SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
It looked for a little while there two years ago that gaming on Linux was finally beginning to take off, mostly thanks to Valve. That push seems to quickly be evaporating. Valve's latest Steam statistics shows that usage of both Linux and MacOS X on Steam is declining, while Windows usage is actually gaining. Linux usage on Steam is down to 0.94% from 1.05% last month, while Windows usage is up to a whopping 95.81%. Was that push for SteamOS in particular and gaming on Linux in general just all smoke?
[Editor's Comment: Original Submission]
This discussion has been archived.
No new comments can be posted.
Linux Usage on Steam Continues to Decline
|
Log In/Create an Account
| Top
| 84 comments
| Search Discussion
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
Anyone who considers protocol unimportant has never dealt with a cat.
-- R. Heinlein
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday May 27 2015, @11:43PM
Windows games are locked to Steam too. Your excuse doesn't explain why linux use is down while Windows is up.
(Score: 2) by Gravis on Thursday May 28 2015, @12:14AM
Windows games are locked to Steam too. Your excuse doesn't explain why linux use is down while Windows is up.
you're right, nothing can properly explains why people are still using Windows. ;)
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday May 28 2015, @01:13AM
The book titled "Windows For Dummies" is also the reason they use it.
(Score: 5, Insightful) by Kell on Thursday May 28 2015, @02:36AM
I believe it's a false dichotomy - Windows or Linux. I don't know a single Linux user (including myself), who doesn't have a dedicated Windows box (or dualboot) for gaming. We're long since the point where the average Linux techie couldn't afford two decent performance machines, and the bang-for-buck of gaming machines has gotten better over time: I can play modern games decently on a sub $1k machine. So why aren't people playing games on Linux? Because they don't need to. Set up a windows machine with optimised GPU drivers for nothing but games, use your primary *nix machine for everything else, and get on with your life.
Scientists ask questions. Engineers solve problems.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday May 28 2015, @03:12AM
I don't have a windows box, if I did it would have been wiped and running Linux by now.
(Score: 2) by linuxrocks123 on Thursday May 28 2015, @03:28AM
Hi, I have no Linux box. I'm also not much of a gamer although I played the original Quake recently and it rocked.
(Score: 4, Informative) by linuxrocks123 on Thursday May 28 2015, @03:30AM
That is, I have no Windows box. All my box are Linux box.
(Score: 2) by Hawkwind on Thursday May 28 2015, @04:36AM
Second, I game on Linux and don't have Windows at home.
(Score: 2) by wantkitteh on Thursday May 28 2015, @07:51AM
Happy to report I joined that club yesterday.
(Score: 3, Funny) by c0lo on Thursday May 28 2015, @04:42AM
And I'm glad you don't know me.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aoFiw2jMy-0 https://soylentnews.org/~MichaelDavidCrawford
(Score: 2) by aristarchus on Thursday May 28 2015, @06:19AM
You evidently don't know me, either! I have not run (notice that, not "owned", not "purchased" not "pirated") Windows since Win95. Glad to make your acquaintance. Si vous plait.
(Score: 2, Insightful) by Noble713 on Thursday May 28 2015, @12:05PM
^This x1000.
Sure, I have Debian Jessie on my laptop, for doing my research (GNURadio stuff, coding, etc...)
Meanwhile, my desktop runs Windows 7 x64 because I play a *LOT* of games, the bulk of which aren't available on Steam or don't have Linux Steam versions. And I have some other CAD software that isn't available on Linux (and/or runs terribly in Wine).
So there is absolutely no incentive to put Linux on my desktop, install Steam.....and cut my gaming inventory by 50%.
(Score: 2) by broggyr on Thursday May 28 2015, @02:07PM
I have a Windows box because many of the games I bought through Steam for Windows simply aren't ported to Steam on Linux (GTA, DeadSpace, Skyrim to name a few).
Taking things out of context since 1972.
(Score: 3, Interesting) by urza9814 on Thursday May 28 2015, @02:56PM
Yeah I used to have a dedicated Windows box for gaming. Until about a month ago I decided it was time to dust the thing off and repurpose it as a file server and media center. The video card is almost a decade old and certainly wasn't a high-end card even back then, so that tells you how much I actually cared about the thing...I basically never even booted it up, because half the games I wanted to run on it are Windows games that no longer run on Windows (but work perfectly well in Wine!); the other half still works on Windows...but work fine in Wine too. So why even bother going through the hassle of booting up a dedicated Windows box?
The funny thing is, now that it's running Linux with Steam and some emulators and some native games and great plug-and-play gamepad support (using some old PS2 gamepads)...NOW I actually want to upgrade the hardware. Ten years running Windows and I never found much to do with it that system; the day I installed Linux suddenly it looks like it has a hell of a lot of potential -- for gaming! :)
(Score: 2) by meisterister on Thursday May 28 2015, @05:07PM
I will second this with the condition that easy and decent dual-booting is only the price of a second hard drive (around $60) and a secondhand copy of Windows ($10-$50 if you're willing to use Vista, though it only runs "well" on an SSD.)
I'll also add the condition that it applies mostly just to new games. 98% of the games I play either have a Linux port (say hello to KSP), run on DOS (SC2K), or either run well enough on Wine (Civ 3) or one of my old boxes (see sig).
(May or may not have been) Posted from my K6-2, Athlon XP, or Pentium I/II/III.
(Score: 5, Insightful) by edIII on Thursday May 28 2015, @12:28AM
This might get modded as troll, but perhaps, it's because Linux users as a *whole* put up with a heck of a lot less DRM bullshit than Windows users, and Mac users are already well trained submissives eagerly willing to be mistreated by the dominatrixes (those sexy rounded corners) up at Cupertino?
I use Linux, but I would never, ever, in a trillion years, use Steam. Why? They pretend to sell me software, but in reality rent me software, and if I ever want to use my software, I need to gently caress the balls of Gabe Newell and pray my Steam account is current and well favored. Well... I don't know this Gabe, or why he simply *must* be invited when I play video games (or at least I must clear it with him like I'm still responsible for math homework beforehand). I also fail to understand why my purchases are not respected, in any way, shape, or form, by ol' Gabe. Therefore I don't play with Gabe's toys, as he is a bit tyrannical with my allegedly purchased software. I would imagine many other Linux users feel somewhat similar.
There are plentiful options for gaming on Linux, and I don't think using an explicitly DRM'd software platform as a metric on open source/FOSS operating systems gives accurate results. What about Humble Bundle? Sure, they sell the heck out Steam Keys, but they have many offerings that don't require Steam, and run on Linux, with no DRM. Although, lately, Humble Bundle as quickly begun selling out and enjoying the money with Steam heavy/exclusive funding campaigns. Aside from Humble Bundle, the Indie Scene is plugging away and bringing new Linux titles every single day. I just think it doesn't make the news, or the sexy magazines and online venues.
As for Steam, they can blow me. Until they're willing to deploy an alternative to Sony/Microsoft with a Netflix subscription model (where it's explicitly renting) on a consumer device they sell, I'm not interested. I don't need to crap up a Linux/BSD installation with DRM'd software. That's literally like taking a shit in the middle of what was supposed to be your cake.
I'm literally too old for video games. It started when you were abused (deeply) as if quarters grew on trees, but then we had the Golden Age of game ownership. True ownership, with nobody watching you over your shoulder when you played a game. No server you needed to inform you were going to play with it. Just you, and your computer, and if you were multiplaying, a nice common carrier connection. The good ol' days. Then Sony and others started fucking it up by making the demand that you *needed* the CD to play. While easy enough to bypass and still maintain ownership, it all went downhill from there. So at least with me, they cannot downgrade me to severely-limited-ownership-under-specific-conditions when I already experienced the optimum product already that was consistent with peaceful enjoyment of one's property. Or in other words, when a person has experienced freedom, you cannot as easily make them love the bars around their cage.
Technically, lunchtime is at any moment. It's just a wave function.
(Score: 3, Insightful) by Snotnose on Thursday May 28 2015, @01:40AM
Fuck, you've already been modded +5 Insightful so I can add nothing to what you said.
When the dust settled America realized it was saved by a porn star.
(Score: 2, Funny) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday May 28 2015, @02:05AM
Linux users as a *whole* put up with a heck of a lot less DRM bullshit
All 40 of them.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday May 28 2015, @09:53AM
40, 10s of million. You left off a few zeros.
(Score: 5, Insightful) by DarkMorph on Thursday May 28 2015, @02:10AM
I'm not intimately familiar with how Steam's DRM works, but from what I've read you certainly can't "sell" something you bought and need to phone home for things to work. Sure I've heard the Steam fans defend it and try to play down the DRM by reminding us how it's less intrusive compared to other DRM, etc. Basically, it's still shit, but it doesn't smell as badly. As if that makes it acceptable...
I was glad about Valve's push hoping it would generate some much-needed attention but with such a small user base since the debut of the Linux port, I'm not sure how this will fare. If it doesn't improve it will leave a huge negative mark in history acting as an omen for anyone who considers making Linux ports and sticking to the plan.
It's been said here that many titles are DRM-free from other vendors such as GOG which is probably a major culprit to explain the poor adoptation rate.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday May 28 2015, @01:36PM
Coming from the classic gaming era I expect to own the games I buy
Hold on let me look that up on page 3 paragraph 2 line 4 word 6. But I first have to find the red piece of plastic to blur out the extra letters to look up on the code wheel. But it is kinda loud in here too because of the driving going constantly checking for 'bad' sectors.
DRM has always existed. It just now 'phones home' too. However stop and think about this. If steam goes out of business. There is 1 dll in all of the games that does the work. Hmm what would you replace to get rid of DRM?
(Score: 2) by HiThere on Thursday May 28 2015, @07:19PM
There have always been examples of DRM, well at least since the Apple ][+, but I've usually avoided the ones that had it in favor of the others. (The only exception is "Wizardy: Proving grounds of the Mad Overlord"...and even there I managed to make backup copies.)
FWIW, I dislike DRM enough, and insist on backups enough, that I think I've spent more on copying programs than on DRMed main programs. (Some of the copy programs were DRMed, but I'm not counting them as such, as my only need for them was to work around the DRM. And a year later they wouldn't work on the new versions even if they still worked. So they were inherently temporary.)
Javascript is what you use to allow unknown third parties to run software you have no idea about on your computer.
(Score: 0, Troll) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday May 28 2015, @02:51AM
oh god you FOSS lot are painful to listen to!
i would hate to live in your little ultra-paranoid perception of reality.... seriously, i pity people like yourself... life must just be really difficult for you.
(Score: 5, Insightful) by linuxrocks123 on Thursday May 28 2015, @03:44AM
Uh ... what? Nothing paranoid about realizing that companies go out of business sometimes. Do you think it's paranoid to worry about a company going out of business if you have $5000 worth of that company's gift cards? I don't. [wsj.com]
Now consider that "buying" Steam games or "buying" Amazon Instant Video movies or "buying" things from any other DRM-laden shitefest is kind of like buying a lifetime membership in a club where the only thing you can do is play that one game or watch that one movie. That's different than buying the game or buying the movie. It's not worthless -- Amazon's probably not going out of business anytime soon -- but it's not the same. If I have a game on CD or movie on DVD, I play it until I die, and then my heirs get to do the same. If I have a game on Steam or a movie on Amazon Instant Video, I get to play it as long as Steam/Amazon are in business and feel like letting me.
Oh, and, in case you didn't know, your heirs officially get jack shit according to the TOS of these sites. Now, as long as your heirs aren't dumb enough to tell the companies you're dead, they might be able to just keep using your old login regardless. But still. It's different.
And I'm a Linux user, and I'll pass, thanks.
