zlacker

They are forcing developers to be the one to pay for it if they do it because there is no other player in the space that would financially benefit from games having SteamOS support. Practically every other company with an game platform, Playstation, Xbox, Nintendo, iOS, Android, etc have programs to fund bringing content to their platform. Also developers can't avoid supporting SteamOS because there is no way for them to 100% opt out of being on that platform.

>>charci+(OP)
> Practically every other company with an application platform, Playstation, Xbox, Nintendo, iOS, Android, etc have programs to fund bringing content to their platform.

the only platforms I've ever heard of this for were Windows Phone and the Epic Store

both of which were runaway commercial successes

>>blibbl+k
Have you ever heard of terms like "Playstation exclusive" before? Companies benefit from having good content on their platform and they typically are willing to pay for it.

>>charci+(OP)
Your argument is illogical. If devs don’t want to support it, they simply will not support it—as evidenced by the thousands of games that have yet to be SteamOS verified, but either run just fine, or don’t run at all with the devs not giving it a second thought.

Besides, if this does end up putting pressure on the developers to start supporting more platforms than just Microsoft’s data collector ahem I mean, Windows, then I’m all up for it. It’s a win for everyone.

>>charci+u1
Not since Bloodborne, I haven't. And I've heard people can play that game on Steam Deck now, too: https://youtu.be/eDHiVsr-jfM

These days the only context I hear "Playstation exclusive" in comes from people trying to analyze how much money Sony lost developing Concord.

>>ohdear+z5
I never said they were forced to support, but that they are forced to fund such a thing for their game as opposed to their being an option for Valve to fund it.

>>charci+er
They aren't forced to fund anything. They have the option for an additional value add, that's all.

>>charci+(OP)
It is typically neither free nor open to develop on consoles. As in, you pay to access developer tools.

iOS and Android less so (even if there is a one time charge for Android and a yearly charge on Apple). OTOH I have not heard of them usually reaching out to more than a handful of devs for promotion purposes.

>>ohdear+z5
It's way harder to support Linux than Windows from a developer's perspective. Proprietary vs. open source drivers, approach to driver updates (rolling release vs. stable distros), 5 trillion incompatible glibc versions, X11 vs. Wayland etc, janky sound systems with varied support across Linux distributions (Pulse, Alsa, PipeWire), no ABI compatibility guarantee etc.

>>sophro+zS
Valve is known for never funding games which is why my original comment expressed surprise. Of course they aren't forced to fund content on their platform, but I had thought they had changed their strategy.

>>diath+hY
What has that got to do with Valve providing a compatibility layer so devs can broadly ignore all that nonsense and just target Proton?

>>mhast+0T
You pay, but you get actual support from console makers. They kind of need to given how closed off it is otherwise. The competition also means larger profile studios (indie and AAA) will usually get some good deals to work with.

The one time model from Apple/Android really is just a tax that gets you nothing but access in comparison. It's a full advert model where the biggest players throw millions at Apple/Android for visibility.

Valve's somewhere in the middle of the two. No "p2w" adverts but it's not doing too much to draw devs (except reducing the tax for AAA devs). It doesn't need to. A lot of its community models are "we're having a party, you bring the food and drinks".

>>bigyab+E5
Real shame, you should try Ghosts of Yotei. It's good.

Astro Bot is a personal favorite too. That one would be tricky to get the true experience on in terms of PC platform.

>>charci+B91
The clsoest thing to funding we ever got was Activision getting Valve to lower the cut for big publishers so they could get onto Steam.

Otherwise, I can't remember the last time they funded a game they didn't make themselves. Maybe in the very early Steam days, but that's long past.

>>johnny+Je1
I probably will play them, once they're ported to PC and sold for $10 like TLoU and Death Stranding were. I haven't even played Tsushima yet.

Neither one of them is a system-seller though. I don't think anyone feels FOMO because they missed the Day 1 release of Gran Turismo, or didn't play Astro Bot with 7.1 Surround and HD haptics. Bloodborne was a magnum opus, Persona 5 had people lining up outside Best Buy to reserve a copy. The PS5 exclusive library is down right impoverished by comparison, to say nothing of the PC exclusives it lacks.

>>bigyab+Ur1
I don't really know if the concept of "system seller" is a thing anymore. Or at least, all those titles belong to Nintendo now. Sony's only had Gran Turismo and then made up for it with a consistent stream of first party titles. Not Nintendo level, but competitive. Xbox has 2 series and utterly bungled one of them. If you're not a racing sim fan, you're looking at the forest instead of the trees.

All those true "seller" series were always 3rd party and they've all pretty much abandoned console deals mid Gen 8. Bloodborne was truly the lasst of its kind.

The real "system seller" for the ps5 is a bunch of Japanese games that will never really be on Xbox and can't run on switch. So that depends on your taste. Japan's mostly come around on PC though, so it's not truly "exclusive" outside of the shaky optimization.