Loki Porting Alpha Centauri, Sim City 3k and More

kato writes "Loki has just announced that it will be porting the following games to linux: Alpha Centauri, SimCity 3000, Soldier of Fortune, Interstate '82, and Heavy Gear II. Pre-ordering should begin soon at the standard places: Loki, Handeye, etc. No word on exactly when they'll be released, though. "

Comments

This is really cool, but...

[shaldannon]

I really like SimCity 3000, and have been hoping for some time that it would be ported eventually. However, SC3k is a DirectX program. I have two questions:

1. How is Loki going to make a Linux version of a DirectX progam and
2. Will the Linux version be compatible (mapwise and interface-wise) with the Windows version?


Who am I?
Why am here?
Where is the chocolate?

Re:This is really cool, but...

[larien]

They've done DirectX conversions before. However, what they've also done is used the Mac source as a base as it has been easier to port. Some info can be gleaned from their news server at news.lokigames.com.

WRT compatibility, other games have been direct translations, having identical interfaces and look. Saved game compatibility has usually come after patches, but some network stuff is done using MS direct play (eg, Heroes III) which they haven't been able to port. In some cases, they've managed network compatibility with Mac versions.

I'm glad Alpha Centauri's being ported, but I'm not quite so bothered about the others. To each their own, however.
--

Re:This is really cool, but...

[Sleepwalker]

As for the DirectX issue, I believe that the Simple Direct media Layer (SDL) that Loki invented does direct graphics.

Speaking of which, has anyone else out there done anything with SDL? I've downloaded it but haven't had a chance to fool with it yet, and I'd like to know if it's worth the effort.

Re:This is really cool, but...

[dieMSdie]

I was a beta tester for Heroes III. I already owned a copy of the Windows version. I found that the maps were 100% compatible. Even maps I had created with the Map Editor that came with the Windows version. I don't remember if the Win version used Direct X or not, but the Linux version's graphics were great. You really couldn't tell any difference, IMHO.

Loki is adding a lot to the Linux world, and I really appreciate their work.

Re:This is really cool, but...

[msphil]

I've been trying to get in to news.lokigames.com of late, but no luck...

One interesting thing I want to pass on to the Loki folks is that (in case they haven't noticed, although I'm sure they have) WINE has a semi-complete DirectX implementation -- including DirectPlay (see dlls/dplayx/ in the source distribution). There may be some licensing issues, but one wonders if there's enough there to enable DirectPlay support under Linux.

It would be Really Nice to be able to play Heroes3 in the usual Heroes3 arenas...

Re:This is really cool, but...

[slashdot-terminal]

Well all the other games they ported to Linux were directX based (with the possible exception of Eric's Ultimate Solitaire) The interface for all their other ports was the same as the
windows version. As for the maps, I don't know, but I don't see why not. After all, it will (probably) be the same code reading and writing the map files.

Why would anyone and I mean anyone actually care about a stupid solitaire game? Let alone for a software company to actually port that game from one OS to another?

Simcity3000 compatability

[DougBorg]

If I remember the Acorn/RiscOS version of simcity 2000 was map compatable with the windows version so i dont see why the 3000 linux version shouldn't work, after all, it is just info on the positions of builds and population data

FreeBSD

[bluGill]

Will this work in freeBSD? (Linux emulation is fine, but there are one or two things that don't run in linux emulation.)

Odds are it will run in freeBSD, and if so I'm gonnna have to buy simCity. One of the few games I even bother to play anymore, or at least last time I had a comptuer that would run it - the black and white orginial on a mac SE.

Accually I only asked this question is to make sure they test in freeBSD.

Re:FreeBSD

[krolours]

>Will this work in freeBSD? (Linux emulation is fine, but there are one or two things that don't run in linux emulation.)

They use the SDL library for most (if not all) of their game ports. The freeBSD port is in progress.

Once it is finished it should be trivial to port the games under FreeBSD.

Re:FreeBSD

[slashdot-terminal]

>Will this work in freeBSD? (Linux emulation is fine, but there are one or two things that don't run in linux emulation.)


That's pretty standard fare for most things. Better get constant updates to the source. If you wait for any kind of distribution you will invariably get crappy results. Most distributions (even the BSD stuff) dosn't hardly update things except on a bi-yearly date.

They use the SDL library for most (if not all) of their game ports. The freeBSD port is in progress.

Meaning anywhere from 6 months to 5 years.

Once it is finished it should be trivial to port the games under FreeBSD.

Ahhh the kicker here is who will do it? Who will buy them. If we do a simple logic we can see that this will probably not happen anytime soon.

1. The number of linux users is less than that of windows users.

2. the number of BSD users is less than the number of linux users.

3. Loki wants to port games to a platform that has the best chance of succeeding.

4. The mac port has already been done and is marketed well because they outnumber linux.

5. Most likely they will sell the linux version well in certain areas (Silicon Valley) but not in anytown USA or anything so I don't really see this as a possible thing.

Linux doesn't need games, it needs an Office Suite

[linuxonceleron]

While haveing games in linux is a Good Thing, and it has a benifit for the community, it really doesn't help position linux for use as a buisiness client. What linux really needs is a commercial quality, stable(sorry wordperfect), and compatible office suite. Microsoft is not a likeley cantidate for porting office over to linux, but what about lotus, they have already released domino server, how about a complete office suite, notes client, and web browser that work and look good together. This is what linux needs to compete against the likes of NT. But, hey if I can use my system to play Simcity 3k instead of working, I'm all for it.