(Score: 0, Disagree) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday May 28 2015, @01:48PM
If I have a game on CD or movie on DVD, I play it until
I dieit gets scratched, lost , or stolen, and then my heirs get todo the samehelp me move a ton of physical media every time I move or remodel my entertainment area and dig through all my crap when I die. Also, I love the hours spent keeping everything in order and organized, or digging through all the unorganized stuff looking for what I want. If I have a game on Steam or a movie on Amazon Instant Video, I getto play it as long as Steam/Amazon are in business and feel like letting mea constantly well organized collection with instant access to new items whenever I want, and zero effort when moving across the hall or across the country.FTFY
(Score: 2) by linuxrocks123 on Friday May 29 2015, @12:36AM
You can fit about 4 HD movies on a single-layer Blu-Ray. You can fit about 200 Blu-Rays in a medium-size box. If you have more than 2 boxes of Blu-Rays in your movie collection, you're a pack rat.
(Score: 3, Informative) by wantkitteh on Thursday May 28 2015, @08:08AM
While I get the whole Steam isn't buying argument, but I don't get any of the anti-Gabe crap that goes around. There doesn't seem to be any rational backing to the hatred besides ad-hominem attacks on him along with his company. But whatever, I respect your right to your opinion, as factually incorrect some of your history seems to be - let's not argue about it here, it's just not worth it. ;)
What I actually wanted to say was that GoG is your friend [gog.com], that the Galaxy client [gog.com] is the DRM-free Steam alternative and that Valve and GoG are actually doing a library integration thing to allow access to purchases in both libraries through either client. Caveat - no Linux client yet, but it's coming "eventually". I suspect this may be because it's getting extra TLC to integrate it into SteamOS - a games console with DRM free options, I like the sound of that!
(Score: 2) by edIII on Thursday May 28 2015, @08:37AM
Sure there is, although hatred is too strong a word. The disagreement is quite rational, as Gabe is working with many of the same ethical considerations and positions as Apple with its famous Walled Garden. Just as I have oft joked you need to caress the balls on Steve Job's status to enter it, you need to do the same with Gabe to earn the right to play a video game you paid for. I think I can strenuously object to the walled garden and treat it for the offensive anti-consumer crap that it is. Only made worse by the needless invasions of privacy.
I will speak with my wallet then. If Steam does come out with a games console that has DRM free options with libraries maintained by GoG or themselves.... Gabe is going to start getting my money real soon. I'll even personally apologize in all of the future Christmas cards I send him, okay? :)
Technically, lunchtime is at any moment. It's just a wave function.
(Score: 4, Insightful) by moondrake on Thursday May 28 2015, @08:28AM
It seems that many here have this feeling. I would probably have agreed a couple of years ago, but I decided to try out steam, and I am actually quite impressed and it is not always as bad as you think.
First of all: it seems the DRM bullshit is more or less depending on the game publisher, not forced by steam (but you are correct in that it facilitates DRM). Many games I play can be downloaded in steam, and I can run them without steam. For some of them it means I lose the ability to play MP or "ironman" mode. The latter requires steam since it uses cloudsaves that prevent cheating. If you dislike steam enough, you just have to have the resolve not to hack or backup the savefile (as we have been doing in rogue-likes for years). So I disagree with your point: its not Gabe balls that need caressing, you need to pray the game publisher has been kind enough not to use the DRM stuff. The real problem is not with Steam, although they did (partly) build a business model on the game-industry demands.
Secondly, Steam has created a "platform" for publishers. It provides a common platform (with some default libs and a fixed set of requirements) for people. This takes care of the linux is fragmented myth (yes, I think its a myth as it is not that hard to make your stuff work on a modern distro if you know your way around on linux). I firmly believe that much of the stuff we recently see coming although Humble Bundle and GoG is because of Steam. FWIW, I personally know an indie-dev who would never have considered porting his game to linux without the support of Steam. You can dislike it for their facilitation of DRM, but the platform itself does have a positive effect on making software available (do you think it is a coincidence that since Steam-on-Linux we suddenly happen to have over a 1000 new games). And that is a good thing. I do not think HB sold out because they provide Steam keys, I think they sold out because they started to sell not-cross-platform titles.
