INTRO
This rant is triggered by - of course - someone being wrong on the internet. Namely that windows is the standard whereas linux is at best a nerdy underdog alternative.
It's really not. I guess I don't have to point out that linux started out as a hobby project that just grew by the merit of the fanbase rather than a business model. It evolved slower than DOS and windows but sturdier. It gained (and still maintains) a strong position in the server industry, lies at the base of android and shares the same roots (unix) as all apple OS'es.
It's just that the main market - desktops - happens to be the most visible one. Microsoft was the first, and mostly because of the nature of software it has maintained in that position.
Well...okay, admitted: MS office is a powerhouse as well. But most anything else? Windows is a business environment. Up until windows 7, it was mostly an allround operating system. Windows 8, 10 and (I guess?) 11 are stable, yes...but when your only comparison is with earlier windows versions,that's not much to go on.
What's more is that there's a battle for the hegemony. I've often heard that gamers would be reluctant to switch operating systems because they wouldn't be able to adapt to it and/or they wouldn't be willing to repurchase their entire gaming library again (or worse: be cut off from their sometimes decades old library). Funnily enough, mobile devices aren't deemed proof of the opposite (it IS a different operating system and it IS breaking compatibility with all the games) because "no one serious games on a handheld".
And okay, those voices went silent when the switch became a success. But it still creates a bit of a vaccuum in the gaming market: mobile computing. Gaming laptops are generally too large and underpowered/more expensive compared to desktop equivalents. Sure, in the wake of the switch, gdp has had their successes, and there's a few others as well...but based on my own experiences with the first gpd win, it's...not a smooth experience. And the OS interface is a large factor in that: joysticking around or attempting to touchscreen a <5" screen just isn't convenient.
(note: the first GDP has other strikes against it: lack of SSD, small hard drive, underpowered, a clunky keyboard and some other stuff. Understandable for its price point - even years later - but still a step back in what you get).
For comparison: when I got my gdp xd+ I was blown away how convenient it all worked. An easy "less than ten seconds from opening the device to being ingame", smooth navigation and a much better key layout (android is made for touchscreen controls) just makes it so much better. If android could play all steam games, it would still be my main gaming platform (I play indie games anyway). But when looking at my two gdp devices, I'm sort of torn between "this one has the games but a horrible way to get to them", and a "this one plays great but has a limited working library(1)".
I have to admit I'm a good potential buyer for the deck. As a parent who tries to keep practicing sports (karate once or twice a week) and board games (every monday evening), trying to squeeze video gaming into it all without sacrificing quantity time(2) with the daughter isn't easy. So a computer that takes 2 minutes to get from turning on to being ingame...sorry, but that simply doesn't work. Just yesterday I tried reading a graphic novel. It took me 30 minutes to read a single page, because I was constantly interrupted by daughter or dog who required attention, opening a door, finding a doll, and so on. It might not be typically gamer-y, but that "put to sleep/resume" function might become my main reason for loving the deck (presuming that'll end up happening...it'll take some time before it gets here). Way more than the horsepower, the pricepoint or even the operating system.
HOW WE GOT HERE
I guess I've got to talk about valve some more. Back in...what was it? 2015? 2016? Valve made three announcements, back to back:
1. the steam controller (a prototype then)
2. steam machines (made by third parties)
3. steamOS (an operating system based on linux)
The attempt was clear: Gabe Newell foresaw that from windows 8 on, microsoft would be pushing their app store more, thus either taking a percentage in valve's profit or be shut out of the main market. While that doom scenario didn't came to pass, the perception wasn't exactly wrong. Android and apple rely on their monopolies of their stores to be able to research hardware and offer new renditions of the operating system for free. Microsoft is in the position where it sells windows 10 as part of desktop pc's, but that's reliant on the customers expecting windows to come with it.
But I digress: it didn't take long for the community to turn on the steam machines: they were mostly overpriced, and because steamOS wasn't up to snuff most shipped with windows anyway. Which...kind of defeated the point of their existence. Besides: since steamOS was free, you could turn every PC into a steam machine.