Ticker: LOKI?

[ajs]

So the real question is this: When will Loki go public? They are probably the single hottest Linux company out there in the sense that games are the only sure-bet out there today. People may buy databases at work, but for every database there's 50 employees who go home and play SimKillMyCo-Workers. And then they buy the expansion pack, sequal, cheat books, etc. If Loki can convince the gaming biz to let them do all of the ports, their profits may require a new set of units (the yottabuck may not be sufficient).

That leaves me to wonder when I'll be allowed to buy in. Either that, or are they hiring? ;-)

Re:Ticker: LOKI?

[Alphix]

From http://www.lokigames.com/about/faq.php3

Are you a public corporation? If so, on what exchange and what is your stock symbol?

Our stock is not publicly traded, and it is unlikely this will change any time soon. While we are interested in hearing from qualified investors, we are sadly unable to entertain any small investments. This is primarily a result of U.S. federal and California state securities regulations, which make it prohibitively difficult to sell unregistered securities to most private investors.

Re:Ticker: LOKI?

[Thomas Charron]

Yea, but the problem with that is, for every game you buy, you pay around 40-50$. Expansions, like 20. Lesse, 60$ per person. Now, lesse you have 15 people at work. That's $900. Now, that database at work cost several thousands of dollars.

A gaming companies profits are no where near the amount of those generated by other sources. While ID is making a good sum, they are certainly not making what Oracle is on their database server. And ID has several of the best selling games of all time under their belt.

Re:Ticker: LOKI?

[ajs]

Our stock is not publicly traded, and it is unlikely this will change any time soon. While we are interested in hearing...

This is a standard blub. It likely means that they have given significant thought to going public. If they had not, they would a) not say anything about it or b) say something much less in line with standard soon-to-go-public-so-we-can't-piss-off-the-SEC lingo. There's this interesting dance that goes on when a company is planning on going public (I saw it when I worked for Open Market and in the companies that friends work for) where you have to say things that don't let on to others that you are going public, but by using the standard phrases (the only ones guaranteed not to piss off the SEC) you pretty much broadcast your intentions. It's kind of like Transmeta keeping hush-hush on their CPU work. You know it's something that they have great confidence in because they won't tell anyone about it, and they've very carefully closed off all of the "normal" channels that companies use to inform the public of such things. This is kind of what the quiet period is supposed to prevent, but of course, entering the quiet period not only broadcasts your intention, but informs everyone of where in the timeline you are. Funny isn't it.

Ah, what an... interesting... time to be alive!

Re:Ticker: LOKI?

[ajs]

Can I get some rationale other than the fact that a lot of people would think it would be cool? Like what Loki's actual numbers are?

*BZZTTT* That you for playing!

Loki is a privately held company. This means you have no right to (and will almost certainly not get) that kind of information unless you happen to be one of their backers.

Actually, I happen to know quite a bit about why a company would go public (having worked for several large financial institutions and been through one IPO). The reasons are:

1. To raise cash. A company may be well placed to move forward in the market, but does not have the capitol to market or into key areas. Going public can produce a large amount of cash with which the company can acquire others, market their product/service, hire, open new locations, etc.
2. Make money for their investors. Investors don't invest because they think that they will make enough in dividends to pay them back. They want to take you public or engineer a buyout.
3. Many employees are working for you because they hope those options plans will be worth something one day. If you don't intend to go public, then they can only hope for a buyout. This is sort of the same as #2, but different because your investors can shut down the company, but your employees can kill it slowly if moral is low.

Loki would probably want to public for all of the above reasons. They are definitely in the right place at the right time to go big.

Re:Ticker: LOKI?

[Thomas Charron]

In theory. But then one must ask why this doesn't apply to traditional commonly used products such as Windows 9x/NT? Or Office? Or heck, any current Win32 based game?

I disagree that software cost is dependant of demand. It just doesn't work like traditional demand rules would. With a traditional product, demand would drive production, the more produced in mass, the cheaper the price.

In software land, you're not making anything, you're simply throwing it to be stamped or burnt onto a CD, who's cost is a small fraction of the total cost of the overall product. Hence, mass production doesn't lead to any overall decrease in the cost of the product.

The future of games under Linux

[mauddib~]

My oppinion on games under Linux is very simple.
Linux still needs some improvement to make it just as good for games as Windows or DOS.
Compare Windows/DOS with Linux
Windows/DOS :
Single user: no security problems, so coders have much more freedom in accessing hardware
Good libraries: I can tell you many bad things about Windows, but DirectX is a good library
Good hardware support: nuff' said
Linux (or any other unice)
Multi user: coders have less freedom because of kernel design which prohibits direct access to the hardware unless run as suid root.
Libraries: I've got to admit: mesa is getting better and better. It wouldn't be bad if we had mesa as standard for every game developed under Linux
Hardware support: Get's better and better (look at nvidea's fast driver support for it's latest card)

Looking at the differences: Linux is not far from it's goal as gaming platform. But do we really _need_ those games? I don't know for sure, but for as far as I know, most gamers still use Windows as their main platform, and I think they don't really see the need for changing to another os.

