Slashdot Mirror
Linux Gaming: Looking Back And Looking Forward
James Hills writes: "Gamespy.com has released their end of the year Linux retrospective , "Operating system historians will record the year 2000 as the year that Linux gaming began to become a serious prospect for both gamers and developers. While many things still need to be resolved for Linux gaming to seriously compete with Windows gaming, companies such as Mandrake, Red Hat, SuSe, nVidia, 3Dfx, Loki, Vicarious Visions, Tribsoft, Hyperion Entertainment, and thousands of programmers working on projects such as KDE, Gnome, and Xfree86 have begun to make gaming in Linux gaming a more mainstream concept. Through the efforts of corporate investors and individual netizens, the Linux gaming market experienced tremendous improvements in all areas last year and the year 2001 looks even brighter. ""
I don't necessarily agree with points 1 and 3.
Point 1>
If what you were saying was true then there wouldn't be any good free open source software available now.
Point 3>
PSX CD's and bajillions of other PC games are duped, copied and "ripped off left and right" but Sony, Blizzard, etc. seem to be doing fine. This is just like the claptrap the recording industry always spews against MP3 distributers.
Give it a few years. My baby sister can navigate her way up and down any windows application, and I am getting her into Linux. Kids today are born and bred on computers, so the 'average user' will start getting more and more intelligent in years to come...
--
Good quote, too many chars. Seriously, the slashdot 120 char limit sucks!
What about online gaming? Everquest, diablo, starcraft blah blah
Well, what I tell people is that:
If you want to see more software like this in the future, then pay them; because otherwise, you can't expect anything in return.
I stay as far away from 'copyright infringing' on software as I can. I wouldn't touch it with a 20' pole.
The reason is that by following the liscences and restrictions, I see just how good/bad they are.
This has really shown me the benefit of Free software (GPL, BSD, etc.) over non-Free.
--
Soma: because a gramme is better than a damn.
We are still supporting linux.
The only downside of the next product is that initially it will probably only work at full feature level with the Nvidia OpenGL driver, but after the first test gets out (still a very long time in the future), I will jump back in to the driver development to try and bring the other open source drivers up to par.
John Carmack
Unfourtionaly it is not that linux is a bad OS its more of a openGL problem. OpenGL is simply not developing as fast as Direct 3D. It doesnt matter how good the people behind OpenGL are if no new versions are released, it will die.
Open GL is currently having a Extension explosion where a lot of new extensions compleatly changes the way open GL is used. This makes it very dificult to use.
What is even more alarming is that there are people out ther working on new API designs like SMASH for OpenGL but they are ignored by the Open GL ARB. Soon we will need a alternative open API
That may work for a game like Diablo, but not really for Everquest. Games like Everquest require a huge amount of bandwidth, so you can't support hundreds of people on a cable modem connection at home. You need an OC3 at least to run such a game. As for giving away clients (not the source, but the client itself), It looks like the guys at Reakktor Media, AG are going to give away the client for their upcoming MMORPG/FPS hybrid, Neocron. They will charge 10 bucks a month, with discounts if you buy 3 or 6 month subscriptions. Unfortunately, though, it doesn't look like Reakktor at this point is interested in doing a MacOS or Linux port of the game, since they only made Direct X and Glide renderers for the game. Of course, if they made a lot of money off the Windows (not I didn't use the term "Windoze", I actually like Windows 2000), they might port it to Linux and Mac. Who knows. And no, I'm not a supporter of Open Source software.
> DLL Hell doesn't really apply to games, which have largely relied on DirectX/openGL for years now.
Actually, I've had Windows game installations queer my system. I even had the Install Wizard render my system unbootable when I removed a game.
That kind of nonsense is one of the reasons I run Linux on my desktop now.
> With SFP in W2K, DLL hell is near 100% myth - it's not possible unless you disable SFP.
I'm sure lots of consumers run out and buy W2K so they can play games.
--
Sheesh, evil *and* a jerk. -- Jade
Yeah I have the freedom to use windows or linux. Whats wrong if I prefer windows? Its all about choice right? Or only the 'correct' choice.
Only the State obtains its revenue by coercion. - Murray Rothbard
I started writing a Tradewars clone called Merchant Empires about 6 months ago. I can fairly saturate my 768K DSL line now with all of the game traffic during peak times. I do this from two server running Mandrake that are installed in a friend's closet.
Cheap bandwidth, which will probably only increase in pipe size and reduce in price, is now creating a completely new and incredible environment for writing and playing large scale, multiplayer games. This is a phenomena that will only increase as projects like WorldForge reach maturity.
Maynard,
Your anti-Loki campaign frankly sucks. So what if you had a problem with a distributor. I think Loki has cranked out an AMPLE supply of games that never would have made the light of day in Linux.
You say your not please with their attitude towards you, well, I think it goes both ways. I've read you posts on their newsgroups and thay are not too constructive.
I guess some people are just pricks...who can never be pleased.
"Power corrupts. PowerPoint corrupts absolutely."
I have Redhat for Server.
:)
I have Macintosh for almost everything
I have Win2K for Games. I was running NT4 but one day it blew up on me and I thought, what the heck, I'll put Win2K on it for a change. A hell of alot better for games than NT4. As for why I wasn't running Win9x...because there's no SMP support in it.
So there's a consumer with W2K for playing games
I don't see a company committing to a technology they have no control over.
sdl changes enough - it becomes a tech support hell - and thats a money hole.
... and we all know Linux gaming isn't a big money maker as it is.
Hmm, it's a pretty sad day when Bill Gates, the mightiest man on earth, needs help from a professional wrestler. I guess he's getting old...
I'd look heavily into driver support before picking up that Radeon. I don't even think they have quality Windows 2k drivers out yet, much less any attempt at a fully functional Linux implementation. The card runs great in windows 9x/me from what I hear though.
First; Loki does not create their own games, they port them, and thus are not able to GPL them, even if they wanted to.
But GPL-gaming is an interesting subject:
While the GPL works good for applications, games are of a totally different nature.
Sure, some good GPL-games exists, but no opensource project could _possibly_ afford all the work that goes into most top-10 games.
One of the reasons is that a game, unlike an application normally has a very short lifespan. Once you've finished it, theres not much more to it, and thus interest fades.
Games need to sell A LOT on a short period for it to be successful, and getting revenue from support or services is not that much of an option.
That said, there might be exceptions:
1. Multiplayer games may have a long enough lifespan for it to work, and if they use an existing game-engine, it might be feasible.
