• 52 results
  • 1
  • 2
#1 Edited by buckybit (1455 posts) -

deleted

#2 Posted by Bellum (2944 posts) -

I really doubt less than 1% of PC gamers use Linux, and Ubuntu seems to be emerging as a real brand. Some OEMs are starting to support it, and you're seeing businesses and governments adopt it for use by non-specialists. That's what's really necessary for consumer Linux, and it's happening. I'm optimistic. The HIB has shown that you can make money on LInux. Not enough to justify development for the big game publishers, but Valve isn't afraid to take risks, and perhaps that's all that's necessary.

#3 Posted by believer258 (11949 posts) -

Your title is a bit misleading, especially if you're as square as I am and hate the fucking term "IMHO". I always forget what that stands for.

Also, this is just wild mass guessing. I'm not going to discount the possibility, but I don't think that a Steam Box is coming.

#4 Posted by Maginnovision (487 posts) -

So you're saying they're going to try to sell a PC and create all the games for it since you'd have to be running linux? That seems fairly unlikely. More likely, they're porting source to linux. Especially since there is no reason to compete when the primary market that MIGHT support you and your linux PC, already does with the computers they have.

#5 Edited by TruthTellah (9153 posts) -

The title of this is rather deceptive, IMHO = Sounds like an IGN headline.

I do think there's a chance of there being something to this, but considering how much Valve just does whatever the heck it wants, I doubt we're really able to make any kind of confident guess on something like this.

#6 Posted by Bourbon_Warrior (4523 posts) -

@believer258 said:

Your title is a bit misleading, especially if you're as square as I am and hate the fucking term "IMHO". I always forget what that stands for.

Also, this is just wild mass guessing. I'm not going to discount the possibility, but I don't think that a Steam Box is coming.

It stands for IM a HO.

#7 Posted by Bellum (2944 posts) -

As far as business sense goes, I feel like it's probably a lot cheaper to develop games for Linux and Mac and port to Windows than the other way around. OpenGL is portable, and you can make common wrappers around the few similar-but-different system calls you need. Actually, if you avoid Cocoa, you can probably just about compile your Mac game on a Linux machine. Translating DirectX to OpenGL is much more expensive, IDK why so many people do it.

#8 Posted by N7 (3590 posts) -
@believer258 said:

Your title is a bit misleading, especially if you're as square as I am and hate the fucking term "IMHO". I always forget what that stands for.

Also, this is just wild mass guessing. I'm not going to discount the possibility, but I don't think that a Steam Box is coming.

It always makes me think of IHOP and then I get depressed because it's too late to go to IHOP. :(
#9 Posted by crazyleaves (646 posts) -
@N7
@believer258 said:

Your title is a bit misleading, especially if you're as square as I am and hate the fucking term "IMHO". I always forget what that stands for.

Also, this is just wild mass guessing. I'm not going to discount the possibility, but I don't think that a Steam Box is coming.

It always makes me think of IHOP and then I get depressed because it's too late to go to IHOP. :(
That shit is 24/7 fool, it's never too late!
#10 Posted by Maginnovision (487 posts) -

@crazyleaves said:

@N7
@believer258 said:

Your title is a bit misleading, especially if you're as square as I am and hate the fucking term "IMHO". I always forget what that stands for.

Also, this is just wild mass guessing. I'm not going to discount the possibility, but I don't think that a Steam Box is coming.

It always makes me think of IHOP and then I get depressed because it's too late to go to IHOP. :(


That shit is 24/7 fool, it's never too late!

I've never lived near a 24/7 ihop.

#11 Posted by believer258 (11949 posts) -

@Maginnovision said:

@crazyleaves said:

@N7
@believer258 said:

Your title is a bit misleading, especially if you're as square as I am and hate the fucking term "IMHO". I always forget what that stands for.

Also, this is just wild mass guessing. I'm not going to discount the possibility, but I don't think that a Steam Box is coming.

It always makes me think of IHOP and then I get depressed because it's too late to go to IHOP. :(


That shit is 24/7 fool, it's never too late!

I've never lived near a 24/7 ihop.

I don't know about a 24/7 IHOP, but the closest IHOP to me is on Cox Road.

I am not pulling your leg. There is an IHOP on Cox Road in Gastonia, North Carolina.

#12 Posted by Maginnovision (487 posts) -

@believer258: I've always lived NEAR an IHOP, it's on my list of things I need in a place to live, but never a 24/7 one.