Thirdly, the moment steam starts to be a subscription service, I will stop using it. I like to pay for the titles of my choice (because I do prefer the once without DRM) whenever I have some $$ to spend.
Fourthly, Steam is a package manager. And I like that. I would prefer I could just yum or apt-get my games, but at least I have an app to do it. Since I am using it, I actually stopped using the things I have on discs as it is just too annoying to find and reinstall things.
Fifthly, Steams push for linux is having a positive effect on linux graphic development (they fund some of the people working on drivers).
All of this does not mean I think Steam is without problems. I think they could do more to stimulate, or at least clearly identify, DRM-free games. And I agree they should think about how to ensure that a user can still use his DRM games in the event that Steam no longer exists or the user can no longer access it. I also think they should open-source their client and fully sand-box games...But we can't have all.
(Score: 2, Interesting) by Dr. Manhattan on Thursday May 28 2015, @01:46PM
Lots of stuff can and should be Creative Commons or whatever... but a big-budget movie, a professional photograph or illustration, a song - those people can morally copyright, and charge money for. I don't pirate games and such; the laborer is worthy of their hire and all that. (Sure, the length of copyright now is insane, but that's a separate issue.)
So, DRM for games isn't automatically a moral failure. Especially when its as forgiving as Steam is - I can install it anywhere, load my games up anywhere, even share them with other users on the same machine. And my game saves get stored in the cloud and downloaded to whatever machine I happen to want to play on. It's actually more convenient in a lot of ways than installing from physical media. Sure, Valve might one day go out of business... but not anytime soon. And, for whatever it's worth, they've promised to put out an update removing restrictions if that ever happens.
So, I can't grasp the Steam hate.
I still play a lot of games under Windows... but that's because a lot of games are Windows-only. On the other hand, there are a few games I'll dip into on the Linux side, just so I don't have to reboot. Antichamber, Serious Sam 3, even the Half-Life and Portal series once in a while.
(Score: 3, Insightful) by edIII on Thursday May 28 2015, @07:36PM
You've said nothing to justify this statement.....
This doesn't justify your statement that DRM isn't an automatic moral failure, which it most certainly, an unarguably is. What you have conflated is the reasonable position of "moral copyright", and the position that through "moral copyright(s)", one can establish rather severe controls to effect the enforcement of said "moral copyright(s)".
I "finger quote" the word moral to indicate my extreme skepticism. The arguments over length, enforcement, and fair use of copyrights hardly makes most of what we consider today morally sound intellectual property. However, let's assume it to be 100% in your positions's favor, and all copyrights that are granted and recognized are purely legitimate, and all disputes with copyright holders are exclusively over distribution with illicit profits. I still fail to see how that morality somehow flows over into the draconian controls being established that erase privacy, eliminate 1st Sale rights, interfere with peaceful enjoyment, etc.
The idea of DRM is to control consumer hardware and software well beyond the point of sale where ownership 1 trillion percent transfers to the new owner in order to effect controls over content. It's very nature not only provides controls, but also provides a wealth of information (see LG performing illicit surveillance of consumer networks) that can be abused. There is simply no way I can ever be made to believe this was the reasonable intents of morally sound copyrights. At what point did we decide to build the "Enforcement Death Star" for the copyright holders again? So while I agree that artists and people should be rewarded (I hardly pirate anything in truth), I steadfastly, and to the death, refuse to give up my privacy, peaceful enjoyment, and in general my freedoms to enjoy my own spaces, virtual or otherwise. I can find no enjoyment when I realize that my space is not my own, my purchase was not respected, and I'm treated as a criminal. I have de facto ended up marrying the copyright holder so they can sit next to me on my couch till the end of time obsessing about what I'm doing with their great works.
Sorry, but none of that was even conceived as possible when the morality of copyrights was being discussed during their creation. What we are trying to do is have that conversation now, but people in my position usually get attacked as unreasonable or paranoid when we bring up the overreach occurring in enforcement :) No, you need to fully and completely justify your invasion into my space as "moral". Please be thorough, and one appeal to emotion over the copyright holder and their work isn't going to cut it. Persuade me to give up my privacy and freedoms, and describe to me the great benefits to the public domain ultimately. I'll wait......
