What’s a ‘Stack’? #

In this context a stack refers to the collection of tools, software, and services your studio relies on for daily operations and to build, manage, and grow your games. This includes everything from your operating system and development environment to cloud services, documentation platforms, and communication tools.

For indie developers and small studios, the stack isn’t just about functionality—it’s also about cost, control, and efficiency. A well-optimised stack ensures you’re not overspending, overcomplicating, or losing control over critical aspects of your workflow.

Optimising your stack isn’t just about cutting costs—it’s about aligning your tools with your goals. Here’s what you stand to gain:

Cost Efficiency

• Many studios pay for tools they don’t fully utilise or that overlap in functionality.
• By auditing and consolidating, you can reduce monthly/annual expenses without sacrificing quality.
• Example: Switching from a fragmented US-based toolset to a unified European provider saved us 97% annually while improving integration.

Operational Control

• Data sovereignty matters, especially for studios handling user data or operating under regulations like GDPR.
• A localised or self-hosted stack gives you direct control over your data, backups, and access—reducing dependency on third-party policies or jurisdiction risks.
• Example: Moving from Dropbox to Infomaniak’s kData gave us end-to-end encryption and compliance with European privacy laws.

Simplified Workflows

• Fewer tools mean less context-switching and fewer integration headaches.
• A cohesive stack (e.g., using one provider for email, hosting, and storage) streamlines collaboration and reduces maintenance overhead.
• Example: Infomaniak’s kSuit replaced four separate tools for us, cutting down on login fatigue and support tickets.

Future-Proofing

• Open-source or regionally focused tools often offer more transparent pricing and long-term stability compared to venture-backed US platforms that may change terms or pricing abruptly.
• Example: WordPress + BetterDocs gave us the flexibility to scale documentation without vendor lock-in.

How to Get Started #

This article will walk you through:

• How to audit your current stack (identifying redundancies and hidden costs).
• Step-by-step migration for key tools (OS, email, hosting, documentation).
• Pitfalls to avoid (e.g., underestimating setup time, overlooking backup needs).
• Real-world examples from our own transition, including cost comparisons and workflow improvements.

Audit #

In short this is a matter of gathering a list of all the tools you currently use. Make it a point to visit the web page, checkout the offering see if they have added services or features and take note.

What your looking for

• Overlapping Functionality
• Unused or Underused Features
• Vendor Lock-in and Proprietary Formats
  e.g. can you still use the files once you stop paying? … not with Adobe 🙂
• Recurring Cost for One-Time or Limited Use Needs
• Fragmented Workflows
• Hidden Fees and Scaling Costs
  Low base price … high cost to add space, users, etc.
• Maintenance and Overhead

This is your “Stack” … here is an example of ours pre-optimisation.

Research #

For each of the needs/functions you defined in your Audit take a moment and research alternatives. Try not to let preconceived notions get in the way …

Here is the stack we came up with

SWOT #

With your Audit Stack and Research Stack available you can perform a SWOT or Strength Weakness Opportunity Threat Assessment. Aside from the edgy the name this is just the business version of a “Pros and Cons” list. Its meant to help you justify your plan in a quantifiable way.

Aside from simply listing Pros and Cons you need to actually perform testing. Demo/Trial each of the options you identified and compare the results against your existing stack. Make adjustments to your researched plan as you go, discovering your existing tool or even the entire stack is perfectly fine.

Our Results

Our transition plan resulted in a significant cost reduction, from approximately €3,000/year to €200/year, though cost savings weren’t our primary motivation. For us, the real issue was the growing friction with service providers like Microsoft and Adobe. Their proprietary ecosystems, escalating SaaS/subscription fees, and increasingly complex regulatory demands were becoming untenable for a small studio like ours.

We initially planned to migrate only the most problematic services to alternatives, aiming to sidestep the worst of these challenges. However, we quickly discovered that the stability, availability, and capability of the tools we found, like Infomaniak’s kSuit, WordPress/BetterDocs, and open-source creative software, weren’t just adequate replacements. In many cases, they outperformed the expensive, proprietary solutions we’d relied on for years.

Ultimately, this led us to a full shift to a Linux-first stack. The decision wasn’t just about cutting costs, it was about boosting productivity, regaining control, and future-proofing our workflow. For any indie dev or small studio feeling constrained by bloated subscriptions or proprietary lock-in, our experience proves that better, cheaper, and more flexible alternatives are not only viable but often superior.

Migration #

So, you’ve done the research and designed a completely new stack. Now comes the critical part: How do you migrate without crippling your workflow? Here’s how to approach it smoothly, based on our experience at Heathen Engineering.

Parallel Workflow #

For teams that can’t afford interruptions, this step is non-negotiable. The good news? It’s easier than it sounds.

• Keep your existing stack running while you transition. Do not move critical-path work to the new workflow until you’re fully confident.
• Clear space for the new stack, whether that’s cloud storage, hard drives, or service quotas. Use this as an opportunity to audit your data storage: archive old files, clean up redundancies, and ensure you have reliable backups of everything.
• Example: During our migration, we maintained our old Windows-based tools and services until the Linux/Infomaniak stack was fully tested and stable.