2. For a massive online-game, it may be possible that the service of being connected may provide enough revenue. But of course, nothing is stopping others from creating lots of competing online-games.
The possibility IMHO exists in reusing GPL'd game-engines. A lot of work in the corporate world seems wasted because most games are written from scratch.
The biggest issue that needs to be addressed in development is to design the games to be platform independant. You will not get any developers to create games specifically for linux, you will have to get them to create games for both linux and windows at the same time, or at least port their game from windows. The problem this leads to is that developers are not going to rewrite their game twice, hence the creation of companies like Loki, so the best thing developers need to do is to write their game for multiple platforms at the same time, using cross platform libraries(SDL is a very popular one) or better design techniques. There is alot of FUD about cross platform development (extreme performance loss, difficulty in designing...). Currently there is an interesting college research project going on that gives alot of good information about this topic. The server for research project goes up and down a lot so keep trying...
Outdoor digital photography, mostly in New Engl
The next generation(tm) of games consoles will move towards standard configurations of commodity hardware. The Xbox is heading in that direction, but I think others will go much further. This could see linux make it into every household sooner than we thought.
GiraffeSville, a place anyone can call home
There seem to be plenty of open source emulators right now... not to mention "licensed" legit ones.
Thank you for your deep insight into the world of copywrite law.. it was very enlightning.
Most "mainstream people" think that linux is about free... why would you install linux (as a mainstream joe not a serious programmer or nerd). It's free, it's the new hype thing, bla bla bla... truth is it's not as easy as window for the average joe to setup for playing, AND mainstream joe is used to the concept of everything on that platform is free, why the heck would he shell out $$ for an alternative OS that he probably doesn't even use as a main one.
Look at what happened with Quake 3, the linux port was quoted not to give the results as expected. Don't get me wrong, an alternative is good, and it's good news, and linux is gaining support, that undeniable, but talking about it beeing a huge success and making a big deal out of it is a bit exagerating, I know a load of gamers, none of them even tried or considered shelling C$60 for a linux game if there's no advantages (performance, etc etc). It's hard to brake into an established market. Microsoft tried very hard since win95, and they've succeeded. They took years to do it, they've built strong support with hardware developpers, and on top of all, they are influencing the hardware buisness with "what's to come" (you want to be fully directX compliant these days else it looks bad against the competition, right?).
Anyways, there's one BIG positive aspect though, the linux community has a much higher average IQ than the windows crowd, (not a flame, an AVERAGE), so I guess the die-hard linux crowd, getting more and more by days, will know that they'll have to act if they want it to continue that way. that means *buying* software in the top of the list.
Makes me think when my amiga was "good only for games, wasn't a serious platform" and now you see linux striving to get the "gaming" tag the amiga had that was so negative... it's sad in a way to see linux stuck conceptually like the amiga was...
I'm waiting for a linux kernel with an amiga-like ease of use and frontend before committing myself to linux, right now, windows 2000 with 2 cpus is the best thing I ever ran since my miggy. But I am always opened to alternatives, as long as It doesn't take me 10 megs of help files and over-configuration to start a simple gui, which is also what mainstream joe wants. Call me stupid, but remember, gaming market is about gaming, not messing around an OS hours to make a game work or this or that... of course there's consoles for that matter too. Oh and all the different configs and linux setups out there, it must be hard to "standardise" everything in a stable fashion for games to run, so again, it's not for the average kid who wants to pop in a cd and play.
I would be cool tho if linux would have a performance edge in any way, but microsoft tweaked it's os and manufacturers the drivers tied to windows really good for that matter so I don't see linux taking over MS in the next year in the gaming area. But still, progress IS good news.
Damn gimme lightwave on linux
--- Metamoderating abusive downgraders since my 300th post.
About your third point:
I think that if the game developers treat their consumers with respect, then the people will be more likely to pay for their products.
I would be MUCH more likely to pay for a product that had no restrictions on use than one that had a liscence so restrictive that I felt that they assumed I was evil and would do everything in my power to destroy their business.
--
Soma: because a gramme is better than a damn.
http://dri.sourceforge.net has preliminary ATI Radeon 3D support in CVS right now. Go here for compilation docs. This will, of course, require XFree86-4.0.2.
Cheers,
--Maynard
They sell software and are a business. As such I expect the same service from Loki as any other business out collecting my cash. I've spent ample money with Loki to expect simple customer service like shipping a released product after having committed to an order, instead I was called a liar in a public forum by their customer service rep. You bet I'm pissed, and if expecting basic customer service and simple delivery makes me a "prick" in your eyes, God help you should you ever decide to start a business.
Cheers,
--Maynard
Companies are in the business of making profits. Profits come from changing technology to something that is supposedly 'new and improved' and charging the same markets for the product all over again.
It's a basic business model... if you can't increase your markets, then you exploit your available markets. Having many people committed to SDL will benefit SDL by allowing more people to have control over it. The technology is owned by the people who use it. Nobody pays a dime.
Keeping
If you get a Nvidia card the performance difference will be negligable (in QIII)(N.B. some of the newer cards aren't fully supported AFAIK), But Voodoo cards take a > 20% hit in FPS. The Kernel slows things down a little (compaired to DirectX). Linus has been asked about changing it by developers, but won't in the near future (I'm sure there are good reasons :-))
--
Full plate and packing steel! -Minsc
Full plate and packing steel! -Minsc
Will my $300 Voodoo 5 at least run w/ Doom3?
-Bad Dos
...a lone voice in a very big world.
Proprietary my eye...OpenAL, SDL (not directly), SDKs for Linux, editing tools, etc.
Did you ever use fenris? Politely contact them? I think you need to read your post that you originally made concerning your problem. You used a public forum yourself.
..and I don't see anywhere in the Loki rep post that you were called a liar (unless this is in another newsgroup than the one I'm looking at.). I think she went on to say that they were working with their distributor to make shipping options more clear.
"Power corrupts. PowerPoint corrupts absolutely."
1. Insert boot CD
2. Wait until asked to insert the game CD
3. Insert game CD
4. Play the game
The boot cd could be updated from time to time to support new hardware, the game cds stay the same. And everybody will be happy since they do have to install anything...
I think that most of you have it wrong when you think that end users install windows. Most end users buy a computer with it already installed and configured. What they do is buy extras (hardware and software) that comes with self install (you install the CD into the drive - it automatically comes up and ask you to click on the install button - you select all the defaults and you are up and running).