#13 Posted by Bellum (2944 posts) -

You're welcome. :)

#14 Posted by Bellum (2944 posts) -

@buckybit said:

@Bellum: I count everything played on PCs - from retail video games to Yahoo browser games (worldwide, incl China & housewives). But I didn't think of phones. Granted Android sold more smart phones worldwide than Apple by now.

But besides that, John Carmack mentioned several times how his company's Linux commitment never paid off (whenever asked about releasing the source code). If you googlebing, you might find interviews with him on that subject.

I too see the Humble Indie Bundle stats and how Linux customers - although smaller in numbers - are donating way more money on average than the rest. You can make money as an indie on Linux. But I think, I don't need to prove the failure of retail-quality games and publishers on Linux. It is well documented.

Valve's Linux engagement certainly is in an exploratory/experiemental phase. But the 'long-game' is the most interesting part? Making their tools and engine available for 3rd parties - with the bang the Linux developer community has - and the growing Desktop install-base, the upcoming GoogleOS, the Android market, the faster Internet, the cloud-streaming (even gpu/render-streaming!) future, the rise of OpenGL, WebGL & NaCl ... making a deal with a hardware vendor to sell a Linux-box for 100 bucks is the smallest of efforts they have to deal with?

Oh I know about that, but the environment is very different now than it was in the Quake 3 days.

The problem with commercial games on Linux is still very much that there's nowhere to find them. You can't learn about them in brick and mortar stores. You can't learn about them on GiantBomb. You can't learn about them really anywhere. HIB is so successful on Linux because it's got so many eyes on it. There's one Stream competitor on Linux already, but it doesn't have that many games and not many people know about it. Lots of eyes are on Valve, and that's great. And not just for Valve, but for other people who want to make games for Linux, too.

#15 Posted by iam3green (14390 posts) -

pretty interesting stuff. i heard that they are making steam on linux. it's pretty cool for the people that use it.

if valve released a steam box, it would help make more sales probably. i'm assuming that it would be some cheap computer that people can use to game on. i think this has been rumored for a while now. i remember hearing stuff like this also.

#16 Posted by kindgineer (2738 posts) -

Well, this seems a bit silly to be believing that this means "Steam box" is coming. However, it is awesome to see Linux Support. I don't use the OS, but more people playing games is never a bad thing.

#17 Posted by Bellum (2944 posts) -

Valve wouldn't be the first to slap some games on a Linux box and sell it as a console. Heck, if it's Valve, they may even sell a couple of units!

#18 Posted by EquitasInvictus (2030 posts) -

I use Linux for school/development purposes, but I haven't really used it much lately. As someone who is really into developing over Linux, however, seeing Valve feel out potential expansion over Linux is almost inspiring.

I doubt Steam over Linux/Steam Box would have me forsake Windows for good, but this definitely might make me switch over to booting Linux more than I usually do.

#19 Posted by ajamafalous (12007 posts) -
@believer258 said:

@Maginnovision said:

@crazyleaves said:

@N7
@believer258 said:

Your title is a bit misleading, especially if you're as square as I am and hate the fucking term "IMHO". I always forget what that stands for.

Also, this is just wild mass guessing. I'm not going to discount the possibility, but I don't think that a Steam Box is coming.

It always makes me think of IHOP and then I get depressed because it's too late to go to IHOP. :(


That shit is 24/7 fool, it's never too late!

I've never lived near a 24/7 ihop.

I don't know about a 24/7 IHOP, but the closest IHOP to me is on Cox Road.

I am not pulling your leg. There is an IHOP on Cox Road in Gastonia, North Carolina.

I've never lived near an IHOP that wasn't 24/7, and I've lived in multiple cities.
#20 Posted by believer258 (11949 posts) -

@ajamafalous said:

@believer258 said:

@Maginnovision said:

@crazyleaves said:

@N7
@believer258 said:

Your title is a bit misleading, especially if you're as square as I am and hate the fucking term "IMHO". I always forget what that stands for.

Also, this is just wild mass guessing. I'm not going to discount the possibility, but I don't think that a Steam Box is coming.

It always makes me think of IHOP and then I get depressed because it's too late to go to IHOP. :(


That shit is 24/7 fool, it's never too late!

I've never lived near a 24/7 ihop.

I don't know about a 24/7 IHOP, but the closest IHOP to me is on Cox Road.

I am not pulling your leg. There is an IHOP on Cox Road in Gastonia, North Carolina.

