What do you think? Did EA pull support for Linux due to laziness or because it was difficult to moderate?
What do you think? Did EA pull support for Linux due to laziness or because it was difficult to moderate?
Stable refers to consistent performance and reliability. The latest update (3.6.19) improved compatibility with newer Linux versions and packages, ensuring the system remains stable after changes. Since the core software runs on Arch, features that function well there should also work in SteamOS.
It’s funny how game developers criticize Linux upkeep expenses while their Windows titles lag in optimization. This approach is now common, and we must push for better from them. The gaming community should urge these companies to provide solid Linux support, necessary quality-of-life updates, and overall well-optimized experiences. If they ignore these demands, we might need to boycott their products to hit them where it hurts—namely their profits. It’s time to make it clear we won’t accept this broken cycle any longer.
I’m tired of game developers pushing kernel-level anti-cheats. I won’t let such intrusive software affect my system. Rather than relying on these systems, they could simply employ more people to manually check cheat reports. Sure, automation sounds efficient, but people always find ways around it. I’ve watched documentaries showing hackers outsmarting these big companies. While I don’t condone cheating, I admire their skill in overcoming systems that focus more on anti-cheat than quality and updates. It shouldn’t be difficult to hire a team to review reports and make informed decisions. Maybe I’m just out of touch, though.
It's more complex than it seems. Reviewing all these would require significant costs, and only a few people bother to test them. I'd still support seeing anti-cheat features for Steam OS.
Game developers have the funds yet continue to justify excuses. Ten years ago, teams manually checked reports and it functioned well. Today, anti-cheat tools such as Valve’s VAC are only minimally maintained. We fund these products and items, but their quality has declined significantly. If I led a company, I’d allocate resources to a dedicated QoL team and a manual review unit. We’ve grown too relaxed, and it’s time for us to push for improvement rather than accepting this downward trend.
SteamOS runs on Arch Linux, making "Linux compatible" a bit tricky. It would need support for Fedora, Debian, Arch and more. Companies today often avoid investing in Linux developers to save costs, which is a big deterrent for me. I haven’t purchased any games from these studios recently, let alone from others.
If they need an anti-cheat, fine, but making it overly invasive will just drive people away. I’m not worried about casual players, but those who know how to control their PCs. I’ve avoided games like Apex Legends, Valorant, and Call of Duty because of invasive anti-cheat. Anything that can access my work documents or browser files is too sketchy. If anti-cheat brings games to Linux, I’m all for it. I just want Linux to be closer to Windows in gaming. With Windows 10 ending, I’ve already helped almost 400 people switch, many of them using Linux Mint or Fedora and enjoying it. If they need Windows, they just use a VM. Simple.
SteamOS functions similarly to a standard desktop Linux distribution. For game developers, focusing on "Linux desktop" is sufficient since it supports SteamOS natively. Android operates differently—it includes a Linux kernel but restricts app development to specific APIs provided by the platform, enhancing UI consistency while limiting access to core system features.