It does work for most games. MPV player supports it as well. It’s still rough around the edges, but it’s definitely there.
It does work for most games. MPV player supports it as well. It’s still rough around the edges, but it’s definitely there.
On the Steam Deck it already “just works” for a lot of games (with an OLED or an external display). So we’re not that far off for those changes propagating to Desktop.
Use Gamescope and a Vulkan layer. Here’s a more detailed post: https://planet.kde.org/xavers-blog-2023-12-18-an-update-on-hdr-and-color-management-in-kwin/
If you get the latest gamescope from git. You no longer need the vulkan layer.
Not surprisingly, North Korea’s Red Star OS has a closed source fork of KDE.
Is it Hell Let Loose? I started playing it since they support Linux now, very well done Battlefield-like game. I haven’t played much BF since 1942.
If you’re not just being facetious, https://areweanticheatyet.com/ is a good source.
According to them ~58% of anti-cheat games work. There’s been a large uptick of anti-cheat support since the Steam Deck.
According to ProtonDB, 86% of the top 1000 games on Steam function (Silver+ rating). It’s a pretty safe bet that the most of the missing 14% is probably due to anti-cheat.
I agree with the other posters, your hardware is going to hold you back. But you could try switching to a lighter desktop environment like LXDE instead of GNOME. This user found a small increase in performance: https://www.reddit.com/r/linux_gaming/comments/dg87jp/does_the_desktop_environment_matter_for_gaming/
But they had somewhat beefy hardware. If you’re truly at the limit of your specs, 100% CPU/RAM usage, your performance increase could be even more.
Try setting RADV_PERFTEST=rt in system options->environment variables in Lutris.
You could also update to Mesa 23.2 since it has raytracing enabled for all games by default.
It’s confirmed steam deck compatible at launch, so it’ll work fine.
I wish more gaming benchmarks for CPUs included games that are CPU heavy. The only one in this list seems to be Total War, but I skimmed the video and I’m not sure if they even tested campaign turn times vs battle.
Show us Stellaris, Civilization, Oxygen Not Included, etc. Some of them aren’t that popular, but they would at least be a good indicator for future CPU bound games.
I’ve only played Chiv 2 on my desktop, but for EAC games I had to install EAC seperately. I’d assume the SteamDeck would do this for you, but maybe it didn’t install properly?
That’s a very good point, but a little misleading. A better number would be to add up all the top tier cards from every generation, not just the past 2. Just because they’re old doesn’t mean they still aren’t relatively inefficient for their generation.
If we kept the generations exactly the same, but got rid of the top 1 or 2 cards. The technological advancement would be happening just as fast. Because really, the top tier cards are about silicon lottery and putting as much power in while keeping stable clocks. They aren’t different from an architecture perspective within the same generation. It’s about being able to sell the best silicon and more VRAM at a premium.
But as you said, it’s still a drop in the bucket compared to the overall market.
I understand the sentiment, but it seems like you’re drawing arbitrary lines in the sand for what is the “correct” amount of power for gaming. Why waste 50 watts of GPU (or more like 150 total system watts) on a game that something like a SteamDeck will draw 15watts to do almost identically. 10 times less power for definitely not 10 times less fidelity. We could all the way back to the original Gameboy for 0.7 watts, the fidelity drops but so does the power. What is the “correct” wattage?
I agree that the top end gpus are shit at efficiency and we should could cut back. But I don’t agree that fidelity and realism should stop advancing. Some type of efficiency requirement would be nice, but every year games should get more advanced and every year gpus should get better (and hopefully stay efficient).
If you like RPGs in general, I think it’s worth playing. No need be a fan of DnD.
Exactly. I should have expanded further, but I was including Forgotten Realms as part of the D&D brand.
It’s a great game, but so was Divinity: Original Sin 2. The main difference, besides the rules swap, is the cutscenes and dialogue animations.
I think BG3 is riding on the D&D brand and marketing campaign. In my mind there isn’t a massive difference between BG3 and D:OS2 (or other titles they’ve done) from a pure gameplay perspective.
Regardless, I’m for it. Hopefully we’ll see more innovative and high budget CRPGs.
I played the enhanced editions on Steam which have a native Linux build. No issues.
Dang, I’ve only had one crash.
I started with Small Gods. Which is a standalone story that takes place early chronologically. After reading that as a test to see how well I would like it. I then went to the beginning in publishing order.