Steam - It's Not Just for Windows and Macs Anymore

psoplayer wrote:
MeatMan wrote:

One of the questions on that beta survery asks "What Linux desktop manager are you using?" What option on that list would you guys recommend I use/choose?

Unity is the default desktop environment with Ubuntu now, so that would be what you'll use unless you go out of your way to try others.

When people say "more user friendly", that usually equates to bigger buttons with less configuration options. I can hardly stand Unity, actually. Making changes to the Unity desktop to make it how I want it to work for me is either difficult or not possible.

That said, during the time I am using Linux at work, the back-end portion of Ubuntu is what works best for my particular situation. I have found the Mint distro, with is based on Ubuntu, with the Cinnamon desktop to be more usable.

psoplayer wrote:
Malor wrote:

I said 'no' on Wine, because Wine kinda sucks. It's better than nothing, but I'd rather just boot into Windows than use Wine.

On that note, on October 31 Codeweavers is giving away free 12 month licenses for Crossover, their commercial wine product. (as they did for the last presidential election) I don't really know how it compares to the free Wine, but combined with the imminent Steam beta it might be a good opportunity to try a full switch for any brave souls out there.

Thanks for the heads up. Would be a great opportunity to try!

Valve at the Ubuntu developer conference:

The Valve guy starts at around 13m. Nothing astounding, but mentions that they're branching out to linux because of the whole open/closed platform thing, and that they believe setting up steam now on windows wouldn't be possible (which makes me wonder about all the 'competitors' from EA, Ubi, etc).

lol at complaining about a closed platform when your platform itself is essentially closed.

Quite a difference between an OS and a storefront.

And it's like Android vs iOS on phones and tablets. On Android you check a box in options and can install programs from any source. You're not tied to the Google Market. You can get things from Amazon's store, or anywhere else you want.

On iOS you have to hack your device to get that kind of freedom.

All previous Windows versions have been like Android, where you can install whatever you want. Win8 is trying to move towards the iOS model.

TheGameguru wrote:

lol at complaining about a closed platform when your platform itself is essentially closed.

Stele wrote:

Quite a difference between an OS and a storefront.

There is definitely a difference but it's still...off.

I don't know if it was so much "complaining" so much as observing the landscape that PC/Windows/others now looks like. Absolutes are a dangerous thing, of course windows, even win8 isn't completely closed, but I find it hard to disagree that setting up something like steam now would be harder than 8 years ago. They said something along the lines of "Microsoft didn't mind them making steam", so hopefully I'm reading between the lines correctly to imply that now they're if not impairing making things like steam (metro?), they're not assisting valve if they were before.

It seems like the kind of political territory between companies where they wouldn't want to say anything to piss off the other party.

idk.. .Steam runs fine on my Windows 8 machine.. zero problems.

Right, but how about the next thing like steam. Could you make something with a similar business model to valve/steam in an environment like iOS, which is what MS seem to be aspiring to? As far as steam goes technically everything it relies upon is still there, it's just static, and unless you tinker on the desktop hidden behind the metro curtain.

It's perhaps getting off topic, but maybe not. We can only see windows in it's current state, and from what I can tell while win8 isn't hostile to steam, it doesn't seem to be fertile soil for things like steam to start and grow up to be a success (which is in valve's DNA, that they will leave space and 'money on the table' for others to be successful with, which eventually in turn benefits valve). That's my big question about metro, that while it could be good for metro app developers, I don't really see it being a great ecosystem, MS are the only ones who thrive from it.

To go further off the beaten track, being open is what I'd partially attribute the success of WoW to. They allowed addons, and for people to mess around scraping data, and for people to set-up a bunch of websites doing stuff with all that WoW information, which in turn reinforced the game.

I'm not going to rehash the whole "what might happen" scenario.. I mean its completely pointless..no one knows for sure what direction Microsoft will end up going in.. since I'm 100% sure they themselves don't know. But that reality won't stop the tinfoil hat crowd from painting any number of dire scenarios.. so carry on.

Windows 8 as it stands right now is no more or less hostile to Steam (or something like Steam starting up) that previous versions of Windows were. The desktop is there, it's easily accessible, it's not hidden and it's as wide open as it ever was. If you were to start up a new digital distribution platform and promote it right, I think you'd have the same chances of finding an audience now as you did on Windows 7. Now, does that align with Microsoft's future plans? Who knows. Microsoft certainly wants their piece of the closed platform pie (something that we have Apple to thank for making popular) but the desktop is of such vital importance to both power users (which includes hardcore gamers) and enterprise (which is still where they make the vast majority of their money) that I would put money down that they will not get rid of the desktop until metrics clearly demonstrate that the vast majority no longer care about it. If a sizeable number of installations of Windows 8 continue to use the desktop (and I believe they will), Microsoft will not get rid of it. Sure, they can get a cut of the sale of Metro apps but if they get rid of the desktop, the users that want it will move elsewhere and that's a massive number of expensive Windows licenses that will suddenly evaporate. We can debate whether Microsoft is hostile to users in suiting their own interests (a department where I think Apple rivals them easily now) but they are not stupid. Valve may be right about Windows 8, time will tell and I think backing more systems is a good idea but based on what they've said so far, it seems to me that they're just upset that they now have to compete with another store rather than ruling the roost virtually unchallenged for the last several years. That's the way it goes, too bad so sad. I'll be very interested to see how their attempts at Linux pan out. It will change everything if they can make the rubber hit the road.

Well said.. competition is always a good thing.. I cheer for any companies efforts to compete with Microsoft on the Desktop OS side.. Having real choice always benefits the consumers.. which is the exact same thing I said about Origin in their attempts to compete with Steam.. and every other digital platform that is trying as well.. and that even includes Microsoft with the Windows 8 Store.

TheGameguru wrote:

I'm not going to rehash the whole "what might happen" scenario.. I mean its completely pointless..no one knows for sure what direction Microsoft will end up going in.. since I'm 100% sure they themselves don't know. But that reality won't stop the tinfoil hat crowd from painting any number of dire scenarios.. so carry on.

For us users, maybe. But for Valve, the fact that there's uncertainty doesn't mean they can just sit back and say, "I hope this all works out!".

Their assessment of the situation has led them to conclude it to be worthwhile to invest non-trivial money and effort into porting Steam and Valve games to Linux.

*Legion* wrote:
TheGameguru wrote:

I'm not going to rehash the whole "what might happen" scenario.. I mean its completely pointless..no one knows for sure what direction Microsoft will end up going in.. since I'm 100% sure they themselves don't know. But that reality won't stop the tinfoil hat crowd from painting any number of dire scenarios.. so carry on.

For us users, maybe. But for Valve, the fact that there's uncertainty doesn't mean they can just sit back and say, "I hope this all works out!".

Their assessment of the situation has led them to conclude it to be worthwhile to invest non-trivial money and effort into porting Steam and Valve games to Linux.

Exactly, which is also why it will work out for users in the end. We already have proof that people are going to replace whatever's lost if Windows does lock down.

*Legion* wrote:
TheGameguru wrote:

I'm not going to rehash the whole "what might happen" scenario.. I mean its completely pointless..no one knows for sure what direction Microsoft will end up going in.. since I'm 100% sure they themselves don't know. But that reality won't stop the tinfoil hat crowd from painting any number of dire scenarios.. so carry on.

For us users, maybe. But for Valve, the fact that there's uncertainty doesn't mean they can just sit back and say, "I hope this all works out!".

Their assessment of the situation has led them to conclude it to be worthwhile to invest non-trivial money and effort into porting Steam and Valve games to Linux.

uh.. I never said Valve shouldn't do it.. but painting a hostile "closed" environment.. when their platform is all about being a hostile closed environment is amusing to me (which is all I said).. Please believe that Valve will settle for nothing less than Market Domination for Digital Distribution...which again is completely fine.. any business should attempt to be the best and dominate the market.

I applaud Valve for attempting to do whatever they need to do to continue to grow and keep their C.E.O happy (Customers, Employees, Owners)

But Valve doesn't really even sell a program, they're just a platform for selling games. All they really do is copy digital bits. What good is there in open-sourcing their offering?

It's the servers and server infrastructure that matters there, not the client code, so much. They're selling servers, not a program.

Malor wrote:

But Valve doesn't really even sell a program, they're just a platform for selling games. All they really do is copy digital bits. What good is there in open-sourcing their offering?

It's the servers and server infrastructure that matters there, not the client code, so much. They're selling servers, not a program.

