I'm not overly optimistic given that the biggest barrier to supporting Linux has always been how much variance there is in terms of what's out there, but it's still a good thing for Linux.
In terms of perceptions of desktop Linux I don't really think it matters. Linux isn't going anywhere and as software probably has more penetration right now than any other operating system ever has.
The weird thing is, for me personally, is that of all the games I collected over there years when I did Windows gaming, many of them are now Apple Silicon native. Sure, the big ones like Elder Scrolls and Fallout franchises aren't there, but many others are. Even the brand-new Baldur's Gate 3 is on Apple Silicon. No Man's Sky is now too.
I'm not a big gamer anymore, but it's just interesting to see.
Nope. The biggest barrier is the FUD around there being so much variance. 99% of desktop Linux is glibc-based. Beyond that, binary compatibility is no harder than Windows. Differrent yes, meaning devs used to Windows have some learning to do, but not drastically different even.
That said, I think most of us, except for the die hard purists, are fine with Proton compatibility being the main target for companies. As long as a game runs as well as it does elsewhere without restrictions or inconvenience, most of us are happy and don't care about the technical details of how it's running.
The pros of deciding your own runtime environment allows you to customize the system more and even run Linux on machine that has very strict resource limit.
The cons is that it is almost impossible to run a software everywhere without bundle literally anything you use into own binary. The steam itself do it(steam runtime), but I don't know if it is even close to a complete resolution because it don't really solve the problem for softwares outside of steam.
If we talk ABI's not API's, it's not a joke https://blog.hiler.eu/win32-the-only-stable-abi/
It's funny because it's true. Valve took advantage of Microsoft API stability guarantees and executed with an overnight success 10 years in the making.
It's actually a great thing, too. You build a game once and it's more stable than any distro packaging could ever make it be.
That is, this is likely easily solvable, but it is most easily solvable at the beginning of a project by choice of base libraries. I can understand not wanting to change things after the fact for a presumably small user base.
They claimed that they'd need a different implementation per distribution. Which makes no sense. It's just open()/ioctl_tty()/read()/write(), all of which are in the libc of every distribution that has ever existed since the 90s.
So less avoiding Windows licences and more avoinding getting cut out by MS.