We are excited to announce that Arch Linux is entering into a direct collaboration with Valve. Valve is generously providing backing for two critical projects that will have a huge impact on our distribution: a build service infrastructure and a secure signing enclave. By supporting work on a freelance basis for these topics, Valve enables us to work on them without being limited solely by the free time of our volunteers.

This opportunity allows us to address some of the biggest outstanding challenges we have been facing for a while. The collaboration will speed-up the progress that would otherwise take much longer for us to achieve, and will ultimately unblock us from finally pursuing some of our planned endeavors. We are incredibly grateful for Valve to make this possible and for their explicit commitment to help and support Arch Linux.

These projects will follow our usual development and consensus-building workflows. [RFCs] will be created for any wide-ranging changes. Discussions on this mailing list as well as issue, milestone and epic planning in our GitLab will provide transparency and insight into the work. We believe this collaboration will greatly benefit Arch Linux, and are looking forward to share further development on this mailing list as work progresses.

  • Earth Walker@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    34
    arrow-down
    32
    ·
    1 day ago

    Using OSS in your product and giving the OSS devs resources to improve their software, instead of trying to take over their project? Did Valve not get the memo that big tech companies are supposed to be evil?? Oh right, they have a monopoly on video game distribution and all of their products rely on DRM.

    • Railcar8095@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      21
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 day ago

      You might be too young to remember, but DRM existed way before Steam, and the worse ones that exist today are the ones that the Devs/publishers add, not the steam one.

    • woelkchen@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      62
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      1 day ago

      they have a monopoly on video game distribution

      People who claim that Valve has a monopoly on PC games are already wrong but you claim that they have a monopoly on video game distribution in general is outrageously false. The 2022 overall video game revenue was a bit over US$180Bn. The PC game revenue was US$45Bn. In 2023, all of Steam was responsible for US$8.6Bn in revenue. The biggest PC games (Fortnite, Minecraft, Roblox) aren’t even on Steam and neither are any console or phone games.

      Criticize Valve for actual things to criticize them for. Don’t spread misinformation.

      • sugar_in_your_tea@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        55 minutes ago

        And even if they had a monopoly (which I agree that they don’t), they have to actually abuse that monopoly to be a problem. Last I checked, the only requirement Valve has for games distributed on Steam is the devs can’t sell Steam keys for less elsewhere, but they can sell as many Steam keys as they want outside of Steam w/o paying Valve anything. They can also generate keys for other distribution platforms and price them however they want.

        That’s extremely fair, and the fact that they’re able to maintain a dominant position in the PC games distribution market without any exclusivity agreements or anything of that nature speaks volumes to the level of service they provide for both users and publishers/developers.

    • Dettweiler@lemmy.dbzer0.com
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      40
      ·
      1 day ago

      I have many games I own on Steam that I can play portably from a flash drive without Steam. DRM is still on the developer.

    • pivot_root@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      35
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 day ago

      They have a monopoly on video game distribution.

      They have a massive marketshare, but that doesn’t make them a monopoly. Developers are still free to distribute their games through any other storefront/launcher, and Valve isn’t going out of its way to engage in anticompetitive practices like exclusive publishing deals with third-party studios.

        • woelkchen@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          14
          ·
          1 day ago

          Comment OP appears to have drank the Epic Games Kool-aid.

          The world’s biggest video game, Fortnite, is only available on Epic Games Store for most platforms. Epic’s market share is gigantic, other video game developers just don’t benefit of it because Epic promotes their own stuff first and foremost. If Epic had a storefront monopoly, it would be classified as anti-competitive behaviour.

    • Eggyhead@fedia.io
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      20
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 day ago

      they have a monopoly on video game distribution

      Last I heard you could buy games from GOG or Epic and install them on a Steam deck produced and subsidized by Valve.

      • woelkchen@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        7
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        1 day ago

        Last I heard you could buy games from GOG or Epic and install them on a Steam deck produced and subsidized by Valve.

        Or get them on PlayStation, Switch, or Xbox (Earth Walker claimed Steam has a monopoly on video game distribution in general).

    • 1984@lemmy.today
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      1 day ago

      I haven’t gamed on pc for quite some time, but I remember every gaming company adding “launchers” for their games that you had to run to install and play their games. Even Nvidia did this with their fucking drivers. :)

      Valve doesn’t do any of that bullshit. Maybe that’s why gamers like them?

      • Jayjader@jlai.lu
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        8
        ·
        1 day ago

        To be fair, weren’t Valve the first company to do that? People were really annoyed at having to install steam just to play some Half-Life.

        Of course, that was only 1 launcher, no launcher-in-launcher shenanigans back then.

        • wizardbeard@lemmy.dbzer0.com
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          4
          ·
          1 day ago

          Yep, Valve also normalized microtransactions significantly through TF2.

          Once again, Valve started it as something reasonable: Cosmetic options, then expanded to allow shortcutting unlocking alt weapons through $1-3 charges instead of through game progression (achievements unlocked alt weapons at first). Other companies followed suite in ever increasingly predatory ways, and Valve got worse with it too over time.

          • schizo@forum.uncomfortable.business
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            3
            ·
            17 hours ago

            normalized microtransactions

            I’d say it’s maybe a little more honest to say they normalized the gambling exploitation in gaming with the TF2 lootboxes.

            You didn’t buy cosmetics, you bought a key to open a box that might get you the cosmetic you wanted.