[michaelmrose]

The average PC is already a trade of that costs the average user around $800 and near 2/3 would need a substantial RAM upgrade a new GPU or both to make gaming through VM passthrough a reality. Most people aren't looking to buy new hardware and learn new tech to game.

It sounds like a useful toy for those whom already enjoy playing with their computer as much as playing with the game.

That said wouldn't limiting the host to integrated graphics (or whatever you get for $25) be a substantial limitation compared to using wine/proton or dual booting?

[prmoustache]

> Most people aren't looking to buy new hardware and learn new tech to game.

Most people don't play game.

Most people that play game that isn't solitary or a web game just buy a playstation, xbox or Switch.

Only a relatively small fraction of people playing AAA games use computer for that. The most hardcore one and the most willing to spend money on a game Rig. And I am pretty sure most of them aren't the least interested in dual boot because they would have a desktop gaming rig and a laptop for everything else anyway. Only a tiny fraction of gamers is probably interested in dual booting. You are part of that tiny group. Fine. The nmbl tool presented in this conference do not prevent dual booting anyway so I am not even sure why people act like they should be offended because grub might be replaced someday by something else with more capabilities.

[michaelmrose]

Only a tiny portion of people are interested in Linux in the first place. Of those it seems like around 25% dual boot.

https://linux-hardware.org/?view=os_dual_boot_win

It doesn't make sense to ex post facto try to justify what people SHOULD do when we can look at what in fact they actually do.

The idea that the only people that play PC games are ONLY play AAA games on their souped up rigs is also a counterfactual. People play games everything from 8 year old laptops to $5000 custom built rigs with RGB everything. You are oversimplifying the universe consists of many and varied irrational individuals not spherical cows.

Dual booting is simple and suitable for nearly 100% of machines running Linux.

Wine/Proton is suitable for nearly 100% of machines running Linux. Steam has reduces this complexity to a few clicks for the majority of titles.

GPU passthrough is unsuitable for 70-80% of configurations and by dint of complexity undesirable for nearly everyone which is why virtually nobody does this.

[prmoustache]

> Wine/Proton is suitable for nearly 100% of machines running Linux. Steam has reduces this complexity to a few clicks for the majority of titles.

Why would one dual boot if games work so well?

[michaelmrose]

Because people don't want to play "games" they oft want to play a particular game and if it doesn't work it doesn't work. Also consider how many people are new and they have an existing computer with Windows the standard play is to dual boot first and then possibly transition to only Linux if it works well enough for usage.

[sqeaky]

Approximately half of gaming revenue is from PC customers. It wavers up and down depending on exactly what metric you want to use and when the last console refresh was.

You are correct on the complexity cost and how most people, even those with nice gaming computers, just don't want to deal with more complexity than needed. Even mandating a store app that works causes a significant hit to conversion rates. EA couldn't give away Dead Space a previously successful AAA title when bundled with their store.

[prmoustache]

> Approximately half of gaming revenue is from PC customers

Whales.

[michaelmrose]

You are thinking of pay to win games with microtransactions. Whereas this trash HAS come to the PC platform there is no reason to believe it represents any substantial portion of the revenue in PC gaming.

[sqeaky]

I suppose everyone is entitled to their opinion, but most people base it on something. You are free to do whatever you're doing, but I hope no one takes you seriously.