I want to buy one just to raise the signal that Linux support is important.
When these machines were announced I switched to Fedora as a daily driver on my high end gaming rig.
It’s been awesome. I still have to go back to Windows for music production unfortunately. I may switch to Mac for that so I can completely abandon Windows.
I run an optical HDMI cable from my office to my TV and get to play games and use Linux in 77”.
Something feels awesome about that.
The Steam Machines raises the bar on PC Console gaming.
Because:
- GPUs don't support HDMI CEC by default, nor does the operating system offer it
- Suspend mode on motherboards often suck
- Many game controllers with 2.4Ghz don't properly import USB Wake events. Or the motherboard didn't implement it properly
I see the Steam Machine as an expensive open source concept car that moves the needle for us PC gamers.
Hasn't all this been mostly solved on the Nvidia Shield Pro for ~7 years now?
Sure, and this also solves those things while having better hardware. I have a shield pro, it hasn't seen a hardware update in a long time. I can game one it, but I need to use the steam link app, not run the games natively. These devices serve similar, but different markets.
Not really - it's not a PC.
I also work in music production (for video games) and fully switched to Linux + FOSS about a year ago.
I'd say it is a lot more doable if you make electronic styles of music. Harder if you make classical styles, as many of the big sample libraries don't support Linux yet.
Just in case you're interested, here's a list of everything I use: https://johnoestmannmusic.com/tooling/
You are lucky. A lot of the games I play with friends use kernel level anticheat crap that doesn't work on Linux
I work in AAA; more people using Linux means we'll actually get buy-in for working with Linux as a platform.
Right now Producers and HQ don't want to support it because "theres no money there" and they're bolstered by a crew of developers who have only ever touched Windows who will reinforce the notion that Windows is all you need (because they've sunk their entire career into the platform).
I remember bringing this topic up a decade ago and basically being laughed out of the room, slowly those laughs will become uncomfortable silences, then token support from the passionate, then proper initiatives.
It takes time, yeah, but we're so much further today already than we were 10+years ago.
Even if AAA supports Linux, it’s got to be without kernel anticheat. That’s a non starter for myself and many others
I don't think that will be the case sadly, just because the majority of gamers don't actually know or care about software having root or kernel level access. In a world where Linux becomes mainstream, AAA games will aim for those users, not hobbyists and enthusiasts like us.
What is the downside of this if I trust the software provider (eg Riot Games or presumably Valve if this ever comes to Linux)? I have recently come around in support of Riot's anticheat because multiplayer competitive games are so damaged without it, even though I use Linux 95% of the time.
It's hard to trust. I have a spare Windows PC where I install whatever on it, and the EA Javelin anticheat has screwed things up before. Wouldn't be doing that on a computer I care about.
Could the kernel have something built in to help with this? Like it can tell a program that nothing else is looking at its memory. And then secure boot attests that the kernel isn't tampered with.
> And then secure boot attests that the kernel isn't tampered with.
That's pretty much a dystopian scenario where you're unable to interact with any network services without using devices with software that's controlled and/or trusted by the service provider. Basically a grave threat to Free Software as a whole, the end of free reimplementations of things you rely on to connect with the society. We already have a glimpse of that on mobile phones controlled by Google and Apple, we don't need more.
There are kinds of games that actually rely on anticheats to be viable, but they're in the tiny minority and I don't think they're worth reorganizing the society over. Most just consider it a solution for problems caused by their incompetently designed netcode.
Linux and Windows both already support secure boot. Anyone is free to make a locked down version of Linux, and they have (game consoles, Android). Desktop Linux has way less market share than Windows. So what would you like SteamOS or the Linux kernel to do? I'm not fond of this stuff, but at least if people are using a partially locked down video game focused Linux, it's better than them going to Windows.
Attestation-gated anti-cheat is invasive, and the direction it points is grim.
But "covers for incompetently designed netcode" doesn't hold at all.
Netcode and cheat-resistance are mostly orthogonal. Netcode is latency-hiding — prediction, reconciliation, interpolation. Cheating is the client being an endpoint you don't control. You can have flawless netcode and still get wallhacked, because a wallhack touches the renderer, not the wire. You have to ship that data for the client to draw the level.
Server-side validation kills the cheats that surface as state: speedhacks, teleports, impossible positions; but it's blind to the ones that don't touch state at all. A wallhack reads memory the client holds. A vision aimbot runs on a second machine reading the screen- nothing crosses the network for the server to reject.[0]
That's why the kernel and attestation stuff exists. Not lazy devs papering over a bug: a class of cheat that server authority structurally can't reach, because the cheat never lies to the server.
