|
|
Subscribe / Log in / New account

McGovern: Valve games for Debian Developers

[Posted January 23, 2014 by jake]

From:  Neil McGovern <neilm-AT-debian.org>
To:  debian-devel-announce-AT-lists.debian.org
Subject:  Valve games for Debian Developers
Date:  Wed, 22 Jan 2014 18:27:21 +0000
Message-ID:  <20140122182721.GF8779@halon.org.uk>


Hi all,

At $dayjob for Collabora, we've been working with Valve on SteamOS,
which is based on Debian. Valve are keen to contribute back to the
community, and I'm discussing a couple of ways that they may be able to
do that [0].

Immediately though, they've offered a free subscription to any Debian
Developer which provides access to all past and future Valve produced
games [1]!

If you're interested, and a DD, simply mail jo.shields@collabora.co.uk
with a mail signed by a key in the Debian keyring, and he'll send you
back a redemption code to add in Steam. If you haven't heared from him
in a couple of days, you can also prod me at neil.mcgovern@collabora.com
as he may happen to be on holiday that week.

Happy gaming,
Neil

[0] If anyone has any specific ideas, drop me a mail :)
[1] List at http://deb.li/91yz, but excluding Steam Greenlight.

to post comments

McGovern: Valve games for Debian Developers

Posted Jan 23, 2014 17:32 UTC (Thu) by zlynx (guest, #2285) [Link] (2 responses)

This is very sneaky and smart of Valve. If they get Debian developers hooked on their games, they can be assured of getting free work to keep Debian compatible with Steam.

I approve. :-)

McGovern: Valve games for Debian Developers

Posted Jan 23, 2014 17:59 UTC (Thu) by Tara_Li (guest, #26706) [Link]

I was thinking the exact same thing! Make Steam *THEIR* itch, and just watch them scratch!

McGovern: Valve games for Debian Developers

Posted Jan 23, 2014 18:54 UTC (Thu) by reedstrm (guest, #8467) [Link]

My first thought was "there goes the productivity of Debian Developers"

McGovern: Valve games for Debian Developers

Posted Jan 23, 2014 18:28 UTC (Thu) by Cyberax (✭ supporter ✭, #52523) [Link] (2 responses)

Weeelll, that's a nice idea to increase the number of Debian developers. Far better than Dunc Tank, anyway.

McGovern: Valve games for Debian Developers

Posted Jan 23, 2014 18:55 UTC (Thu) by dashesy (guest, #74652) [Link] (1 responses)

Seems interesting, but does this offer include any past/future developers as well?

McGovern: Valve games for Debian Developers

Posted Jan 30, 2014 12:11 UTC (Thu) by neilm (guest, #28422) [Link]

It includes anyone who has a key in the Debian keyring who requests it.

McGovern: Valve games for Debian Developers

Posted Jan 23, 2014 19:27 UTC (Thu) by ssmith32 (subscriber, #72404) [Link] (1 responses)

Looks like I'm not the only one whose mind jumped instantly to somehow connect this to solving the init system issue:

http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.linux.debian.devel.announce...

:)

McGovern: Valve games for Debian Developers

Posted Jan 24, 2014 4:27 UTC (Fri) by Max.Hyre (subscriber, #1054) [Link]

The link for the precise post (or at least the one I found) is http://article.gmane.org/gmane.linux.debian.devel.general/189671

You're welcome. :-)

Thank you, Valve! But...

Posted Jan 23, 2014 23:10 UTC (Thu) by debacle (subscriber, #7114) [Link] (24 responses)

I like to thank Valve for their offer, which is very kind! It shows, that they not only take, but also like to give. Thank you, Valve!

This offer, however, is not appealing to me. I like to use, promote, and develop free software, whenever possible. As far as I know, Valve games are not free software.

Maybe it would be more helpful, if Valve shows their gratitude to Debian and other free software projects by other means. E.g. they might sponsor meetings of free games or multimedia developers or support the development of free video card drivers.

Anyway, this is not meant as neither a critique of Valve nor the fellow developers enjoying Valve games. Have fun!

Thank you, Valve! But...

Posted Jan 24, 2014 1:37 UTC (Fri) by Tara_Li (guest, #26706) [Link] (13 responses)

Steam is pretty much strictly a distribution network, much like BitTorrent. So, unless there's a continuing listing fee for putting something up on Steam, I would expect there would be at least some free (beer) software available, if not free (libre).

Thank you, Valve! But...

Posted Jan 24, 2014 2:45 UTC (Fri) by deepfire (guest, #26138) [Link] (12 responses)

Some open-source stuff on Steam:

Aquaria: http://store.steampowered.com/app/24420/?snr=1_7_7_151_150_1
Gish: http://store.steampowered.com/app/9500/?snr=1_7_7_151_150_1

Thank you, Valve! But...

Posted Jan 24, 2014 16:55 UTC (Fri) by rahulsundaram (subscriber, #21946) [Link] (11 responses)

Afaik, both games aren't open source. Only their game engines are.

Thank you, Valve! But...

Posted Jan 25, 2014 1:21 UTC (Sat) by rahvin (guest, #16953) [Link] (10 responses)

AFAIK Valve does not require remuneration for anything posted to Steam, for example the free to play (pay to win) games that are in numerous abundance. They also do not charge for access to, or use of the steam tools for use in distributing software via Steam and only collect a margin on sales.

Though I know of no examples of free (libre) software on Steam I highly doubt Valve would care if such software was offered through Steam. In fact the distribution and automatic updates could make it quite convenient. It's more likely that developers don't see the value if offering free software through Steam because it's just as easy to stick a download up on the internet.

Thank you, Valve! But...

Posted Jan 25, 2014 1:27 UTC (Sat) by khim (subscriber, #9252) [Link] (9 responses)

It's more likely that developers don't see the value if offering free software through Steam because it's just as easy to stick a download up on the internet.

It's much harder for the developer and much simpler for user because Valve will not distribute just any program, they need to review it first. There are process for large publishers and there are greenlight for indies, but I'm not sure if FOSS games ever tried to pass it.

Thank you, Valve! But...

Posted Jan 25, 2014 3:39 UTC (Sat) by mathstuf (subscriber, #69389) [Link]

FOSS from the start? I don't think so. I have the source for Penumbra on my machine as well as source releases for Aquaria, Luguru and a few other games which have been part of the Humble Bundle. All of these are on Steam. Valve certainly hasn't rescinded their Steam distribution rights because of it.

Thank you, Valve! But...

Posted Jan 25, 2014 4:21 UTC (Sat) by raven667 (subscriber, #5198) [Link]

If FOSS game developers think their stuff is any good they should try to distribute their work where more of the public can see it, on Steam. It'd be cool to see tux racer or wesnoth up ther next to everything else and if they do charge money for the binaries it could be a small revenue stream to cover the costs of making the games.

Thank you, Valve! But...

Posted Jan 25, 2014 11:29 UTC (Sat) by kleptog (subscriber, #1183) [Link] (6 responses)

> It's much harder for the developer and much simpler for user because Valve will not distribute just any program, they need to review it first.

Wait now, is this a counterpoint to the recurring argument "distributions are unnecessary, every developer should be distributing directly to users"?

Looked at this way, Valve is doing for games what Debian does for FOSS: providing a stable platform for developers to work on.

Thank you, Valve! But...

Posted Jan 25, 2014 14:50 UTC (Sat) by khim (subscriber, #9252) [Link] (5 responses)

Wait now, is this a counterpoint to the recurring argument "distributions are unnecessary, every developer should be distributing directly to users"?

Please stop inventing strawmans. Whenever problems with distributions are discussed the opposite model is not “direct distribution to users” but rather “appstore model”: developer is given API and it creates package then “appstore” does the rest. It can be coupled with “direct distribution to users” (as in Android) or not (as in iOS), but the important thing is that there are stable API, there are SDK and developer just need to built it's package once and developer determines how it should look and work. Distribution channel may reject something if it does not think it's adhering to the guidelines but under no circumstances can it change package without developer's knowleadge. Compare with distributions where mere mention of the want to control the package leads to temper tantrum.

Looked at this way, Valve is doing for games what Debian does for FOSS: providing a stable platform for developers to work on.

Not even close. Valve just provides platform for developers. Yes, with some rules, approvals and so on, but still in the end developers decide what is launched when and how. Debian developers take stuff from FOSS developers and try to create coherent whole from that. Developers themselves have no control over their creation: packagers determine when and what will be shipped and in which form. Big difference. Even Apple does not have hubris to demand that from developers—they have strictest rules out of all “appstores” (they can get away with that because they are sole gatekeepers to hundred of millions of paying users), but even Apple does not dare to demand so much from developers as Debian or Fedora demands.

Thank you, Valve! But...

Posted Jan 25, 2014 17:14 UTC (Sat) by vonbrand (subscriber, #4458) [Link]

What do Fedora, etc "demand"? Anybody can set up their own software repository (and many thrive).

Thank you, Valve! But...

Posted Jan 27, 2014 19:19 UTC (Mon) by anselm (subscriber, #2796) [Link] (3 responses)

Developers themselves have no control over their creation: packagers determine when and what will be shipped and in which form.

Nothing prevents developers from packaging their own software for Debian if they want to control how that is done. The only requirement is that the resulting package must comply with Debian policy.

The upstream developers don't even need to be accredited Debian developers/maintainers themselves if they can find somebody to sponsor uploads of their package into Debian.

Thank you, Valve! But...

Posted Jan 27, 2014 21:05 UTC (Mon) by mathstuf (subscriber, #69389) [Link] (2 responses)

You're missing the big picture. Here's what you need to say if you want to be accurate here:

> Nothing prevents developers from packaging their own software for {Debian,Fedora,Arch,OpenSUSE,Gentoo} if they want to control how that is done. The only requirement is that the resulting package must comply with {Debian,Fedora,Arch,OpenSUSE,Gentoo} policy.

That's quite a bit higher of a bar. Five *different* packages need to be created which have 5 different sets of rules which need to be applied. What khim is arguing is that upstream needs to be able to create *one* package for Linux users and that's *it*. It also should, ideally, not need redoing 3 years down the line when the project has zero money left.

Thank you, Valve! But...

Posted Jan 27, 2014 21:17 UTC (Mon) by anselm (subscriber, #2796) [Link] (1 responses)

You have to decide what you want. If you don't want to take the trouble to create a Debian package for your software, then chances are you will find some Debian developer who would be happy to do it for you. If you want to have complete control about how the packaging is done, you can do it yourself.

Khim can argue for a unified packaging method until he is blue in the face but that doesn't make it more likely to happen. For the time being, the distributions are what software producers need to work with, and claiming that getting a package into Debian means giving up control of how the packaging is done is simply not true – there are lots of options for achieving this, including ones that do not require giving up any control at all.

Thank you, Valve! But...

Posted Jan 27, 2014 22:11 UTC (Mon) by mathstuf (subscriber, #69389) [Link]

> Khim can argue for a unified packaging method until he is blue in the face but that doesn't make it more likely to happen.

I agree with the sentiment, but that doesn't make the problem go away either. The root issue is that the relationship with distros and upstream is backwards. Usually the distributor chases developers to use their mechanisms (we have umpteen thousand users!) whereas in a distro, the upstream has to chase the distro to ship their software "properly". The alternatives are to bundle libraries so that they can't be left stranded when everything moves from underneath them (the best solution today) or to keep chasing the distro when things upgrade (which requires money with near-zero ROI and therefore won't be done).

Personally, I prefer the .sh bundles that are available on Humble Bundle because I can put them on a separate partition (I run ~5–10GB for / which won't fit many game assets). They all get installed to $prefix/games/root/$game which also makes uninstall easy (rm -rf). I also don't have to worry about suid problems since root never touches the files.

Thank you, Valve! But...

Posted Jan 24, 2014 12:30 UTC (Fri) by njwhite (guest, #51848) [Link] (8 responses)

> Maybe it would be more helpful, if Valve shows their gratitude to Debian and other free software projects by other means. E.g. they might sponsor meetings of free games or multimedia developers or support the development of free video card drivers.

Well, from what I've read it sounds like they are doing a great deal to improve free video card drivers, so that should be applauded.

But yes, another nice contribution to the community would be to release the engines to some of their games as free software. It may impact their revenue, I'm not sure if they have licensing said engines as a business model at present.

On the same subject, actually, I don't see why the steam client couldn't be free software. Or does it have some sort of obscurity-requiring DRM built in?

Thank you, Valve! But...

Posted Jan 24, 2014 14:22 UTC (Fri) by mpr22 (subscriber, #60784) [Link] (1 responses)

It may impact their revenue, I'm not sure if they have licensing said engines as a business model at present.

They do. The Source engine (the basis, apparently in incrementally developed incarnations without useful version numbers, for all of their in-house games since Half-Life 2) is gratis for purely-gratis projects, while non-gratis projects require a commercial licensing agreement.

Thank you, Valve! But...

Posted Jan 24, 2014 16:43 UTC (Fri) by mathstuf (subscriber, #69389) [Link]

Sounds like a Qt-style GPL+exceptions with CLA could work for the Source engine (the exceptions would be for game assets and any scripts associated with them at least).

Thank you, Valve! But...

Posted Jan 24, 2014 14:54 UTC (Fri) by Cyberax (✭ supporter ✭, #52523) [Link] (4 responses)

Steam client simply doesn't need to be OpenSource. It's pretty clear that Valve would want to retain full control of its development anyway, so there are no advantages in opening its source.

Thank you, Valve! But...

Posted Jan 24, 2014 16:36 UTC (Fri) by deepfire (guest, #26138) [Link] (2 responses)

There are. People do not like running binary blobs on their computers.

Then, there's the white-box security model -- we trust Steam to handle our personal, even financial, information.

Thank you, Valve! But...

Posted Jan 24, 2014 16:42 UTC (Fri) by Cyberax (✭ supporter ✭, #52523) [Link] (1 responses)

I very much like running binary blobs on my computer, if they are classified as 'games'.

Steam is going to be used to run binary-only software, maybe with a light DRM. One more blob simply makes no difference.

As for credit card numbers, they are used by online merchants that are complete 'black boxes'. And I don't think that Steam client actually stores any financial information locally.

Thank you, Valve! But...

Posted Jan 24, 2014 16:57 UTC (Fri) by deepfire (guest, #26138) [Link]

Steam provides more than running blobs[1]:

1. Steam cloud
2. The community thing:
- IM/conferencing -- I'd use open-source Steam communication over Skype any day
- the rest (blogging, reviews)
3. Big Picture -- I can see it transformed into something more than a blob launcher

--
1. Some of the blobs could be trusted (signed) builds of open-source code, btw; I'd actually love to be able to find open-source games through a simple category search

Thank you, Valve! But...

Posted Jan 24, 2014 17:03 UTC (Fri) by deepfire (guest, #26138) [Link]

I thought a bit, and there's more to that story.

Some people find Steam UI glitchy, and/or clunky in places -- certainly, sometimes I feel the same way. I guess Valve would accept patches : -)

I'm not sure if there would be many instances of a situation where it's easier to patch the code to your heart's desire, than it would be to go through the write-bug-report-communicate-iterate low-pass filter -- and I'm sure the threshold is different for everybody. It's not something to dismiss, still.

Thank you, Valve! But...

Posted Jan 27, 2014 4:13 UTC (Mon) by imunsie (guest, #68550) [Link]

I have a vested interest in Steam (in that I have ~500 games in Steam, ~140 of which run on Linux), and would be quite interested in contributing from time to time if they did decide to open source the client - I've already written some third party tools to work with Steam games (in my junk code on github).

They do have DRM, but I don't see it as being a significant problem for open sourcing the client - it only affects Windows games (not Linux, I don't know about Mac) and works by the server wrapping the game's executable to tie it to the particular Steam installation the user is running on (the wrapped executable does not need to be online to verify the environment is what it expects). If their environment changes or they log in elsewhere the server simply generates a new executable for them to download - no install limits and no always online requirements. The point is, the client has very little to do with the DRM they employ.

Steam has always been designed with the philosophy that users should be able to play the games they own as easily as possible (as opposed to other DRM platforms who's philosophy seems to be that customers are nasty buggers and should be prevented at all costs from using the products they may or may not have paid for if there is even the slightest doubt they don't own them - a subtle but rather significant difference), so their DRM has been designed to keep out of the way as much as possible.

When it has bitten me, is when a publisher requires keys for their games and they underestimated how many copies they were going to sell in a weekend sale (they did resolve it early on the Monday when they could get more keys from the publisher, but there were a lot of people who couldn't play Burnout Paradise that weekend).

One thing I can see as being a concern for them if they did open source the client, is people creating fake/proxy steam libraries that lie about what licenses the user has - a lot of games ship DLC files with the main game (for multiplayer games it is often not a choice since they need the art assets to render DLC that other players are using), and Steam has an API that the game can query to find out which DLC the player actually owns. In an open source client it would be trivial to alter the library to tell the game that the user owns whatever DLC they want. Being closed source doesn't prevent this kind of thing from happening, but it does raise the bar quite a bit.

Thank you, Valve! But...

Posted Jan 24, 2014 21:04 UTC (Fri) by directhex (guest, #58519) [Link]

> This offer, however, is not appealing to me. I like to use, promote, and develop free software, whenever possible. As far as I know, Valve games are not free software.

You are correct. None of Valve's games are FOSS. I don't know whether it's even an option - some of their engine technology is licensed from third parties.

> Maybe it would be more helpful, if Valve shows their gratitude to Debian and other free software projects by other means. E.g. they might sponsor meetings of free games or multimedia developers or support the development of free video card drivers.

Discussions are ongoing about how Valve can best use their resources. As a random example, SDL2 largely happened thanks to Valve.

> Anyway, this is not meant as neither a critique of Valve nor the fellow developers enjoying Valve games. Have fun!

Thank you for your post. I absolutely understand the position some people take regarding software Freedom - it's nice when it doesn't turn into a hellish arguing match as might happen in other communities.

Busy Debian Developers

Posted Jan 25, 2014 12:57 UTC (Sat) by _xhr_ (guest, #92665) [Link]

Hehe ... that was a smart move. Now all the Debian developers are sitting in front of their computers playing games and forgetting to update their packages, apply security patches and so on ...

Just kidding :P

Looking forward to another gift from Valve in the near future

Posted Jan 26, 2014 1:05 UTC (Sun) by speedster1 (guest, #8143) [Link]

Those who are more interested in libre software than free games may be getting a fine gift from Valve soon, the VOGL debugger that advances the state of the art pf OpenGL debugging on desktop Linux (doesn't support the mobile/embedded variant, OpenGL-ES, at this time)

http://richg42.blogspot.de/2014/01/vogl-opengl-tracerdebu...


Copyright © 2014, Eklektix, Inc.
Comments and public postings are copyrighted by their creators.
Linux is a registered trademark of Linus Torvalds