Hey there, I work in the Linux gaming space. Epic and Tim Sweeney are not hostile towards Linux. The worst you can say is they're indifferent (and can you blame them, given the size of that market?), but even that is not true. Epic's game engine supports Linux. Could they do more to support Linux gaming? Sure. But that's not the same as being "incredibly hostile."

Epic purchased Rocket League developer Psyonix and ended Linux support for the game shortly after:

https://www.rocketleague.com/news/ending-support-for-mac-and...

Also macOS[1]. It was part of their upgrade to use a newer DirectX version[2]. Rather than maintain two renderers, they chose to end support for OSes which don't have DirectX support. If it costs more to maintain support for a platform than that support brings in, why would they do it?

[1] https://support.rocketleague.com/hc/en-us/articles/360042201...

[2] https://support.rocketleague.com/hc/en-us/articles/360043307...

The main reason they should support it is because people paid money for a Linux version.

And they were refunded? ( Even after thousands hours of Game Play Entertainment Hours )

If that were the real reason, why is rocket league still available on both the ps4 and Nintendo switch?

presumably because those platforms have way more users than linux?

Yeah, not only that but Linux users are known to be hostile to commercial software companies.

Given that, the microscopic market, and the additional programming complexity I don't see a reason why any game company should go out of their way to support Linux ever.

(As a Linux desktop user, I'm thankful when they do though. I'm so glad that Beyond Compare from Scooter Software works on my main workstation, for instance. Also Zoom, Slack and VS Code among others... Looking forward to trying MS Edge some day soon.)

No Epic Store in Linux. Repeatedly stated they've no plans to.

Meanwhile, Steam is doubling down with Proton. Since Proton, I don't have a Windows partition around anymore, it just works for an enormous number of titles.

Ignoring Linux != Hostile to Linux

Just because they don't want to build for and support a relatively tiny platform does not mean that they're hostile toward that platform. They support it in other ways via their game engine. Steam, on the other hand, has a vested interest in supporting Linux due to SteamOS, which they hope to pursue again in the future.

Just because Valve has a lot of goodwill in supporting Linux, even though Proton hasn't really affected Linux's market share in gaming, does not mean everyone else is actively hostile toward it.

Choosing not to support a platform which may not be profitable is not "incredibly hostile."

Don't forget when calculating profitability that you also have to account for opportunity cost: the devs you hire to work on Linux could instead be working on improving your fledgling client for the much more profitable Windows platform. Valve is already over that hurdle with Steam, so their profitability calculations will be different. You can't draw a direct comparison.

Like I said, I work on Linux. Trust me when I say there's a lot of very good reasons not to support it that have nothing to do with one's personal opinions of the platform, or whatever it is the OP meant by "incredibly hostile."

That's not hostile; that's indifferent.

He is just trying to push Epic Store and getting part of the pie, everything else is mindless blah blah.

It's not mindless it's just he's lying about what he values

Yep, that is another way of putting it.

Exactly. He's just using keywords like monopoly and stuff to gather support.

And overall I don't understand why people take sides in corporate battles like any of those mega corporations stand for morals or the greater good or anything like that.

Because one side of this dispute benefits us as customers. It's that simple.

One side benefits some customers, the other benefits other customers.

If you don't like having choices and you think choices are bad for people then perhaps you'd prefer to live in a place like China.

This lawsuit is taking place in the USA where people overwhelmingly value freedom of choice.

Speaking of China - Apple gave the Chinese government their own app store. Perhaps Epic should point that out as well. It would make for a great headline: Apple gives China their own app store, but not US!

Mate, I think Epic are bad guys doing the good guys’ work. Apple needs to be taken down a peg in the interest of the whole market, and sadly the only ones volunteering for the job are scumbags themselves. In the end there will probably be victims on both sides no matter what, because it’s always about the dollar and never about the consumer, sadly.

For someone who preaches choice so much, you sure are against going with a different choice like, say, Android.

Not at all. I have and use both because half of my customers use one and the other half uses the other.

That’s the problem though. When half of the people in United States have no choice but to leave their digital home in order to get some rights to use their own equipment without begging Apple... that needs to change.

That other half has the option to replace their phones if they happen to be so pissed off with Apple.

No. If half the population would be forced to leave their digital home in order to make things right, the landlord is at fault.

Let's not extrapolate your personal feelings on an entire population. The vast, vast majority of Apple users are very satisfied with their experience as evidenced by consumer satisfaction ratings.

Competition benefits customers. There is no competition for pricing on the AppStore, ergo the pricing is more or less free (A monopoly).

The store itself is so big as to be it's own market, and as such Apple shouldn't be allowed to use monopolistic practices even though they created the market themselves.

I agree wholeheartedly, and I sincerely hope that this process will end with Apple opening up. I just don’t think either side is completely devoid of consumer support for their practices.

Which one and how? And how are you sure they're not just faking it?

Because some corporations actually do make efforts towards improving society: https://www.apple.com/supplier-responsibility/ https://www.apple.com/environment/

Some corporations are shamed into doing the right thing, typically after an extensive period of morality-free cash-hoarding. Apple was just fine with their supply chain until news emerged of conditions down there (and Cook being a logistic guy, he’s clearly always known), at which point they hd to save face. Similarly, they keep saying they are green but have no qualms pushing out billions of unrecycleable and un-serviceable electronics every year, without taking any real responsibility for disposing of them.

Corporate ethics are hypocrisy all the way down.

I'm an Apple fan but the AirPods are a pretty decent counterpoint to Apple being 'green'.

think about steam whatever you want, but they've done some real fantastic work there with their linux support. the other day i installed forged alliance -from 2007, only supports win natively- on my linux machine and it was easy as pie: after a few mins of downloading and installing, the game was up and running.

It seems silly to me. Commodification of the platform would be massively beneficial for Epic. At the very least I'd be neutral towards it and just allow Valve to do all the expensive heavy lifting, then work on my own Linux compatibility and support in the background.

If anyone thinks for one second that this guy actually cares about any of this (beyond the extra 30% he could pull) I have a bridge to sell you.

Well I guess this is my larger confusion/concern: only people in the gaming space seem to be seeing this for what it really is. Media outlets so far seem to be running with the 'Epic is taking on the establishment' narrative.

Hate against linux for a gamedev is understable.

I understand not actively supporting it, but why hate or actively try to work against it?

Personally, I tolerate/support linux only because it's the only OSS alternative to windows (Yeah I know about OpenBSD).

I absolutely dislike some of linux philosophy like "everything is a file" which I find plain wrong.

But I agree that he go too far and hurt users only due to engineering taste.

Hmmm, I remember Epic spending quite a bit of effort to get the Unreal Engine running on Linux back in Unreal Tournament 99 times, even hiring Daniel Vogel full-time to work on it.

I'm not the biggest fan of Epic Games or Tim Sweeney and it's probably a drop in the ocean, but Epic did donate $25k to Lutris.

Why do this if Tim is "incredibly hostile towards Linux"?

Seems more like indifference to me.