I understand the dystopia argument, and it's a decent one. "Just write better netcode" isn't.
I'd humbly request that you spend time trying to actually grapple with the problem, there are some exceptionally well paid and talented programmers who are working on this non-stop in the large publishing houses (EA, Ubisoft, Tencent, Activision) who would do anything to avoid paying royalties to shitty software that breaks the performance and reliability of their games: yet for some reason year over year they can't seem to manage it.
Worth understanding why that is, instead of assuming incompetence or malice; perhaps its a harder problem than you think.
[0]: https://arxiv.org/pdf/2512.21377
I know about the cheating problem and would rather they just not solve it. There are more important things than video games.
Cool,
You're welcome to, but those games precipitously lose players, because it's frustrating.
https://www.reddit.com/r/GTA/comments/1af8t12/online_isnt_fu...
I know it's frustrating, I really don't care. They can play or do something else. GTA Online from those comments actually does look like a case of bad netcode btw, and it does have kernel anticheat already.
Kernel level anticheat doesn't make sense on Linux because the kernel is open. There's simply no incentive to do that
An open source kernel doesn't prevent attestation mechanisms. Anticheats on Windows increasingly require Secure Boot, and all others drivers to be signed/whitelisted; they could try to put similar restrictions on supported distros.
Yeah, I imagine Linux support would be more like a supported Linux distro rather than generic Linux support. Something like SteamOS but with kernel anti-cheat and secure boot from the start.
Big question is whether they can make craching the anti-cheat it hard/unpredictable enough that the publishers will trust it. If the publishers release such a platform and someone releases a live distro that can crack it with 3 mouse clicks, that's a lot of wasted effort.
I have no idea how effective the Windows anti-cheat is, but I imagine that Linux tooling in general is going to make it harder to lock a user out of controlling their own machine.
In fact Android has secure boot plus its own stricter thing. Probably the most commonly running software based on the Linux kernel.
Yeah, the nightmare scenario. I'm actually a little bit worried that we will look back on the last few years as the Golden Years of Gaming on Linux
it's a non starter to even have kernel level anticheat, it's the worst idea pushed on the consumers since browser level drms.
I strongly disagree. There have only ever been a handful of data exploits attributable to kernel-level anti-cheats. On the other hand, developers report that they significantly reduce cheating. As someone who plays online games, this is a tradeoff I gladly make.
I often feel these comments are made by people whose preferred games are not ruined by cheaters. This is happening right now in Arc Raiders, and it's really sad to watch. The developer, Embark, is now investigating using KLAC to reduce the number of cheaters.
As someone who doesn't play online games this is not a trade off I gladly make. Fortunately, however, KLAC will never become part of the Linux kernel, because adding it to an open-source system simply doesn't make sense.
Sure, but maybe this is a different battle? First party Linux support is orthogonal to games not using kernel level anti-cheat solutions.
Tangentially, I wouldn't use kernel level anti-cheats, but if Valve's solution is indicative of the SotA in userspace anti-cheat solutions, there's a lot of room for improvement.
Thankfully that has been improving [1] and non-kernel is 100% possible today [2] with valve has so much on documentation and support for game and anti cheat developers to accomplish this.
[1]: https://www.gamingonlinux.com/anticheat/ [2]: https://partner.steamgames.com/doc/steamdeck/proton
Unfortunately many of these developers believe that kernel-level is mandatory (by virtue of believing that it actually works to prevent _all_ cheating, which we know it doesn't).
Exactly, no game is worth installing a rootkit for
How much do you rely on Steam hardware survey? I am doing my part reporting my Linux usage.
I'm somewhat lucky in that I didn't have to be the one to force that issue, another friend in my gaming group already made the decision that he would switch to Linux and no longer play any games that did not work on Linux/Proton. So it was pretty easy for me to just switch last year.
My thinking was that I’ll use the Steam Machine for whatever I can. If there’s some title that friends really want to play and that requires kernel anticheat, and it exists in geforce now, I’ll do that from the steam machine.
If it’s something even less doable than that… well I’ll do without.
But you're playing with friends, right? So you don't actually need anticheat at all. Or are you playing with friends and random assholes from the internet?
I'm curious because if a game requires anticheat that means there's an intention that I'd be playing with people who would cheat if they could. And I don't want to have anything to do with people like that. I don't really understand why anyone wants to spend their time playing games with assholes from the internet.
> But you're playing with friends, right? So you don't actually need anticheat at all.
There are a lot of games out there where a group of friends parties up and then goes against other parties of friends out there. Sometimes I want to play with my friends against others instead of only against my friends. Its been a pretty common kind of game style for decades.
