this post was submitted on 15 Jan 2025
433 points (98.4% liked)
Games
17074 readers
1085 users here now
Video game news oriented community. No NanoUFO is not a bot :)
Posts.
- News oriented content (general reviews, previews or retrospectives allowed).
- Broad discussion posts (preferably not only about a specific game).
- No humor/memes etc..
- No affiliate links
- No advertising.
- No clickbait, editorialized, sensational titles. State the game in question in the title. No all caps.
- No self promotion.
- No duplicate posts, newer post will be deleted unless there is more discussion in one of the posts.
- No politics.
Comments.
- No personal attacks.
- Obey instance rules.
- No low effort comments(one or two words, emoji etc..)
- Please use spoiler tags for spoilers.
My goal is just to have a community where people can go and see what new game news is out for the day and comment on it.
Other communities:
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
It's not about killing Windows.
It's about slowing making G*mers comfortable with the idea of Valve's own closed off ecosystem.
They have already made G*mers comfortable with not owning their games, loot boxes, micro transactions.
This is just another example of Valve being the money grubbing, monopolistic, anti-consumer company that they've somehow got away with for years now.
I'm not sure that Valve working to making Linux gaming a smoother experience is a strong example of them being money grubbing and anti-consumer.
Of course, but that isn't what they're saying in response to the topic of the post: the question of what the point in making steamOS available for PC's is. Is it the main reason? I'm not sure it is, but you can be sure that if it isn't contributing to Valve's bottom line in some way, it wouldn't be happening.
I assume the primary reason for Valve supporting Linux is to protect themselves against possible hostility from Microsoft. So yeah, it's a business decision to protect Valve's profits; but frankly - it's also beneficial to everyone who isn't Microsoft.
Overall, I'm not a great fan of Steam. (And generally it's me talking down Steam; recommending itch.io and GOG; and sometimes even defending Epic against what I think are unfair attacks.) But here I'm just saying that I don't really see the negative of Valve creating Steam OS. Although I don't intend to use Steam OS, I think I'm already benefiting from the support Valve has given Linux to create Steam OS.
Just to be totally clear: Steam OS is a distro for the Steam Deck. It's great that they based their handheld's OS on Linux. There is pretty much universal agreement that is a net positive for gamers. Up until recently, there wasn't a way to install Steam OS on a device other than a Steam deck, except by using third party tools to hack together a bootable version of the Deck's recovery image. That's now changed - Valve have recently released generic install images of Steam OS. Hence this post about a Valve dev's comments about Steam OS competing more directly with Windows, which it previously did not on really any level.
I don't think anyone in the thread is positing that Valve creating Steam OS is a negative. I and the other poster are saying that regardless of whether the dev's comments are truthful, the reason Valve has now released Steam OS more widely is money-oriented, not some altruistic act toward gamers. The benefits to gamers generally associated with Steam OS are simply not related to this new development. Steam OS is not an especially useful distribution for PC gamers. For example, it doesn't include Nvidia drivers like other gaming-oriented Linux distros. But one feature it does have is that it's inseparable from the Steam ecosystem. And while you could describe Steam as "a games store", you could just as easily and accurately describe it as "a DRM platform". In other words, anti-consumer, money-grubbing, etc.
I won't say I told you so when in four years Valve starts offering exclusives to those using SteamOS.
Unless some major structural changes happen at Valve (Gabe leaves and/or the company goes public), I sincerely doubt they would ever do this.
Gabe. The same Gabe that has profited off micro transactions, lootboxes, and selling unfinished games. That Gabe?
You already have to use workarounds to get non-steam games to work on SteamOS.
Let's not forget that this started back ten years ago now with the failed Steam Machine concept.
Gabe needs to pay that fleet of Valkyries he has bought somehow.
Yep that same Gabe.
I get it, he's a billionaire and he's got yachts. Billionaires should not exist, I agree. That's a different discussion.
I'm not worshiping the dude, I'm just saying that it is unlikely that he would allow something like that. It is antithetical to Valve's ethos up to this point.
I usually think that gamers are by and large not critical enough when it comes to valve, but surely if they wanted to make a closed off ecosystem they wouldn't have based it on Linux and open sourced it