I actually did try that. And it wasn't a success. That is to say: I discovered linux mint one or two years before and had dibbled into gaming on it, albeit on a desktop pc I was given from work because it was too slow (still a single core pentium 4 in...2014, iirc). And sure enough: windows was a slog on the device...but linux mint (cinnamon) was a breeze. It was as if the device had gotten a major hardware update. Of course, there wasn't much to DO on the device but some office work (libreoffice was another discovery). One of the new features of steam was that you could download and play games with a linux port on it. "All five of them", as people like me would snarkly say because...well...gaming on linux wasn't really a thing. Granted, that pc wasn't able to run anything decent regardless (it didn't have any noticeable 3D card), but it was a cool hobby project.
Too bad steamOS was a worse experience in every single way. Clunky, not really a store aside steam (note: distros like mint use the equivalent of an app store to download, install and manage programs)...and the video card lost compatible drivers on one of the updates.
I don't blame steam machine makers to revert to windows...I would've done the same thing in their place.
The steam controller was a breed of its own. I still have that. And if it had an actual D-pad I probably would still be using it as my main controller. The soft "rrrrrrr"-like motion underneath your thumbs is actually kind of relaxing and feels good. Or rather: it probably would feel good if the software was made for it correctly. In terms of navigating a mouse cursor, I much prefer it over a joystick or trackpad, but a mouse is still better.
And okay: it didn't have the best start because the early prototypes promised a touchscreen with an actual screen on it (meaning: it's like a smaller wiiu controller). So it's like "I'm hyped...oh, wait: it's only this. And it's not better than a mouse. So...great tool, I guess? :-\ ".
But to get back on track with this rambling: steam machines were dead on arrival. The steam controller was discontinued after some time. And steamos faded into obscurity.
NEXT UP: PROTON
My hobby project never went away. Not soon after, I ditched MS office for libreoffice on my main PC. And when valve announced proton in august 2018, that was almost a signal for me to finally set up dual partitions (windows & linux mint, the former being the default).
I tried wine and crossover to get windows games to work, but...I got to admit it: I'm a magpie. A collector. I want my games to work, but once they do I lose interest. Wine has quite some hoops to go through and things to tweak. That's okay if you've got a few games you'll spend dozens if not hundreds of hours in, but less so if you have hundreds of games you want to quickly check.
Proton changed all that. Valve took what was there (including stuff I never heard of, like DXVK) and bundled it in a much easier to use package. The result was an open invitation: "can you check how many games will work out of the box with this?". The initial "officially supported" list was 27. But soon everyone was finding windows games that just worked. Or had a few kinks. Or had slowdowns. Or...
But that really didn't matter. Protondb collected - and in a way still collects - results from what works.
The media attention quieted down not so long after release, but I can honestly say that progress has been steady. I'm not 100% sure to what degree or how the information from https://www.protondb.com/ is passed to valve, but I've got no doubt it got picked up, investigated and improved where possible.
But of course: our rigs are different, linux distro is different and as proton versions started coming out, things were different there as well. Worse: because linux users are more tweakers than I am, it wasn't too surprising to find people using all sorts of weird tricks to get games to work (eg: Furi had weird artifacts but ran otherwise fluid. I had to put some weird parameters in the launch settings to get rid of these at first, and since the game lists now as verified I take it that's being effectively implemented). I have no idea why it's called "gloriouseggroll", but it's apparently some sort of beta of experimental proton settings and newest wine/DXVK/other stuff. The bleeding edge or nightly builds, so you will. And true enough: a user mentioning it works on gloriouseggroll is a general indication that within a version or two from proton, the game will work better/perfect.
And...okay, I get some sort of personal pride on it. For example: I was the first one to report pandemic the board game (https://www.protondb.com/app/622440) as working after I applied (and shared) a trick I had picked up in another report. And that's cool...even though asmodee later removed the game from steam (
).
But I won't lie: while exciting to test, not all games gravitate to "better". I don't know whether later updates of either the game or proton sometimes cause it to dwindle, but it happens. Not often, but it happens. But there as well: that's the nature of PC gaming for you:
Person 1: "I tested this game on rig X, linux distro Y with proton settings Z: it works".
Player 2: "I tested this game on rig A, linux distro B with proton settings C: it crashes".
Yeah...good luck replicating that one. Person 1 isn't exactly keen on revisiting his earlier reply, let alone trying to replicate what 2 had found, and player 2 isn't going to swap out distros either. We're volunteers, not payed employees. We abandon once it starts looking like actual work.
So in case you're wondering why valve has taken the enormous task on trying out their entire library on deck...that's why. Heck: I wouldn't fully trust my earlier proton reviews to be accurate anymore either.
The flipside of this is unification. Oh, with my indie preference I'm not exactly crying when my "20 bucks for 7 games" turns out to have a game not starting on linux. That's obviously different when you fork over 50 bucks for a game and have it run like a doped snail (or not at all), so the deck verification process is an enormous but crucial step.
Somewhere in a thread I mentioned an odd notion that apparently Book of demons doesn't work, even though I've played it for multiple hours on my linux mint rig (now the default launcher, by the way). Even weirder is that tabletop simulator gains that same "not working" sigil, even though it's a native linux game, is still in active development...and I've got a couple hundreds of hours under my belt without even noticing anything unusual(3).
So while speculation, I think that valve currently just want to highlight the games that are great as well as that are playable, and just sweep the rest under the rug (at least for now). That's understandable (though on the other hand: I can't imagine any sane person trying to play C&C remastered on a deck).
EDIT: while writing, I came across this article about the certification program here: <link>.
I'm not happy with the critique, but I certainly believe it's genuine. The certification program might be big, but seems more about creating a fancy-looking catalog than listings of actually good working games.
The inevitable steam deck
It's debatable whether valve tried and failed five years ago. And I'm not sure whether the deck will become a household or not either. As a fanboy, I won't deny it fits my taste and has the potential for...well...everything. From what I've seen, steamOS certainly looks more polished and modern (plasma interface, based on arch linux, a store based on pacman). It's at least on paper more versatile than the switch, albeit not by itself (plug it in a docking station and you've got a computer, and I'm sure it's not that hard to connect to a TV either).
The ironic thing is that it's neither a console nor a PC per se. It has more playable games than any console (especially if we're comparing launch line-ups) but less than a regular windows PC. It's easier to use than a PC (especially when comparing it to most linux distros) but it seems like you'll be tweaking things to get the most out of it. It's "easier to hack" if you want to use that phrase, but good tutorials might be harder to come by (just yesterday I read someone stuck trying to install software to his SD-card). It's easier to install other programs like media players or emulators than consoles, but again: probably takes a shift in thought for windows users.
"but you can install windows on it".
Yeah...that's not really an argument. There aren't much comparisons out either, let alone objective ones (do you really trust the linux gamer to claim linux is better? ). But why should valve rush to provide proper drivers for an operating system they're trying to get away from? And my guess is that even with all the proper drivers and whatever tweak and setting you can squeeze out of it, it'll still not be as easy to use as steamOS. Not that the latter deserves praise (it might: I haven't tried it), but it's designed for its controller.
There's also steamOS as an image which isn't released yet. Why? Because marketing. The truth is that most people aren't fans of windows; they just don't know any real alternatives, or are hesitant to try them. I don't even blame them: windows has been the dominant home operating system for over a quarter century, and has embedded itself in our collective mindset to the point where alternatives aren't properly considered. And it often hinges on small things: I can't install linux for my girlfriend because her job still uses regular MS office, and she's a fan of the sims 2 (which is notoriously difficult for wine to handle (https://appdb.winehq.org/objectManager.php?sClass=application&iId=1942). But my father handles the ubuntu laptop a friend gave him quite well(4), and the mint laptop I gave my brother a couple months ago seems to hold up fine (he uses libreoffice at his job) (5).
...and I've digressed. Erm...what I'm saying is: it's not impossible that this might topple the balance and lead to a massive shift toward linux, but I wouldn't count on it. I've mentioned GDP and aya neo a bit earlier. For them, windows is a cost as well. A cost for a product that isn't suited to their needs (see my mentions on GPD win earlier).
...but steamOS is. The problem with open software is that valve can pump millions in proper development and all the competition has to say is "thank you" and slap the image on their next product.
Well...okay, that's not really true. Valve's steam deck is sold under the general price point and hardly makes valve a profit, if at all. Like the big three, their money's in the software. With epic store breathing free games and lower taxes down their neck and slowly adding features to the store to make them...erm...less hatefull in the general public's eyes...valve really has to act. A device that's sold at a bargain price but with the implied condition that you need to have an account AND a way to pay for the device means that valve can really expect their verified games to sell.
Well...more than usual (it still is the largest software store on the planet, after all).
So in that regard, it's kind of hard to say who will profit the most of steamOS. If it gets popular, GDP, AYA neo and others can cut out windows and thus the price point, but the only scenario I think where valve really loses is an almost absurdly unlikely: that the competition ships with a version of steamOS that somehow manages to run the (preinstalled) epic store properly...and I have no freaking idea why anyone would want to go in that direction.
