It’s still an argument, given that this historically wasn’t the case. And Mac used to have a bigger share of the pie. Do they even make Mac only games anymore?
But those numbers pretty much prove my point. Unless you’re already set up to be making games specific to a system, there’s no point in starting from scratch to only name something for 1-2% of the market.
If the least used operating system. Why limit your audience to such a small niche to begin with?
… which is no longer true. Also supporting Linux does not mean its limited to Linux only. This is in addition to Windows. And supporting Steam Deck comes with some extra goodies for the publisher, as they get some extra marketing in Steam itself and by videogame outlets, fans and YouTubers speaking about it. Do not make the mistake and look at numbers without taking context into account.
Your argumentation only explains why devs didn’t create Linux native applications in the past. I said its no longer the case. So don’t misunderstand me. What you said is true for the past, not today.
The short answer is in many cases it’s just not worth it. Maintaining a Linux build is not free and the possible market share gain is fairly minimal. Add to that the possibility you get it for free through proton and your reasons for investing the dev effort shrink.
I’ve heard an argument for maintaining Linux builds because Linux users will provide better bug reports but that mindset is unlikely to ever survive in a big studio
You added “only” in there. You can compile a game for each OS natively (and many games do). Native in this context refers to the binary itself (ELF, EXE, bin, etc), and the OSes that can run it without using some kind of compatibility layer.
It does not matter. The point I was referring to you is that Linux is no longer the least used operating system and why its not limiting to that operating system when creating native Linux support. And no, its not about Native Linux Only games, its Native Linux games in addition to Windows games.
Your argument which I quoted is no longer an argument today.
This is not what you said. This is not pedantic. ok you know what you are right and happy birthday. No need for toxicity here. If you don’t even know what you are saying and changing your argumentation over the discussion we had.
I didn’t say anything (you might notice I’m not op). What I am saying is that you are willfully misinterpreting the spirit of op’s argument. Also, nice touch saying no toxicity and then being toxic. Very classy
On Steam Linux user base surpassed MacOSX user base, so that’s no longer an argument: https://store.steampowered.com/hwsurvey/
Most mac gamers do not game via steam, I’d say, you have to look at the apple app store as well.
It’s still an argument, given that this historically wasn’t the case. And Mac used to have a bigger share of the pie. Do they even make Mac only games anymore?
But those numbers pretty much prove my point. Unless you’re already set up to be making games specific to a system, there’s no point in starting from scratch to only name something for 1-2% of the market.
I was referring to
… which is no longer true. Also supporting Linux does not mean its limited to Linux only. This is in addition to Windows. And supporting Steam Deck comes with some extra goodies for the publisher, as they get some extra marketing in Steam itself and by videogame outlets, fans and YouTubers speaking about it. Do not make the mistake and look at numbers without taking context into account.
Your argumentation only explains why devs didn’t create Linux native applications in the past. I said its no longer the case. So don’t misunderstand me. What you said is true for the past, not today.
The short answer is in many cases it’s just not worth it. Maintaining a Linux build is not free and the possible market share gain is fairly minimal. Add to that the possibility you get it for free through proton and your reasons for investing the dev effort shrink.
I’ve heard an argument for maintaining Linux builds because Linux users will provide better bug reports but that mindset is unlikely to ever survive in a big studio
This question was about NATIVE LINUX ONLY games. Not just supporting it…
You added “only” in there. You can compile a game for each OS natively (and many games do). Native in this context refers to the binary itself (ELF, EXE, bin, etc), and the OSes that can run it without using some kind of compatibility layer.
The word ‘only’ does not appear in OP’s question.
It does not matter. The point I was referring to you is that Linux is no longer the least used operating system and why its not limiting to that operating system when creating native Linux support. And no, its not about Native Linux Only games, its Native Linux games in addition to Windows games.
Your argument which I quoted is no longer an argument today.
You’re being pedantic. Linux might not be below Mac anymore but it’s still 2% compared to Window’s 96%.
Sure, the argument isn’t “Linux is the least popular os” but it IS still true that Linux is significantly less popular than Windows
This is not what you said. This is not pedantic. ok you know what you are right and happy birthday. No need for toxicity here. If you don’t even know what you are saying and changing your argumentation over the discussion we had.
I didn’t say anything (you might notice I’m not op). What I am saying is that you are willfully misinterpreting the spirit of op’s argument. Also, nice touch saying no toxicity and then being toxic. Very classy
No one develops for Mac either, so I’d say it’s valid.