Re:The future of games under Linux

[Zibby]

The only reason I use windows it to play games. Flame all you want, but StarOffice fills my needs office application wise.

Currently, one of the major drawbacks for linux gamewise is X. It's just not designed to handle 3D games. (Xfree 4 should help) GLX helps, and does a good job running Q3A.

But these limitations would be fine for 2D games. (RTS, simulations, etc...) And the porting should, in theory, be eaiser AND would be abble to run on a wider range of systems because of the lower hardware requirments.

I'd buy anything and everything Blizzard ported (or had ported) to linux without a second thought.

But, if you asked me to perdict which current game would sell espically well for the linux platform, I'd tell you RollerCoaster Tycoon. Why?

Price. $20 - $30

System Requirments: The windows version needs a p90 with 16 mb of ram as a minimum. (Recomends a p200 w/ 32 mb of ram)

It's been on PC Gamers top ten list since it was released

I've lost more hours of productivity to this game then any other I bought recently.

Well, you get the idea. If companies are going to bring their games to linux, the not as flashy as the 3D shooter but still fun 2D games would be the ideal place to start because you can sell the product to a larger section of the Linux community. As linux evolves, so will the systems that run it. Better support for 3D and better SDKs.

And who wouldn't want to play StarCraft, Baldur's Gate, Total Aniliation, RollerCoaster Tycoon, SimCity under Linux? In my opinion, these would be excelent games to port.

Alpha Centauri

[anthonyclark]

Could someone who has played Alpha Centauri please tell me if it is any good? I bought Civilisation : Call to Power on the strength of some online reviews but found it quite limited in long-term appeal. How does Alpha Centauri compare to Civ:CTP? Does it have the same massive slowdown during later stages of a game? (ie. when many cities, etc are built) Are the computer opponents predictable?

Any honest reviews would be gratefully received.

Re:Alpha Centauri

[Svartalf]

Well, I've not played it yet- I do have it in hand, borrowed from my brother. One thing in it's favor is that it's a Sid Meyer game; Civ:CTP, while it's a great game and I'd buy it again, is something that Activision had been doing on their own.

Re:Alpha Centauri

[gothic]

By FAR is AC a simply *superior* game then Call To Power...I own Civ, Civ2, Civ2:MGE, CTP, AC, and the AC Addon. Call To Power is the worst yet. The graphics maybe pretty, but that doesn't make up for the simple lack of interest the game generates. One thing to remember, Sid didn't do Call To Power. From what I understand, the only reason they could use the good Civ name was because they won a lawsuit. AC should be compaired to Civ2, and does a good job of taking up where Civ2 left off. I bought AC when it came out, and I'm still playing it (Same with Civ2, is that bad?)
My one bit of advice: Don't play AC to win, play AC to play. =] Pretty simple. But it will keep you playing for a long time.

On a side note, we have issues: Try to play AC on a speedy system. Something over 300mhz. It will generally be rather smooth. Don't play on an NT box if you choose to play on Windows, as it screws with the sound. Make sure you (of course) get the latest patches. Lastly, have to fear of kicking a little ass.. =]

Re:Alpha Centauri

[SEE]

How does Alpha Centauri compare to Civ:CTP?

No idea, never played CTP.

Does it have the same massive slowdown during later stages of a game? (ie. when many cities, etc are built)

Not really. It does pretty good even on my 6x86-120, which is at/near the "absolute minimum requirement" of a Pentium-133. (For maximum speed, set all the "fast movement" game options [I do] use the low-res graphics set [I don't]). Extensive automation options and the F-key secondary interface make managing large empires relatively easy.

Are the computer opponents predictable?

Well, each faction has a favored strategy, and there are some little stupidities that are exploitable if you feel like "cheating" (like trading worthless cites for great ones). But playing at Transcend level and regularly changing the faction you play, the victory conditions allowed, and the size of the map will give you both challenging and variable play.

Anyway, I really, really like Alpha Centauri, and strongly recommend it.

Re:Alpha Centauri

[Wah]

if you like Civ type games Alpha Centauri is a must have, if simply to see what Reynolds and Meier have done this time. I played it through a few times and now try to avoid it, unless I have tons of time to play. It (a true sign of good games) can make entire evening disappear. The tech is cool, the CGI is nice, there's even some inside jokes about M$, all the different factions are really different and should be played that way, the vehicle design and upgrade app is cool, battle is nice and simple, the voice-overs are well done, and there is a plotline. Tweaking your own type of government is fun. The bottom line is that it is very much a sequel to Civ2, the gameplay is nearly identical, just more polished and with all new stuff (albeit does out in much the same way).

Re:Alpha Centauri

[Stonehand]

It's nice, but I'll be a heretic and note that for me, it doesn't have as good a "feel" as Civ2 or MOO2. While the unit design is interesting, most of the weapons are for all practical purposes just a short series of numbers and same for the armor, instead of having the radical differences between AF Disrupters, BHGs, MIRV/EMG missiles and so forth... so it's nice, but not THAT huge of a deal.

Terraforming is damn slow. 'specially if you're raising lots of land from the sea, which IS admittedly a cool feature. Managing an ever-expanding perimeter of clean/super formers is tedious, at best, and there's no option to automate formers specifically for growing one's islands -- and IIRC, the stack system is too weak to create a stack of formers and order them to all do the same thang with a minimum of keystrokes.

You'd also better have a good tolerance for "issues", like delusional "governors" whose priorities can be remarkably strange (not quite as bad as in _Civ II_, perhaps, where the Domestic Advisor would suggest spaceship parts before, say, *ANY* buildings are built), and the occasional odd starting arrangement (like a player being stuck on a tiny, mostly rocky island with room for exactly *one* base. There seems to be a bit more randomness here, as your initial units might get eaten by those of Planet, or you might start next to a *nice* "Landmark" giving you bonuses, or so forth. CivII allowed for *huge* continents with, say, 5 players on 'em, but I don't remember ever starting in the middle of a nearly un-terraformable rockfield.)

Re:Alpha Centauri

[JamesKPolk]

Funny... I've never, ever, ever, ever gotten global warming, or suffered the consequences of somebody else's pollution, in SMAC.

Maybe that's because the two factions I play most often are Morgan and Deirdre... but no, not even when I played as Hive or anyone else.

The huge swarms of mindworms :

"Do you togetherthink? ... because I'm going to have to prune some of your branches"

only occurs when you have bases with large pollution problems... just make sure to build Tree Farms, Centauri preserves, get the right Secret Projects.. and all of that goes away.

Re:Alpha Centauri

[scrytch]

> I also think the worms can be too powerful of a unit. They win 2/3's of all attacks regardless of the units strength.

Mind worms are psi units, and thus do ignore all armor when attacking. Your unit defends with morale, sensor and base bonuses, and any psi defense bonuses you may have, such as Empath Song, or The Neural Amplifier. Psi units are also heavily weighted toward attack, and enjoy a significant defense bonus. And finally, if you're unlucky enough to be caught in fungus while a boil is attacking, you suffer a defense penalty (unless you have The Pholus Mutagen)

When you have appropriately trained troops, even a single demon boil is no threat to a base. It's when they pop up from fungal growth. Had one swarm take a base from size 20 to size 10 in one turn once. Ouch.

Re:Alpha Centauri

[scrytch]

Er, meant to say psi units get a significant offense bonus. Psi defenders are typically quite weak (except those fungal towers in SMACX, those suckers are tough).

Re:Alpha Centauri

[scrytch]

One thing I've always enjoyed about AC is that although diplomacy is still chinese-menu, at least the factions speak in complete sentences. diplomacy in CTP was so laughable ... I think it was actually worse than Civilization I

Re:Alpha Centauri

[PurpleBob]

If you're complaining about the color scheme, it seems you haven't tried the gamma correction option in the game. Turn it up to 1.5 and things are nice and bright.

I agree about Civ:CTP. I played the demo of it - it was okay, but it wasn't instantly addicting the way the Alpha Centauri demo had been. Plus, it felt like one of those Civ2 scenarios where the scenario maker messes with all the settings just because he can. (Clue to game designers: don't assume you're better than Sid at designing the fundamental rules. You're probably wrong.)

--

Re:Alpha Centauri

[PurpleBob]

Ah ha! Thank you for clearing that up. I'd only heard a vague rumor of Sid Meier's "Sweep of Time Trilogy", which would include Civ III, Alpha Centauri (II?), and one other game... I couldn't concieve of a game set before 6000 BC, so I assumed it would be a continuation of Alpha Centauri, which would be extremely odd because the big ending of Alpha Centauri involves "transcending" and essentially turning into gods. That'd be one weird game.

Of course, a sim with dinosaurs is also weird... but I'm confident that Sid can manage to make it a good game.
--

Re:Alpha Centauri

[PurpleBob]

Actually, Industrial Base gives you better armor, not Industrial Economics. But I guess that kind of proves your point.

The technologies are confusing, until you start reading the quotes and descriptions of the technologies. They're actually entertaining - I know that came as a surprise to me, after playing CivII where the technology descriptions were intolerably boring.
--

Re:Alpha Centauri

[BJH]

Wow! I know the meaning of every word in that comment (except "Pholus"), and I still couldn't understand a thing you said.

Windows has good hardware support?

[FascDot Killed My Pr]

That depends on what you mean by "good". If you mean a large breadth of support, then yes, Windows has good support.

But if you mean a large depth of support, as in "Yeah, I got that new SDG 123 card and slapped it in this weekend", then Windows sucks. When I used to run Windows I would never let any hardware less than 6 months old touch it (and I preferred to wait 12 months). Why? Because installing new hardware is guaranteed to toast Win95.

But still, "better than Linux", right? Yes. For now. But as more hardware vendors jump on the Linux bandwagon with open specs/drivers we'll see Linux boxes make the phrase "bleeding edge" a thing of the past.
---

Where?

[El Volio]

I can find no mention of this press release on their website (one would think it would show up there pretty quickly...)

Can anyone give us anything that will allow us to confirm this?

Pissed Off

[Tsk]

Yes, I'm pissed off because :
1) I can't find any anouncement on the Loki web site
2) The cool thing I like About Linux is that it runs on non X86 hardware. And many announcement of That kind only care to do the port for the i386 linux crowd - once in a while PowerPC owners will have some chunks and pieces. But Alpha users never get any attention, not to mention other High powered platform running Linux

I whish the computing industry would realise that supporting x86 and only x86 is driving them nowhere because one day ( and Boy I whish this day to be sooner than expected) the x86 platform will die, because One day producing "compatible" processors that are more powerfull than the ones available nowdays will cost too much. Compagnies making games only have x86 expertise and they'll loose $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$ the day x86 dies. They should support other hardware, because it costs a bit but with that bit you usually cover all the hardware ....
sorry for being off-topic ....