I wholly, and fully, stipulate that Gabe's reach-around skills are truly stellar in this regard. However, a reach-around implies what again? It matters not how fine the garden is, or how beautiful and distracting its delights are, you are still being deprived of true ownership. Gabe, still knows far more about you then he needs to, and has way too much control.
Translation: For as long as we are alive, we are going to leave our secret codes and DRM technology running on your systems. It's like a guard dog, but it's not working for you. It will most likely never bite you during its stay there, and if it does, we promise, it didn't mean it in anger. Just a mistake. For what it's worth, if something *ever* happens to us, we promise that regardless of the legal and practical natures of our transition being involved, our guard dogs will all be removed. Until then, you just need to trust us about the dogs and their activities, as even though they are on your property and using your hardware, you're expressly forbidden by law to interfere with them.
Translated Response: Get your fucking dogs off my property, and pick up that one's dump it just left in my kernel. Thanks.
P.S - I don't hate Steam. What I find morally abhorrent, are DRM enabled platforms that don't allow me to enjoy something so simple from my youth: I paid for a game and I got to keep it for life in peace and privacy. You can exchange Steam with Amazon and their Kindle offerings if you want too, or basically anything from Apple.
(Score: 1) by Dr. Manhattan on Friday May 29 2015, @06:29PM
You have absolute control over whether you install Steam or not. If you don't like what it does - if you don't agree with the terms on offer - don't install it. Steam offers services beyond a one-time download - cloud saves, installs without having to carry around the media, 'achievements' for whatever they're worth, etc. If Steam were required to get the water you needed to live, that'd be one thing - but if the game isn't worth the bargain to you, don't make it.
The 'first sale' thing... if that's vital to you, don't use Steam. I haven't found my peaceful enjoyment interfered with. As to 'erase privacy' - you say, "Gabe, still knows far more about you then he needs to, and has way too much control." Okay, fine. Go ahead. Outline your scheme - what does "Gabe" need to know, and control?
I mean, what, is Steam digging into your browser history or something, and I haven't heard about that? Or is it recording your usage of a game?
(Score: 2) by edIII on Thursday May 28 2015, @07:58PM
I've used it before, quite a few years ago actually. On a technical basis, I've got no issues with Steam, and yes, it's extremely impressive for what it has accomplished.
Not sure I agree with you, but you brought up a good point. In my mind, Humble Bundle was always about the anti-DRM stance from the beginning and it was a big part of their identity. They moved away from that when not only did the cross-platform stuff disappear, but so did the DRM free offerings. Once you have a Steam only campaign, or a campaign with limited DRM-laden offerings, you jumped the shark.
Ditto. Wish it was just a "dumb" package manager though....
I disagree, I think we can have it all. However, that requires work, perseverance, and a dedication to full reforms of intellectual property. The best way to do it is by speaking with your wallet and civil disobedience. The reason why we can't have it all, is that so many of you bend over for Steam to get the reach-around. Stop enabling them, and we might start having it all again :)
That's a lot to ask though, since I know many of your are just as hopeless about anything actually changing, and just want to have some fun on the couch. That's fair too. Pick your battles.
Technically, lunchtime is at any moment. It's just a wave function.
(Score: 2) by moondrake on Friday May 29 2015, @11:34AM
> The best way to do it is by speaking with your wallet and civil disobedience
The problem though is that with Loki and LGP and all that we (I) did vote with my wallet, but our wallet was just to small to make a difference. With steam I actually see something tangible (more people porting games, stimulation of OS development, etc).
I think it makes more sense to support steam now and then try to change the system once our wallet has grown large enough. However, predicting the future is always difficult.
(Score: 3, Informative) by CoolHand on Thursday May 28 2015, @09:52PM
Anyone who is capable of getting themselves made President should on no account be allowed to do the job-Douglas Adams