I've never lived near an IHOP that wasn't 24/7, and I've lived in multiple cities.

Nobody seems to have quite gotten it yet. IHOP on Cox Rd? I feel bloody stupid now...

#21 Posted by Maginnovision (487 posts) -

@believer258: I get it, I just keep thinking about 24/7 ihops rather than hopping onto cox.

What cities specifically? Or states maybe?

#22 Edited by predator (352 posts) -
#23 Edited by Ravenlight (8040 posts) -

OP seems to have extrapolated in a way I can't follow. I don't see any evidence of a Steam Box on the radar.

At most, if Steam on Linux takes off, it would be open to the hacker (in the more traditional sense of the word) community to build their own version of a Steam Box.

Since Valve's exploration of the Linux platform seems to be an a nascent stage, I'd say it's a 50/50 chance of seeing Half-Life 3 before an official Steam "console."

#24 Posted by ZeForgotten (10397 posts) -

How the hell did you come to that conclusion? 
Well at least you said that it was in your honest opinion. 
Now all I gotta do is wait for someone who works at Valve to share their information, you know, get the info from someone who matters.  
 
But hey, go Linux! 

#25 Posted by ajamafalous (12007 posts) -
@Maginnovision said:

@believer258: I get it, I just keep thinking about 24/7 ihops rather than hopping onto cox.

@ajamafalous What cities specifically? Or states maybe?

Both Houston and Austin, Texas
#26 Posted by Shivoa (626 posts) -

@Bellum said:

As far as business sense goes, I feel like it's probably a lot cheaper to develop games for Linux and Mac and port to Windows than the other way around. OpenGL is portable, and you can make common wrappers around the few similar-but-different system calls you need. Actually, if you avoid Cocoa, you can probably just about compile your Mac game on a Linux machine. Translating DirectX to OpenGL is much more expensive, IDK why so many people do it.

Valve don't seem to have your problems with writing an engine with D3D calls and then porting those to their OpenGL equivalents. They did it a few years ago when they embraced MacOS X and spoke about it then. Obviously the ideal it to have an implementation agnostic interface for rendering and then you link that to the D3D or OGL implementation depending on the platform (or even give Windows users the choice - remember the old days when we'd barely weaned gamers off Glide for Voodoo cards and so Unreal Tournament would ask you if you wanted software rendering, OpenGL, DirectX, or Glide as your rendering API) but Valve didn't seem to think they were having any performance issues with calling their Direct3D style functions which actually did the equivalent OpenGL calls.

Because Windows is the lion's share of the gaming market for PCs and DirectX (render, audio, input, etc) is the industry standard (baring those few outliers like id software) and also the hardware standard (Direct 3D feature level being how hardware vendors sell and even develop their graphics products and drivers - see Intel and how they messed up OpenGL feature parity in their integrated solutions in the last few years while genuinely chasing the highest DX feature level they could) then it makes sense to target that platform first. Cross platform then you've probably got a good reason to target OpenGL ES on PS3 due to the less standard nature of the CPU design but that's not really a renderer reason but a wider engine building choice and that isn't the same thing as having an OpenGL 3/4 code path for Mac/Linux.

#27 Edited by MattyFTM (14393 posts) -

I don't see a Linux based Steam Box being very appealing. I mean, 99% of games on Steam still won't support Linux, so they wont support the Steam Box. And the only way more devs will port it to Linux would be if it gained more popularity, and I don't see a box that only supports Source games and a few indie games selling very well. It's a chicken and egg situation. To get more games on Linux, you need a bigger game-playing Linux userbase. To get a bigger game-playing Linux userbase, you need more games on Linux. OK, it's not quite that simplistic, and I can see Steam on Linux increasing the profile of Linux gaming to the point where more developers port their games over to it, but it's going to be a slow process. It's going to be well over 10 years before a large enough portion of the Steam library is on Linux for a Linux based Steam Box to be financially viable. Look at how long it's taken for Mac to gain a gaming foothold. And it still has a long way to go.

Moderator
#28 Posted by Skytylz (4033 posts) -

If Linux got full support from PC devs I would definitely switch to Ubuntu or at least dual boot rather than use windows 8 at all times.

#29 Posted by Talis12 (488 posts) -

do i believe that Valve could pull off their own console? yes i do.

do i believe its because of this Linux thing? no i dont.

