Valve Reaffirms Commitment To Linux, SteamOS

[jacob]

That is called: Admiration.

You can admire and appreciate what Valve does without believing in DRM or proprietary software.

They have contributed greatly to our community.

I sort of think that it's a fallacy to believe in all software being all open or all closed. I think there are appropriate times for each.

For example -- operating systems, it makes sense all base hardware and the platform to be open.

However software wise - I am not sure I would be too comfortable with my bank open sourcing all their internal software. I don't think that would be wise and could invite some major problems.

I think games are the one area where there is a very compelling case for a proprietary model as opposed to FOSS:

1. No-one depends critically on games. It is unacceptable to rely on a non-free OS, office suite or compiler, because that puts you and your business at the mercy of the software vendor. Games are just for fun, if the game vendor tries to screw you over, nothing bad will happen. Grab a book or go to the swimming pool for a few laps instead. Or play another game.

2. Games have a very short life time. A development environment or a video editor don't become less useful after you used them once, but after you played through a game, it loses some or all (depending on the game) of its appeal and charm. Games can cost a lot of money to develop, but they must make for that investment over a very short period of time and can't rely on dedicated longtime users with deep pockets to sponsor them, donate to them or contribute to their development.

3. OSes and production software are more valuable as more people know them and are involved in their development. In a way it's the opposite with games: what would be the appeal and marketability of a game where everyone already knows the plot, all the lines of all the characters, the solutions to all the puzzles, the details of all the possible endings, has seen all the graphics and heard all the soundtracks?

[jacob]

However software wise - I am not sure I would be too comfortable with my bank open sourcing all their internal software. I don't think that would be wise and could invite some major problems.

I don't think that's a good argument. I wouldn't be comfortable knowing that my bank relies on security through obscurity. I prefer to believe (or at least hope) that they have their systems audited by as many eyes as possible and that they are based on a widely tested and proven software stack.

[cjcox]

When Half-Life 3 comes out, all will be made clear.

[TemplarGR]

I have mixed feelings about Valve and Linux. I love Linux (or GNU/Linux, if you prefer) because it's a free-as-in-freedom operating system. Steam is a DRM tool for proprietary software. So in that sense, I am opposed to their business model.

But on the other hand, Valve's work on Linux may be a big part of the push it needs to gain wide use. And we all benefit if Linux (in a relatively free form, not locked down as in Android or ChromeOS) is more popular.

This is such a stupid approach... I hate reading opinions like these because they are so ignorant it hurts...

Yes, as Linux users we prefer free as in freedom (and beer let's not kid ourselves here) software. But we have to ucknowledge that not everything is sustainable/viable under that model.

Video games take considerable resources to make and have a limited life span. There is also huge competition because it is a crowded market. If they didn't have a prioprietary model in order to make some money back, those games would have never been made. See how good the opensource games are, do you see any opensource game really up to the standards of closed source? There is only 0ad, and this IIRC was a closed source game too in the beginning, before opening up to the community. And it still takes many years to complete, it is still in Alpha...

So, there HAS to be support on the Linux platform for closed source apps and DRM. DRM is important in order to not scare away game companies. There is nothing wrong with DRM, as long as it is optional.

[geearf]

I sort of think that it's a fallacy to believe in all software being all open or all closed. I think there are appropriate times for each.

For that I like Bruce Perens' view:
Non-differentiating software should be open as it does not matter, anyone can run it anyway.
Differentiating software gives you an edge over everyone else, so opening it is not best.

Non-differentiating software is anything that is available to anyone: Windows, UE4, etc...
Differentiating software is what is kept to yourself: Google's search engine, etc.

[geearf]

I think games are the one area where there is a very compelling case for a proprietary model as opposed to FOSS:

1. No-one depends critically on games. It is unacceptable to rely on a non-free OS, office suite or compiler, because that puts you and your business at the mercy of the software vendor. Games are just for fun, if the game vendor tries to screw you over, nothing bad will happen. Grab a book or go to the swimming pool for a few laps instead. Or play another game.

2. Games have a very short life time. A development environment or a video editor don't become less useful after you used them once, but after you played through a game, it loses some or all (depending on the game) of its appeal and charm. Games can cost a lot of money to develop, but they must make for that investment over a very short period of time and can't rely on dedicated longtime users with deep pockets to sponsor them, donate to them or contribute to their development.

3. OSes and production software are more valuable as more people know them and are involved in their development. In a way it's the opposite with games: what would be the appeal and marketability of a game where everyone already knows the plot, all the lines of all the characters, the solutions to all the puzzles, the details of all the possible endings, has seen all the graphics and heard all the soundtracks?

1- How about pro-players? Farmers? etc. Many people do depend on their game working perfectly. I wonder if the pro SC/BW players kept old Windows around to just play that game as it was not running greatly in W10 until more recent patches.

2- No one is asking for games to be all free, just the code, they can still sell the assets for the same price, their return will be same. Also with many games being online, making them pay for a subscription is feasible, for example: http://onehouronelife.com/

3- I don't understand this, as with streams you can already see all of that before buying the game today.

[justmy2cents]

Steam is a DRM tool for proprietary software. So in that sense, I am opposed to their business model.

Steam offers DRM, not demands it. Using it or not is up to developers.

You have to admit that not offering it would be same as shooting themselves into the foot as some big companies really believe that it is necessary to prevent pirating and wouldn't publish game without.

Just try searching for DRM free games on steam.

[eydee]

Thanks, Jean-Paul Giraffe.

[geearf]

Just try searching for DRM free games on steam.

How do you do that? Is there such filter?

[coder]

I use only DRM-free stores to buy Linux games

Such as?