Also, if you look in their shareholders report, they mention there TW2 for Linux as a success example. So again, this disproves the insufficient market size argument.
Gilrond-i-Virdan;n7037860 said:
Ahahaahahahh! Of all the things you've said, this is the most deteminedly optimistic. "Proper design". Come on. IF we're very very lucky, we'll get modding tools that some people can use. IF we're even luckier, this will be a release not packed with lots of bugs.
Full credit to CDPR coders, they do great work. But these things are crazy complex. There are so many variables and only so much time. There are bugs in the engine of Witcher 3 that are still being fixed. Hell, I had a smooth release, then hitching for six months, then smooth again. Boggle.
Also, you've -decided- the issue was a technical one, whereas at 1% of the installed user base off Steam, I'm still betting it's the user base for Linux that is the primary issue. Witcher 2 was the aberration that didn't work out fiscally, so they didn't repeat it. Minimal assumptions.
The weak argument that "They said Witcher 3 was coming to Linux before changing their minds" isn't a convincing one that it was technical at all. The fact that they released Linux for Witcher 2, overcoming technical issues, but not for Witcher 3 with a much larger budget, says that it was a market-based decision to me.
TW2 for Linux worked out OK, they officially reported it to shareholders, I already said above. They are obligated to report successes and failures. So unless you claim they lied in the official documents, let's stick to what info we have.
Regarding proper design I meant taking care of making the engine cross platform from the start. Initial effort to do it is lower than effort later to retrofit needed changes for Linux release. So again, if they are interested in the Linux release they'll do it. If they are not - they won't. I'll wait for the outcome, but as I said, I'll be done with CDPR if your assumption is right, and they decided to ignore Linux users. There are enough companies which pay attention and care to release games for Linux.
Regarding proper design I meant taking care of making the engine cross platform from the start. Initial effort to do it is lower than effort later to retrofit needed changes for Linux release. So again, if they are interested in the Linux release they'll do it. If they are not - they won't. I'll wait for the outcome, but as I said, I'll be done with CDPR if your assumption is right, and they decided to ignore Linux users. There are enough companies which pay attention and care to release games for Linux.
Last edited:
Gilrond-i-Virdan;n7038080 said:
Actually, it really depends on how the corporation is set up. What they are obligated to report to their shareholders in their Annual Report would depend on a variety of factors, not least the local law. CDPR is publically traded, so they are, over here, obliged to attempt full disclosure. But saying "We made a Linux port" doesn't mean it went well - could mean quite the opposite.
I found this: "4. On 22 May 2014 the Studio released The Witcher 2: Assassins of Kings for the Linux platform. " Later, in more detail they say this: "On 22 May 2014 CD PROJEKT RED responded to the increased popularity of the Linux platform by releasing its flagship game - The Witcher 2: Assassins of Kings - for Linux and SteamOS. Like all other releases, the Linux version of The Witcher 2 will be actively supported to ensure customer satisfaction and long-term playability. "
All that means is, "We released Witcher 2 on Linux because it's more popular than in 2011. We think." That's it. They didn't talk sales numbers or successes at ALL. And it's not referred to again. They also talk mobile games and the Witcher Adventure Game - more than they talk about Linux. Where are those games now? Yeah.
Furthermore, and this is significant, a corporation will act to minimize it's bad decision to shareholders in both presentation and execution. For obvious reasons. Here's one way to tell:
"We made a Linux port. Sales were on par with the market as presented" = not good news. CDPR didn't even -talk- sales, so really not good news.
"We made a Linux port. Sales were great! Up 20% over expected revenues!" = good news. This is how CDPR talks about Witcher 2 and 3, by the way.
For example, from the same 2014 Report: "In May 2014 the Company held the second edition of its “Insomnia” sale, with a set of limited-time discounts on selected games. The event generated excellent sales and produced a notable uptick in user activity (120% increase in the average duration of visits to GOG.com). " See? They liked that!
Witcher 2 for Linux didn't work out okay. I can tell because the 2015 Annual Report didn't include, "Our Linux port for Witcher 3..." anything. Again. If something works out well, you repeat it.
I did notice from Page 21 of the 2015 Management Board Report that they consider "PC" to be, well, Windows. Witcher 2: 2011 release to PC. Yep.
Gilrond-i-Virdan;n7038080 said:
I did not know that.That's a big claim, too - are you a software developer?
Also, Witcher 3's RedEngine 3 is already developed - they are upgrading it for Cyberpunk 2077, according to Jose Texeira for CDPR.