> I don't really understand why anyone wants to spend their time playing games with assholes from the internet.
Yeah, it'd be nice to somehow exclude those assholes who would cheat. Maybe if there was some kind of technology which could limit the ability for people to use cheats, some kind of "anti-cheat". It would probably have to be pretty low level in the system to properly enforce this "anti-cheating" integrity, maybe in the kernel and hardware level?
> And I don't want to have anything to do with people like that.
And nobody is forcing you too.
> I don't really understand why anyone wants to spend their time playing games with assholes from the internet.
Maybe your experience and preference is not shared equally by all? HN users in particular to seem to struggle with this concept for some reason.
I've only ever played a couple of games with kernel-level anticheat. The rest have some other reason they don't work in Linux.
I'm curious which ones you had trouble with? I switched last week, and have been testing all the games in my library. I'm quite impressed with how all of them just work with zero or little tinkering. The only games I haven't been able to play are the ones with anti cheat that explicitly deny Linux.
In Proton: Age of Empires 2 DE multiplayer went out of sync which ends the game. BeamNG Drive (now Linux native but wasn't a year ago) took 20min to preprocess shaders, then was laggy compared to Windows on the same machine, then reproducibly crashed from a memleak. Both were known issues on ProtonDB, but the rating still said "gold," so I stopped trusting the ratings.
Dolphin is Linux native. Works fine except for the huge input lag using GameCube controllers (via wii u adapter which is the only solid way), which means I can't really use it. Known issue with some driver, I tried a kmod to overclock it but no dice.
*sad poro noises
It’s always fantastic to read a success story of migrating to Linux gaming from Windows. As Windows gets worse and worse there will be more people joining us.
Even without buying you can send Linux gaming signals by playing on Linux and participating in the hardware survey.
I too want to buy one to support the ecosystem, but sadly, Valve doesn't want me to.
> This item is not available for purchase in your region
Ditto.
I use Macs for work and PC for games, and this little box seems a good opportunity to play The Legend of Linux on a desktop or a couch, and make it true.
A much better way to raise that signal, is to use that money to buy native Linux games instead.
Let me guess, DAWs? Have you tried Reaper (FOSS) or Bitwig Studio (commercial)?
As a sibling comment pointed out, Reaper is not FOSS, it's fully proprietary. What makes it stand out is its great Linux support, and very generous licensing.
If you want to venture into the FOSS DAW realm on Linux you have to go to LMMS and Ardour. I've played around with them, they're a little bare-bones, but they do work. Issue is I haven't been able to use them properly, because I just can't stand to look at them, they are afflicted with the medium-size open-source project curse of looking particularly horrid. I hope this isn't taken as an affront to any of the developers behind these projects, a DAW is a hard task, but I keep asking myself, out of the set of developers who work on these projects, is there really no one who feels the same way as me? Am I just afflicted with some weird pixel-peeping autism-esque disorder that makes me stare at the constantly-reocurring-throughout-all-FOSS-applications clump of jarringly gradient-ed grey buttons with white icons on them, their round corners contrasting with each other because they're clearly placed way too close together than they were meant to be? (I swear I see this in every mid-scale project using QT and older GTK!)
And I also need to confirm, this isn't just a "slight annoyance" for me, I have genuine issues when I have to concentrate on a project within some application that is suffering from the FOSS UI affliction, my mind wanders to looking at those buttons again, or those #00FF00 greens, or at some label that has clearly seeped a few pixels downwards out-of-alignment with the button it was placed in...
Ugh, I know I have some issues for sure, but I know someone else has to care about this too? It's the main reason why I fail at using non-textual FOSS software, and have to resort to Logic Pro or Ableton!
Sorry for the rant, I had to get it out of me. I wish I had more time in a day, then perhaps I could go to these projects and help out with UI, but I have a feeling my proposals will be rejected, even if I had the time to make them, I have found most FOSS developers are quite happy with how their UI usually looks like, including many people here on this forum.
No, Ardour is disgustingly ugly, so is Gimp and other FOSS apps stuck in the 90s. Some people dig that though I guess.
Also isn’t the case with Ardour that they essentially want you to pay for the binary because compiling it is a PiTA and there are no instructions on how to do so?
You're not alone, I'm also constantly pixel peeping and disappointed with the UIs of many open source (and closed source!) tools.
Reaper is neither Free nor Open Source.
Seconding Reaper, great software. Renoise is also extremely fun to use if you’re comfortable with trackers (for midi input not that they track you) and you make electronic music
How do you use a controller with your TV? Do you route USB over there as well?
Please buy pinephone instead.