#30 Posted by Murdouken (709 posts) -

They aren't trying to cater to the small amount of people who do use Linux, they're trying to make Linux a more viable development platform for developers so that people will begin to use Linux. Steam for Mac has worked out quite well and you see way more games getting mac versions nowadays, so they're just giving Linux the same treatment.

Online
#31 Posted by MikkaQ (10294 posts) -

@buckybit said:

@ZeForgotten: just to clarify, why I came to think the Steam Box is on it's way ... there have been discussions over the last months, industry wide - not just among fans and or journalists or business analyists (no, not "Pachter").

The "long game" (= making money with video games in the future - think of 10 years and more) is full of shifting elements ... towards browser audiences, smaller devices, faster bandwidth. The discussion in certain circles goes beyond gaming websites, beyond 'the next Microsoft/Sony/Nintendo console', but rather Apple, Valve and ... Amazon.

The Valve Linux blog post specifically said "getting the Steam client onto Linux with full functionality ". This does not mean the website in a browser, but the functionallity of Steam Services on Linux.

The Humble Indie Bundle stats show potential on the Linux side. But "Gaming on Linux" depends on having "Desktop Linux" running - and THAT discussion is going over a decade. People should just googlebing "When is Linux ready for the Desktop?" and similar search terms.

At this stage Linux + Games is probably an experiment for Valve. But where Valve goes, others listen and follow? Having a full functional Steam/Valve service, that provides tools, the source-engine and maybe improved WINE style wrapper and/or installer for such a 'small' audience is a lot of work for a few bucks Valve does not need. There has to be more in play. There HAS to be something bigger at stake.

And it all makes sense, if you look at the b i g g e r ... p i c t u r e.

Linux is the most distributed Operating System worldwide. It runs embedded in every device you can think of. Raspberry Pi costs 25 bucks - it is more advanced than most boxes people have had 10-20 years ago. Barebone smart phones from China equally cost only a fraction for what they are sold in the West (by Apple & Co.) They have now quadcore-cpu's in them with advanced graphic chips. Technology, hardware, is not the issue. Developing and cooperating with a distributor is not an issue. Having a platform providing the content is the BIG game companies play today. Microsoft and Sony are pushing for their online services (Gaikai!), because they too know, the profit is in having the iTunes Store for video games. Even obscure entities like this Ouya business SEE the opportunity.

Steam is already there. Steam/Valve can lose their advantage, if they leave their competition to catch up. Why is this less than evident?

I know some game developers who agree with me. I would have changed the title (which was meant as a Game-of-Thrones reference = video game industry players pushing each other) of the thread in: "Steam Box is coming?...", but couldn't after I already posted. Yet people have a much greater time nitpicking on that and hijacking this thread for IHOP-jokes, instead talking about Linux and Gaming, or the possibilites of what Steam/Valve is going to do with their Linux engagement in the future. I guess, that's how it is...

This is all nice, but none of it explains how any developer will be drawn to it. Linux may be the more distributed OS in the world, but I don't think publishers have an interest in selling games for server farms. Valve may put in the effort, but to look at my Steam library only 5 of them or about 2% of my game library on steam are made by Valve. Maybe another 5 of them actually run on Source engine. That leaves a lot of other publishers who right now have little to no incentive to port their games over to Linux.

A WINE wrapper isn't going to cut it in the commercial market, because it's not perfect. If it can't perform equal to a native windows game in all situations, then how could Steam even consider selling that to people on a box in their living room? They're not going to understand why everything doesn't just work perfectly, they want to pick and game and have it go.

At this point I think we can only call an experiment an experiment. There is a very high possibility something like this could stagnate or fail, and I don't think there is any sense in getting excited about it. I mean seriously, it's a commercial venture on Linux. That's a hard phrase to say without snickering.

#32 Posted by Bellum (2944 posts) -

@Shivoa said:

@Bellum said:

As far as business sense goes, I feel like it's probably a lot cheaper to develop games for Linux and Mac and port to Windows than the other way around. OpenGL is portable, and you can make common wrappers around the few similar-but-different system calls you need. Actually, if you avoid Cocoa, you can probably just about compile your Mac game on a Linux machine. Translating DirectX to OpenGL is much more expensive, IDK why so many people do it.