There are a lot of developers making games for Linux - but those games aren't, generally, nearly as good as CDPR ones. Are you really going to miss out on some quality gaming because you won't unbend on the Linux thing? Seems kind of unlikely to change their mind, frankly. Fanatical behaviour doesn't get a lot of respect, you must have noticed.
I.e. they in their own words admit the growth of the Linux market. What else do you need them to say to confirm that they see it as worthy enough of attention? Again, the whole year of "working on it" and then abrupt stopping, shows they had a technical issue, not market size one (since market of Linux gaming is gradually growing since then).
Sardukhar;n7038850 said:
Yes I am, but that point isn't just obvious to me. It was explained multiple times by those who help others learn Linux games development. I can find you a few lectures on this subject if you want to hear it from them.
Sardukhar;n7038850 said:
Not from what I've seen from CDPR developers. They pointed out that they heavily invested in new APIs (i.e. DX12 and I hope Vulkan). Using them means rewriting the whole engine from scratch if they want to have a quality result. Here is a good overview if you want to dig into what it can involve:
http://www.gdcvault.com/play/1022999...Vulkan-Lessons
TL;DR - updating the old engine won't cut it. You might reuse some parts of course, but a huge chunk of core architecture design needs to be remade from scratch.
Sardukhar;n7038850 said:
Good is a subjective / disputable term here, and simply irrelevant if the game isn't playable for me.
Sardukhar;n7038850 said:
Well, in such case, I'll just unlikely to pay any attention to them then until they'll reconsider. They'll be in the same category as EA and Co. As I said, there are enough developers to support with my money who care about Linux users. Time will tell.
Last edited:
Suhiira: Yes indeed, but good developers should learn from past mistakes. So they can learn from the problems they hit with TW3 Linux release.
It's not that there is a conspiracy against Linux but... If you're looking to play video games on PC, just switch to windows (or find a way to get it...), it's not because you want to that it will happens.
Source
They won't waste money on a support that would be a loss of money just to please you, they didn't released The Witcher 3 for linux, so.... You can be sure there won't be any Cyberpunk 2077 for Linux like.... Never, ever.
Either find windows, or get a console, or just deal with it.
You can argue as much as you want, that won't change the finality of it : no love for linux, it's just a very small portion of the market, so just like Mac, most publisher don't want to waste time developping games for those supports, it's economically not interesting, only a few people use linux.
Just like they don't release anything on audio-tape now.
Sure, there's still a purist market, but honnestly, if I'd had to release an album, I wouldn't want to bother me with that format, lot of works for not-so-much rewards.
Source
They won't waste money on a support that would be a loss of money just to please you, they didn't released The Witcher 3 for linux, so.... You can be sure there won't be any Cyberpunk 2077 for Linux like.... Never, ever.
Either find windows, or get a console, or just deal with it.
You can argue as much as you want, that won't change the finality of it : no love for linux, it's just a very small portion of the market, so just like Mac, most publisher don't want to waste time developping games for those supports, it's economically not interesting, only a few people use linux.
Just like they don't release anything on audio-tape now.
Sure, there's still a purist market, but honnestly, if I'd had to release an album, I wouldn't want to bother me with that format, lot of works for not-so-much rewards.
Last edited:
Maelcom404;n7042700 said:
No, that's not the way to do it. Linux users should demonstrate demand and not buy games that aren't released for Linux (unless it's some old game that no one works on anymore, then Wine would be an OK solution). If Linux users would do what you suggested, there will be an excuse for those who don't release games for Linux to say "why should we, go install Windows". Oh, oh, no way.
Maelcom404;n7042700 said:
GOG later said that it was a mistake made by that GOG rep, and apologized for the misinformation.
Source
Maelcom404;n7042700 said:
I already explained above why you can't extrapolate anything from TW3. You can read it. But again, if there won't be ever CP2077 for Linux, there won't be any interest in CDPR for me. As simple as that. Show me their statement that they don't want to release it, and I'll change my view on them already today.
If you use DRM yourself, I see no reason why you should tell other users not to show their demand for DRM-free games on DRM-free OS.Maelcom404;n7042700 said:
Maelcom404;n7042700 said:
Does that suppose to mean that you think Linux is technologically behind? Wake up call. Incumbent consoles like PS and Xbox are like audio tapes, because they are always behind the current technology. Linux is ahead, not behind.
Last edited:
They also said they were going to release mod tools. They released them for W2. They didn't for W3. Know why? Because not enough people used the mod tools to make it worthwhile. They promised a Linux port for W3. They didn't release it. See where I'm going with this? If there actually was a vast userbase for Linux they would've made time. They took the time to port to PS4 when they had never made a PS game before.Gilrond-i-Virdan;n7043220 said:GOG later said that it was a mistake made by that GOG rep, and apologized for the misinformation.
