Hacker News new | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit login

UE4 itself can build to Linux, so this move just baffles me. If anything, I thought Epic was going to push harder on Linux.

Valve is pushing linux hard because they have to compete with microsoft, and although steam is much bigger than the windows store, windows store comes with the platform and linux has nothing comparable. Epic store does want to compete with steam, but they also care about the eastern market—hence the tencent investment—where internet cafes are much more popular than PCs; they can make deals with the internet cafe owners to make epic the installed store, and artificially capture market share that way.

I don't see the link between interest in the Eastern market and not supporting Linux.

Windows penetration on those regardless of official licenses installed on machine? A good few years ago, MSFT came out saying they didn't care if over 80% of the machine were running unlicensed version of Windows as long as the market share in East Asia for Windows OS was so dominant that no-one would be familiar with anything else.

Why would that matter, though? Even with better support, people gaming on Linux is still a tiny fraction worldwide, Asia is no different there.

I can only think of 2 possible reasons-- (1) the support costs are too high for the number of players (online competitive game, I'm sure there's quite a bit of dev time involved in securing the clients & preventing cheating that is Linux-specific) (2) Valve is supporting Linux, epic is busy feuding with valve, and this is similar to a petty toddler breaking their toy so they don't have to share.

Could be either, but I don't see how market penetration of windows in Asia could explain it

1% of desktop market is counting pennies for AAA studios.

Not like this was ever any different. And yet, they used to support it then. They have just turned a corner as a company. With all the exclusivity deals, anti-competitive tactics, anti-consumer sentiment and nonsense that the Sweeney clown spews, they are really competing with EA for worst gaming-related company. (Their tech is still good, but so is EA’s; that’s not the problem.)

Exclusive deals are part of the industry since the early 80's.

Other than Unreal (the game), there was hardly any big effort to support GNU/Linux from Epic side.

Unreal Tournaments were supported, including the last one that got cancelled.

Exclusivity has no place on a decentralized market. When Sony and Microsoft do it, it’s still reprehensible, but understandable. This is inexcusable. People defending such deals (including Sony’s or Microsoft’s or Atari’s) are idiots.

Call naming just proves that it isn't worthwhile dealing with such community.

Leaving money on the table is always a sound business decision.

Well when its pennies compared to what you have to invest you are not really leaving anything. Which is bigger, the OS X market or the Linux market. When we say Linux, certain ones or all of them?

I understand where these companies are coming from. I would too love to have more games available to me on OS X but the simple fact is there are not enough customers to spend money to develop directly for it or even contract out to a software house to write a wrapper. Let alone how many complain how much the games or DLC cost are worse on some platforms compared to others.

Now it is more profitable to get cross platform with PC and game consoles.

My comment was aimed at artificially fragmenting the PC community with exclusives, not Linux in particular.

A couple of pennies from a name calling community isn't money on the table.

I am not talking about the Linux community. I don’t belong to that community. Leaving your game out of Steam is not a sound business decision, as publishers are now finding out. Once Epic stops throwing money (not a scalable practice), they will be back on Steam in no time, with tarnished reputation.

Before 2007 mobile gaming might have been pennies for AAA studios. A wise business move isn't about closing doors but peeking through them, the next stage might very well be gaming on the cloud and cloud rarely runs on windows.

This is just my few pennies about that train of thought.

Imo no one will game on the cloud. The latencies involved are too great for fluid gameplay.

Remember Loki Games?

More than 1% if the market will react with hostility due to this. Gamers are a hornet's nest when it comes to anti-consumer practices.

Gamers are quite used to game consoles exclusives.

Epic store is not a console app.

> UE4 itself can build to Linux, so this move just baffles me.

That could be to support Android or game consoles like the Switch.

I doubt it, unreal tournament 99 had a Linux build. Assuming their engine has been iteratively developed, there has likely always been the ability to build for Linux, even before Android existed.

Unreal Engine 4 is a fresh codebase I believe; not a descendant of UE3.

Guidelines | FAQ | Support | API | Security | Lists | Bookmarklet | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact