While it's super cool that maybe I'll be able to run linux at home and still play games some time in the future, it's kind of sad that the only reason he cares is because he's worried about a MS app store potentially being a competitor to steam, and yet people are fervently praising him for it.
He doesn't really care about linux, he doesn't really think Windows is a bad platform for gaming, he just wants to try to crush a competitor. If he did care he would have done something years ago. Id has managed to release the vast majority of their games on linux, and it didn't take a potential fiscal threat to make them do it.
I agree that he's certainly not doing this for the Linux community purely out of the kindness of his heart. But why should he? He's running a business and has to choose the profitable products to develop. Up until recently, Linux gaming has not had a huge amount of potential profit. It still might not for that matter.
If you watch his presentation however, he does talk about a lot more than just the fact that the Windows/Mac app stores are all trying to take a cut. One of the key points he makes is that the largest proportion of innovation in the gaming scene is happening/originating on PC. Digital distribution, social gaming, free-to-play, community generated content and markets, etc. All these were primarily instigated on the PC, but are potentially in danger from closed, captive marketplaces.
Are people going to generate new hats for Team Fortress (to pick a simple example), when the approval process for content in the various app stores could hold it up for weeks or months? If another innovation such as Social Gaming (farmville, etc.) were to come along, but all the platforms were locked down as to what features they can enable for the users; would it ever take off as a business model?
So yeah, he's certainly doing it out of self-interest for Valve, but it's about far more than just the monetary cut they take. It's about the freedom to develop new and innovative ideas on an open platform without worrying about whether they'll pass the inspection of some opaque 3rd party authority.
PS: It's quite ironic to complain about a person making good logical business decisions on a forum dedicated to startup companies, where the majority of people are trying their damndest to make their own businesses work...
If there was ever a competitor that deserved to be crushed, it's Microsoft.
I'm all for this. If Microsoft wants to turn their OS into a consumer toy or a corporate tool, go ahead. I'd love to have an open-source OS that happened to be a first-class gaming platform as well, where if there's problems with performance, companies like Valve has a recourse: patch the OS.
Not "need", but if Valve wanted to submit patches, they could. Secondly, they could make their own distro for their own hardware which they are allegedly doing. Then they can do whatever they want with the kernel.
But you can't assume it is a gift. What does it matter if desktop Linux takes off on the backs of proprietary nonfree software? Not just proprietary apps on top of a free stack, but a proprietary distribution platform where most programs bought for it only run through it, where the controller can at whim close your account, and they vet and determine who they bless to use their platform earpiece? Doesn't that defeat the purpose?
The vast majorty of current Linux titles are not on Linux because of Steam. Few titles (Crusader Kings comes to mind) actually ported their engine to run on opengl / posix / alsa or sdl just because Steam appeared there. Most of the last 2 years of Linux gaming boom has been due to Unity and the Humble Bundle. Unity was porting to Linux before Steam on Linux was announced, same with the Humble Bundle.
Having a platform is fine and everything, but here are two observations from seperate perspectives:
1. Why develop for a platform where you can only expect a few thousand sales, even on the de facto distribution platform that takes a cut of proceeds?
2. If there are no games on a platform, wouldn't you just want to release directly and let your potential customers come to you? If they are desperate, wouldn't cutting out the middle man be more profitable, since Steam isn't making Linux development easier, just marketing and sales processing? I think Steam is so important on the desktop PC because there are so many games on it. People don't go download Origin or seek out a developers site to buy a game, they just buy it on Steam. If you are on something like gnu/linux, you have no competition game-wise, you just have to make sure people know you exist. In almost any genre, you have minimum modern competition on the platform. So why give Valve whatever % they take?
Knowing that the game exists is 80% of the battle for indie devs.
I check Steam everyday looking for new Linux releases. I can't say the same for checking indie game blogs or wherever else I'm supposed to find the announcements of a Linux version. Even if I did, it's simple mathematics - do I check 30+ websites of various game publishers, news organisations and indie devs, or do I just check Steam?
They have a pretty powerful platform; I think the publicity benefits of being on Steam far outweigh the cut they take as a middleman.
What does it matter if desktop Linux takes off on the backs of proprietary nonfree software?
Meh. I'm old enough to remember how Serverside Linux took off in corporate environments: Oracle ported its database. That was seen as a sign of approval, and soon Linux was everywhere. It was pretty rare to actually be running Oracle, but that was the tipping point.
>he doesn't really think Windows is a bad platform for gaming
How can you know this? Right now, being a Windows desktop centric company is a huge liability as consoles and mobile are eating the gaming world. Yeah, PC gamers will always be here, but not in vast numbers.
>he just wants to try to crush a competitor
He also wants to contemporize and have his own OS. If the Steam linux-based console came out with tons of game support, it might be a no brainer for PC gamers sick of building expensive systems and dealing with Windows centric hassles (DRM, shoddy updates, OEM crapware, goofy UI decisions, etc). I'd buy it and retire my desktop. As long as the games were keyboard/mouse-centric and complex, not lazy PS3/4 transfers.
This comment is so broken. It begins by saying why Gabe has come to care about Linux (it is a solution to MS lock in). Then you say that he doesn't care about Linux.
Whether he's taken his sweet time coming around, he HAS come around. He now obviously cares about linux.
Some people like a sports team because of the way they play the game. Some like the same sports team because they're the local team. Others like them because of the color of their uniforms, or they find one of the players very attractive, or any number of reasons. Some started liking them only after they did well last season, others got team related tattoos 10 years ago.
> It begins by saying why Gabe has come to care about Linux (it is a solution to MS lock in).
That's not why he cares, he cares because the MS App store is a threat to Steam lock in, and he wants his tasty 30%.
> Then you say that he doesn't care about Linux. / He now obviously cares about linux.
No he doesn't, he cares about being a pied piper leading people away from a potential loss of revenue for him. I know otherwise reasonable people who only buy games if they are on Steam, and who dump on Origin while simultaneously praising Steam. He wants to make sure that continues, and having Windows 8 centre around an app store that he doesn't make money from is upsetting to him.
There is not one thing that Windows 8 does that is "bad for gaming" from a consumer perspective compared to Windows 7, a platform he is fine with. Note that I have no intention of buying W8, but I have a distaste for BS, regardless of the source or the target.
> Some people like a sports team...
Sure, a rising tide raises all ships etc, I understand that. It's just disappointing it's coming, not from a love of what makes Linux great, but from a greedy app store owner who doesn't want another app store cramping his style.
You just have to remember how bad GFWL was, and look at how bad the current Microsoft App Store is, and you'll know there is no threat to Steam coming out of Microsoft. Even if Microsoft manages to get the right people on the ball, they are still years behind.
He doesn't really care about linux, he doesn't really think Windows is a bad platform for gaming, he just wants to try to crush a competitor. If he did care he would have done something years ago. Id has managed to release the vast majority of their games on linux, and it didn't take a potential fiscal threat to make them do it.