Likewise, I don't see any way for microsoft to win in a situation like this. In an effort to make windows 10 popular, they've roughly thrown out most exclusive console titles to be also playable on PC. I'm not sure how many exclusives the windows app store still has, but to my knowledge everyone flocks to steam. Sometimes after a year-long exclusive in epic's store, but it still gets there in the end.
...and the future?
Ugh...I can't not talk about it, but I predicted that the switch would end up roughly as popular as the wiiu, and we all know how THAT prediction turned out to be.
But ey: with the risk of making a fool out of myself: yes, I think the deck will be succesfull in the end. Not a runaway success, but I think it'll certainly fare better than their earlier push. As for the why, I'll summarize my rant from above a bit:
* iteration, not revolution: steamOS, the steam controller, steam machines and some other stuff didn't so much failed (though really: they did) as layed the groundwork for this device.
* good timing: PC gaming is slowly turning into a niche whereas mobile gaming is gaining ground. This gets them out more, shows more exposure. It's not in the "buy this one for little Timmy" category, but with some tinkering I just KNOW I can make good use out of it (eg: I already have overcooked on my PC, but my PC isn't couch co-op. But with some HDMI connection and a few wireless controllers, that'll become much easier).
* we already have the freaking games. My colleague is hesitant about ordering a deck, but has to concede that he'd only refrained from buying a switch "because the software remains so expensive". Sure, the deck is more expensive. But when you take the total cost of ownership in account (say...a switch and ten games vs a deck and ten games), chances are the former is the most expensive device.
* a weird status quo for developpers. Why? Because valve isn't not only NOT trying to lure others into releasing linux games but sometimes have better load times on windows games through proton than on native linux. The paradoxal result is that it might well be that after a while LESS studios will port their games to linux in order to play better on linux (yeah, okay: I'm not taking anticheat software in the picture here. But that's still a pretty darn small aspect of the total cost of a game). Or in other words: they hardly have to do anything they don't already do to get a deck certified result.
* future proof. Okay...so let's say valve announces steam deck 2 the moment I unbox my late steam deck. In console land, that's bad news, as it usually means that in a few years you won't have much new releases for your obsolete system. But on that aspect, the (first) deck is like a PC: it still plays everything, and aside bleeding edge software (which will always require hardware investments) you can still play your games. My current PC is nearly a decade old by now, but still manages. Similarly, I think the (first) deck will "manage" next gen games just fine. And it means continued support for proton as well, so...where's the bad side to this, really?
* steam sales. I won't lie: I predict this'll be tacked down a bit, at least for the near future. If the profit margins are really as low as estimated, profits need to be secured in order to keep up the support for proton and steamOS development...which is crucial to become a success.
So...the last thing isn't so much pro-consumer, but but overall I don't see any threats. This is the culmination of what they've been working on since...well, at least the introduction of proton (in hindsight I could've predicted it: why invest so much in linux compatibility if the percentage of linux gamers is so low?), but more likely already since the first steamOS/controller/machine announcement. They're not going to back away from this soon. Or at all.
So my pondering is whether valve will rise to the point where it'll stand toe to toe with microsoft, sony and nintendo...or will they even surpass them?
(1): still: I played the CRAP out of dead cells on it. If the experience is even "just about the same" on valve's deck, the price'll be worth it in spades.
(2): I don't believe in "quality time". When you spend time with someone, you should be paying attention to them. But you cannot somehow "pay more attention" than average in order to save up time you can use to later neglect them. Hence: I spend quantity time with my daughter: making up stories and engaging her when we flip to picture books, build stuff with lego together, play soccer, make her a sandwich, make a toothbrush ceremony...all that stuff.
(3): ahem...okay: the game intro screen is flat out bad, and it's every bit a mouse driven game that would probably handle terrible on a deck (text too small, internet required, hard to handle). But from a technological perspective I see no reason why it's flagged as such.
(4): I'm a bit disgruntled: I told him I could get him a linux mint laptop, but I wasn't going to be his personal troubleshooter
(5): the last one I gave him ran out of disk space somehow to the degree that it can't even recognize new USB sticks to clear things up. It's probably some sort of malware, but with no way of scanning (also unavailable) that's just a hunch.
This rant is triggered by - of course - someone being wrong on the internet. Namely that windows is the standard whereas linux is at best a nerdy underdog alternative.
It's really not. I guess I don't have to point out that linux started out as a hobby project that just grew by the merit of the fanbase rather than a business model. It evolved slower than DOS and windows but sturdier. It gained (and still maintains) a strong position in the server industry, lies at the base of android and shares the same roots (unix) as all apple OS'es.
It's just that the main market - desktops - happens to be the most visible one. Microsoft was the first, and mostly because of the nature of software it has maintained in that position.
Well...okay, admitted: MS office is a powerhouse as well. But most anything else? Windows is a business environment. Up until windows 7, it was mostly an allround operating system. Windows 8, 10 and (I guess?) 11 are stable, yes...but when your only comparison is with earlier windows versions,that's not much to go on.
What's more is that there's a battle for the hegemony. I've often heard that gamers would be reluctant to switch operating systems because they wouldn't be able to adapt to it and/or they wouldn't be willing to repurchase their entire gaming library again (or worse: be cut off from their sometimes decades old library). Funnily enough, mobile devices aren't deemed proof of the opposite (it IS a different operating system and it IS breaking compatibility with all the games) because "no one serious games on a handheld".
And okay, those voices went silent when the switch became a success. But it still creates a bit of a vaccuum in the gaming market: mobile computing. Gaming laptops are generally too large and underpowered/more expensive compared to desktop equivalents. Sure, in the wake of the switch, gdp has had their successes, and there's a few others as well...but based on my own experiences with the first gpd win, it's...not a smooth experience. And the OS interface is a large factor in that: joysticking around or attempting to touchscreen a <5" screen just isn't convenient.
(note: the first GDP has other strikes against it: lack of SSD, small hard drive, underpowered, a clunky keyboard and some other stuff. Understandable for its price point - even years later - but still a step back in what you get).
For comparison: when I got my gdp xd+ I was blown away how convenient it all worked. An easy "less than ten seconds from opening the device to being ingame", smooth navigation and a much better key layout (android is made for touchscreen controls) just makes it so much better. If android could play all steam games, it would still be my main gaming platform (I play indie games anyway). But when looking at my two gdp devices, I'm sort of torn between "this one has the games but a horrible way to get to them", and a "this one plays great but has a limited working library(1)".
I have to admit I'm a good potential buyer for the deck. As a parent who tries to keep practicing sports (karate once or twice a week) and board games (every monday evening), trying to squeeze video gaming into it all without sacrificing quantity time(2) with the daughter isn't easy. So a computer that takes 2 minutes to get from turning on to being ingame...sorry, but that simply doesn't work. Just yesterday I tried reading a graphic novel. It took me 30 minutes to read a single page, because I was constantly interrupted by daughter or dog who required attention, opening a door, finding a doll, and so on. It might not be typically gamer-y, but that "put to sleep/resume" function might become my main reason for loving the deck (presuming that'll end up happening...it'll take some time before it gets here). Way more than the horsepower, the pricepoint or even the operating system.
HOW WE GOT HERE
I guess I've got to talk about valve some more. Back in...what was it? 2015? 2016? Valve made three announcements, back to back:
1. the steam controller (a prototype then)
2. steam machines (made by third parties)
3. steamOS (an operating system based on linux)
The attempt was clear: Gabe Newell foresaw that from windows 8 on, microsoft would be pushing their app store more, thus either taking a percentage in valve's profit or be shut out of the main market. While that doom scenario didn't came to pass, the perception wasn't exactly wrong. Android and apple rely on their monopolies of their stores to be able to research hardware and offer new renditions of the operating system for free. Microsoft is in the position where it sells windows 10 as part of desktop pc's, but that's reliant on the customers expecting windows to come with it.
But I digress: it didn't take long for the community to turn on the steam machines: they were mostly overpriced, and because steamOS wasn't up to snuff most shipped with windows anyway. Which...kind of defeated the point of their existence. Besides: since steamOS was free, you could turn every PC into a steam machine.
I actually did try that. And it wasn't a success. That is to say: I discovered linux mint one or two years before and had dibbled into gaming on it, albeit on a desktop pc I was given from work because it was too slow (still a single core pentium 4 in...2014, iirc). And sure enough: windows was a slog on the device...but linux mint (cinnamon) was a breeze. It was as if the device had gotten a major hardware update. Of course, there wasn't much to DO on the device but some office work (libreoffice was another discovery). One of the new features of steam was that you could download and play games with a linux port on it. "All five of them", as people like me would snarkly say because...well...gaming on linux wasn't really a thing. Granted, that pc wasn't able to run anything decent regardless (it didn't have any noticeable 3D card), but it was a cool hobby project.
Too bad steamOS was a worse experience in every single way. Clunky, not really a store aside steam (note: distros like mint use the equivalent of an app store to download, install and manage programs)...and the video card lost compatible drivers on one of the updates.
I don't blame steam machine makers to revert to windows...I would've done the same thing in their place.
The steam controller was a breed of its own. I still have that. And if it had an actual D-pad I probably would still be using it as my main controller. The soft "rrrrrrr"-like motion underneath your thumbs is actually kind of relaxing and feels good. Or rather: it probably would feel good if the software was made for it correctly. In terms of navigating a mouse cursor, I much prefer it over a joystick or trackpad, but a mouse is still better.
And okay: it didn't have the best start because the early prototypes promised a touchscreen with an actual screen on it (meaning: it's like a smaller wiiu controller). So it's like "I'm hyped...oh, wait: it's only this. And it's not better than a mouse. So...great tool, I guess? :-\ ".
But to get back on track with this rambling: steam machines were dead on arrival. The steam controller was discontinued after some time. And steamos faded into obscurity.
NEXT UP: PROTON
My hobby project never went away. Not soon after, I ditched MS office for libreoffice on my main PC. And when valve announced proton in august 2018, that was almost a signal for me to finally set up dual partitions (windows & linux mint, the former being the default).
I tried wine and crossover to get windows games to work, but...I got to admit it: I'm a magpie. A collector. I want my games to work, but once they do I lose interest. Wine has quite some hoops to go through and things to tweak. That's okay if you've got a few games you'll spend dozens if not hundreds of hours in, but less so if you have hundreds of games you want to quickly check.
Proton changed all that. Valve took what was there (including stuff I never heard of, like DXVK) and bundled it in a much easier to use package. The result was an open invitation: "can you check how many games will work out of the box with this?". The initial "officially supported" list was 27. But soon everyone was finding windows games that just worked. Or had a few kinks. Or had slowdowns. Or...
But that really didn't matter. Protondb collected - and in a way still collects - results from what works.
The media attention quieted down not so long after release, but I can honestly say that progress has been steady. I'm not 100% sure to what degree or how the information from https://www.protondb.com/ is passed to valve, but I've got no doubt it got picked up, investigated and improved where possible.
But of course: our rigs are different, linux distro is different and as proton versions started coming out, things were different there as well. Worse: because linux users are more tweakers than I am, it wasn't too surprising to find people using all sorts of weird tricks to get games to work (eg: Furi had weird artifacts but ran otherwise fluid. I had to put some weird parameters in the launch settings to get rid of these at first, and since the game lists now as verified I take it that's being effectively implemented). I have no idea why it's called "gloriouseggroll", but it's apparently some sort of beta of experimental proton settings and newest wine/DXVK/other stuff. The bleeding edge or nightly builds, so you will. And true enough: a user mentioning it works on gloriouseggroll is a general indication that within a version or two from proton, the game will work better/perfect.
And...okay, I get some sort of personal pride on it. For example: I was the first one to report pandemic the board game (https://www.protondb.com/app/622440) as working after I applied (and shared) a trick I had picked up in another report. And that's cool...even though asmodee later removed the game from steam (
).But I won't lie: while exciting to test, not all games gravitate to "better". I don't know whether later updates of either the game or proton sometimes cause it to dwindle, but it happens. Not often, but it happens. But there as well: that's the nature of PC gaming for you:
Person 1: "I tested this game on rig X, linux distro Y with proton settings Z: it works".
Player 2: "I tested this game on rig A, linux distro B with proton settings C: it crashes".
Yeah...good luck replicating that one. Person 1 isn't exactly keen on revisiting his earlier reply, let alone trying to replicate what 2 had found, and player 2 isn't going to swap out distros either. We're volunteers, not payed employees. We abandon once it starts looking like actual work.
So in case you're wondering why valve has taken the enormous task on trying out their entire library on deck...that's why. Heck: I wouldn't fully trust my earlier proton reviews to be accurate anymore either.
