I'd actually prefer dxvk to Feral's wrapper, since it's FOSS unlike the later. Besides, Feral seem to have some problem with DRM-free games (note complete lack of any of their releases on GOG). While projects like dxvk are open source, and CDPR can use them while actually contributing to their development.

I don't think it would in all honesty, I 'd like to see it run on Crossover, maybe it would run better. Oh speaking of I don't think that video will be necessary I found a distro that I really like. I still prefer Windows, but Zorin OS is by far the most professional and improved distro I've never seen. Those guys obviously take themselves seriously. It comes with the latest Wine I'll be testing W3 on it with both Wine and Crossover.

Surely not as much as their Windows profits, but it can be profitable. They made profit on TW2 for Linux which came out 3 years after the Windows release. TW3 came out in May 2015, so it's still less than that, plus it's a much more popular game and Linux gaming market is bigger today. So I don't think profits will be an issue here.

Could you citation that please?

Search for their shareholders reports for previous years. There are some here (but some of the older ones could be gone): https://www.cdprojekt.com/en/investors/

You can also quite easily realize, if TW2 wouldn't have been profitable, they wouldn't have even considered making TW3 for Linux to begin with. They clearly did, until they hit some unexplained snag down the line.

See here: https://www.gamingonlinux.com/wiki/The_Witcher_3_Linux_port

There's no evidence what so ever that the Linux community contributed anything to W2's sales and didn't Witcher 3 make most of it's profits from the consoles? Also try to avoid Linux centric sites. Throughout all this debating not once did I post a link to a Microsoft site. Because that would be silly.

You missed the point. They considered TW3 release for Linux more than a year after TW2 for Linux was released. By that time they could easily analyze how profitable or not TW2 for Linux release was. They wouldn't have decided to do it if it was a failure.

Also, in their report, they list TW2 for Linux release as success. You don't list something that loses money to sharehodlers as a positive.

Companies don't tend to share or be 100% honest with their consumers and that includes the very best of them. In other words. If they honestly thought Linux was worth their time they would've done it by now. Since a lot of old games are made for Windows and are going to carry that legacy I say forget about Linux porting and focus of just perfecting Wine/Crossover. That way who cares if it's made for Windows. I think more people should use Crossover. Monetized software is nearly always more sustainable then free software. You get what you pay for.

Lot's of things could go wrong. I think it was their management lack of experience that caused it. They probably estimated that the effort would be comparable to TW2, since it was a naturally the point of comparison for them. But TW3 is quite a lot more complex, including the fact that it's using DX11 rather DX9.

It could easily be, that they realized, that the effort of porting it to Linux is way more substantial than they thought. And that caused them to cancel their plans. Of course that was at the time when wrappers for DX11 weren't in good shape. Today the situation is better, and the effort can potentially be way smaller, which brings back the prospect of profitability for them.

Late response is late I have been working.

do you think CDPR are a bunch of out of collage students that don't know what they're doing?


What do you work for CDPR or something. Where are you getting this information? This conversation reminds me of a time I walked into an Gamestop shop and there were two employees arguing over which was better. Unreal Engine or Quake 3 engine. I asked one of them what an engine was. To which one of them said “When you remove the graphics and the sounds what remains is the engine.” Reading your “expert” descriptions of DX11 and Vulcan is extremely irritating. Vulcan may very well be better then DX11 I’m really not sure. But I know for a fact that you don’t know. All you know is that Valcan works better for Linux based distros then DX so naturally you prefer it. But you have no hands on experience using or rending games with it in engines. This is just backseat programming.

Their own employees commented on competence of their management, and those weren't positive comments (see a few recent videos on this topic). They especially highlighted, how management didn't want to listen to actual programmers when making decisions. So I wouldn't be in the least surprised, if their management didn't listen to their actual graphics developers about it, and when they realized how hard it all is, it was rather late already.
You just said you have no idea about graphics APIs, and the rest of your comment is completely off mark. So get back on topic please.

Game development is hard and designers and programmers/artists are always butting heads this is nothing new. Since W3 is quite possibly the most successful DRM free AAA game ever made I think that shows how competent the team really is. The hardest part about making a game is trying to get the whole team on the same page. Furthermore that's just hear say. There's no substantial evidence to any of it. When team management is incompetent it's often obvious. Like EA with Star Wars Battlefront 2.


Neither of us have an idea but only one of us is acting like they do.

Well then stop detailing the issue. Here's my "on point..." point: You want W3 on Linux? You want more games on Linux? You want more people to use Linux?

There's only one way you're going to achieve that. You're going to have to make it work like Windows. Drop the use of repositories for installing apps. Use a system where you download single files from websites that you double click on to make them work. Create a start menu interface as close to Win 7 as you can legally get away with. Use Windows naming conventions. Root drive should be called C-root:\> or something. Home should be called users. App installers should distro agnostic. Backwards and forwards compatibility for your installers so they'll work many years from now without depreciation.

In short make it like Windows and people will use it and you'll get your wish.

We already have "Sounds Like Windows, Walks Like Windows, Flies Like Windows, Tastes Like Windows…" OS. It is called Windows. Eww… No, that's not it! :P

It is called "ReactOS". And guess what, it doesn't work. :) The real issue here someone is too old to adapt and accept things working different to how (s)he knows it from childhood. People of the Windows 95 era will always think Windows 95 is THE TRUE OS, they have the same difficulties accepting Windows 10 and its "Windows Store" (or is it "Microsoft Store"?).

As the saying goes, you can't teach an old dog new tricks.

Wrong wrong wrong... well mostly wrong. React OS is well, you do have to put effort into it you can't just leave it their to rot. Also if I said "hey there's this new games that's totally awesome but you need to learn japans to play it"
you probably wouldn't like it.

When you play just about any game there's a reason new-game/campain is always at the top and quite is at the bottom. Or why File, Edit, View, Tool, is always at the upper left.


I learned Linux and it was like learning a new language. After I got past the growing pains of learning it's system though I still didn't like it. It's immensely frustrating communicating this to the community since the idea of someone learning to use Linux and still disliking it doesn't seem to exists to them. Linux has moved all it's bloat and problems off the core OS and into repositories. Also these repositories or rather what you need from them is unique to each Linux distro making them borderline proprietary. Who's idea was it to install apps from a repository with a package manager. It's the dumbest idea I know of. That's why I call them Linux suppositories.