Valve don't seem to have your problems with writing an engine with D3D calls and then porting those to their OpenGL equivalents. They did it a few years ago when they embraced MacOS X and spoke about it then. Obviously the ideal it to have an implementation agnostic interface for rendering and then you link that to the D3D or OGL implementation depending on the platform (or even give Windows users the choice - remember the old days when we'd barely weaned gamers off Glide for Voodoo cards and so Unreal Tournament would ask you if you wanted software rendering, OpenGL, DirectX, or Glide as your rendering API) but Valve didn't seem to think they were having any performance issues with calling their Direct3D style functions which actually did the equivalent OpenGL calls.

Because Windows is the lion's share of the gaming market for PCs and DirectX (render, audio, input, etc) is the industry standard (baring those few outliers like id software) and also the hardware standard (Direct 3D feature level being how hardware vendors sell and even develop their graphics products and drivers - see Intel and how they messed up OpenGL feature parity in their integrated solutions in the last few years while genuinely chasing the highest DX feature level they could) then it makes sense to target that platform first. Cross platform then you've probably got a good reason to target OpenGL ES on PS3 due to the less standard nature of the CPU design but that's not really a renderer reason but a wider engine building choice and that isn't the same thing as having an OpenGL 3/4 code path for Mac/Linux.

It's not about performance, but development and maintenance costs. It's not impossible to do, but seriously, why try to maintain a wrapper talking to two APIs when you can support as many platforms just using the one API that is multi-platform? At least for something as complicated as 3d rendering! I understand DirectX also has other useful components for game developers.

#33 Posted by Shivoa (626 posts) -

@Bellum: For a wide release game (when I make games using an engine I rolled myself and am using OpenGL, I am not being hypocritical but working under the constraints of indie development - even then I'm half-tempted to build a game for Windows and live with only hitting 90% of consumers on day 1 and porting to OpenGL later) then a non-negligible expense on PC is making sure the game works with hardware/software combos. For the initial release you probably don't want to deal with your hardware pool multiplied by every Linux distro you can think to test. As mentioned with the Intel thing, hardware partners care a lot more about getting their Direct X up to scratch in both feature levels (and customers knowing what that means so your minimum specs actually mean something to the semi-technical) and tested drivers (not to mention the fun of optional features / vendor specific extensions if you're going to be a bit cutting edge). Basically the vast majority of games calling into DirectX (specifically D3D for rendering) is normal because it's easier to build something doing that and have confidence in your code working reasonably fast and with less edge cases that you need to track down and patch. And there's a lot of "we've done this for several years this way so we continue to do so" from a while back when OpenGL wasn't as healthy as it is today (but after around a decade ago when it was still healthy for the first flush of 3D acceleration on PCs).

Personally I use nVidia hardware a lot. Their stereoscopic 3D support is only available to consumers with Direct3D games (their Pro solutions offer the OpenGL support and back in 1999 era their first shutter glasses/drivers offered OpenGl to consumers then - the removal seems to be a market segmentation issue painted to be an issue with quad-buffers and modern OpenGL that I'm slightly dubious about being a real problem). So basically if I want to use nVidia optimised hardware (3D Vision screens/glasses with 120Hz FullHD monitors) then I have to code to DirectX, otherwise I'm stuck with 2D or buying Tesla GPUs (and knowing I'm coding a solution no consumer will ever see on their GeForce unless nVidia change their mind about drivers and market segmentation).

I'd say it's mostly convention today that makes so many people go for Direct3D on Windows as their primary platform and then port to OpenGL as they need rather than doing OpenGL on everything. You've got to build some DirectX engine for cross platform if you're on 360; MSDN and other resources make DirectX easy to research (although I see a good mix of HLSL and GLSL in technical papers showing no 'common language' when people are reporting on new techniques they've developed) and work with; and the last 5 years has been engines with DirectX for PC and 360, OGL ES for PS3 (and different extensions ES for Wii), and Carmack doing his thing and making sure hardware vendors actually remember to release updates to their OpenGL drivers every now and then to support Rage.

Most people buy in engines so it's not really an issue there but even rolling your own then the overhead of building a sensible abstraction and two implementations isn't much of a commitment when you're talking big studio. Even large indie/10-20 man teams can probably afford the slightly longer dev time for building in both options. I've written stuff in the past with a generic interface to speed porting in either direction, even when I've only got time to build one renderer. They're not massively different in creating buffers of data and referencing it in the render calls.