Source
I already explained above why you can't extrapolate anything from TW3. You can read it. But again, if there won't be ever CP2077 for Linux, there won't be any interest in CDPR for me. As simple as that. Show me their statement that they don't want to release it, and I'll change my view on them already today.
If you use DRM yourself, I see no reason why you should tell other users not to show their demand for DRM-free games on DRM-free OS.
Does that suppose to mean that you think Linux is technologically behind? Wake up call. Incumbent consoles like PS and Xbox are like audio tapes, because they are always behind the current technology. Linux is ahead, not behind.
But it's obvious you simply won't believe that CDPR has abandoned Linux like they did modding until Cyberpunk 2077 comes out and skips Linux. I don't know why you torture yourself like this but it's your life mate.
Last edited by a moderator:
Yeah, -everything- I've read says Cyberpunk is being made on REDengine 3. Dunno where you heard differently.
You do realize that a growing market could ( and probably does) mean 0.5% market share to 0.8% market share right? If Witcher 2 Linux sales had supported it, you'd see Witcher 3 on Linux. It's really simple from a non-prejudiced standpoint. No release means not enough sales. That they tried it for WItcher 2 and didn't repeat only confirms that. The only reason you think they were working on it is a couple ads and a few words from non-coders. The proof they didn't think it was worth anything is simple - they didn't release it.
Hey, I'd love to see all games on Linux. Why not? But I see nothing convincing to indicate a market share higher than 1%. I am,however, not prejudiced in my view, so I see clearly.
Really, Witcher 3 is playable for you - you just have to let go of your prejudices. It's not unplayable, you're refusing to play it. That's a huge difference. It's the "if you won't play the game my way, I'm going home" response from kids. Only, you actually like the game. Maybe if you play it, you'll be a more respected voice to the developers.
If you haven't even played Witcher 3, I'll flat guarantee they don't respect your opinion on it - and probably your thoughts on future platforms either. Is your goal to get more games on DRM free platforms or not? Because pestering them to put it on Linux while not playing a multi-years labour of love for these guys is only going to decrease the value of your opinion.
You can fight to win or fight to lose. Pick.
You do realize that a growing market could ( and probably does) mean 0.5% market share to 0.8% market share right? If Witcher 2 Linux sales had supported it, you'd see Witcher 3 on Linux. It's really simple from a non-prejudiced standpoint. No release means not enough sales. That they tried it for WItcher 2 and didn't repeat only confirms that. The only reason you think they were working on it is a couple ads and a few words from non-coders. The proof they didn't think it was worth anything is simple - they didn't release it.
Hey, I'd love to see all games on Linux. Why not? But I see nothing convincing to indicate a market share higher than 1%. I am,however, not prejudiced in my view, so I see clearly.
Really, Witcher 3 is playable for you - you just have to let go of your prejudices. It's not unplayable, you're refusing to play it. That's a huge difference. It's the "if you won't play the game my way, I'm going home" response from kids. Only, you actually like the game. Maybe if you play it, you'll be a more respected voice to the developers.
If you haven't even played Witcher 3, I'll flat guarantee they don't respect your opinion on it - and probably your thoughts on future platforms either. Is your goal to get more games on DRM free platforms or not? Because pestering them to put it on Linux while not playing a multi-years labour of love for these guys is only going to decrease the value of your opinion.
You can fight to win or fight to lose. Pick.
RepHope;n7044680 said:
CDPR never made it a secret. They explicitly said, that condition for releasing full modding tools is releasing REDengine for 3rd party developers. Since the later never happened, modding tools never happened too. Compare it to Unreal Engine and their editor. That's what CDPR had in mind from the start. Since TW3 engine is obsolete, there is no reason for them to invest in the editor now. With CP2077 situation can be different, so time will tell if editor will come out eventually.
Sardukhar;n7044890 said:
To be clear, I never saw any explicit information about CP2077 engine. CDPR are very secretive about it. But you can use deduction to figure out they are going to use new generation APIs. They said many times it will be way more demanding game than TW3. Older APIs won't cut it for that, and TW3 engine was on the brink of overengineering and they squeezed all they could from it. They even planned a GDC talk about the later, but canceled it eventually: https://web.archive.org/web/2016080...in-the-development-of-the-witcher-3-wild-hunt
I can't see this profile now, but one of the core CDPR developers explicitly lists new generation APIs as his focus expertise in CDPR: https://pl.linkedin.com/in/tomasz-jonarski-83667a11
Make your conclusions.