When people buy hardware (PC or gaming) with Linux pre-installed and only then will software developers start developing games (in any serious way) for it.
I don't think that has to be as far off as the previous post implied, but I think it is more likely because a new hardware manufacturer enters the market with some down market home computing hardware that is not a PC.
Many for-profit businesses release some free code along with their proprietary goods. See Corel, IBM, Sun... they get no special consideration beyond having done a good deed when it comes to fulfilling their customer service requirements to this customer. So, to Loki and it's programmers I say good for you -- you have done a good deed. Thank You for OpenAL. But this doesn't release Loki from their obligation to this, and other, customers. I contacted Loki privately several times before I complained in a public forum. The Loki rep then claimed I had misrepresented our private communication(s) in my submission, and requested permission to post our correspondence. I replied with the correspondence, and the rep never replied back. The story and comment tree is still in Kuro5hin's archives -- read it for yourself.
All of that wouldn't matter to me if they had fixed their web page to make certain others couldn't get into the same bind I found myself in with their ordering and distribution system. They continue to allow these sorts of orders even after having had problems in the past. I do not respect this, nor will I stop my criticism. A lone voice, maybe. But I don't criticize for personal gain, nor out of hatred for the people who work for Loki. I do this entirely because I think it's the right thing to do; your (and many other's) derogatory name calling notwithstanding. And I will enjoy Alpha Centauri from Windows today, bought at a fraction of the cost off of a discount shelf I might add.
Cheers,
--Maynard
I work in the game industry - I thought I'd share my personal views on the Linux/game situation.
First off, while I really admire the work John Carmack has done - I think people need to realize that the industry needs more buy-in then just John! He's in a unique position that he can take the time to improve the drivers, and mandate id's support ( I think ).
What we need to remember is that any other profitable (and relevant) company wouldn't, and won't, have their engineers working away on something that won't immediately contribute to the bottom line (let alone someone else's!) So, pepople droning about sdl, whatever. Doesn't matter. Companies don't want to have a dependence on something they don't control. Its both a technical risk, and a tech support nightmare (don't even get me started on distro differences - they're comparable to dll hell).
Earlier in this forum, someone mentioned the measure of sales might not be units sold. Hate to break it you buddy - thats all its about. My prediction is that you won't see first tier developers/publishers throw serious manpower behind Linux until they can ship a million units. Until then, it will be farmed out to small port shops - where there's very little risk to the original company.
As for the API wars - well, the war's been over for a while. DX won. Someone earlier asked of OpenGL will be available on the XBox - I'd be shocked if MS let that happen. They've done a great job on making OGL a bad buisness decision - why would they go back on it now. So - you can see what a great move for MS it was to secure the "universal" API... DX8 buys you XBox and PCs. Other consoles go to the metal. The profit margins here make proprietary engines worth it.
To sum up - to make Linux gaming happen, we have to prove a) there's a serious market for closed-source entertainment, b) an API exists that leverages existing code developers have for their existing games and c) a common delivery target - the distros have to have common game components - down to the version.
It will be very interesting to see what happens over the next 12 months - will Linux been relegated to a server-only domain for games, or will it become a first tier target market?
Anyways, just the viewpoint from a guy in the trenches. Who, by the way - hasn't given up hope
Cheers,
I dunno where you're getting this 'flakiness of DirectX' stuff from, but that isn't the case at all. Windows 2000 with DirectX8 and NVIDIA's Detonator drivers is the best gaming platform out there.
Yes - as much as it hurts, you have to admit - that a) MS isn't going to deprecate or change the direction of a gaming technology and b) you can pretty well promise a minimum installed base on almost every machine.
I'm not saying that teh sdl people would do that - but it's a technical risk the suits don't like, and they're the ones who make the decisions - and pay my salary.
So you're basically saying that both KDE and Gnome are wasted time as a server doesn't need to run desktop software at all :-)
The point is that Linux might some day replace Windows and for that it will need all those games and applications which are the main (and only?) reason why people is using Windows instead of the other (and better) alternatives (BeOS, Linux, *BSD)
'Be' is hardly a 'large-corporation', but they abandoned all of the BeOS users by jumping on the embedded systems bandwagon and announcing no further development for the BeOS.
I do agree with your second point, that they will assure the installed base.
I think the problem with sdl is that it is still in its infancy and a may go in many different directions. Many open source projects are similar to this. But, there are also projects like Apache, Linux, Gimp, Perl, and others. Many companies could commit to Perl and Apache without worrying about the direction of the project changing. Once a project like SDL has a large enough userbase, it will stay on track, because the userbase are the people who develop it.
Keeping
Do you happen to know how the Matrox G400/450 OpenGL implementation is coming? I've heard reports (via Raster) that it is still somewhat flaky and doesn't support the full spectrum of stuff it should. Is that going to change anytime soon, or that something to wait for after Doom III test is released?
- - - - -
Napster-to-go says "Fill and refill your compatible MP3 player", which is a lie. It's not MP3. It's WMA with DRM.
As someone who's actually made money developing games, albeit a while ago, I have these insights:
1. Linux, for the end-user/desktop client comes in two flavors - geeks and appliance installs. The easiest one to sell to are Linux appliance installs.
2. Part of the problem is distribution. What we need is someone to sell the box that has the game manual, and separate out the cheat manuals and the strategy and add-ons manuals. That's where the money is.
3. What we need is Linux games that have a single install disk, download most of the code from a website (easier to patch and handle probs), and then you can get sold on all the other things.
Will in Seattle
Multiplayer is where it's at, but not necessarily for a central commercial server. I never played Diablo2 on Blizzard's server after I saw the lag, I always play on a LAN. Same for UT. The purchase model is not going anywhere anytime soon, and bringing up cases where it could possibly work is not going to make everyone decide that commercial server games are the future.
-----------------------
Nicotine free Amish .sig.
Or just use a distro with a package manager that handles dependencies decently (apt).
--
Soma: because a gramme is better than a damn.
Fight 1...
Klick, versus...
Hacker! Fight!
"3y3 4m 31337!" Insert repeatable unblockable move
WINNER! Hacker.
But the soul still burns!
--
Gonzo Granzeau
Gonzo Granzeau
"Nothing the god of biomechanics wouldn't let you into heaven for.." -Roy Batty
A linux only game that is top of the line that everyone wants to play will be what makes linux a platform worth gaming on.
Except that's never going to happen.
If a company has a good game, they're going to want to get it out to the most people. Linux, I'm sure, doesn't even have 1/20th the amount of gamers that Windows has.
So lets see, which option makes the most sense to Mr. gamemaker?
-- Dr. Eldarion --
The NSA people who designed NSA Secure Linux were being paid. I worked on an OSS project at university and was paid. The lead developers of this projects were paid as well (they didn't even have to teach classes, they are full time faculty who only work on this project).
Keeping
& Baldurs Gate II doesn't run in Linux...
--
Full plate and packing steel! -Minsc
Full plate and packing steel! -Minsc
Would a DX layer mean that everything accessing a sound card, video, joystick, etc would have to be rewritten or can it exist without interfering?
What d'you need a computer for? Play cards or Monopoly or Risk instead - there's gameplay for you if you don't need flashy graphics. ;-)
Sure, there's nothing new in the world - nearly everything copies something. Hell, if you want you could say that Q3 is just Space Invaders with a flashier front end. These days though, top-notch graphics are a de-facto part of the game, so much so almost that the customer expects them to be there. Consider a car - would you be slightly disappointed if you bought a new car and found it didn't have a starter motor and you had to hand-crank it? The car may handle brilliantly, but the step between what you expect and what you get on the user-interface is likely to put you off.
Grab.
I just bought a new K7/1100, Asus nVidia GeForce2 GTS, and Asus A7V mainboard. I installed RedHat *cringe* 7. It found everything in the box right away, and once I got all the updates applied and Helix setup, I went over to nVidia.com and grabbed their 0.9-5 Linux drivers, read the directions and attempted to install them. The nVidia RPMs for RedHat 7 were built for a different kernel (RH 2.2.16-21) instead of RH 2.2.16-22 (which is stock with RedHat7). I tried their trick of "insmod agpgart --agp-use-unsupported=1" (or something like that) and forced their kernel module to be loaded instead of whining about -21 vs. -22 (while praying that doesn't hurt anything). Also I tried compiling the driver myself but I think RH7's beta gcc is what's preventing that from working. Then I forced RPM uninstalls of all the Mesa stuff which causes problems.
With all that stuff installed, X dies when its launched. I've still got a few more ideas to try, and still a couple more resources to tap (friends, newsgroups, some anandtech articles, etc), but I'm about ready to head back to my former Linux now Win2k box (P2/333 + Voodoo3) to play Q3F until some decent information comes out or nVidia makes an easier install for my machine.)
---
Online FPS numbers by game
Breakdown of Halflife by mod (over 29k counterstrike players when this was posted)
This is not a dream, not a dream...we are transmitting from the year 1-9-9-9.
Its simple, because 3D engines aren't the expensive part! Games have 4 times the numbers of artists and various other creative talent than programmers. The programmers themselves are really just a pretty small part. Thats why there are so few OS games. Because game production is a manufacturing process not a service process like so much network gear is. Its relatively easy to write the server, etc. but the art and plot of the game is the creative and expensive bottleneck.
So far I've gotten all my Karma from telling people they are wrong... :)
Games can be open source, they can be GPL, and at least the one in this link has been running on linux for several years now.
Alright, I'm making an OS MMORPG. I make my money off subscription sales. Question: How do I secure my business model? What is to prevent a million people from copying me and destroying my customer base?
If everyone has access to the client and server code then anyone can run a server that can afford the hardware etc. I don't expect the hardware to be a big barrier to entry for that much longer though because its getting progressively cheaper.
In short, your business model would work for about a year or two. Maybe three if you don't release your server code (since you don't have to because it isn't actually distributed). Then other similar services will be up and probably as good as yours. They will also be cheaper since they didn't have to pay the original development costs for the software and you did. Suddenly your customer base has been cut a million different ways and your revenue drys up. You lose.
So far I've gotten all my Karma from telling people they are wrong... :)
Right, DirectX emulation, you'll always be a version behind by the time you finish the emulation, if not 2 :) Really not an option.
--- Metamoderating abusive downgraders since my 300th post.
And am planning the purchase of a PS2. Frankly, gaming on Linux is a joke. How much do you wanna bet that ID Software isn't going to release Doom 3 for Linux, or allow a port? I'm doubting it.
I own Terminus, Unreal Tournament, and about ten Loki games. I'm pleased with Vivarious Visions (and actually like Terminus)... but as many already know I'm NOT pleased with Loki, or their attitude towards this customer. So I don't buy their products any longer. Where is Alpha Centauri, or any reasonable explanation for this mess? Why do they continue to accept multiple pre-orders on their web page when they know it will hold up the delivery of other games purchased in the same order to their customers?
I'd love to see gaming take off under Linux, and think the software infrastructure should be in place once XFree-4 w/GLX and MesaGL, Linux-2.4 w/DRI, and a standardized base between distributions comes along. I'm guessing this will really fall into place by Redhat-8.0, which means about a year from now or so. Until then games authors are going to be forging a new Linux market and eating the support costs associated with the various incompatibilities between Linux distributions. Until this happens though I've given up. After buying twelve or so games for Linux in the hope that I could completely wipe out Windows in order to enjoy a few good games I've now come full circle and re-installed a Windows partition in order to game again. It's easier than dealing with this mess. Frankly, I'll be buying a PS2 ASAP (God knows when they'll be on store shelves) and am thinking of dumping PC gaming altogether.
Cheers!
--Maynard
What we have here is a classic case of Domino ladies and gentlemen...
For linux gaming to become successful linux itself has to go mainstream, and it's falling short on ease of usability. The average gamer/user is not experienced enough (or do not have the time) to install and learn linux properly and install the games that are available for linux RIGHT NOW.
So once the game companies starts to see that even ordinary gamers/users installs linux with ease and has no problems in learning it then they will finally develop games for the platform and sell them through retail. IMHO linux still has a very long way to go before that happens.
People would probably be more likely to pay for a produt if it didn't have crazy/stupid restrictions in the liscence or dumb/non-working copy 'protection' features.
--
Soma: because a gramme is better than a damn.
Kids today are born and bred on computers
Close. Kids today are born and bred on WINDOWS computers. They're used to everything being handed to them in a nice little package. As the years go on, they think, "Hey, computers are easy!".
Then you show them Linux. A select few will say, "wow, this is damned cool." The rest will say "Why bother? There's no point. I already have my nice-little-user-friendly Windows box right here. Show me ONE advantage that Linux has for me (that I really give a damn about), and MAYBE I'll give it a chance." And chances are, there won't be any advantages to give them.
These kids grew up on computers running Windows. Most of them will stick with what they know.
-- Dr. Eldarion --
> Linux gaming on the retail scale is a joke.
And it didn't exist at all two years ago.
For the purposes of fortunetelling, it might be better to look at trends rather than a snapshot.
--
Sheesh, evil *and* a jerk. -- Jade
We may disagree on whether my course of action has been appropriate or whether I've over-reacted. We may also disagree on the relative value of Loki's contribution to the Free Software community. But the derogatory (and sometimes threatening) comments I've received over this issue has only strengthened my resolve. I thank you for your apology over the name calling and accept that you disagree with my conclusions and course of action. I hope that if we meet at a Linux or USENIX conference we'll shake hands and simply agree to disagree on this one issue.
Take Care,
--Maynard
It takes time for people to copy what you are. In that time, you can upgrade yourself to be ahead of the competition. Keep it up, and you've got customers for life. Slack off, and...well, remember the dinosaurs? There's a reason that metaphor is so popular in business, and this type of situation is it.
Wannabe competitors can copy or emulate your code. But they can't as easily duplicate the community and rich world you'd already have.
Richard Stallman loves you.
-Don
Take a look and feel free: http://www.PieMenu.com
Yes but it is during the "slacking off" phase that you make the majority of your profits because it does take as much effort to stay on top once you get there. Under your model you breed competition for yourself, not necessarily a good thing. Besides any strictly coding improvement can be almost instantly implemented by your competitors with little to no cost to them. Since you have to stay the innovator to keep on top, you end up spending the majority of the development money and reaping few benefits for it.
Having to constantly work harder than your competition is not a recipe for success.
Counting on a good "community" to keep your customer base is nice, but how long will that last if you have to charge more than your competitors because you are forced into the role of innovator? Don't bet your business on intangibles like "community."
So far I've gotten all my Karma from telling people they are wrong... :)
OMG They have major financial problems... so what? Just like the recording industry may they all choke and die from their greed.
Dickens knew what they are all about...
``Are there no prisons?'' asked Scrooge.
``Plenty of prisons,'' said the gentleman, laying down the pen again.
``And the Union workhouses?'' demanded Scrooge. ``Are they still in operation?''
``They are. Still,'' returned the gentleman, `` I wish I could say they were not.''
``The Treadmill and the Poor Law are in full vigour, then?'' said Scrooge.
``Both very busy, sir.''
``Oh! I was afraid, from what you said at first, that something had occurred to stop them in their useful course,'' said Scrooge. ``I'm very glad to hear it.''
In short, you aren't open sourcing the *GAME* per se, but the *ENGINE* that drives the game. Let's face it - you don't really want other people monkeying with your data files, maps, etc. Yes, they can copy them, but it's not legal, because those are components you pay for, and the license is written appropriately.
No, this is no barrier to the clients, but it does prevent another corporation from setting up a competing server. They can write another game based on the same engine. So can you - the real question then is, who can write the better game?
That should have been Mandrake 7.2 not 7.1. I did have it kind of working with 7.1 but that's another story :)
Thanks for your direct reply. I seem to remember that you had previously stated that Q3 generated disappointing revenue, which is what I based that presumpton upon. I'm pleased to know that you're planning to continue supporting Linux. I hope I'll be able to play Doom 3 using a Radeon card rather than the Nvidia GeForce, as that's what I plan to buy.
Thanks also for your games -- you don't know how much time I've wasted with your Quake games; entertainment money well spent.
Cheers,
--Maynard
Mostly correct, except for one fatal flaw...
Besides any strictly coding improvement can be almost instantly implemented by your competitors with little to no cost to them.
Negative, for the exact same reason that you have a bit of lead time with your initial product. It takes time to reverse engineer (or just, if your product is open source, learn about and comprehend) any improvements you make. While your competitors do this, you make money off the improvements, and forge ahead with new ones.
Granted, you can make more profits - in the short term - by slacking off the innovation. But this almost inevitably comes at the cost of maintaining the lead which has generated your revenues to begin with, until you're just another competitor with no more profits than anyone else. And then you're in trouble.
One more thing:
Don't bet your business on intangibles like "community."
You'd be surprised how many sucessful businesses (like AOL) survive mainly by doing just that.
My point is that MS may depreciate or change the technology if it will gain them more money.
I agree - we've seen them do that - but they won't be abandoning something that a) has a stranglehold on the industry and b) they control exclusively.
They historically have dumped stuff when it became a liability to them.
AOL survives on ease of implementation not on community. Everyone I know who has ever been on AOL started there because it was an easy place to get started. They all left AOL when they realized they were paying too much for what they were getting.
The problem with your model is that many people will go with a cheaper alternative than your bleeding edge game. The services your competitors provide will be essentially subsidized by your own efforts. It is substantially cheaper to reimplement your work than to develop it themselves. Your business model will be inherently more expensive than theirs because you must work harder than them to stay ahead. This is assuming you don't make a mistake and allow them to catch up. Once that happens your business model fails entirely.
Now if you offer your work as Closed Source, then they have to essentially reverse engineer every new thing you do. This expensive unlike simply giving your innovations away for free in OS development.
In short, running a business is much like fighting a war. You want to be able to win definitively and then exploit that, not consistantly scrape by fighting with attrition. You want the fight to be as lopsided as possible because it allows you to make the most profits and that is what business is all about.
So far I've gotten all my Karma from telling people they are wrong... :)
The major problem I'd have in windows was that if there was a misbehaving app (even IE would do it), it could render the system inoperable and force a reboot. It was too easy to do.
At least in the case where the apps fuckup in linux, I have the option of ssh'ing in and killing them.
Also, it's a case of 'you get what you pay for'.
I don't (need to) pay anything for Linux and it has all the functionality I need.
I have to pay for windows, and it's a substandard system (for my needs).
--
Soma: because a gramme is better than a damn.
I wonder how they managed to play Diablo 2, Alice, Broodwar, Sim under their wine....
I didn't say it had to be Debian, other distros are using apt, even RPM-based ones.
Also, you're running on the unstable/testing package tree. You have to accept and expect the fact that things will break.
It's not called unstable or testing because they like to use big words!
--
Soma: because a gramme is better than a damn.
WHAT ABOUT ME?!?!
(goes back to photoshopping BBABs head)
-- Dr. Eldarion --
I'm a hardware kind of guy and have been using Linux for a couple years now. For the past year I've been using a laptop, so high end games are not really an option. Soon I will be building a beast of a desktop. My question is this: What is it that makes Linux less desirable for games? Sure there are more "mainstream" game companies focusing only on windows but is there some technical reason for higher game performance? Is it just a matter of optimization? I know this is a newbie question but like I said, I'm a hardware guy.
...Linux box, I'll move.
- I don't care if they globalize against free speech. All my best free thoughts are done in my head.
If I were the president of a gaming firm (instead I'm the president of a free software producing company), I would seperate the code from the content and cut some costs.
Game development costs are ridiculous for the returns of mediocre selling games. Either you make a smash game or you sink. Costs could be cut a heck of a lot if there was more code re-use in today's gaming industry. It seems every little game has its proprietary 3D rendering engine. That's great, but why not focus your efforts where it counts (the fun of the game!).
If there was a free, cross-platform, very fast (as in cpu cycles) rapid game development platform that emphasised modularity, anyone could build games on their spare time using world-class tools developed by thousands of enthusiasts all over the world! All that would be needed is a game production company to want to cut development costs by not wanting to pay for a rewrite of mountains of code.
If the game development environment was to be composed of many interworking (but independant) parts, the useless parts could be discarded when not needed (stopping game developer's fear of bloat :)
Making the environment easy to use would encourage new developers who are only interested in making games (instead of computer programming) to make more games! It would also increase pressure on game production co's to make better games!(nice graphics are a novelty, crappy storylines make for crappy gameplay and no fun)
This only leads to increased prosperity and everything your heart desires. Thank you.
So, it comes down to yesterday's features at a lower price, or tomorrow's features at a higher price. The only question is, can you stay ahead far enough to justify the prices you do charge? Your competition has the advantage of cheap and quick - though not free and instant - adaptation of your stuff to theirs. You have the advantage that your more technically advanced players, at least those who don't want to be competitors, can and will make "their" game better by submitting new mods back to you (you being the only open game in town); you'll still have to integrate and QA it, but there's less development cost all the same.
Unlike in a war, you can never totally defeat your opposition; new competitors can spring up out of nowhere. (Even if you go closed source, if your feature set stagnates, that allows time for wannabe competitors to reverse engineer everything you have, and you won't necessarily have warning until they're taking your customers away.) So you've got to dominate not only everyone who is, but everyone who could be. This, if done well, is one possible way to do that for a long time.
If you are open source then your competitors which are using your code must be, by definition and legal license, open source as well. Therefore they will have player mods just like you and the sum of their players will certainly be more than yours so your competitors as a whole will have more of an advantage with a grass roots player mod movement. Yeah, yeah, you've got the innovative reputation but your opponents are cheaper so players may go with helping out the cheaper server to get the best of both worlds in terms of cost and game play.
Anyway I still think a better choice for games design will always be closed source development with good server scripting abilities for possible player mods. Maybe release a small multiplayer server package capable of supporting a few individuals who want to roleplay. Small enough that you can't consider it an MMPORPG anymore so it won't cut into your market. You should be able to carve out a good two years of use without significant competition, during which time you can still be creating the next generation game instead of being trapped in a short-term constant upgrade path in order to maintain your customer base.
Anyway I think we have to agree to disagree because this discussion doesn't seem to be getting us anywhere. Thanks for the distraction from my dreary hum-drum existence. :)
So far I've gotten all my Karma from telling people they are wrong... :)
Yes, nethack is fun in a retro sort of way, but there's higher standards now.
--
Obfuscated e-mail addresses won't stop sadistic 12-year-old ACs.
Win dain a lotica, en vai tu ri silota
If you are open source then your competitors which are using your code must be, by definition and legal license, open source as well.
Only if your license requires it, and only if they're using your code as opposed to coming up with their own. Give them the opportunity to go totally closed source, with no player mods, and you'd be surprised how many would be competitors place control of their product over good player experience (and thus, ultimately, over income).
You should be able to carve out a good two years of use without significant competition, during which time you can still be creating the next generation game instead of being trapped in a short-term constant upgrade path in order to maintain your customer base.
Actually, I was thinking the path I outlined could last for quite longer than two years. With appropriate mods, including upgrade transition paths (say, from 2D to 3D as the tech comes into place), this could last until...well, MMPORPGs themselves go out of style. (Except for the "massive" bit, they've arguably been around since before the Web.)
Anyway I think we have to agree to disagree because this discussion doesn't seem to be getting us anywhere. Thanks for the distraction from my dreary hum-drum existence.
Agreed, and you're welcome. ^_^
Linux is not going to be *the* operating system. Ever. There can never be one single operating system because people have different needs. But it can be *an* operating system. It is based on Unix and in most aspects it is compatible. Therefore, it is pretty easy to "port" a Unix app to Linux (or BSD, etc.). Much easier than say an OS/2 app to MS Windows or an MS Windows app to MacOS. Right from the start, a wide variety of systems can run whatever game you're making. Its important that games (or any other program)
should not be developed *just* for Linux (or even worse, for one particular distribution), but rather Unix in general.
As others mentioned, a common gaming engine could be created and and reused. This way, companies only need to "port" their games to Unix once (for the first game that uses the engine) and not very time they come out with a game.
-- luke
The draft specification for OpenAL is available here. Although it is still undergoing review and open for comments, the interface is stable and unlikely to change significantly. Linux users can try out the "very nearly" 1.0 implementation by checking out the devel-1-0 branch of cvs.
Linux specific docs are in located in cvs, as are test programs. Tutorials are available on the web, and anyone running into problems can either post their question on the mailing list or drop by #openal on openprojects. I'd be interested in hearing what sort of things you think are unaddressed in the docs and what sort of information you feel is lacking.
--
J. Valenzuela -- tsaotsao@lokigames.com
The development costs are too high; therefore, the perfect solution is to support the use of cross-platform APIs (OpenGL, OpenAL, SDL,..). That means adding new APIs and functions to match the monster of all Windows gaming APIs: DirectX and Direct3D. If we can't improve our APIs to match Microsoft's versions, then its really going to be an uphill battle. Look at all of the features in DirectX 8: an audio API for multi-player online gaming, interpolated key-frames, force-feekback input device support, etc...
To further improve chances of Linux games, we should probably also work on a BSD-licensed 3D game engine using open APIs. If a cross-platform engine was developed that can compete with the best games engines out there was available for free (remember some engines like the Unreal engine can cost upwards of several hundred thousand dollars to license), it would certainly help Linux games in general.
The only way to get Linux games is make it financially profitable for the developers to make games
and also when the game boots linux from the cd, searches for filesystems to save game data, and runs flawlessly enough to get people to decide to install linux
meridian at tha.net
First of all, MesaGL doesn't exist. It's Mesa3D (and it's not an OpenGL API before anyone accuses it of being one). And that's pretty much dead now venduhs such as nVidea are releasing certified OpenGL drivers for X, but Mesa is still pretty useful for those of use who have to do software rendering (and have a very useful reference on low-level optimizations of 3D math).
And OpenAL offers pretty good quality sound, prolly better than DirectSound. The API itself is piss easy to learn, and as it is so similar to the OpenGL API, integrating it into games is a non-issue.
- Damnit, I'm dead Jim
"I wish there was a way collectively, the linux companies could buy Loki out and gpl their apps"
What rock do you live under?
Loki do not write their own games. They port titles from other companies under contract. They do not own the source code to those games, they only have a limited license to use it. Even if Linux companies bought Loki, the licensing restrictions would still apply.
If the new owners of Loki refused to port titles unless they were released under GPL, they would have just wasted a lot of money, as all the huys and gals at Loki would have nothing to do all day, except maybe finally write some docs for OpenAL.
- Damnit, I'm dead Jim
Here is a link to my upcoming book on LInux game programming. Bye bye karma...
- Damnit, I'm dead Jim
It's amazing how many people don't care about their freedoms, or will gladly give up freedom X for the ease of Y.
--
Soma: because a gramme is better than a damn.
Woah, slow down there Mr. Zealot.
They moved away from DOS because everyone suddenly stopped supporting it. Do you forsee everyone abandoning Windows anytime soon? That's what I thought.
As for the advantages, note that a good portion of people won't care about stability if they don't know how to do anything. Price is almost not an issue, because they buy computers with Windows pre-loaded. They don't know any better. Basically your choices for computers without Windows (that the average Joe knows about) are: Build it yourself, Build it yourself, or.... Build it yourself! I'd say at least a good 99% of computer owners in this country couldn't do that if their life depended on it.
That last statement is getting less and less true as years go on. Windows is MUCH more stable now than before. My win2k box has been up since I installed 2k three months ago without *1* crash. I'm sure many other people have much better records too.
Pull the RedHat box out of your ass and look at the facts, Linux is NOT going to take over Windows in the Desktop market until Mr. Joe Smith can use it with the ease that he uses Windows, and that's not going to happen for a *LONG* time (if ever). That, added to the fact that his favorite software will most likely never exist for Lunix makes the likelihood of Linux as the dominant OS pretty slim.
-- Dr. Eldarion --
You know what that means don't you? Subscription sales. You give away the source to the game client (hey maybe even the server), set up your world (this should take the most time - this is where you add value, besides the actual server hardware itself) and invite people to play your free client in your world for a trial month. If they like it, pay .. $8 a month for the service. Make sure the world isn't always static (I'm not talking Evercrack here, they've made an obscene amount of money on a pretty crappy service) so players have a reason to come back month after month, year after year, and voila, you have an open-source game that makes business sense.
You don't lose anything by giving away the source; any potential competitors have to flesh out their own world and put up their own server hardware and offer the support that you will provide (because you're not Blizzard, you don't just leave your customers in the lurch when the game breaks down). And some other company did this, and their game looked great, hey I'd play it. Variety is always good, and their code will get back into your codebase. If someone uses your engine to create a fantasy game service, and someone else uses it to create a space game service, they've nailed 2 different, minimally-competing niches.
--
It's rare that you're presented with a knob whose only two positions are Make History and Flee Your Glorious Destiny.
"Linux gaming on the retail scale" is halfassed by most developers too. If they'd take the effort to use quality-control with their Linux ports, and release the Linux version at the same time as their obligatory Windows version, the situation would improve dramaticaly.
--
Soma: because a gramme is better than a damn.
Not ports of games that are 2-3 years old.
Just think if there was a port of halflife rather
than going thru wine. Counterstrike mod alone would be worth it.
If you know how to use OPenGL lighting that is, otherwise you're screwed... SOMEONE RIGHT SOME DAMNED DOCUMENTATION FOR OPENAL! PLEASE!
*cough*
- Damnit, I'm dead Jim
As someone will surely point out that my figures don't actually represent the gaming croud - probably because a rough estimate would put 99.9% of gamers into the Windows catagory. I only run games under Linux because I can - the Windows versions constantly outperform them. Since I don't actually have access to any figures, I have to make them up - but every gamer I know uses Windows - including those who use Linux as their primary desktop. Even CmdrTaco admits to having a Windows machine for EverQuest. Even if we assume 20% fo the market might be interested in Linux games, the bottom line is that the 20% usually can run them under Windows anyway.
Choosing the target OS is a no-brainer - Linux ports are always of secondary importance.
'nuff said
Keeping
Tribes 2 is going to have a linux client, and is in beta testing right now (for both windows and linux)
I think were getting to the point where we need a linux based set-top console box that can play PS, DC, Linux games maybe even M$-Xbox games.
It would be much easier to do networked games. It would be the ultimate universal gaming engine it could even have old Atari and Nintendo emulators. Toppling the greedhead console gaming industry.
This is already happenning, just not with open sourced game engines. Instead of using valuable development time and money, several companies have licensed game engines from others, with the UnrealTournament and Quake III Arena being very popular.
A linux only game that is top of the line that everyone wants to play will be what makes linux a platform worth gaming on.
Then they need to make all the popular games have a linux port AND put it on the windows version CD. People don't want to give up windows when their favorite games don't run on linux.
--
Good quote, too many chars. Seriously, the slashdot 120 char limit sucks!
Linux sure rules that already since the Qw era.
A cstrike client would rule (yeah rite it works with wine...but), and the upcomming tribes II client will also rock.
Hardware support needs improvement. ie. G400 is out for a year now, and still sucks a bit, but hey its still in devel so....altough 1600x1200 @ 24 bps Divx playback with 40 %cpuload on celery 850 trough xv with mplayer (based on aviplay ) kinda rocks.
- --[... The secret of the hanged man, the smile on his lips... ]-- -
Actually, the best selling games are quite easy. Who Wants to Be a Millionaire and Barbie Pet Rescue were two examples of top 10 games in 2000 based on units sold: as a bonus, these games also had some of the lowest development costs.
Many other similar games sold quite well compared to their cost of development.
Hardcore games, on the other hand, have a history of being cutting edge and costing a lot to develop.