Dependency Chain #

Your tools don’t exist in isolation, they rely on plugins, integrations, and data formats that may not be obvious until something breaks.

• Test each tool in your new stack alongside the old one. You’ll likely discover you need:
  • A plugin to enable a new tool to read old data.
  • A module to integrate with a legacy service during the transition.
• Example: We found that some Unreal plugins required additional configuration to work seamlessly with our Linux-based pipeline. Testing early saved us from last-minute surprises.

Fallback #

No migration is perfect. Assume something will go wrong, and plan for it.

• How will you access old files after shutting down the old stack?
• How will you support legacy clients or projects that rely on deprecated tools?
• Have a contingency for critical breaks. For us, this meant:
  • Keeping a small Windows install for testing Windows builds of our tools and games.
  • Using it as a fallback workstation in case of unforeseen issues with the new stack.

Tools Review #

This section is a list of tools we reviewed and our impressions of them. This isn’t an endorsement by Heathen Engineering, just a summary of our research to help you start your own evaluation.

Linux #

We tested several Linux distributions for stability, compatibility, and ease of use. Here’s what we found:

• Arch Linux
  • Pros: Bleeding-edge, lightweight, and highly customisable.
  • Cons: Not ideal for production environments due to its rolling-release nature and potential for instability.
  • Verdict: Great for enthusiasts, but we needed something more stable for daily work.
• Ubuntu LTS
  • Pros: The gold standard for compatibility, every tool and service we needed had Ubuntu as a baseline. Hardware support was flawless, Proton worked seamlessly, and the transition from Windows was surprisingly smooth, even for engineers with decades of Windows muscle memory.
  • Cons: Not the most cutting-edge, but stability was our priority.
  • Verdict: Our ultimate choice. It just worked.
• Pop!_OS
  • Pros: Polished, user-friendly, and well-optimised for modern hardware.
  • Cons: Smaller community and slightly more “bleeding-edge” than Ubuntu, which could introduce instability.
  • Verdict: A strong contender, but we opted for Ubuntu’s broader support and stability.
• Linux Mint
  • Pros: Essentially Ubuntu with a more traditional desktop experience.
  • Cons: The pre-configured setup didn’t offer enough advantages over vanilla Ubuntu LTS for our use case.
  • Verdict: A great option for beginners, but we didn’t need the extra layers.
• SteamOS
  • Pros: A stabilised Arch build, optimised for gaming and workstation use.
  • Cons: Too console-like out of the box, better suited for a gaming rig than a development workstation.
  • Verdict: Interesting, but not the right fit for our workflow.

Infomaniak #

Infomaniak became the cornerstone of our new stack, replacing Microsoft 365, Wix, Dropbox, GitBook, and our domain registrar, all for a fraction of the cost.

• Pros:
  • One-stop shop: Consolidated all our backend needs (email, hosting, storage, domains) under one European provider, solving regulatory concerns.
  • Standard tools: Uses widely supported platforms like WordPress and BetterDocs, but with one-click setup, no need to build everything from scratch.
  • Flexibility: Could easily host our own Git server or other backend services if needed (though we’re sticking with GitHub for now due to GitHub Sponsors).
• Cons:
  • None significant for our use case.
• Verdict: A game-changer for cost, convenience, and compliance.

Blender #

Modern Blender is leaps and bounds ahead of where it was just a few years ago.

• Pros:
  • Sculpting tools: Outperform, in our opinion, Maya’s sculpting tools.
  • Workflow: Dynamic resolution and modifier workflows make iteration much faster than competitors.
  • Versatility: The only tool that does everything we need well enough, modeling, sculpting, animation, and even basic compositing.
• Cons:
  • Not as specialised: Tools like Houdini or ZBrush outperform Blender in specific areas (e.g., procedural workflows or extreme organic detail).
• Verdict: Our go-to 3D tool. While other tools might excel in niche areas, Blender’s rounded capabilities make it ideal for our workflow.

Krita #

Like Blender, Krita won us over by being a single tool that does it all.

• Pros:
  • Vector + Raster: Handles both vector and raster layers in the same document, smoothly. This was a huge advantage over Adobe’s fragmented workflow (Illustrator for vectors, Photoshop for raster).
  • Cost: Free and open-source.
• Cons:
  • Adobe’s tools are still superior at the extreme ends of vector/raster work, but we don’t need that level of specialisation.
• Verdict: Perfect for our needs. No more switching between apps.

DaVinci Resolve #

We don’t do much video editing, but when we do, DaVinci Resolve fits the bill.

• Pros:
  • Familiar workflow: Similar to Adobe After Effects, which minimised our learning curve.
  • Powerful: Seems just as capable as AE, we just don’t push it that hard.
  • Cost: Free version is excellent; Studio license is affordable if needed.
• Cons:
  • None for our limited use case.
• Verdict: More than enough for our video editing needs.

Tenacity Audio #

Our replacement for Audacity, because sometimes, simplicity wins.

• Pros:
  • Familiar: It’s Audacity, but without the baggage of Muse Group’s ownership.
  • Lightweight: Does everything we need for audio processing.
• Cons:
  • None to note.
• Verdict: A no-brainer replacement. If you’re looking to move away from Audacity, start here.