Re:Pissed Off

[Alphix]

I dont think Loki deserves all this moaning...

From http://www.lokigames.com/prod ucts/civctp/updates.php3:
Updates and patches
Civilization: Call to Power 1.1 Update
Intel x86 and compatibles (3.8 MB)
PowerPC* (2.7 MB)
Alpha** (5 MB)

And from http://www.lokigames.com/about/faq.php3 :

What Linux distribution do you use as a base? Do you include an installation wizard to support many distributions?

We would like to support at least the major distributions, but many of the details still need to be worked out. We have released an Alpha version of Civilization: Call to Power, and are exploring the possibility of Sparc support; thanks to our partnership with Terra Soft Solutions, we will also be supporting the PowerPC. Linux is growing, changing and adapting to users needs on a daily basis. We'll keep pace with the current industry standards and work with publishers and game distributors to produce quality products that respond to users needs as closely as possible.

If you were talking more generally than Loki I do understand you though....but I seriously doubt that the x86 platform will die anytime soon...

This is great!

[jd]

Loki certainly seem to know how to drive the Linux games market! More power to them!

If the original software companies aren't interested in making Linux ports themselves, then a go-between company that is & will is perhaps the best possible alternative. In a way, it's better, as you'll end up with a very big, very powerful games company for Linux - muscle that could come in handy to break open the games console market.

Re:This is great!

[jd]

Almost forgot - if anyone from Loki is reading this, PLEASE pester David Braben into letting you port Virus 2000 and/or "Elite 4" to Linux! I, for one, would pay a small fortune for either of these under Linux!

From a game maker company

[D3]

Out of respect for not posting the name and info from a private e-mail I will not list the company or personal name of where I got this information. In the process of e-mailing the V.P. of engineering for a well known game company (on a topic other than games) I asked him about his take on Linux support/development. Note, this was not anyone associated with Id Software as might be implied below.

"Glad to hear you have enjoyed some of our games. I think Linux has a
chance...but it will be slow going until sales and profits convince
publishers that it's a wise investment to do Linux versions. Currently what
happens, is a Linux porting group will offer to do a port of a Windows game.
The porting group gets a decent royalty for Linux sales and the original
developer and/or publisher don't have to pay for the port...so for them,
it's basically risk-free. (note that this doesn't apply to Id Software
since they mainly support everything for the fun of it (their words, not
mine) because they can). :)"

So everybody support Loki as best as we can and the game makers will respond by making games on Linux.

SDL now industrial strength IMHO

[Anonymous Coward]

I've been testing/fooling around with/writing code for SDL for a while now and it's getting to be THE library for both native Linux games and for porting games to Linux.

It supports Win32 (either through Visual C or Cygnus's cross-compiler), Linux, Beos and the Mac (although the latter two need some more work). There's lots and lots of goodies in its API: threads, tracked music playback, MIDI playback, CD playback, MPEG music and video libraries, multiplayer net code, threads, hooks to OpenGL (it's possible to write an SDL program which is hardware accelerated under X f.e), hooks to GTK+, and fast access to X framebuffers through a linear surface which can be converted to any colour depth.

In short , if you're looking to write a game or any multimedia kind of app, SDL is the way to go. It is possible by changing a single switch at autoconf time to have your app recompiled for Windows 9x + DirectX 5 or better.

Another great thing is that this lib is being used for Loki's commercial games so it's real-world and any improvements made there go straight back into the source. Likewise all the testing and feedback makes it possible for all those games to be ported to Linux :) I know you have it already but anyone who wants to have a look can find it here

Re:Yes, Windows DOES has good hardware support.

[Bishop]

Simple: we can tweak the hell out of Linux drivers, we can't under Windows. The former is insteresting and some would say fun. The latter is boring, and infuriateing when it dosen't work because there is nothing we can do about it.

Can't help but wonder...

[Penrif]

Is Loki spreading themselves a wee bit thin? It seems like every month or two they're announcing a few more titles. Are they really that good at porting these things?

I don't think so. I still have a few bugs left unresolved from their first title, Civ:CTP. For instance, networking does not work from the PPC platform. This just happens to be the main reason I bought CTP, so I could trash my roommate, but I've had to do it running Linux under Virtual PC on top of MacOS instead of just going into LinuxPPC.

If you're listening Loki, I'm still waiting. And no, I don't want a refund, I want a functional game. I'll even help code/test it if you want.

System Overhead?

[slashdot-terminal]

Just a little question what kind of systems do we actually need to run these games? I have had a *very* difficult time even running fairly trivial ports of various dos games on my linux machine because they do graphics interface work quite poorly. If people don't believe me just look at a dos game (just humor me here) and play it for a while now play a compatable linux game on the same hardware and such. Assuming that the hardware requirements for the game are close enough to the actual hardware that your system has you really see lagging preformance.

If games control the PC market then Linux games will force a new system ever 3 weeks. I'm sorry if I come off sounding like a flammer but it's the truth with most apps the conversion process dosn't go well at all and just sucks mostly.

PS. Are there any good ST games out there for linux I sure would like a good native star trek simulation for linux (no not the BSD games trek).