Sardukhar;n7044890 said:
You keep repeating that, and I'll keep repeating that it's only true when development design is done properly. They started doing it too late, and were bitten by difficulty of the task caused by poor planning. Not sure if you are yourself a programmer and understand what it means. Suhiira above seem to have understood what I mean by this. I.e. this has nothing to do with the market. It's about engineering. Bad engineering drives costs up to unacceptable levels, which ends up killing the effort no matter what the market is.
Sardukhar;n7044890 said:
I won't argue about numbers anymore (it's pointless, you don't have them and waving this infamous 1% won't change that). I see nothing convincing that the market isn't worth the effort, and increasing number of gaming studios agree - I buy their games. If CDPR isn't among them, so what. As I said, there are enough other developers to support.
Sardukhar;n7044890 said:
Not quite yet. May be it will become playable in Wine one day, or CDPR will at some point decide to honor their original plans, who knows. Not today however.
Sardukhar;n7044890 said:
Don't they? If they don't respect my opinion on platforms, why should I respect their opinions about them? I.e. the argument "go install Windows" isn't something I'll respect.
Sardukhar;n7044890 said:
They expressed interest in the Linux release multiple times. So, no point to present it as something they didn't initiate themselves.
Sardukhar;n7044890 said:
I picked. I support developers who care about Linux users. That's a mutual benefit. We (Linux gamers) get more Linux games, and they (developers) get support for making more of them. Win win for us.
Last edited:
Gilrond-i-Virdan;n7045160 said:
Sure, but aren't you here to convince CDPR Linux is a viable platform for their work? How are you going to convince devs to develop for Linux if you only buy their games -after- they've made the product on Linux?
Sure, that's supporting them fiscally, but it's only after they've taken the risk.
In not playing Witcher 3 at all, you don't really convince them of anything other than your own stubbornness, it seems to me. Not really the way to sell something.
Fixed the broken link above to Wayback Machine: https://web.archive.org/web/2016080...in-the-development-of-the-witcher-3-wild-hunt
Sardukhar;n7045280 said:
I'm not sure we can convince them of anything here. I doubt they even read these forums much these days. At least if they do, they don't communicate with us here in any way. This thread is more for users and discussion of this subject amongst us. I.e. I personally didn't yet give up on them, and unlike others here don't yet assume they gave up on Linux users too. So, this subject is relevant in my view, same as various other subjects here which are discussed despite basically zero info coming from CDPR. But if in the end it will become clear that CDPR aren't interested in Linux release, I'll agree with you that this topic will lose purpose, and will be first to propose to close it.
Sardukhar;n7045280 said:
As I said, support is a mutual thing. I bought their previous games, and played them on Linux, thus supporting them with my money. I especially appreciated TW2 Linux release. If they want support in advance, there needs to be a level of trust. I.e. why should I pay for TW3 now, if behind the scenes CDPR could decide not to release anything for Linux in the future? There are two ways to build such trust. Either prove it with action (release something for Linux, which people can buy), or use crowdfunding, which puts trust as a core ingredient of the relation with backers. I.e. people back some project only if they put enough trust in those who run it. And if those developers pledge to release something for Linux, people trust they'll keep their word to the best of their ability, and won't betray them along the way.
But without crowdfunding or any other such trust building relation, I'm not going to extend it that far, as to readily buy unplayable TW3, without any indication whether the money will be used for further Linux gaming efforts in CDPR. That's just unreasonable. May be later, when it will become playable in Wine I could buy it on some major sale, since there won't be any point in showing further demand for TW3 itself. But it won't be because I'd expect anything at that point.
Last edited:
Gilrond-i-Virdan;n7046430 said:
To your first part, you're probably right. It's not a small decision and the forums don't seem to be a major interface. To your second sentence, they do read the forums, they being an assortment of REDs. They don't say much here for multiple reasons, mostly because communication has to be official nowadays. Anything a RED says gets jumped on and seen as Corporate Policy. Safest plan in that environment is say as little as possible.
Gilrond-i-Virdan;n7046430 said:
I see where you're coming from with this and although I wish I didn't have to, I disagree. It's not mutual, especially when you are in a minority position like convincing them of Linux support - or the validity of modding. They don't need the revenue or trouble and so you have to go to extra effort to convince them it's worth it. Because they are doing fine - better than fine - doing neither.
But insisting, again and again, that it's fiscally or technically viable without acknowledging the difficulty and cost of a Linux port? Without buying their flagship game and saying,"This was a lot of funa nd I'd love to recommend it for my Linux fans, but sadly, I cannot! Which is too bad, since I think Linux users would really enjoy meeting Roche again and chasing drowners through the misty countryside of Vellen!"
That doesn't convince me and I'm at least mildly pro-Linux port. Chances of it convincing the REDs who do read these forums or might answer/respond to a tweet? Minimal to none.
