669
Epic Games CEO Tim Sweeney was asked by Verge why there is no support for the Steam Deck for Fortnite (lemmy.ml)
submitted 2 years ago by to c/linux_gaming@lemmy.ml
272 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] 13 points 2 years ago (7 children)

They don’t even have to support Linux. They just have to stop actively preventing the game from launching on Linux platforms.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 7 child comments
    •
  • [–] 0 points 2 years ago (6 children)

    Then they get bad press for cheaters using Linux or whatever due to some bug they easily could've caught during the QA they didn't do. So they either need to scramble to fix it, or pull Linux support and block those older versions from connecting.

    All of that is worse than never supporting Linux in the first place. So if they're going to support it, they're going to need to do proper QA and get their support staff trained to deal with Linux issues.

    A smaller studio or something with SP only mode can get away with it, but it's a lot more tricky for big MP games.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 6 child comments
    •
  • [+] 1 point 2 years ago* (last edited 2 months ago) (5 children)
    [deleted]
  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 5 child comments
    •
  • [–] 0 points 2 years ago (4 children)

    Can and should are very different things. Here are some big differences to understand why it doesn't make sense for Fortnite, but it might make sense for Apex:

    • Fortnite isn't on Steam, so the only people who would play it on Linux are enthusiasts and cheaters (if it's easier than on Windows)
    • Fortnite has way more players than Apex - the possible pool for new users is likely much smaller for Fortnite, and the potential for making money is higher with getting current users to spend than attracting new ones, and they have more users to lose with bad press
    • Fortnite has two anti-cheats, EAC and Battleye, Apex just has one (EAC); depending on how they're integrated, that could mean twice the attack surface

    I wish they'd support Linux, but I don't think comparing to Apex makes a lot of sense here.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
    •
  • [+] 1 point 2 years ago* (last edited 2 months ago) (3 children)
    [deleted]
  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
    •
  • [–] 0 points 2 years ago (2 children)

    I'm not saying it needs be on Steam to work, I'm saying it needs to be on Steam to be popular on the Steam Deck since the install process is otherwise quite involved. So if they just enable Proton in EAC, they'll only get a handful of enthusiasts (who are probably playing on another platform anyway) and open themselves up to Linux-specific cheats.

    so can Epic Games

    I'm not saying they can't, I'm saying it's probably not profitable for them to do so. They're not going to get many new users if they support Linux, so the net impact is that they'll have another platform for support requests and potential cheats.

    Apex is on Steam, so the barrier to play their game on Linux/Steam Deck is really low (just enable and potential users are now ~2% higher). So for them, turning on Linux support is probably profitable since they'll convert a lot more people on that platform.

    Please stop defending

    What am I defending? I'm explaining why it likely doesn't make business sense for Epic to support Linux. My point here isn't to claim that Epic is doing something good here, but to show it's probably not some weird hatred of Linux, but a business choice. Some of it is also probably a rivalry with Valve, but I don't think Sweeney would let that get in the way of profits if push came to shove. Sweeney's main goal AFAICT is to make money, not to stick it to some competitor.

    Yes, Epic could support Linux pretty quickly if they chose to. They're choosing not to, most likely because it won't make them as much money as other efforts would. It's really not complicated.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [+] 2 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 months ago) (1 child)
    [deleted]
  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
    •
  • [–] 1 point 2 years ago

    Yes, I have those installed as well, and it's not hard. But it's a barrier for mass adoption. I'm interested to know how many people who own a Steam Deck actually have Lutris or Heroic installed, and how many of those actually use it. I have both, but I've only used them a handful of times. My guess is less than half have either installed, and less than half of those use them.

    So we're looking at a fraction of an already small group of users, and the vast majority who would use it to play Fortnite already play on another supported platform. So why should Epic go out of their way to support it? The playerbase isn't there, so there's really not much economic incentive to do so.

    Rocket League

    That's a separate issue IMO. They wanted it exclusive on EGS (mostly for sweet sweet MTX profit), and EGS didn't (and still doesn't) support Linux. So their choice is one of the following:

    • keep the Steam version, but only for Linux users - that's really odd
    • port EGS to Linux - probably not worth it, since they'd also be expected to port a bunch of other stuff as well
    • kill Rocket League Linux port - loses some customers (like me), but ultimately is probably cheaper long term

    They knew they'd lose some users in the EGS switch, but the point with Rocket League wasn't to maximize players of RL, but to maximize users of EGS, which they hope would result in higher total sales on the platform. If you're already on EGS for RL, maybe you'll try Fortnite and get hooked. It's a harder sell if you can still use your platform of choice.

    Epic wants to sell EGS exclusives and make that MTX recurring revenue. That's why they bought RL, why they made it free, and why is exclusive to EGS. That's already why they buy these exclusivity agreements, and supporting Linux doesn't fit in that strategy.

    It kinda sucks, but at the end of the day, I have plenty of other options on Steam that I'm not going to bother much (I actually still play SP RL sometimes on Steam when I get a hankering, but I'm boycotting MP). I have never purchased anything from Epic, nor have I played any of their games outside of a quick test to mess with my Steam Deck. It's an unattractive platform because they don't support my platform. If they decided to support Linux, maybe I'd give them another shot.

    I don't hate Epic because of it, I totally understand why they're making the choices they are. I'm not going to go through hoops to play their games until they go through hoops to earn me as a customer. They don't seem to want that, so whatever. The same is true for Origin (or EA Play out whatever it's called now), Microsoft Gamepass, UPlay, etc no, and other game platforms, so I just don't buy from them. Every year Valve earns my business by making more and more games available (I've been Linux only since before Steam on Linux was a thing), so they get my money.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent