“Linux is finally getting better support for multiplayer games.”
I recently came across this claim while responding to comments on one of my recent articles, but it’s not the first time I’ve heard this claim and others just like it. The framing sounds reasonable, and if you just took it at face value, it would seemingly explain the current state of affairs, with many newer games either bringing native clients or at least being playable through compatibility layers.
But... this claim is misleading. Linux has “supported” multiplayer games for quite some time. Not even “recently”. Think moreso, decades. Multiplayer games don’t require some "special operating system feature” that Linux previously lacked. All they need is a working network stack, stable drivers, and the ability to run performant applications; Linux has had these for a very long time.
In fact, many of the early open-source games that long defined “gaming on Linux” were inherently multiplayer titles, like Tremulous (now Unvanquished), Nexuiz (forked into Xonotic), and Open Arena.
So here’s the real question: When people say “Linux doesn’t support XYZ”, what do they actually mean, and is that even the right question?
Tech Insight: “support” is usually a vendor decision
When we think of software “compatibility”, we typically think that the operating system layer is at fault. You’ll hear things like “Yeah, but can it run my favourite apps?”, or “I can’t use
This idea is understandable from a user perspective: your favourite app or even device doesn’t work, you just assume it must be because something’s missing on the part of the host operating system. Yet, the reality is that most of the time, Linux isn’t missing a capability: Support is being withheld.
An easy example of this is, ironically, Easy Anticheat. The developers behind many of the major games that don’t work on Linux often cite its “lack of support” for Easy Anticheat as their primary reason for not porting to the platform. Some of these developers even block players on Linux outright, justifying their actions with one of two claims: Linux users are hackers, or kernel-level anti-cheat cannot work on Linux.
Neither claim is factual.
Anti-cheat can, and does work on Linux. Easy Anticheat even has a Linux-specific solution. Kernel-level approaches are possible, just not typically implemented, which is the excuse publishers use to insist they can’t port their work to Linux.
So the operating system is rarely the real blocker. It’s also rarely a cost issue - many of the popular game engines, like Unreal, have native Linux support. So what’s really happening? A combination of priorities, risk tolerance, business strategy, and frankly, old attitudes - either from developers, or from higher-level actors who distrust anything they don’t personally understand.
The uncomfortable truth
Software companies can choose to support any platform they like. They can also choose which platforms and users to treat as insignificant, acceptable losses. But like it or not, their choices get reframed as the platform’s problem when they’re not.
This pattern persists outside of gaming, too. Case in point: “Photoshop doesn’t work on Linux.” The reality? Not a Linux problem. There’s nothing functionally stopping Adobe from porting it. The graphics stack is mature. Packaging, subscriptions, DRM, etc, all resolved (for some years now).
It’s a decision. The platform isn’t blocking the company from doing anything. Are there gaps sometimes? Sure, but all platforms have them. In fact, the Linux ecosystem has ironically filled many of the gaps that are allowed to exist on other platforms because of the way it’s been treated as though it has more than usual.
So if a vendor wants their software to run on Linux, they can make it happen. And once you see this reality, you can’t unsee it. The narrative completely dissolves.
Practical Tip: Take a soft software audit
It’s still early in the year, so this is the perfect time to take charge of your digital workspace before the year warms up, literally and figuratively. One way you can do this is to pick one app you don’t really need/use anymore, and remove it.
Not for the sake of minimalism, though that can be nice too, if that’s your thing. It’s just that every bit of clutter has a cost: more updates, background services, account logins, more dependencies, more mental noise. Every extra bit of cruft you remove is a lighter load on your device and your mind.
Here’s what I’ve published recently:
DEV Community
- Reframing Frameworks A grounded look at why you should learn CSS fundamentals and still embrace frameworks, and how both teach you to think in systems rather than just rules.
If you want to stay in this lane
- Open Software is More Than a Philosophy - The Roll Out A look at software ownership, compatibility, and how open tools keep your options alive when vendors do not.
Working with us
At RolandiXor Media Inc., we blend design and open-source thinking for our clients.
Elsewhere
- Mastodon: mastodon.social/@rolandixor
- Threads: @rolandixor
- X: @rolandixor
Support this work
If this writing has been useful and you’d like to help sustain it:
→ https://ko-fi.com/rolandixor
Catch you in the next Roll Out!
Comments