Sardukhar;n7050020 said:
One could convince them if they'd be willing to communicate which means dialog. But they aren't communicating, so how would you know if any arguments are even heard? CDPR never participated in any open discussions about Linux gaming, never attended Linux gaming conferences or were part of major Linux gaming related collaborations like the Vulkan working group (unlike a number of other major gaming studios like Epic and Oxide). So it's hard to evaluate where they stand and what kind of convincing they still lack. And talking to a wall starts looking rather pointless pretty quickly.
But going back to mutuality, for me support is clearly mutual with studios which openly declare their intentions, such as in crowdfunding campaigns. They say - back us, and we are going to work on game X, which we'll release on Linux as well, and DRM-free. I can support such project, even if crowdfunding bears some inherent risk of failure. Like any investment, it can work out for the mutual benefit, or it can fail, but at least if the project owners are honest, they'll try to succeed. I.e. it's a open two way relation. Backers support the project, and developers pledge to fulfill certain list of goals. Fair and square. CDPR aren't conductive for building such forward looking trust, because of the way they operate, so relation with them is your regular buyer / seller relation. I.e. if they release something for Linux - I'll buy it. Not more than that, and definitely no pre-orders or anything the like. As you yourself highlighted, this relation isn't mutual enough. That's exactly my point, so we aren't arguing on the essence of what's going on. I just don't understand why you'd assume in such relation, extending trust to them is reasonable.
Sardukhar;n7050020 said:
I think I clearly said multiple times, that technical difficulties they encountered are probably the reason TW3 Linux release didn't come out in the end. More difficulties always means added cost. However it doesn't make such efforts non feasible in general. As I already said several times, their troubles were self inflicted. That's bread and butter of software development. Poor planning can backfire for project as monolithic and huge as TW3. You can't fix it without spending a lot of time, if you woke up too late to do it. So, proper planning and design is their friend.
Last edited:
Gilrond-i-Virdan;n7050280 said:
Yeah, it's an uphill battle, no argument. But they still took a shot at Linux for W2 and also do Linux stuff on GoG, as well as making GoG DRM-free, so there is interest in that shared agenda.
Gilrond-i-Virdan;n7050280 said:
See, sure you've said multiple times there were technical difficulties, but you also point out communication is lacking. So you don't know that the technical difficulties were the issue, or even an issue. You really don't. You can suppose it or infer it from fairly weak evidence, but you don't know it. And your solution seems kind of simplistic, too: start building in support at the beginning, like that's a magic bullet. If it was that easy, why wouldn't they do it and grab an extra 1%, ( yes, I'll use Steam until I see some more convincing numbers, preferably from a non-Linux site) in sales?
So we don't know how technically challenging it is or how much of a factor that was. Which, before you say it, I realise is because they haven't told us.
Here's what I think, in brief, and summarizes the obstacles to Linux Cyberpunk:
1. Witcher 2 on Linux didn't sell what they wanted it to, or did and they'd already decided it would be a one-off before it went on the market, for whatever reason. Penguin-phobia, feature creep, I dunno.
2. They didn't build in compatibility or a robust enough API platform to REDengine 3 and they are now overhauling RE3 for Cyberpunk and RPG X (whatever that is). As you say, trying to incorporate the new tech is going to be a pain, so they aren't going to spend resources on anything beyond Win/Console platforms.
3. It's not just about money - it's about enough good people. CDPR is pretty fussy in their hiring and staff and they are running pretty hard right now. So they simply don't have the staff and aren't interested in the effort to get more for that 1%.
4. They figure with GoG they have a fairly good chunk of the DRM-free people anyway, especially given GoG's crazy growth rate (400% I think I saw in the 2015 financials) and that Linux users who hate DRM will eventually run dual-boot.
You can't really "fix" 1 or 2 now. Boat has sailed.
3...see 3 is dependent on that 1%. If Linux users really want CP2077 to run on WINE, start a movement to make it happen. Get in early, "Fight The Future: Netrunners would use Linux!" kind of thing. They totally would, you know. Well, the pros would run multiple OS, because pros, but they'd all have run DRM-free at one point or another. Netrunner are hackers, hackers who fight Corps.
So make it a PR thing, not in a bad way. Ask what you can do to help, see if CDPR is interested in free promotion in the Linux world for Cyberpunk, that kind of thing.
4. Support GoG and Linux on GoG. Amass lists and petitions from GoG Linux users for Cpunk. Really try to develop a Linux GoG Cyberpunk community.
Still an uphill fight.
Be a pity if Cpunk wasn't available on Linux, from my perspective as an old 'Punk, though.