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. ""
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
- - - - -
Napster-to-go says "Fill and refill your compatible MP3 player", which is a lie. It's not MP3. It's WMA with DRM.
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.
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.