What is a ‘Stack’? #

In this context, a stack is the collective DNA of your studio’s operations. It is the suite of tools, software, and services you rely on to build, manage, and ship your games. For the SME (Small to Medium Enterprise), the stack isn’t just about functionality it is about Risk Management, Fiscal Resilience, and Creative Control.

Optimising your stack isn’t just about cutting costs; it’s about ensuring that no third party holds a “kill-switch” over your production.

The Pillars of Optimisation: #

• Fiscal Resilience: Reducing recurring SaaS overhead. (Example: We reduced our annual per-user cost by 97%).
• Operational Sovereignty: Moving data to European-based or self-hosted providers to ensure GDPR compliance and jurisdictional safety.
• Architectural Freedom: Choosing tools that act as “Frameworks” (like O3DE) rather than “Opinions” (like Unreal).

---

The Audit: Identifying the “SaaS Tax” #

The first step is a brutal audit of your current dependencies. Ask yourself: “If I stop paying this subscription today, can I still open my project files tomorrow?”

Our Pre-Optimisation Stack (The “Microsoft-First” Era) #

Before our shift, we were a 20-year Microsoft-first house. Here is what the liability looked like per seat:

The Sovereign Research: Finding the “Middle Ground” #

We discovered that the “mainstream” options are often bloated with features like AI Copilots and telemetry that actually hinder productivity for professional engineers.

Here is the stack we came up with

SWOT (Strength, Weakness, Opportunity, Threat) #

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 with a €200 – €400 on-boarding, 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 #

Before settling on our final environment, we audited the primary “foundations” of the Linux ecosystem. Here is how they measured up against the needs of a professional game development studio.

Arch Linux (Our Pick Choice)

• Pros: Minimalist by design; you build the OS from the ground up with zero telemetry or bloat. The Arch User Repository (AUR) provides the fastest access to the latest development tools and libraries.
• Cons: Requires an engineering-first mindset for maintenance. Because it is a rolling release, an update can occasionally introduce breaking changes if not managed with snapshots or careful package holding.
• Verdict: Our Internal Standard. While the myth says it’s “unstable,” for an experienced engineer, it is actually the most stable precisely because you know exactly what is installed. Since Valve chose it for SteamOS, it is the logical choice for a Steam-centric studio.

Ubuntu LTS (Runner Up)

• Pros: The industry baseline. If a tool exists for Linux, it is (nearly) guaranteed to have an .deb or a PPA for Ubuntu. Hardware support is generally the most “plug-and-play” of all tested distros.
• Cons: Significant “opinionated” bloat (e.g., Snap packages) and corporate telemetry that can feel a bit too much like “Windows-lite.”
• Verdict: The Reliable Refugee Choice. Ideal for developers transitioning from Windows who need a “it just works” environment without diving into the command line for basic setup.

Fedora Workstation

• Pros: The “Enterprise Desktop.” It offers a very polished, professional experience with the latest stable kernels. It is often the first to implement new security and display technologies (like Wayland).
• Cons: Short lifecycle (6-month releases) can lead to a “forced update” cycle that may disrupt long-term project development.
• Verdict: The Corporate Contender. A strong choice for those who want a professional “Workstation” feel but aren’t ready to go full-DIY with Arch.

SteamOS / Bazzite

• Pros: Highly optimised for gaming; the “Immutable” nature means it is nearly impossible for a user to break the core OS.
• Cons: The “immutable” file system, designed to protect the OS actually makes it frustrating for a developer who needs to install low-level system libraries, compilers, or custom drivers.
• Verdict: Perfect for Testing, Poor for Building. Great for a dedicated QA machine or a Steam Deck, but too restrictive for a primary development workstation.

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, modelling, 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.