HN user
Years ago, Zalman used to make something like this that you could put a 2.5" SATA disk in [1].
It was much cheaper, but you needed to add storage. I wish they still made them. I normally have spare disks around and it worked out much more cost effective.
[1] https://www.zalman.com/EN/Product/ProductDetail.do?productSe...
What kind of firmware updates do you need to do on it, when its only purpose is to act as a screen?
On some screens, signal processing has been significantly improved in later firmware versions. New features are also not uncommon, such as VRR and HFR being added after release[1]. This is particularity nice for modern consoles.
[1] https://www.flatpanelshd.com/news.php?subaction=showfull&id=...
Reminds me of the history of the ARM1 chip, where the chip was accidently running off leakage alone [1]
[1] https://en.wikichip.org/wiki/acorn/microarchitectures/arm1
What are the main costs of releasing a Linux version of a game when using Unity or Unreal? My limited experience with Unity has been "check the Linux box, click the build button". It even cross-compiles no problem. People I know tell me Unreal is similar.
For a simple game that uses the entire UE4 stack, you might be able to get away with that if none of your code is Windows-specific and works exactly the same on the Linux distribution you are targeting. Once you start using your own middleware and libraries from outside of the default engine, you need to make sure every single one works across all the platforms you're targeting. Many won't have a Linux compatible version, and those that do may only work against specific distributions and hardware. Even then: Have they changed the window manager? What have else they customised?
There have been many issues with anti-cheat solutions over the years on Linux.
It's not like they have to do a full run of play-testing for Linux. Just check if it starts, play for 10 minutes and release that.
For a simple game, you may get away with this. Anything larger will require significantly more testing. I've been a producer on large games, and the QA process starts very early on. You don't 'finish' a game and then QA starts - It's an ongoing process that consists of significantly more than just launching a game.
We know we're a minority so we're willing to put up with bugs
Some people don't see it that way though. People who have paid for a product have the right for it to work properly. Tickets for Linux support are often higher [1], so the time investment against payback can be problematic.
GPU driver support on Linux can also still be problematic. From feature differences against Windows, to crashes. These all take additional development time. Linux developers are often more difficult to acquire in the game dev world. QA even more so.
Game dev is really hard. Some of it is hidden by engines like UE4 on the surface, but as soon as you start digging down into serious development, it's difficult.