Re:System Overhead?

[shaldannon]

AFAIK, just about any Linux system should run these. Civ CTP works fine on both my dual-400 celeron system and my friend's PII (166? | 266?) (although you can tell a noticable difference ;) ). It also runs through X on any other UNIX. Just for fun I tried to run it off his computer, over his T1, through the school network and onto a Sun Ultra 5. The result was slow as molasses, with 16 colors and a nasty green tinge, but it worked.


Who am I?
Why am here?
Where is the chocolate?

unsure

[ricOS/2]

I so far have abstained from buying any commercial software for my linux box (which happens to be my only box, and it ONLY runs linux). No, it's not because it's not free software that I don't buy it -- I have no problems with non-free software. It's because I don't see how they can guarantee compatibility if I choose to upgrade my software... I like all of the older games (TTD, Civ1, SimCity1, MOO/MOO2, XCOM1, Warcraft2 etc) more than the newer ones (although I liked Alpha Centauri before I gave my Win box away), and I'm not sure that if I buy a Linux game now that I'll be able to play it in two years after I upgrade to the latest offerings of the distribution I use with whatever kernel and glibc we have at the time ... If anyone can assuage my fears, I'd be grateful (maybe I could play Alpha Centauri again... ;)

BTW, Loki doesn't give discounts to those who already own the Win version of the games they port, do they?

Re:Games are Great for Linux

[slashdot-terminal]

Amen to that, brother! My question is, how are action games going to work under a PMT scheduler? Just boost their priority? Or maybe tweek the scheduler to give a guaranteed
X% of the processor to a particular class of app (see the Bach book for an explanation of this)? Or all most of the new games multithreaded?

Under most modern operating systems (NT, linux, BeOS, and others) multitasking is possible. In linux you just have to set the priority like you said to a really high level and whatever that is causing the system to bog down at 19 or something. Works really well for things like distributed.net and others.

Re:Linux doesn't need games, it needs an Office Su

[slashdot-terminal]

While haveing games in linux is a Good Thing, and it has a benifit for the community, it really doesn't help position linux for use as a buisiness client. What linux really needs is
a commercial quality, stable(sorry wordperfect), and compatible office suite. Microsoft is not a likeley cantidate for porting office over to linux, but what about lotus, they have
already released domino server, how about a complete office suite, notes client, and web browser that work and look good together. This is what linux needs to compete against the
likes of NT. But, hey if I can use my system to play Simcity 3k instead of working, I'm all for it.

Wow just what I need. At the end of the day when I come home from work and everything is fine I just get back to work right? Nope. Anyone who actually enjoys working on shall we say unchallenging office apps instead of expanding his/her mind is a complete fool. I don't need an "office suite" at home. I would never need one and would not buy one. I think there are other alternatives to microsoft that also work for the office suite thing if linux dosn't have it anyway.

They do!

[slashdot-terminal]

Who cares? If they run anything like linux q3 does on my machine they'll be crap..

Don't you know? Every game is supposed to run crappy. It's just the companies forcing you to get newer stuff and run it. Never mind about the fact that you may not want to actually get a new computer at all. I have found that out the hard way many times. Hell it dosn't matter that your are poor or that you can't afford one to the level that the game needs at all; it about plain and simple profit.

Plus isn't Q3 just some network game anyway? I will never play a game where the main focus is on playing over a network that I still do not have access to or a machine that will run said software.

But eventually you will be able to. When their little computers hit that little thing like the speed of light and they cannot increase processor speed then they will have to stop creating bloatware at all. And don't say that quantum computing will even cover this. The real world is not star trek and is not ever going to even come close.

How about a... combination with Interplay(!)

[Zach Baker]

I think it's possible Loki could have a go at a public offering. I was pessimistic about this the last time I thought about it, but Loki is far enough outside of the spectrum of normal game companies for it to work, and they do dominate their (currently small) market.

But I'm still hesitant about that idea, because what they really need to do is secure their place in the market somehow. At some point, when Linux gaming is hot enough, Linux versions of games will ship under the same publishing deal as the Windows version. At that point, Loki has problems. That's what I'm worried about -- they have no ownership of their content, and not enough control over distribution. They need to fix one of those problems somehow.

So what about a buyout? A buyout by a large publisher would completely mess up Loki's current business plan. Then there's a host of non-game companies to pick from. Red Hat seems like a good choice, because they have that synergy thing and a great distribution channel to offer. Although it wouldn't achieve the speculative valuation of an IPO, it would be an excellent growth strategy for Loki.

However, consider this outlandish suggestion. Interplay is already publicly traded (IPLY), and is a mid-size publisher (an endangered breed). If they mated, I believe Loki would be able to enhance their position in the market, be able to take on a few original games, and get pretty good distribution and promotion. You've got a public company, you've got a pretty good distribution setup, you've got Shiny, Interplay's in Irvine, hey, even the name sounds hip. Not too shabby.

However, I gotta go for the Red Hat buyout as the most likely scenario.

Re:How about a... combination with Interplay(!)

[Zach Baker]

Well, since Red Hat refused to distribute Quake II a while ago because they don't want to do closed source stuff, I seriously doubt that is likely.

Ooh, good point. Since Loki is all about O.P.P. (other people's programs), they've had to bend over backwards to show that they do support free software. But given their current business, no amount of bending would be enough to fit in with Red Hat's stated business philosophy.