#34 Posted by Bellum (2944 posts) -

@Shivoa: Interesting. Thanks for the clarification. :)

#35 Posted by banishedsoul1 (294 posts) -

death to windows

#36 Posted by Shivoa (626 posts) -

@banishedsoul1 said:

death to windows

Death to trolls! :(

#37 Posted by TheGorilla (230 posts) -

Probably the only reason Steam Linux is a thing is because there are a few people at Valve who love it and want to do it. The only Linux games out there are going to be Valve games and a few indies. Most games are not going to be ported. It's not worth it financially.

I don't understand why Linux users seem to always want to believe that Linux is one developer away from world domination.

Why do people even want a Steam box to begin with? Isn't the whole point of PC gaming having your own upgradable box? It's not like if Valve releases a box it's going to be many times more powerful than next-gen consoles. They'll have the same constraints.

Steam on Mac is a nice little thing with a few games for it. Steam on Linux is going to be a nice little thing with a few less games for it.

#38 Edited by Omegus (30 posts) -

@TheGorilla said:

Probably the only reason Steam Linux is a thing is because there are a few people at Valve who love it and want to do it. The only Linux games out there are going to be Valve games and a few indies. Most games are not going to be ported. It's not worth it financially.

I don't understand why Linux users seem to always want to believe that Linux is one developer away from world domination.

Steam on Mac is a nice little thing with a few games for it. Steam on Linux is going to be a nice little thing with a few less games for it.

Well thank you for generalizing linux users like that. Thats ignorant. Have you ever had any linux distro on your computer? From the comments you decided to burst out with instead of researching ill go with no. I have been a Linux user since 2010. I don't know how good or bad Linux was before. But when I tried Ubuntu 10.10 when I first started I thought "wow I can customize my whole OS, for free. Oh look more free software, games and great community." I dual booted until I bought my new custom rig from Ibuypower.com. At that point I said "Let's buy a computer with out windows and ill do a fresh install of Ubuntu." I saved almost 200$ on the computer . My computer has at least 60+ games on it.

So what If there are not as many Linux users as windows users. Not all Linux are "Super Nerds, Microsoft Haters and what have you." In fact I don't hate Microsoft I think they are smart for making great money on new technology and sucking people in to keep buying garbage versions of their OS that are riddled with Malware, Spyware, Trojans, Worms, Blue Screens of Death. Heres another Fact for you Windows is the 78% of all computers out Now. Linux is 84% of all servers out now. Next time you play a game with EA or Ubisoft or Squareenix or what have you and your running your mouth about Linux remember what that server runs on. I'm going to play Minecraft and Trine 2 ....you know the Linux versions.

#39 Posted by AlisterCat (5593 posts) -

What about your non-honest opinion?

#40 Posted by jakob187 (21676 posts) -

@Maginnovision said:

@crazyleaves said:

@N7
@believer258 said:

Your title is a bit misleading, especially if you're as square as I am and hate the fucking term "IMHO". I always forget what that stands for.

Also, this is just wild mass guessing. I'm not going to discount the possibility, but I don't think that a Steam Box is coming.

It always makes me think of IHOP and then I get depressed because it's too late to go to IHOP. :(


That shit is 24/7 fool, it's never too late!

I've never lived near a 24/7 ihop.

We have TWO of them in my town! One of them is right next to a Flying J's and Carl's Jr. The other is on Baylor Campus.

#41 Posted by Maginnovision (487 posts) -

@jakob187 said:

@Maginnovision said:

@crazyleaves said:

@N7
@believer258 said:

Your title is a bit misleading, especially if you're as square as I am and hate the fucking term "IMHO". I always forget what that stands for.

Also, this is just wild mass guessing. I'm not going to discount the possibility, but I don't think that a Steam Box is coming.

It always makes me think of IHOP and then I get depressed because it's too late to go to IHOP. :(


That shit is 24/7 fool, it's never too late!

I've never lived near a 24/7 ihop.

We have TWO of them in my town! One of them is right next to a Flying J's and Carl's Jr. The other is on Baylor Campus.

I wonder if their website has a powerful enough search that I can find one anywhere in souther california that has a 24/7 ihop

#42 Posted by TheGorilla (230 posts) -

@Omegus said:

@TheGorilla said:

Probably the only reason Steam Linux is a thing is because there are a few people at Valve who love it and want to do it. The only Linux games out there are going to be Valve games and a few indies. Most games are not going to be ported. It's not worth it financially.

I don't understand why Linux users seem to always want to believe that Linux is one developer away from world domination.

Steam on Mac is a nice little thing with a few games for it. Steam on Linux is going to be a nice little thing with a few less games for it.

