Linux overtakes Mac as Steam's second-most used OS, thanks to the Steam Deck
pcgamer.com
pcgamer.com
I was hoping for that trend to reverse with game porting toolkit, but it doesn't seem like that's happening. Whoever pushes for Gaming at Apple doesn't seem to have massive internal support. Metal VR died almost as soon as it released and somehow they thought making Game Porting Toolkit license incompatible with Wine/Proton/CrossOver was a great move, because all you need to convince a game developer to invest in a dead (to your audience) platform that will likely deprecate your API in a year or two is a proof of concept of how well it can run.
Edit: factorio and oxygen not included have both been pretty solid, too. I think factorio is even native.
But what you're writing is basically what Linux gamers were writing for many years - even before Valve started focusing on it too.
That's the one bad experience I had with the game - in Steam it is already marked as available on Mac OS but after downloading the 100GB it tells you that it's actually still the Early Access version (with incompatible save files!) and you have to wait till September for the actual game. Which meant another 110GB download on my fallback device.
That Apple made GPT but then ignores this obvious route, instead thinking it will somehow mobilize game developers to port their games natively to their bespoke low-level graphics API is ridiculous - "you see, they just didn't know about the graphics capabilities of Apple Silicon before!". Yeah, right.
Lots of game developers can barely be convinced to release usable Windows binaries, see also the mess of badly performing DX12 games (which is more like a low-level console API that needs optimization to perform) vs yeet the pixels out DX11.
No. Linux gaming thrives because Valve embedded Wine directly, branded as Proton, into the Steam launcher. GPT is the same, only for the Mac target of wine rather than Linux, and obviously Apple can't integrate it into Steam.
In terms of compatibility I've been using Whisky (a wine UI wrapper) + GPT for a few weeks now and window steam loads fine (albeit slowly), and all the windows games I play work fine (certainly far better than wine - GPT).
Of course the problem here is that it's not cleanly integrated into native Steam, so it's (1) requires a separate launcher installed, (2) requires a separate steam install, and (3) if the game ever does get ported you'd need to migrate your saves from the windows container wine uses.
This ignores all the attendant performance thrown away by shader translation (that linux also suffers) and cpu translation (that any non-intel code suffers, but in practice that's just Mac)
I've seen better-behaved Mac GTK apps.
It appears that there is some problem with BG3 on GFN. The game’s launcher constantly complains about “corrupt data files” and cloud saves take some time to sync from and to Steam.
However, I think that this speaks more to the degree to which Apple have put the torch to Mac gaming than it does to the size of Linux gaming.
Perhaps the key is for them to work closely with Valve to make Proton work well on macOS, which would also neatly deal with the 32-bit issue because WINE/CrossOver on macOS handles 32-bit Windows binaries just fine despite macOS having dropped support for 32-bit Mac binaries ages ago.
This however seems unlikely because even setting aside the issue of how Apple might see doing this as pushing users to a competing marketplace, it also cedes some amount of the Mac's functionality and thus marketability to a third party which Apple has never been keen on.
Apple are doing something very similar already with their Game Porting Kit framework. It supports DX12 games translated to Metal and runs very well. This effort only become public this year, though, so the fruits of that labour are yet to be borne.
But then again, let's face the truth: Apple doesn't care about having Counter Strike on your Macbook. They make billions doing absolutely fuck all and taking 30% of all microtransactions on all App Store games.
The only real impediment is that they need to care. The one thing in common across all successful gaming platforms is that the platform owner cares a lot and works closely with game devs to make things work:
- Microsoft/Nvidia/AMD ship game-specific patches and optimizations for Windows games
- console makers work closely with third-party devs and give advice, feedback, certification, etc.
- Valve specifically has put tons of effort into SteamOS and certifies individual games as ready/not ready for the Steam Deck
All it takes is a platform owner who cares, and cares on the level of interventions for particular games, but this is totally foreign to Apple's DNA (both in general, and for games in particular). They'd need a huge culture shift.
Truth be told we got more pleasure from cussing at the Apple guy than actually playing any game.
Civ 6, Stellaris, and Factorio I own copies / licenses of and all three have native builds for Linux so I'd be _amazed_ if they did not also have native builds for OSX too (or failing that, at least the Linux builds should be usable).
There's plenty to disagree with RMS on, but he's absolutely right that Linux is not an OS; it's a kernel.
But I'm guessing the reason they don't is because there are some non-superficial differences.
I hear more often than not ubuntu users using the arch wiki for example because despite the package manager, lots of things are similar.
Your argument is like saying Lutherans and Episcopalians aren't both Protestants because they disagree on the meaning of the trinity, despite agreeing on 99% else.
