>>Release a goddamn new game (HL3 - dreams) and make it Linux exclusive for a time
I think people seriously overestimate how popular that game would be. If they really did release it as a Linux exclusive, a lot of us nerds(and I mean it as a compliment here) would install Linux in a heartbeat just to play it, but I think overall, the game would sell very poorly. It has been so many years since the last one that the mainstream public doesn't care about it anymore - a group of hardcore enthusiasts would buy it + some people interested in what the whole Half-Life hype is about, but I'd be surprised if it sold million copies.
I also think about the other side of it. I love teaching people about Linux/(F)OSS/etc. However, I would hate to see HL3 exclusive for Linux. It would largely hurt the community, I think.
Let's assume millions did rush to buy it and install Linux.
Think of how many of them would be installing it just to play one game. Most would gripe about not being able to do something they're used to in their other OS [0].
While I love Linux, there are some pain points on desktop. Just getting it installed on your machine is not always trivial even when you know what you're doing. Something you've done a thousand times sometimes just doesn't work for no real reason and you just have to try again [1].
Linus help them if they need a proprietary driver [2].
I imagine most of the people trying Linux for the first time would be trying it with the intention of playing a game instead of learning a new system. That sets them up to be annoyed every step of the way and walk away angry at the new system (Linux).
On top of all that, it could cause some frustrations for people like myself who try to help others install and learn Linux. I imagine having several conversations with friends/family thinking they want to finally learn some of this Linux thing I keep talking about. Only to discover it's just because they want to play HL3.
Exactly. Convince people Linux is worth moving to, but don't force them towards it.
If memory serves, when Valve was initially getting their feet wet, publicly, with Linux, they were getting Left 4 Dead (1 or 2, can't remember) to work there. If I remember correctly, they got it to a point that hardware for hardware, they got the Linux port to run better than the Windows version.
And that's a direction worth going if you want the gaming crowd to follow: come this way and get an extra boost in performance. We know you just spent $300 to get a couple frames per second boost, come get a few more for free.
They really need to do something about Big Picture mode though: that thing looks terrible on anything above 1080p. Even more so at 3440x1440 where it is blurry and inside black bars. If they're trying to make Steam into an appliance of sorts, the user interface needs to be right.
As absurd as it looks, Microsoft in some part seems to be helping make Linux more attractive. I can tell because of my younger brother, he is constantly complaining of Windows shenanigans (forced upgrades, inconsistent performance, disk space usage, some kind of 30fps cap that he needs to fix on regedit sometimes).
He tried CS:GO in my Linux box and liked that it just worked, apparently ran smoother, and according to him the OS itself seemed simpler. He wants to try Linux on his computer now with my help. Let's see how that will work out, but still, it's a start.
I feel like this is true and frankly it bothers the living hell out of me.
I'd like to eventually be using an open source operating system on my desktop, I really would, but Linux Desktop is crap and from what I can tell will remain crap because their community has crap ideas.
But now Windows is getting more crap too, by trying to copy the crap parts of the mobile ecosystem and the crap parts of Linux at the same time.
I'm facing a future where I end up with a Linux Desktop not because the Linux Desktop has finally become worth using, but because Windows has become so shit it is better by comparison.
It's enough to make me want to give up computing altogether.
> There is no "Linux desktop", there are distros, they have various desktop environments KDE, Gnome, Unity, MATE, Blackbox, and lots more.
Yeah, that's a big part of the problem right there.
> I'm curious what MS Windows has copied from a common Linux DE or distro that you believe is "crap"?
Rolling releases, i.e: break everything every 3 months, an over-reliance on the the command line for configuration tasks (and I say this as someone who loves powershell), package managers, and hardcoded paths (mostly for their dev tools), to name a few.
Not at all. If I meant that I'd have said "is never required" or similar; I clearly stated it was my personal experience.
It depends on your hardware as much as anything IME - sadly most PC hardware sellers make stuff to work under MS Windows, so if you're not careful with your purchases you can have problems.
I used to use Slackware, and that was a lot of command line - or at least text based - configuration; but I chose it to learn about administration. Like buying an old car so you can practice fixing it.
Things are improving over time, even if slowly. With more people using Linux distros, the incentive to improve the desktop parts is greater.
Kernel support is improving too. AMD is contributing to the open source amdgpu driver now, Intel's open source driver is one the most supported among distros.
And what if a Linux Desktop ends up being better than Windows at some point in the future, well, why won't you use the best tool you have available?
I had the chance to run KSP on an older laptop, something more to low end. On windows it was playable on low settings, with small hiccups. On Linux it was running smoothly with similar settings, same game save. It could have been code optimizations, game engine, the OS, the drivers, but there was a difference.
Sounds like a great way to get progress on Linux moving faster, in a way helping the chicken-egg of users vs dev support. Short term pain for long term gain.
Windows is often a horrible thing for people to learn at first, but they do it because it's the default.
If Linux is to be in the sphere of 'things to learn to play games/be productive,' then a more disruptive event is better than hoping to get there by growing at 0.2% per year...
Agreed but all they really need to do is make the BETA Steam OS only. This still gets the hardcore enthusiast interested while not alienating everyone else.
I know why you think that, but when Fallout 4 came out even my father was interested in it, and he'd never heard of any prior Fallout game, and hadn't really gamed in years.
Of course, he also still asks me every year when "the next Half-Life is coming out".
It would also have the danger of backfiring - fans being pissed off that they'd have to change their OS because valve decided to arbitrarily make it exclusive.
I think people seriously overestimate how popular that game would be. If they really did release it as a Linux exclusive, a lot of us nerds(and I mean it as a compliment here) would install Linux in a heartbeat just to play it, but I think overall, the game would sell very poorly. It has been so many years since the last one that the mainstream public doesn't care about it anymore - a group of hardcore enthusiasts would buy it + some people interested in what the whole Half-Life hype is about, but I'd be surprised if it sold million copies.