In the future, we're likely to see more titles like Barbie Pet Rescue in the top 10 sellers. This isn't bad, they're just completely different markets. Although it bugs game reviewers ;) .
im my opinion, linux needs the following things to help the situation regarding gaming on linux.
1. A big bucks company (VA or redhat) to get some cash behined SDL/Mesa. If SDL get's some commercial companies using it to produce cross playform games natively, there would be a load of interest from other companies currently using Direct X.
2. Nvidia and other companies to ease the licensing on their drivers, so that they can be modified and redistributed (in binary form) by various distributions, like Redhat. this way, hardware 3d rendering works out of the box.
3. finaly, some support from the users. i've pre-ordered deux ex, and already have a couple of loki games. id software weren't impressed with the Q3A sales, and thats what we need to change.
i wish i was but oh well
If Kids will stick with what they know, then why did they move from the 8-bit/16-bit platforms to DOS/PCs? Why did they move from DOS to Windows? Why they move from 3.11 to '95'? '95 to '98? '98 to ? What? What is that you are saying? All the KIDs in all the classes move INSTANTLY from one-setup to another? There was NO migration period?
ONE advantage of Linux over Windoze? Stability, Price, Speed, Price, Freedom, Price, availability across more platforms, Oh, did we mention Price? I guess what you are saying will come TRUE if KIDs become more STUPID as they grow up and, not as common sense dictates, that they actually learn to use their brain.
"Hey computers are easy! They give you a pretty blue-screen, and you don't have to worry about saving your work or recovering, because you cannot. Just follow the 3 Rs: Re-boot, Re-install, Re-instal Windoze!!! Aint modern technology grand?"
Well, for games (especially multiplayer), there is a reason for it's closed nature. The game's users musn't be able to edit their clients to assure that they can be trusted.
--
Soma: because a gramme is better than a damn.
I was refering to freedoms in general, not just software liscencing freedoms.
Many people would gladly give up their basic freedoms as long as they can still watch their primetime TV shows and buy their crap music.
--
Soma: because a gramme is better than a damn.
I'm actually not sure if I agree with your first assertion. We're not going to release the source to our gaming engine, but I think it probably wouldn't matter all that much if we did, because the important parts of what we're releasing is the data that runs the engine. If gamers wanted to modify the engine, it wouldn't give them access to the extra levels and game packs we're making. That's the meaty part of what we're selling, really, the creative part. The engine is just the playback routine for the data.
But we do expect to be paid, of course :)
How about some short lists of companies and projects, hmm?
Here's a list of projects where people are getting paid (not everyone, but in most cases the largest contributors):
Actually, I'm getting bored, so I'll end there and note that I probably didn't even get a hundredth of the companies and projects...
Linux gaming on the retail scale is a joke. Sales of Linux-only game titles are pathetic. The Quake 2 and Q3A strategy of allowing access to the data files and having the user download the executable is much more effective. Until MesaGL can become more stable and versatile, and until the OSS sound system can be improved to the performance level of DirectSound (or until something else performs likewise), Linux games will just remain the tinkertoys that they are right now. As far as the future goes, that depends on whether or not any decent or outstanding APIs are developed.
"Ancillary does not mean you get to rule the world." --U.S. Circuit Judge Harry Edwards, speaking to the FCC's lawyer
There are literally hundreds of Linux games available. All the Solitare and Tetris you'd ever want.
Have you flamed SpanishInquisition t
As far as I know their product does not run on linux.
Of course I could be wrong....
Who the fuck wants to reboot their computer (takes at least 3-4 minutes for me) every time they want to snag a little gaming session? Or, God forbid, switch back and forth between a game and another task (web browser or something.)
---
-----------------------
Nicotine free Amish .sig.
Yes Linux is a good ganes platform for SERVERS... but wyat about clients... who is porting??? No-One..... why not???? I wish I could get rid of the M$ interfaces and just a have a pure linux console.. which we all know would be safe, secure, free and fast...
Mattyb (b for bastard)
I shop at a number of different computer stores in the Portland, OR area. Of those, almost all of them have carried Linux games in the past.
Few of them still do.
Sales of Linux games has been sparse. Part of this is that most people who use Linux do not tend to shop at those outlets for Linux stuff. Some of the titles just sit on the shelf for months.
The biggest problem though seems to be with how chain stores order. You think Mac games are considered an afterthought... These people do not seem to know what Linux is or what is wanted.
Stores that you would expect to be able to keep Linux programs in stock are falling behind. The biggest example of this is Fry's in Wilsonville. They used to have a large selection of Linux games and programs. Now the Linux/BSD shelf is half stocked with Windows ME! The only current versions of Linux are Redhat 7.0 and SuSE 7.0. Slackware and Mandrake are gone. There are about two different games. Nothing seems to getting reordered at the Portland store for Linux. (Though they do for their California stores.)
The attitude I see when dealing with these places is "The Linux Hype is over, so we don't carry it any more.".
I guess you just have to keep hammering on your local stores if you want to be able to find Linux *anything* in the future.
"Trademarks are the heraldry of the new feudalism."
I'm not sure that more games development for linux is a good thing, as it would detract away from the strengths of linux i.e non propertar, stable and open souce. Without these strengths, linux has failed and is just another has been. Linux is barely ready for the desktop, let alone a powerful games machine
Let me know when all of the various sdl RPMs needed even to play DOOM don't conflict with each other or require specific, conflicting versions of each other.
:(
Seriously, mad propz etc. to the sdl hackers who do this stuff that I can't even imagine how to do, but for casual folks like me that don't want to assemble all of the components and libraries to compile from source, there needs to be a single self-contained RPM that can be installed simply.
Until then, and until I can play Diablo II, run my USB scanner and digital camera, and watch pr0n^h^h^h^hquicktime movie trailers from Linux, my hated Windoze partition stays.
TomatoMan
-- http://frobnosticate.com
Games have always been on the cutting edge. It seems to be a tradition or something
That being said, there is always the problem of the average user. Let's face it, the bell curve of knowledge for computer users is probably biased to the low end of the curve.
The upshot is that the skills needed to setup and install a mildly sophisticated game even on a windows box is likely over the head of an average user.
Some people just don't get the idea of certain products. For example, I can recall someone calling up a tech support line asking for the cheat codes for Flight Simulator.
So now we want to move to the wonderful world of Linux, etc. I can see that there may be problems here until we get the average expertise of people up to speed.
Unfortunately, many people do not care to invest the time and effort needed.
This falls into the category of: "We do not have time to get gas. We are running late already"
"It is a greater offense to steal men's labor, than their clothes"