shmerl: Often people mean different things when saying "indie" or "AAA" So let's clarify what it can mean.
Normally, "indie" stands for independent. I.e. a studio which can release games without getting money from external publishers which would dictate them what and how to release. For example CD Projekt Red are an independent studio so their games can be called indie. AAA in this context means a game funded by external publisher (let's say some kind of Ubisoft or whatever) which placed demands on development studio (such as "don't release games for Linux" or whatever).
Another common way of understanding these terms is orthogonal. By "indie" people simply mean low budget games, and by AAA big budget (regardless of where the funds come from). In these terms for example CD Projekt Red make AAA games, since their budgets are quite big.
So let's go back to your statement. You mixed up both of these definitions in one sentence I think. You mentioned publishers which fund games (one way of meaning AAA) as well as big budget games (another way of meaning AAA). And you made a sweeping statement that neither will release games for Linux.
You may be right that EA or Ubisoft are not interested in Linux. Their backwards thinking as well causes them to use DRM for example. So who cares about what they are interested in. Independent studios which release big budget games however is another matter. Studios like CD Projekt Red or inXile or Larian already showed interest in Linux games. And they release big budget games, they aren't some amateurs like some people usually think of independent studios.
However that's not stopping on such independent studios as well. Publisher funded games also start appearing on Linux (such as funded by Deep Silver for example). This will snowball to the point that even backwards thinking publishers like EA will get interested. But again, I personally don't care, since most of their games are sick with DRM anyway.
And you base numbers on what? On pure speculation? Real numbers show that percentage of Linux sales is pretty high (around 10% or more for some games). Humble Bundle already demonstrated that. So potential is there, and it's there already now, not in 2015 or later. It can of course grow and it will grow.
Not according to developers who see it as an opportunity. And not according to companies like Valve which even are working on consumer market products using Linux like their gaming console.
It's your own problem that your expectations don't match the reality. Just sit and relax and see events unfold. Linux will even overtake Windows as a gaming platform at some point.
DirectX domination is coming to an end. It was at its peak not long ago, but it will go only down the slope onwards together with decline of Windows usage itself. And it seems that Valve is that straw which broke their back. It won't happen overnight, but it will happen pretty gradually. You can revisit this matter in a year or two from now to see how it will progress.
It's good to point out that GOG joining the list of gaming distributors helps this process as well, since GOG will be able to provide additional feedback for developers and potential publishers about Linux sales which will help increasing their interest in releasing games for Linux.
Ok I know what AAA and indie means I use AAA for big budget video game publishing companies and video game development companies.
That's why I didn't mention 2K Games and Deep Silver because they are releasing the PC versions of their video games for Linux as well.
See there you go you proved my point 10% for some video games I am talking about the whole Linux market it's not at 10% and it will never grow to 90+% of the Windows market or even 50% I have been hearing Linux is the future of video games since like 2001 or 2002.
VALVe is working on developing a video game console that runs on Linux sure but most people who will purchase a Steambox will just install Windows. I already read comments from a lot of people on a lot of websites on the internet who will do this like. I even talked to quite a few friends of my real life friends who are going to do this around 10+ people I talked to. I have 100 real life friends who all purchase and play their video games on PC on Windows only out of those 100 real life friend about 12+ of my real life friends do not want to purchase PC versions of video games that support OpenGL only DirectX.
Your funny everything I said is more realistic Linux will never overtake Windows as a video game platform. End of discussion.
DirectX is still dominating look at AMD's Mantle API it translates DirectX 11's HLSA not OpenGL's GLSL. The rest of 2014, 2015, and beyond hundreds of PC versions of video games will be using DirectX 11 and DirectX 12.
You just love Linux so much that it's clouding up your vision of what the future is.
Quite a lot of fortune 500 companies have a partnership with Microsoft to use Windows in their offices like Intel. Intel strictly forbids using Linux. Intel only uses Linux for server and Research and Development (R&D) that's it.
NASA and a lot of government agencies use Windows and won't switch to Linux. The U.S. Government pays Microsoft a lot of money to use Windows.
Despite the fact that Linux delivers higher FPS than Windows does and doesn't require you to shell out several hundred dollars every few years?
I get that you're a troll, but could you at least try and make the trolling plausible.
