From the opinion piece:

Last year, I pointed out how many big publishers came crawlin’ back to Steam after trying their own things: EA, Activision, Microsoft. This year, for the first time ever, two Blizzard games released on Steam: Overwatch and Diablo 4.

  • woelkchen@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    10 months ago

    All this pedantic smugness and yet you still can’t present a half decent argument for why linux support matters for other vendors besides steam Valve.

    I gave a reason why it barely requires any effort to bundle up existing FOSS solutions to make Windows games compatible, ie. expanding the potential user base by several millions. I know what I’m talking about because I package Linux software myself.

    Steam Valve could have sold 30 million decks and it still would hardly matter.

    That’s 5 million more than Xbox Series X|S and Windows games would run with hardly any extra work required. That’s different from making native ports.

    Just throw a google search for “SteamOS frustrating”.

    I don’t care for annecdotal evidence. Sales numbers speak for themselves.

    Learn the difference between Valve and Steam before trying to lecture anyone.

    • DrRatso@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      10 months ago

      The fact that it can be done or even relatively easily means nothing. Whether teams are hired in-house or the task is outsourced does not matter, it still costs a decent sum of money and requires ongoing maintenance costs. You need additional devs, you need QA and customer support, you even need new features in your client. You can’t just wing it and bundle some packages, we are not talking hobby projects here.

      Again steam did not do this to drive game sales, otherwise they’d have done this before they needed a deck solution. And this is because stand-alone the amount of game sales this would drive is nothing to major vendors because most linux gamers are willing to use heroic/lutris/bottles/wine whatever themselves or dualboot / vm passthrough to play what they want.

      And you keep hinging on steams hardware sales figures but it is not like the praise or demand for steam deck comes from it running a linux base. It would be more accurate to say people love it despite that fact.

      The praise steam is getting and what is driving steams device sales numbers comes almost in its entirety from the hardware platform being really good and the price being really low. And this comes back full circle - this is almost exclusively why steam invested in linux compatibility.

      So no, steams hardware sales numbers don’t speak for themselves.

      • woelkchen@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        10 months ago

        Again steam did not do this to drive game sales, otherwise they’d have done this before they needed a deck solution.

        Proton exists far longer than Steam Deck. You don’t know what you’re talking about.

        • DrRatso@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          10 months ago

          And steam has been trying to push linux based steam hardware before proton, so maybe you are out of your depth here?

            • DrRatso@lemmy.ml
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              10 months ago

              Lmao, you should go look into the origins of steams hardware line then and why steam invested in proton. Come back with something more than “ackchyually”