Most Linux guides do work on all distros, as long as you're willing to adapt for package management solutions and Desktop Environments (when applicable).
Debian caring about reproducibility matters quite a lot to some people, but not most, etc
In a world that has almost completely standardized on grub, systemd, fhs, etc with major applications being shipped in container-like blobs (snap, flatpak, appimage) that mirror a Windows-style setup.exe workflow and then bypass the filesystem and package manager and talk right to the kernel anyway... yeah, if you're an end user, your distro choice doesn't much matter. Pick whatever has out of the box drivers for your laptop's trackpad.
And as a Debian user for many years, the differences are surface-level enough that the Arch Wiki is still one of the best resources with completely applicable answers.
Given the popularity of Steam, it's a high-visibility, high-priority application, which means your distro may be running it in one of three ways:
1) A snap
2) A flatpak
3) Your distro's native packaging format (deb/rpm, etc.)
So yeah, there might be a bit of variation there. I've already had a handful of problems on the Steam Flatpak on Fedora in which it's been suggested that I should switch to the RPMFusion Steam rpm instead, but so far I have resisted.
The fact that Steam is a program that installs other programs means that it will frequently test the boundaries of the OS and package format's security models.
Yes, Fedora defaults to and prefers Flatpak and Ubuntu defaults to and prefers Snap, but you can install either on either distro and it should Just Work. In which case, distro-specific differences are an even further moot point.
Why bother posting who's opinion it is if you think it will cause disagreements? (curious)
* not so minimal but makes it highly compatible
Basically everyone is using something Debian/Ubuntu-based or Arch-based. If you can install a flatpak or Debian package you’re pretty much golden (which includes Fedora users, who can install flatpaks).
Vulkan is pretty much the graphics API standard for the entire Linux ecosystem.
I believe on Steam it's even better/easier, as it just ships with an Ubuntu base and uses that (but I don't really use Steam).
Point being: I think the differences between distros for this kind of stuff has been rather overstated. For most things, it doesn't actually matter all that much.
One minor correction, Modern Steam OS is Arch-based, not Ubuntu-based, but your point still stands.
As far as I understand correctly SteamOS might be based on Arch, but it uses Valve's kernel and mesa while running the games themselves in a container.
https://gitlab.steamos.cloud/steamrt/steam-runtime-tools/-/b...
Proton has got so good that the best way of making games work on Linux is to target Proton and all your cross platform challenges are taken care of.
There was the famous "Win32 Is The Only Stable ABI on Linux" article last year which pretty much about this https://blog.hiler.eu/win32-the-only-stable-abi/ https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=32471624
As you said, easier/better to target Win32 and just use Proton.
It's also funny because it kinda became true on another level as "Win32 Is Only Stable on Linux". It's easier to run old games and softwares (XP era and earlier) with Proton under Linux than on current Windows 10/11
Yeah, I'm gonna call that out as suspicious. Maybe on a few select titles, but the Wine database shows tons of titles that still won't run above "Silver"; all of which run just fine on newer versions of Windows. The older games that Windows can't run are usually due to some insanely intrusive DRM solution which also wouldn't run on Wine.
And this isn't me as some Windows fanboy, my comment history clearly shows I'm a Linux user; but that statement is just ridiculous on its face.
All gaming related checking is now on ProtonDB (pretty much everything that works on ProtonDB also works on Wine/Wine-staging with DXVK and VKD3D-Proton, this is how i play all of my GOG games - of which i have hundreds - for example).
In fact DXVK is so good that people use it to play Windows games... on Windows[0] and AFAIK it was how Intel Arc users played pretty much anything pre-DX12 for a while because Intel's own implementation was too slow/buggy.
[0] Actually this is how i decided it is time to ditch Windows a few years ago: i tried to play a D3D9 game on my Windows 10 PC and had various visual glitches - then threw the DXVK DLLs in the game's directory and everything worked fine. After a couple more occasions of this i decided that if i'm using DXVK for games on Windows might as well use it under the proper environment.
I found this usually to be true, but there are exception. For example I can't get Disco Elysium to work with Wine no matter what I try, but it's reported as working on ProtonDB. I've encountered some other exceptions too.
I can just about guarantee they will all run fine.
Also it'd be worthless to even try that, i made the switch almost three years ago and not only the software stack has changed a lot since then (IIRC Windows 11 didn't even exist), there is even a new discrete GPU vendor out. Today's comparison would not be representative at all.