Well thank you for generalizing linux users like that. Thats ignorant. Have you ever had any linux distro on your computer? From the comments you decided to burst out with instead of researching ill go with no. I have been a Linux user since 2010. I don't know how good or bad Linux was before. But when I tried Ubuntu 10.10 when I first started I thought "wow I can customize my whole OS, for free. Oh look more free software, games and great community." I dual booted until I bought my new custom rig from Ibuypower.com. At that point I said "Let's buy a computer with out windows and ill do a fresh install of Ubuntu." I saved almost 200$ on the computer . My computer has at least 60+ games on it.

So what If there are not as many Linux users as windows users. Not all Linux are "Super Nerds, Microsoft Haters and what have you." In fact I don't hate Microsoft I think they are smart for making great money on new technology and sucking people in to keep buying garbage versions of their OS that are riddled with Malware, Spyware, Trojans, Worms, Blue Screens of Death. Heres another Fact for you Windows is the 78% of all computers out Now. Linux is 84% of all servers out now. Next time you play a game with EA or Ubisoft or Squareenix or what have you and your running your mouth about Linux remember what that server runs on. I'm going to play Minecraft and Trine 2 ....you know the Linux versions.

lol, I don't see how I was generalizing Linux users so much aside from one joke, but I guess you kinda proved that jokes point. I've setup and run Ubuntu on my computer before and I rarely even use Windows, but I will never understand why Linux users get so excited about their OS. All operating systems are pretty much garbage compared to the bullshit nonsense holodeck future I want to live in.

I really don't know how to respond to your post. This is where my obnoxious desire to start internet arguments and get the last word in becomes a real pain. You wrote an entire paragraph about how you switched to Linux in order to support your statement that I'm ignorant. Why did you even call me ignorant? - because I said Steam on Linux will not cause major publishers, like Ubisoft who has thought about stopping PC development for years now, to suddenly start developing for Linux? - or because I made a joke about how intensely passionate many Linux users are? - or because I said Steam on Linux was cool but would probably end up being less important than Steam on Mac?

@Omegus said:

In fact I don't hate Microsoft I think they are smart for making great money on new technology and sucking people in to keep buying garbage versions of their OS that are riddled with Malware, Spyware, Trojans, Worms, Blue Screens of Death. Heres another Fact for you Windows is the 78% of all computers out Now. Linux is 84% of all servers out now. Next time you play a game with EA or Ubisoft or Squareenix or what have you and your running your mouth about Linux remember what that server runs on.

Are you aware of how crazy this sounds? First off I don't see how I was 'running my mouth about Linux' when I was simply saying I didn't think Steam on Linux was going to be a "big" deal. I said it would be nice, but implied I didn't think it would revolutionize the industry in any way. I could always be wrong, that's the point of making predictions. You say what you think will happen, other people say what they think will happen, and then we wait and see what actually happens. The original poster said what he thinks will happen, I said what I think will happen, and then you called me ignorant and explained how you like your Linux computer more than windows. As to your facts, they might well be right, I don't know and I don't really care, but no one is going to take them seriously unless you cite your sources, especially when you have such a clearly strong bias.

#43 Edited by Sooty (8082 posts) -

You are beyond crazy if you think Steam on Linux has anything to do with a possible Steam Box. Even Mac native gaming support is pretty terrible, but it's still leagues ahead of Linux right now.

#44 Posted by blindisaac (141 posts) -

@believer258: Gotta love NC. I live near Climax and that is literally on the other side of Horney Town.

#45 Posted by Jonny_Anonymous (1049 posts) -

I would totally get a Steam Box

#46 Posted by zeekthegeek (391 posts) -
#47 Posted by buckybit (1455 posts) -

deleted

#48 Posted by banishedsoul1 (294 posts) -

valve is turning into apple they get a clut take over hypes everything. I love ubuntu its damn sexy and windows sucks donkey balls. But Linux will never be a gaming platfrom. as much as i would love to see windows dead its not going to happen.

#49 Posted by Example1013 (4834 posts) -

@banishedsoul1 said:

valve is turning into apple they get a clut take over hypes everything. I love ubuntu its damn sexy and windows sucks donkey balls. But Linux will never be a gaming platfrom. as much as i would love to see windows dead its not going to happen.

Color Look Up Table?

#50 Posted by KaramonD (53 posts) -

http://www.joystiq.com/2013/01/07/rumor-valve-to-unveil-steam-box-this-year-will-use-linux/