Hadn't even thought of that. I take back my statement that a Red Hat merger looks like Loki's most likely course of expansion. Once again, good point!

Re:Linux games rock!

[demon]

... they really need to lobby Blizzard and port over some of their games ...

I've asked Scott Draeker about this myself (once via e-mail and once @ LWCE in August) - believe me, they've tried. Blizzard is absolutely convinced that there's not enough market for their games on Linux. (yea, like getting their mailserver crashed by Linuxers begging for a port isn't enough evidence...) If you want Blizzard to let Loki port their games, TELL THEM about it! Call them, e-mail them, whatever. Find some way to express to them that yes, the Linux market is big enough, and YES, we want StarCraft!

Re:Who cares???

[slashdot-terminal]

Good god man, what piece of shit you trying to run it on? A '486? Quake 3 was quite play able on my old Cyrix 200 system with a Voodoo 3000 graphics card. I just spent $20
on for a 300 mhz upgrade and the system rocks.

Why does anyone really need to upgrade anything at all? Why is it constantly necessary to upgrade in a microsoft like fashion when linux was meant to allow crappy machines to shine. Frankly I find this lack of vision..disturbing.

Re:Who cares???

[slashdot-terminal]

Operating systems and applications for them are two entirely different matter. Sure, Linux, AmigaOS and some other operating systems can run on pretty low-power hardware but
would you really want to tell the software developers that they aren't allowed make anything else but programs that work on 386 or 68000?

I have really seen some pretty amazing stuff on low end machines like these. All you have to do is optimize, optimize, optimize, and do some work arounds and there you are.

If a certain program really can do its job on a low-power machine, it's fine and it shouldn't be 'enchanted' to need more than it really needs. But should we forbid programs like
Quake3 (complex realtime 3d needs modern hardware) or applications for large scientific visualization (need pretty lot of memory and preferably CPU too) if they do not work on
older machines? IMO not.

Ever seen a program called gtop? This is a GNOME version of top and it just plain is a memory hog on systems or at very least significantly contributes to generally bad system load. An ncurses program run from the console is also safer. Linux dosn't crash or hand except if you use the graphical interfaces. Then you can have windows resource type problems in terms of the mouse barely being able to move or not at all and no commands can be send to the X server at all.

About the need to keep programs within certain perameters. Is it really necessary to increase graphics by 2% and increase system resoures like ram by 250% and processor requirements by 600% and hd space by 300% come on even the most avid person would not see this as an acceptable trade off. And that's basically all we are really seeing after all even with 20/20 vision you do not see all that much difference.

Re:First 3D games by Loki... not

[larien]

You're wrong; Myth II and Heretic II are both 3D games.
--

Re:Linux doesn't need games, it needs an Office Su

[slashdot-terminal]

I'd like to put in the obligatory plug for AbiWord, and Gnumeric, which are the most polished parts of the GNOME Office replacement. Remember, unlike their KDE counterparts,
the GNOME tools compile, build and work with the GNOME libraries you already have for your everyday GNOME desktop.

Well I actually had experience unless it has changes significant by lightyears of progress Abiword does not have even a fraction of the features of say Word or Wordperfect has in it. A great deal of the features were simply not implimented (the menus said that if you want to add such and such a feature here is where to add it). It's not a fair comparison because it not finished afterall.

I disagree.

[ffatTony]

I do not expect the people at my office besides myself and the other programmers to use linux for quite some time (read maybe around 2050). Even if there was the most wonderful linux office suite and was free. They would still happily pay MS mucho $ and complain about its short comings. People don't want different things.

Our strategy to attract users (if thats the general desire) should be to continue making games. Get the kids early and they will stick with what they know (linux, free software et al) into the future.

Personally I really don't care if more users use linux. I use it. And personally vi is the only word processor (I know vi is more correctly labeled as a text editor, I'm just trying to make a point:) I hope I'll ever need.

Re:Neet.

[slashdot-terminal]

Now the day that you can walk into Wally World and buy a shrink wrapped Linux game I think we will have made it.

Never heard of that one.

Re:Meet the Trollers'

[Dunkahn]

I have just a question : With all those games, when will we find time to work ? And oh, a second one : With all those games, all my friends will be asking me "Help me install Linux ! This is a cool OS... I need to play". I was thinking about 20 fake-nerds rushing on me : what should I do with them ?

How big is the commercial Linux game market?

[Junks Jerzey]

I have to wonder if Loki is actually making any money at this. Everyone I know who runs Linux--only a handful of people, relatively--dual boots Windows 95/98 in order to run games. People who spend a lot of money on games can't stand waiting months or a year for the big name games that are in stores now. And since most Linux users got Windows when they bought a computer, there's no reason not to use it as a game platform (other than paranoid idealism).

How well are they selling?

[Skeezix]

What I'm curious about is how well our the games that Loki has ported, thus far, selling? Anyone have any numbers or rough figures?
----

Re:How well are they selling?

[msphil]

I don't have rough figures, but according to a post on the heroes3 newsgroup (loki.games.heroes3), one of the beta-testers ordered the game through Loki -- and Loki was waiting for some more stock in order to ship it.

Guess at least one title sold through the initial product run =)

(Loki has, to date, refused to release sales figures.)

Re:How well are they selling?

[Skeezix]

^our^are
----

Re:How well are they selling?