The flipside of this is unification. Oh, with my indie preference I'm not exactly crying when my "20 bucks for 7 games" turns out to have a game not starting on linux. That's obviously different when you fork over 50 bucks for a game and have it run like a doped snail (or not at all), so the deck verification process is an enormous but crucial step.
Somewhere in a thread I mentioned an odd notion that apparently Book of demons doesn't work, even though I've played it for multiple hours on my linux mint rig (now the default launcher, by the way). Even weirder is that tabletop simulator gains that same "not working" sigil, even though it's a native linux game, is still in active development...and I've got a couple hundreds of hours under my belt without even noticing anything unusual(3).
So while speculation, I think that valve currently just want to highlight the games that are great as well as that are playable, and just sweep the rest under the rug (at least for now). That's understandable (though on the other hand: I can't imagine any sane person trying to play C&C remastered on a deck).
EDIT: while writing, I came across this article about the certification program here: <link>.
I'm not happy with the critique, but I certainly believe it's genuine. The certification program might be big, but seems more about creating a fancy-looking catalog than listings of actually good working games.
The inevitable steam deck
It's debatable whether valve tried and failed five years ago. And I'm not sure whether the deck will become a household or not either. As a fanboy, I won't deny it fits my taste and has the potential for...well...everything. From what I've seen, steamOS certainly looks more polished and modern (plasma interface, based on arch linux, a store based on pacman). It's at least on paper more versatile than the switch, albeit not by itself (plug it in a docking station and you've got a computer, and I'm sure it's not that hard to connect to a TV either).
The ironic thing is that it's neither a console nor a PC per se. It has more playable games than any console (especially if we're comparing launch line-ups) but less than a regular windows PC. It's easier to use than a PC (especially when comparing it to most linux distros) but it seems like you'll be tweaking things to get the most out of it. It's "easier to hack" if you want to use that phrase, but good tutorials might be harder to come by (just yesterday I read someone stuck trying to install software to his SD-card). It's easier to install other programs like media players or emulators than consoles, but again: probably takes a shift in thought for windows users.
"but you can install windows on it".
Yeah...that's not really an argument. There aren't much comparisons out either, let alone objective ones (do you really trust the linux gamer to claim linux is better?
). But why should valve rush to provide proper drivers for an operating system they're trying to get away from? And my guess is that even with all the proper drivers and whatever tweak and setting you can squeeze out of it, it'll still not be as easy to use as steamOS. Not that the latter deserves praise (it might: I haven't tried it), but it's designed for its controller.There's also steamOS as an image which isn't released yet. Why? Because marketing. The truth is that most people aren't fans of windows; they just don't know any real alternatives, or are hesitant to try them. I don't even blame them: windows has been the dominant home operating system for over a quarter century, and has embedded itself in our collective mindset to the point where alternatives aren't properly considered. And it often hinges on small things: I can't install linux for my girlfriend because her job still uses regular MS office, and she's a fan of the sims 2 (which is notoriously difficult for wine to handle (https://appdb.winehq.org/objectManager.php?sClass=application&iId=1942). But my father handles the ubuntu laptop a friend gave him quite well(4), and the mint laptop I gave my brother a couple months ago seems to hold up fine (he uses libreoffice at his job) (5).
...and I've digressed. Erm...what I'm saying is: it's not impossible that this might topple the balance and lead to a massive shift toward linux, but I wouldn't count on it. I've mentioned GDP and aya neo a bit earlier. For them, windows is a cost as well. A cost for a product that isn't suited to their needs (see my mentions on GPD win earlier).
...but steamOS is. The problem with open software is that valve can pump millions in proper development and all the competition has to say is "thank you" and slap the image on their next product.
Well...okay, that's not really true. Valve's steam deck is sold under the general price point and hardly makes valve a profit, if at all. Like the big three, their money's in the software. With epic store breathing free games and lower taxes down their neck and slowly adding features to the store to make them...erm...less hatefull in the general public's eyes...valve really has to act. A device that's sold at a bargain price but with the implied condition that you need to have an account AND a way to pay for the device means that valve can really expect their verified games to sell.
Well...more than usual (it still is the largest software store on the planet, after all).
So in that regard, it's kind of hard to say who will profit the most of steamOS. If it gets popular, GDP, AYA neo and others can cut out windows and thus the price point, but the only scenario I think where valve really loses is an almost absurdly unlikely: that the competition ships with a version of steamOS that somehow manages to run the (preinstalled) epic store properly...and I have no freaking idea why anyone would want to go in that direction.
