, and it is easier to develop for. You also don’t have to worry about memory limitations. A large portion of PC users don’t even buy games @ $60. I certainly don’t. $40 is the sweet spot when I buy new games I really want, and everything else is steam/amazon sales. The $60 price point is just there for the impulse buy suckers, and it quickly drops vs console games. PC games don’t hold value especially when you can’t resell them. I don’t think anybody is willing to put up with another price hike, but linux users might put up with less sales. Even though that’s true, there may not even be a price difference considering windows users will be subsidising linux versions, and steam is cross platform. The only way I see linux users really paying more is through linux exclusives, or if linux ports must be bought independently of windows versions.

            • bjm
            • 7 years ago

            Exactly! So then quit shouting from the roof tops how “Linux users pay more” when you won’t be willing to actually pay more if a publisher were to demand it.

            Deanjo said it best, this Humble Bundle statistic isn’t a good barometer for judging Linux’s potential revenue. It’s a charity event. That shouldn’t be a surprise given how much of open source community is based on charitable contributions.

            Either the statistic is total crap to gauge the potential revenue sales (which it is) or the statistic is an accurate gauge (which it isn’t). And that’s where MSRP comes in — because last I checked, the majority of gaming sales is NOT based on charitable contributions, but actual sales predicated by the MSRP. If “Linux users paying more” isn’t indicative of a willingness to pay a higher MSRP, then it’s indicative of nothing at all for potential gaming sales.

            Oh wait, you meant “Linux users pay more than Windows when the prices are the same”, right?

            • l33t-g4m3r
            • 7 years ago

            No, not exactly. The humble statistics do prove linux users will pay more than windows users, but that’s all it shows. It doesn’t show linux users will pay above MSRP. Only idiots would pay above MSRP, and the typical linux user isn’t an idiot. You need to consier the userbase before making assumptions like that. Selling games above MSRP is a good way to piss off the community and guarantee no sales at all. At that point, competition like Desura and Wine/Steam would replace linux/Steam.

            [quote<]Oh wait, you meant "Linux users pay more than Windows when the prices are the same", right?[/quote<] Yes, but not exactly how you worded it. Linux users would pay more when the prices are [i<]fair[/i<]. Ripoff pricing isn't going to get you anywhere, but you could keep prices from dropping as low as windows gets. Hell, you could make linux versions additional DLC. Still, people need to look at the history of linux gaming here. Most AAA games that are cross platform, have been cross-platform at no additional cost, while budget titles might not have firesale steam pricing. Keeping the same business model and offering a good selection should provide plenty profit and further gaming while blatant price gouging will only stall the market. I will say linux gaming seems to be coming along quite nicely with recent news, including performance updates for ATI users and the latest KDE being more efficient.

        • Bensam123
        • 7 years ago

        Nix users pay double… you end up at 2% of total sales.

      • Deanjo
      • 7 years ago

      No what it means is that there is little selection for commercial games on Linux currently and they will pay dearly for any little morsel that is thrown their way. Humble bundle stuff is far from AAA title stuff and everybody is willing to cough up a couple of bucks laying around in their PayPal account that they probably never would use otherwise. Nobody minds paying a few bucks for 3/4/5 simple games especially when that money is going to charity. Humble bundle is not a good barometer to judge the potential revenue of a Linux port. Pay what you want is very different then paying MSRP.

    • provoko
    • 7 years ago

    niiiiiiiiiiiiice

    Ubuntu Software Center always reminded me of Steam, so it’s no big deal, but it’s good to know Steam is coming to Linux.

    Desura always worked on Linux, maybe Steam is afraid of competition.

    • diesavagenation
    • 7 years ago

Pin It on Pinterest

Share This