This is great news, most the built-in Linux games are, at best, Newgrounds games. Hard to find anything worthwhile. Considering Valve's importance in PC gaming, hopefully other developers will follow suit.

God I love L4D2 so much.

Also, I'm curious as to what Linux their using and on what kind of computer. My desktop runs an older version(not quite sure, but it was the newest one as of September 2010), and it runs any Linux game I've tried easily. Yet my laptop, running Ubuntu, the most common and user friendly one, has trouble running the built-in Tetris.

Old News, nice that you're reporting it though.

again old these Left 4 Dead

Nothing against Linux, but it is surprising people still go through the trouble of using Linux and wanting to game heavily on Linux. I guess these sort of results do offer some vindication in that decision.

cool

What is Linux?

Okay, should I care?

yay! more frams in a second that no one can make heads or tails of! but, if it can process that much, perhaps that means more can be happening onscreen?

It is not very surprising. Linux is an amazingly resource light OS. If developers would support it in greater numbers it could easily cut into the Windows market, even possibly overtake Mac

Linux could do potentially well with games in the future then perhaps...

A bit slow on the draw there, GIO.

If only you could run it on a Raspberry pi. That would be awesome

This is me not caring. -.-

This is nothing short of Gaben being a troll. He's being butthurt by Windows 8. As long as Windows 8 becomes succesful, and/or Windows 7 remains the benchmark for PCs, this will end up hurting his profits. And it wasn't because of Linux, but because of the OpenGL. Valve's been optimizing drivers for OpenGL in Linux and is finally making Nvidia care a bit for the open-source kernel (kind of feel bad for Nvidia, after that jerky sign Torvalds pointed at them). Now, the comparison was between OpenGL 4 and DirectX 9. That's nowhere fair since OpenGL has been outdated for a few years now while DirectX included better rendering technologies (I'm excluding DX10 from this) and upgraded its APIs. Also consider the fact that Source is now an old engine (already optimal when released, it runs extremely good on new high-end rigs), which is just being improved by including better texture handling and multi-threading, and just that. If you want to compare oranges with oranges then it should be OpenGL 4.2 vs DirectX 11.1. I'm pretty sure Valve made this with latest OpenGL. Like I said before, Gaben should pause its techie stuff and go back to make games. For the last 5 years, Valve's games have been from third-party developers. Finally, don't get me wrong. I love Valve, it's my favorite. But the latest decisions they've been making points to more services and less games (and more Gaben trolling). Let alone Half life 3.

A tin can could run a Source powered game decently.

Why didn't they run it in OpenGL on both systems if they really wanted to compare? Oh wait, they did after the fact, and there was less than a 12 frame difference... that doesn't make as good of a story though x.x. I am just glad that Linux might actually be getting some decent video driver support (I remember how painful it was to get Doom 3 running on a Linux machine 8 years ago).

As much as I love Left 4 Dead 1 and 2, they need to stop beating that horse! Even with the "new" Cold Stream DLC I think it's about time they start taking about a new entry in the series rather than being like "LOOK WHAT I CAN DO!"

I do believe OS: XBOX360 Runs L4D just fine.