[Skeezix]

Well that seems to bode well. I'd love to see the figures themselves though. I suppose time will tell.
----

GNU/Linux needs modern games

[noc]

Looking at the differences: Linux is not far from it's goal as gaming platform. But do we really _need_ those games? I don't know for sure, but for as far as I know, most gamers still use Windows as their main platform, and I think they don't really see the need for changing to another os.

Yes, we do need those games. Games were always part of the BSDs, have always been on the GNU task list, were included with every version of MS Windows and every version of MacOS, and have always been played by computer users. And modern computer users want modern games.

We aren't necessarily looking to change the hard-core gamers' OS of choice, but rather the general computer users'. We need games for our Free OS if we want it to be complete.

DirectX conversions

[Random_Task]

I'll probably get chewed out by you guys for knowing this kind of stuff, but if you have ever worked with the actual DirectX package you would realize that a conversion is not as complex as it may seem.

DirectX was designed to be a package of graphics/sound/communication libraries that interacts quickly with the windows operating system. I'm sure we all knew that. The important part of that statement is that they are libraries. There is a theory in computer programming that the main functionality of the game should be separated from the user interface. In fact even when the coding and design gets to the user interface level much of the design has been abstracted to such a point that to execute graphics routines/ sound routines/ and communication routines the coders will make calls to the graphics package of their choice. This is the key to reusability. When coding one should keep most of these library calls to only a few mandatory design layers. When a conversion is then in order all it requires is that the modules that handle the above mentioned routines be replaced with modules that are system compliant. Of course this requires work, but this is where a wrapper can come in to place and wrap all of the old DirectX calls and redirect them into "our" own system dependent modules.

If the product is designed correctly the hard part shouldn't be in the porting. The hard part is in the actual coding. These ideas are bordering on component technology, but in my research it seems that a lot of the hard code game industry and other development companies are going that route, be it through CORBA, COM/DCOM or any of the other component based technologies. Reusability and portability just becomes a matter of wrapping a few things here and there.

If anyone notices any errors please comment. Also, I am well aware of the design issues involved with abstracting graphics routines including the execution time. But if you do any real coding with this stuff you realize that the real time saving is not made by reducing function calls by eliminating redirection, but rather through optimizing algorithms. And finally, MS claims that there is a version of COM that works with UNIX/LINUX but DirectX's use of COM shouldn't important in a conversion if DirectX is being wrapped. It is definitely not important if the DirectX routines are being replaced by those of another graphics routine or by custom routines, but if there is some kind of DirectX emulation going on I'm not sure if COM would be required to work on the LINUX boxes.

As far as maps go, all of the maps are stored in data files as exported information (I'm pretty sure about that.) Just because the graphics are handled differently doesn't mean that the underlying data is handled differently. In reality the map data is exactly the same. The system dependent program will import a standard map data file and display the said data file in its own system dependent manner.

This has probably already been said by now.

Random Task ... brr its cold up here in ND..

Poor Parsing

[John Poole]

Let me get this straight?
"when I have to boot to Win9x in order to play a game"
Ah, when exactly do you HAVE to play a game?

I don't have to play games, I just have to boot to Win9x when I want to play a game. I'm not that much of a gamer, but it is nice to have a quick game of Half-Life when I want a break from whatever I'm working on.

Remember, life is more than just work -- you're allowed to have fun, too.

The Problem with ports...

[Upsilon]

Sure, I would love to have some Linux games, but in most cases ports are released long after the original versions. Any game that I really want to play I probably already have, so getting the Linux version would require buying it AGAIN. Who wants to pay for something twice? Not me. Especially since, as much as I love Linux, its hardware support needs some work. Maybe X 4.0 will help, but currently the same game using the same hardware will perform considerably slower under Linux than it will under windoze.

Upsilon

SDL efficiency?

[roystgnr]

I'm a little curious if there's been any improvement in the multimedia layer that Loki uses since the first CivCTP patch came out? Unfortunately, on my machine civctp is a statically linked executable (Bad Loki!) and so I can't just download the latest SDL code from their site and try it. I'll happily go hunting around again if they've had a later CivCTP patch than 1.1.

CivCTP has some problems. I've played both the Windows and Linux versions for a while, and while both are unacceptably slow and memory-leaking for a 2D game (and Alpha Centauri is even worse - what, do we need to start benchmarking frame rates on non-3D games again???), the Linux version cranks up X's CPU usage as well. As near as I can figure, they send a complete screen redraw across the X pipe every time something as simple as a small cursor blink happens. And on a 1280x1024 screen, that can hurt.

no, here's why - sm 4014304401

[goon]

...Will I be able to buy an "upgrade" to the Linux version if I buy the Windows version? Loki and Activision sell their respective versions of Civilization: Call to Power independently of the other. In addition, we pay royalties to Activision based on sales of the Linux version. We currently have no plans to provide a Linux 'upgrade' for purchasers of the Windows version, but will announce an upgrade policy on this website should that change....

this question gets asked about once every few months. I guess that consumers have to realise that the purchase of one ports does not necessarily entitle you to obtain the binary for another platform, without paying (in full).

links: http://www.lokigames.com/products/civctp/faq3-Sale s.php3#upgrade

Re:MS hardware support will continue to best Linux

[dagnabit]

Isn't HAL really Harware Abstraction Layer, not Allocation?