This is all very true. But are they actually open-sourcing Steam (sorry, I haven't had time today to watch the video)? As I understand it, they're bringing Steam to the Linux platform in a binary form but I don't think they're open-sourcing it. They're hoping to make gaming take off on Linux so that if Microsoft locks down Windows to the point where Steam's no longer viable there, they have somewhere to direct their user base. I don't think Valve has any interest in open-source do they?

Right... I'm responding to Guru's needling about porting a closed-source app to an open-source platform. I don't see any particular benefit in opening the source to that specific program. They potentially could, but what benefit would there really be?

Oh, you know, I just realized I may have misunderstood Guru's point again -- I thought he was criticizing Valve for bringing Steam to Linux, but he's (I guess) criticizing them for being upset about a closed environment that they have no control over, while offering a closed environment that their customers have no control over. He's basically calling them hypocrites.

Steam is such a light-duty DRM platform, though, that I'm not sure it really even counts. It's trivial to crack Steam games, to my understanding. I have no direct experience (and no particular skill in that area), but the general impression I get is that it takes maybe an hour or two to de-DRM a Steam offering.

And, of course, Steam isn't using a monopoly position in OSes to force customers to accept them in a new market, digital software distribution.

Malor wrote:

Right... I'm responding to Guru's needling about porting a closed-source app to an open-source platform. I don't see any particular benefit in opening the source to that specific program. They potentially could, but what benefit would there really be?

Oh, you know, I just realized I may have misunderstood Guru's point again -- I thought he was criticizing Valve for bringing Steam to Linux, but he's (I guess) criticizing them for being upset about a closed environment that they have no control over, while offering a closed environment that their customers have no control over. He's basically calling them hypocrites.

Steam is such a light-duty DRM platform, though, that I'm not sure it really even counts. It's trivial to crack Steam games, to my understanding. I have no direct experience (and no particular skill in that area), but the general impression I get is that it takes maybe an hour or two to de-DRM a Steam offering.

And, of course, Steam isn't using a monopoly position in OSes to force customers to accept them in a new market, digital software distribution.

Many games don't even use the Steam DRM. You can just copy the files out of the steam dir to any other location and run the games directly.

Microsoft is not a monopoly on OSes. If they are, so is Apple and while Microsoft pulled the trigger first, anyone who thinks this exact kind of thing isn't coming to OSX if Microsoft sees success with it is kidding themselves. I'll leave anything else I have to say on Windows 8 for that thread.

Microsoft is not a monopoly on OSes.

The court system of the United States disagrees with you.

Malor wrote:
Microsoft is not a monopoly on OSes.

The court system of the United States disagrees with you.

Don't disagree with you but doesn't this weaken your argument as this is the same court system that says corporations are people and a whole other P&C sh*t that we don't need to go over here?

Were you active in computing at the time? Did you follow the trial?

They're a monopoly.

I said I didn't disagree with you.

Malor wrote:
Microsoft is not a monopoly on OSes.

The court system of the United States disagrees with you.

This is ridiculous. We have choices.

Plus when was that ruling? The landscape has changed remarkably since then.

Don't feed the troll and certainly exercise your right and ability to read the entire case against Microsoft and what exactly happened in the end. Don't take anyone least of all Malors point of view as gospel...plus the ruling was ages ago...its kinda amusing that Malor behaves as if was yesterday..sh*t I wish it was I would buy Apple stock..

IBM should sue Compaq as well for copyright infringement!!!!

Back on topic.. what is the best Linux distro for gaming? As well as multi-monitor support?

TheGameguru wrote:

Back on topic.. what is the best Linux distro for gaming? As well as multi-monitor support?

For multi-monitor support you should check the general linux questions thread, it's been discussed in there a bunch I think.

As for gaming on Linux, not sure if there's really a best distro yet. Since Valve is targeting Ubuntu that's a safe bet though.

TheGameguru wrote:

Back on topic.. what is the best Linux distro for gaming? As well as multi-monitor support?

Distro won't matter for multi-monitor support. What you'll be at the mercy of are the NVIDIA and ATI binary drivers.

I'm running 3 monitors off of my Radeon 5870. It works, albeit not necessarily with the most wonderful of setup experiences. I'm really hopeful for Wayland, the replacement for X, which looks to modernize a lot things like multi-monitor. It's way overdue.

Ubuntu is the target platform for Steam as SixteenBlue said, so that's the choice for gaming.

For classic games, Puppy Arcade is pretty damn cool.