A Lot Of Valve's Proton Work Is Landing Back In Upstream Wine

[shmerl]

Stadia is not using Wine, from what I've heard.

[Lanz]

This is why I won't buy games anywhere but Steam. Even GOG's client doesn't run on Linux and they don't give back like Valve does.

[kenjitamura]

It would be interesting to see if Google's new Stadia streaming service, which is based on Linux, would make use of Proton to increase the size of the game catalog.

It would also be interesting if Google forbade it.

I'm hoping that Google would be able to use their clout to force more devs to target Linux directly. If you want to be on Stadia, it should be a requirement.

I'm still of the mind not a lot of developers will be releasing new linux clients because of Stadia even if they're making ports specifically for Stadia. The most obvious reason being that a lot of DRM software isn't linux friendly and rather than look for a different middleware they can just strip the Stadia version of it since only google will be receiving a copy of the game.

One of the other reasons being that the machines deployed for Stadia backends will all be using the same hardware configurations and software stack. This will make developing for Stadia much easier than trying to make a game that plays well on multiple different hardware and software configurations.

The one principle that made console gaming so much more effective to program for, despite usually having lower specs than high end PC's, while still looking good was the fact that they all had the exact same hardware and underlying software. This is an advantage that google will be claiming for itself with Stadia and it will make working out the bugs and optimizing the games performance so much easier for developers than if they had to release a public linux client.

AMD even hinted at this being a major point for Stadia development when they released their new GPU analysis tool just last week:

Radeon GPU Analyzer (RGA) is our offline compiler and integrated code analysis tool
...
RGA lets you write and edit shader or kernel programs, and then analyse the generated machine ISA for a wide range of supported AMD GPUs, showing you the isolated cost of a particular program as you develop it, to help you understand and fine-tune it for the target GPU you care about.

[abott]

It is best for everyone if they force native Linux versions, but I'm also not picky and this is helping for now.


Eventually, the companies will HAVE to force their hand to make native Linux versions first class if they really want to make it what it could be. Although if Google doesn't want to do it, Valve can force it later by offering a discount on the fee taken for games supporting Windows, Mac, and Linux. Even 3% less taken would make most devs RUN to get a Linux version out.


I'm also not sure why they don't do it together somehow right now. Even as competitors, they both have the same enemies and fears. Right now, with Google's support, this is the absolute perfect time. Google definitely doesn't want to paying to run Windows in their servers. Even they don't have enough cash for that garbage, especially paying the per core licensing bullshit.


Work together, please. You need this. You know it. We all know it here.

[aksdb]

The one principle that made console gaming so much more effective to program for, despite usually having lower specs than high end PC's, while still looking good was the fact that they all had the exact same hardware and underlying software.

I think you can toss that idea, since the current console generations are pretty fractured. Different models of the XBox, different models of the PS4, soon different models of the Switch.
But yeah, on a console the game is more or less the only running app with no interference from other stuff. Not having to deal with background processes, firewall, antivirus, different drivers etc. is still a huge plus.
Though I think that would work out for linux as well. Just support one distribution and the two main graphics drivers (mesa for intel and amd, binary for nvidia) and you are done. If someone has hardware not supported by that distribution and has to use third party sources, it's simply may or may not work.

[humbug]

One thing stadia will do is make the whole developer community become familiar with Vulkan. Since it's the only graphics API allowed. So everybody's backend toolsets, workflows and game engines will put a greater effort onto Vulkan. Since this is a big part of the porting pain to Linux desktop hopefully it will mean more ports for us...

I'm also thinking Google will likely have an impact improving the AMD drivers, since they're using AMD hardware.

No doubt, and we have heard that AMD is looking to greatly expand their Linux driver team. The greater focus is probably due to stadia.

Also AMD would never have won this contract if not for the massive improvements in their open source drivers in the last few years due to the push from internal AMD as well as Valve, RedHat etc. So it's interesting a market (Linux) investmet that everybody thought was not lucrative may suddenly become very lucrative for them because of their investments.

[humbug]

I'm also not sure why they don't do it together somehow right now. Even as competitors, they both have the same enemies and fears. Right now, with Google's support, this is the absolute perfect time. Google definitely doesn't want to paying to run Windows in their servers. Even they don't have enough cash for that garbage, especially paying the per core licensing bullshit.


Work together, please. You need this. You know it. We all know it here.

Even if Valve and Google are not directly working together there is a lot of synergy here.
The underlying Linux OS, the Vulkan graphics API, the investment in AMD open source graphics. They will both be making direct contributions towards the upliftment of those endeavours. So they should feed off each others success. e.g. if your game/s are running on Linux desktop with Vulkan then releasing a stadia version should be relatively simple, and vice versa.

What matters is that Valve and Google do not engage in destructive competition. By destructive competition I mean the kind of thing that Epic is doing; signing contracts with 3rd party devs asking them to give up the rights to sell on other stores in exchange for money.

[starshipeleven]

The one principle that made console gaming so much more effective to program for, despite usually having lower specs than high end PC's, while still looking good was the fact that they all had the exact same hardware and underlying software.

This is vastly overrated.

Back then the application was running basically on bare hardware and "GPU drivers" or even APIs were not a thing. So yes having the same device was a very important requirement.

For a long while now, consoles hav been devices with an OS and offering APIs just like a PC. The main reason they still exist is because of exclusives.

Nowadays, the Xbox is literally a PC running a specialized Windows 10 offering DirectX API just like a PC.

[Ilfirin]

Nah, Google is just parasitizing on what Valve and others does in years.

[aksdb]

Even if Valve and Google are not directly working together there is a lot of synergy here.
The underlying Linux OS, the Vulkan graphics API, the investment in AMD open source graphics. They will both be making direct contributions towards the upliftment of those endeavours. So they should feed off each others success.

Not necessarily, unfortunately. It is totally possible that Google uses special, highly optimized drivers, maybe even with special features necessary for flawless streaming. They could have something developed by their own devs or as contract with AMD or NVIDIA that never sees the public light.
Same with input and sound APIs. They could be using SDL, openAL, whatever ... or they could come up with something tailored exactly to their (streaming) needs.
Actually they would have more incentive to create an API that is close to PS4/XBox/DirectX than trying to get devs to use Linux specific APIs.