That’s the nice thing about Garuda; all the difficult stuff is already set up for you, but because the distro is basically Arch, you still have the power to do whatever you want with your OS once you’ve used it for awhile and get the hang of things. If you wanted, you could even strip out all the Garuda stuff and return to vanilla Arch.

That’s why I recommend it for first time Linux gamers. It’s Arch with easy mode enabled. And there’s absolutely nothing wrong with that.

I was under the impression Arch was more for “hardcore” users, is that an outdated mindset (or was it ever true)?

It’s more nuanced than that.

Arch Linux, the distro Garuda Linux is derived from, is definitely not a distro that holds your hand like e.g. Linux Mint does. It (somewhat) demands you to read extensively through its excellent^[1] ArchWiki.

However, Garuda and other derivatives^[2] are opinionated takes on Arch that try to fulfill a specific goal that its respective maintainers have in mind. This can range from using Arch Linux as a base for delivering:

• a scrutinizingly optimized distro that at (the very) least inches out every other distro in performance (i.e. CachyOS)
• a distro that functions as a glorified installer^[3] for Arch. But with that, remains very close in spirit to what Arch is all about (i.e. EndeavourOS)
• a ready-to-go gaming distro (i.e. Garuda Linux)
• (and everything in between and beyond…)

(Note that the oversimplified descriptions found above don’t quite do justice to the enormous effort that is put into these projects. Furthermore, it has to be mentioned that each of these distros proud themselves on the amazing communities they’ve built.)

Finally, it goes without saying that having an Arch base continues to pose a (potential) maintenance burden^[4] with the constant stream of updates. While some of the above distros include some of the available protections by default, none claim to provide a silver bullet^[5]. Thankfully, problems ‘should’ only act up every once in a while. And (almost surely) deflecting them with a working snapshot provides an evergreen magical experience.

So, to conclude, Arch Linux as a distro definitely is more demanding than e.g. Linux Mint. However, the derivatives mentioned above definitely bridge the gap to a remarkable extent. So much so, perhaps, that you might not even notice much of a difference (besides the constant stream of updates).

---

1. Arch Linux is not unique in its extensive documentation. This is more of a trend we find on other distros that come with (almost) no defaults; e.g. Gentoo also sports a(n arguably even more) comprehensive Wiki. This makes total sense as these systems require from their users to set it up. Which, unsurprisingly, is a nonstarter without proper guidance. ↩︎

2. This includes but is not limited to the likes of CachyOS and EndeavourOS. A more exhaustive list is found here. ↩︎

3. Historically speaking, the hardest part about Arch Linux was its installation. This has since been mostly alleviated with the introduction of archinstall. ↩︎

4. I think the Upgrading the system section of its System maintenance wiki entry is one of the most striking examples of what I mean. I’m simply unaware of any other distro that requires/demands something similar. Note that -on Arch- you’re encouraged to update daily or at least weekly. ↩︎

5. In Arch Linux’ defense, this is a hard problem to solve without introducing radical changes. Even openSUSE that pioneered the BTRFS + Snapper workflow in its Tumbleweed, is actively seeking and working on an even more powerful solution. But let’s not get down that rabbit hole for now 😜. ↩︎