And finally i never commented on how things performed[0] (i am assuming it is performance you have in mind with the "work better" as you mention that this "work" has to be "not equal but better" - anything else would be too vague to matter) - especially since the situation that made me decide DXVK was good was actually making the games i tried to play actually work regardless of performance (i happened to have some screenshots from a game i had issues with since i tried to report the bug in hopes the developer fixes it - they didn't - and this is the result i was getting [0][1][2]. Dropping DXVK in - under Windows - fixed all of those). FWIW in my experience performance was more or less the same (i did some testing with various games on Steam between Linux and Windows 10 after i installed Linux, some games performed better, others worse but the difference was miniscule that i only noticed with tools like mangohud on Linux and RTSS on Windows), which was great as i'd switch even if it was always slightly slower because i dislike Windows' UX, so that was a nice "bonus". But that isn't relevant to the experience i had anyway.
[0] Except that part about Intel Arc, but that was widespread knowledge when these GPUs came out, you can find several YouTube videos about the issues they had and some used DXVK to avoid them - BTW Intel kept improving their drivers, so even if you tried to replicate the results nowadays you wouldn't get the same results.
[1] https://i.imgur.com/b9apwRy.jpg
This has been a common saying for a long time. IIRC even before Valve made Steam available for Linux, the main Overgrowth developer who had Linux versions of some of their games break over time eventually mentioned (in a blog post) that you should just use Wine with their games as it is more likely to be stable.
(this may or may not have to do with the Linux version of their older game, Lugaru, using OSS - though at least the demo did run a few years ago when i tried it with a wrapper... and after removing/messing around with a bunch of .so files)
If you need Windows to play Call of Duty, you're probably going to stick with Windows for everything because of the hassle.
My understanding is there is no technical reason these anti-cheats cannot work via Proton, but the anti-cheat makers will ban if they figure out you're not on Windows out of some weird fear of people having root access to the system. I could be wrong, however.
So the big anti-cheat platforms VAC, EAC, BattleEye, etc. all support linux, however the developer has to enable it - last I checked Battlefield2042 could run on linux just fine (as BF1 and BF5 did) but they didn't enable the anticheat on linux.
I'm not sure how possible kernel level anti-cheat is via wine, the entire point of that is to be on the ring 0 layer where the best cheat software lives. Drivers generally get permissions to read/modify any memory anywhere using hooks that are difficult/impossible to detect from userland.
The reason you'll get banned on linux if they don't instantly nope-out on launch and don't want to support linux is because what anti-cheat software does is primarily two things: See what is hooked into the game, and see if all the memory is in an expected state. Obviously the compatibility tools don't match windows 1:1 and will look _bizzare_ to software comparing it to what you'd expect on windows. So the state doesn't match which it assumes means something is modifying it = cheat software.
tl;dr - idk if ring0 anticheat could ever work via wine, a lot of games use anti-cheat software compatible with linux but just don't enable it, if anti-cheat was somehow didn't instantly freak out on launch then it'll see a bizarre and heavily modified system compare to a real windows install, with unexpected behaviour.
EDIT: From my understanding DKVX for example presents as the direct3d/directx library which of course has very different behaviour and is very clearly modified/not actual direct3d/directx
To make this work, there has to be some compatibility layer good enough to fool kernel level anti-cheat into allowing the game to run.
I don't know how that would be possible... but that would be the silver bullet, so to speak.
That's the problem though - if the compatibility layer can fool the anti-cheat then so can actual cheats.
Both cheats and compatibility layers do the same thing - modify behaviour.
Generally anticheat will take a "blanket" approach and ban or crash by default and whitelist specific types of behaviour.
What we ultimately would need would be a kernel level interface/process that the game talks to if it identifies it's running under linux. Which is totally possible to do, linux users specifically would hate it, and it would be a lot of work. Without this you're stuck in userland.
Honestly the only realistic hope is the steamdeck becomes a lucrative enough platform for developers to target. Valve has already made sure the popular anti-cheat software supports linux. Valve's stance has been to provide cheat mitigation through other things such as overwatch/trust factor in CSGO (which works well from my experience). VAC itself is actually very primative.
For every other distro, someone in the community will take what you’ve done and patch together the pieces to make it work.
Say you’ve got SteamOS and Ubuntu support, let the user click an “OK I know what I’m doing” button, and they’ll figure it out.
https://gitlab.steamos.cloud/steamrt/steam-runtime-tools/-/b...
Thankfully, the Apple Silicon machines are powerful enough to support many modern games. I'm currently (and happily) playing Baldur's Gate 3 using Wineskin on my M1 MBP with no problems. So far no bugs, and multiplayer with PC users works great.
Fixed headline
I consider myself a big old Apple fan boy, have various flavors of Mac machines around the house, etc.
But my Steam Deck has been an absolute revelation. Makes it so easy to pick up games really quick, game in random places, and use my existing library of games whenever I want.
I also have a gaming PC… which I hardly boot up anymore.
The Steam Deck is easily my favorite consumer electronics device, in years. Probably since the original iPhone came out.
The delta between MacOS gaming market share and Linux gaming market share on Steam is exclusively due to the Steam Deck.
With every new release of hardware or software that Apple makes, fewer and fewer of the existing game library on MacOS (Steam or otherwise) continue to work; it's absolutely absurd. You know you can't even play Bejeweled on a modern mac, right? How am I supposed to explain that to a widow with Alzehimers who just wants to keep playing the games she remembers? (This actually happened. I had to fucking wine-bottle the windows version myself)
Of 502 games in my Steam library only 163 will run on an Apple Silicon mac. Big kudos to the game authors who even bother anymore.
Back when Steam was trying to make consoles, they were recruiting others to make the hardware. I'm not sure how available software was then, how open options were then. But I so want to know it compares to today.
It sounded like the whole Deck UI was fairly custom at start? And there has to be a decent bit of custom integration, beyond the shell itself. Tweaks to the base Arch OS & it's packages. Supposedly the Big Picture Mode in Steam has gotten a decent overhaul that makes it more Deck like, but I haven't tried it nor a Deck yet!
I hope someone else out there has the courage to try a Linux gaming deck!
Unsurprisingly nvidia dominates with gpus.
The reason for this is pretty clear, there's nothing as good as the Quest 2 in the PC VR headset market anywhere near the Quest 2's price, and even if you're willing to fork out more the options are either long on the tooth or mediocre for the price. It's why I use one as a PC headset.
I've been playing War Thunder simulator battles in VR for the past few weeks, and have gotten serious enough about it that I've upgraded my PC and dropped ~$400 on a HOTAS setup.
I'm using my Quest 2 because there's really no other viable options. The resolution isn't high enough to be "good", but it's simply the best available at the moment. I'm anxiously awaiting the Quest 3 and will buy it at release.
There are some headsets out there now with higher resolution, but they're very expensive, hard to actually find for sale, from a small/unknown manufacturer, or all of the above.
Edit: freedomben commented that Steam works but complains on Fedora w/o 32-bit libraries. So it might work until a game actually needs them.
And macOS has a 64-bit-only Steam client, altough they don't support any 32-bit games anyway.
I finally retired that machine this year and bought a higher-end gaming pc for less than half of what it would cost me to get a less-than-the-best Apple Silicon MBP.
Yeah, it's heavy. Battery life isn't great. But my phone has replaced so much of my mobile computing needs that I don't really need to take a laptop with me when I'm traveling unless it's for work, in which case I'll have my company-issued machine with me anyway.
I never thought I'd leave MacOS for Linux - but I recently got back into gaming and basically wasn't willing to spend $4k+ on a machine I couldn't game on when all of my personal project needs, etc. can be attended to on a cheaper gaming laptop.
The fact that Apple Silicon is an absolute beast, graphically, made it all worse somehow. Like having a Ferrari in your garage that you aren't allowed to drive - only pay for and look at.
Am I Apple's target demographic? Apart from being a developer - probably not. I don't do a lot of multimedia stuff (at least, I don't do anything that isn't adequately served by a PC with a solid GPU). Because I grew up on linux I'm right at home there with all of my non-work dev / geek / fun stuff and that probably makes me an outlier.
Apple's success clearly speaks for their business savvy - and, there's now a number of chinks in my (previously 100%) Apple loyalty across my wide array of gadgetry (several Apple TVs and one each for me and my wife of: laptop, ipad, iphone, watch, airpods). After a disappointing battery experience with my airpods - I replaced them with some excellent-sounding soundcore buds. My apple watch needs to be replaced soon and I'll probably get a Garmin (again - battery life and consistent failure to capture VO2 max on outdoor runs, other frustrations). I enjoy VR gaming and plan to upgrade from a quest 2 to a quest 3 instead of buying a vision pro. What's next to go in my Apple line-up? I don't know but I've become much more open to shopping around for non-Apple tech than I was in, say, 2016 when it seemed to me that nothing else could compete with Apple.
I wonder how true this is for Apple's "geek core" of tech professionals, and how much of it is just my unique little anecdote? And, in any case - does Apple care? They've cornered the market for both the technical-artistic and "luxury" class. Plenty of meat on those bones without worrying about the geeky whims of the pesky few that are open to (and capable of) something like abandoning Mac OS for Linux.
Still, it was sad to give up my Mac OS personal computing environment. I love Apple - but for what I care about, Apple just doesn't seem to love me. We'll always have our iOS time together I guess, for now anyway.