Likewise, I don't see any way for microsoft to win in a situation like this. In an effort to make windows 10 popular, they've roughly thrown out most exclusive console titles to be also playable on PC. I'm not sure how many exclusives the windows app store still has, but to my knowledge everyone flocks to steam. Sometimes after a year-long exclusive in epic's store, but it still gets there in the end.
...and the future?
Ugh...I can't not talk about it, but I predicted that the switch would end up roughly as popular as the wiiu, and we all know how THAT prediction turned out to be.
But ey: with the risk of making a fool out of myself: yes, I think the deck will be succesfull in the end. Not a runaway success, but I think it'll certainly fare better than their earlier push. As for the why, I'll summarize my rant from above a bit:
* iteration, not revolution: steamOS, the steam controller, steam machines and some other stuff didn't so much failed (though really: they did) as layed the groundwork for this device.
* good timing: PC gaming is slowly turning into a niche whereas mobile gaming is gaining ground. This gets them out more, shows more exposure. It's not in the "buy this one for little Timmy" category, but with some tinkering I just KNOW I can make good use out of it (eg: I already have overcooked on my PC, but my PC isn't couch co-op. But with some HDMI connection and a few wireless controllers, that'll become much easier).
* we already have the freaking games. My colleague is hesitant about ordering a deck, but has to concede that he'd only refrained from buying a switch "because the software remains so expensive". Sure, the deck is more expensive. But when you take the total cost of ownership in account (say...a switch and ten games vs a deck and ten games), chances are the former is the most expensive device.
* a weird status quo for developpers. Why? Because valve isn't not only NOT trying to lure others into releasing linux games but sometimes have better load times on windows games through proton than on native linux. The paradoxal result is that it might well be that after a while LESS studios will port their games to linux in order to play better on linux (yeah, okay: I'm not taking anticheat software in the picture here. But that's still a pretty darn small aspect of the total cost of a game). Or in other words: they hardly have to do anything they don't already do to get a deck certified result.
* future proof. Okay...so let's say valve announces steam deck 2 the moment I unbox my late steam deck. In console land, that's bad news, as it usually means that in a few years you won't have much new releases for your obsolete system. But on that aspect, the (first) deck is like a PC: it still plays everything, and aside bleeding edge software (which will always require hardware investments) you can still play your games. My current PC is nearly a decade old by now, but still manages. Similarly, I think the (first) deck will "manage" next gen games just fine. And it means continued support for proton as well, so...where's the bad side to this, really?
* steam sales. I won't lie: I predict this'll be tacked down a bit, at least for the near future. If the profit margins are really as low as estimated, profits need to be secured in order to keep up the support for proton and steamOS development...which is crucial to become a success.
So...the last thing isn't so much pro-consumer, but but overall I don't see any threats. This is the culmination of what they've been working on since...well, at least the introduction of proton (in hindsight I could've predicted it: why invest so much in linux compatibility if the percentage of linux gamers is so low?), but more likely already since the first steamOS/controller/machine announcement. They're not going to back away from this soon. Or at all.
So my pondering is whether valve will rise to the point where it'll stand toe to toe with microsoft, sony and nintendo...or will they even surpass them?
(1): still: I played the CRAP out of dead cells on it. If the experience is even "just about the same" on valve's deck, the price'll be worth it in spades.
(2): I don't believe in "quality time". When you spend time with someone, you should be paying attention to them. But you cannot somehow "pay more attention" than average in order to save up time you can use to later neglect them. Hence: I spend quantity time with my daughter: making up stories and engaging her when we flip to picture books, build stuff with lego together, play soccer, make her a sandwich, make a toothbrush ceremony...all that stuff.
(3): ahem...okay: the game intro screen is flat out bad, and it's every bit a mouse driven game that would probably handle terrible on a deck (text too small, internet required, hard to handle). But from a technological perspective I see no reason why it's flagged as such.
(4): I'm a bit disgruntled: I told him I could get him a linux mint laptop, but I wasn't going to be his personal troubleshooter
(5): the last one I gave him ran out of disk space somehow to the degree that it can't even recognize new USB sticks to clear things up. It's probably some sort of malware, but with no way of scanning (also unavailable) that's just a hunch.
