Slashdot Mirror


Ports vs. WineX, What's Best For Linux Gamers?

James Hills writes: "Recently there has been much discussion about what is better for the future of Linux, to continue the process of native ports or embrace WineX so you can run all the Windows games you want on your favorite OS. Unfortunately, this debate also has tremendous repercussions for the future of companies such as Loki, Tribsoft and Hyperion. Read more for how the heads of Transgaming, TuxGames, Loki, Tribsoft, and Hyperion see the issue."

6 of 211 comments (clear)

  1. Porting == Better Software by runswithd6s · · Score: 5
    How does that equate? Let's say you've got a Windows-centric software company that feels they've got a great product. It's well designed, fairly robust, and the gameplay is such that people will flock to buy the game for the primary target OS: Windows. The beta testers rave about it, the press is salivating.

    The game releases, and as predicted it's a great success. Linux users are envious, but dislike having to dual boot their boxes. Emulation is not quite there for this new game, as it uses a bunch of Windows-centric, bleeding-edge DirectX calls, and was never ported to OpenGL. In addition, the game uses DirectSound, and other Direct(insert extension) calls. IOW, it's a purely Windows game.

    Now the company begins to receive requests like, "Can't you make this OpenGL?" "Have you heard of OpenAL?" "I want to run this awesome game on Linux, and I refuse to buy Windows. I know a dozen friends who'd love to play, but they have the same requirements!"

    Our software company is now in a dilemma. What to do? Let's call Loki and see if they can help us. Loki agrees, seeing the potential for an infusion in sales, and begins to port the game to OpenGL, OpenAL, and the SDL libraries. As they work on the code, they find a lot of logic problems, some really nasty bugs, and basic structural problems with the program. They fix these and send it back to the originating software company.

    The company is floored. How could we have missed so much? It worked well on Windows, but when we use these standards-based API, it breaks! Let's incorporate these changes and see if we can't make a better Windows product as well.

    And thus, the cycle of software improvement continues. The original software company learns some valuable lessons about standards-compliant programming, Loki (or other porters) make some money for the consulting and marketing, and the players, both Linux AND Windows win by getting better software.

    No. I don't see porters being in any type of immediate danger. Marketing and business decisions aren't solely based on the Windows phenomenon, they're based on demand. People will continue to demand Linux ports for software because they KNOW that the WineX libs will always be playing catchup with Direct(insert extension). They KNOW that OpenGL, OpenAL, and SDL afford game developers the flexibility of cross-platform compatibility and standards-compliant design. They KNOW that a better product will be the result.

    WineX is a good short-term solution, contrary to the author of the article we're replying to. It is not a long-term solution in the eyes of game designers or the consumers in general.


    --

    --
    assert(expired(knowledge)); /* core dump */
  2. Native is MUCH Faster by ClubStew · · Score: 5

    Not only should we support and embrace companies like Loki for doing such a great job and helping to make SDL a great gaming layer (hopefully more game programmers will then use it instead of DirectX for cross-platform games from the get-go), but we should embrace native linux games.

    We all know that Wine is a bit of a resource hog, since it emulates windows on top of another OS, and Windows is a resource hog on its own, so now you've got two hogs and that can only lead to trouble (anyone seen Hannibal?). Running natively makes the games much faster and gives linux the boost that it needs for people and organizations (like PC Mag that claims there's not enough apps for linux when the reverse is actually true).

    • If you want to run your games fast like they should be, go native!
    • If you want to support the linux world, support the companies that do an excellent job porting games to SDL.
    • If you want Tux to kick Borg Gates's ass, support native games.
    • If you want linux to start getting on more desktops - even of home users - let their be software...and it was good.

    We all want linux to succeed, so lets support native linux games (and other programs, as well, like StarOffice and KOffice, etc) and the companies that work hard to get good software for linux that attracts attention!

    1. Re:Native is MUCH Faster by Molf · · Score: 5

      That's true, but it's not the point. Wine really *doesn't* emulate Windows at all. It emulates the API, which is an entirely different chestnut. This is why Wine should eventually be able to run Windows apps faster than Windows itself - you *always* need an interface between the app and the OS, this simply acts like the one Windows apps know how to speak to. In theory it should be no different than a `native' API, or running Windows app natively under Windows - except for apps which try to access Windows directly. These won't work properly, because Wine Is Not an Emulator.
      Molf

  3. Linux needs to suport Direct3D (I know, MS....) by hillct · · Score: 5

    Support of comonly used APIs will contribute to linux native ports of popular games, WineX and other emulation solutions are a step in the right direction.

    Support through an emulation layer isn't the conclusion of any development effort. This is a basic tenet of Open Source. The work of TransGaminga is a great contribution twards this goal. Eventually there will be native Linux support for direct3D. This I am certain of.

    As for following Microsoft, implementing their API rather than promoting the potentially vary competitive OpenGL; well, open source operates with an entirely different market model than treditional corporate development. Some market segments such as enterprise IT equally receptive to open source as to treditional software. This allows open source solutions to thrive in that market space. Other market segments such as computer gaming, target a customer base which is generally less technically inclined, and in pursuit of entertainment rather than productivity solutions - I maintain that development of efficient solutions to productivity issues is one of the driving forces behind open source development -, anyway, the gaming customer base is seeking entertainment rather than technical solutions to technical problems. As such, the gaming market will always be dominated by the easiest to use OS, with the simplest setup, and the most readily (as percieved by novice customers) available commerecial support.

    This is why game consoles are still as popular as they are. There was a time when game consoles were themost advanced and highly customized platforms for video game entertainment. With the advent of extremely high quality video cards, sound cards, and control devices for PCs over the past decade, it would be reasonable to assume that customers might choose to purchase a PC (which can now be priced competitively wihth some game consoles - as amazing as that is, in and of itself), which is more flexible, and by every reasonable measure, more useful, but, alas! - game consoles are still extremely popular. I maintain that this is because the gaming customer seeks simplicity and ease of use that (as much as it pains me to say) linux doesn't yet provide at this point, even with the great efforts of Ximian, and the Gnome Project, among others

    The point of this rambling diatribe is that computer game designer will always favor the simplest to use platform, which is inherently, where the majority of gaming customers will be. This means, that regardless of the elogance or superiority OpenGL, the Linux community will need to adopt direct3D because, as others have pointed out, no programmer wants to port code from one platform to another especially when that requires a significant API change.

    --CTH

    --

    --

    --Got Lists? | Top 95 Star Wars Line
  4. As long as I have hack I'll be alright... by karmawarrior · · Score: 5
    Seriously though, the major complaint I hear amongst people wanting to move over to Linux isn't that there aren't enough games but that their existing game collection would go out the window if they were to switch.

    And they don't want to do that.

    I say go on, get 'em to both projects. We need compatability, and we need a genuine native powerful platform that lets Linux beat the crap out of the competition.
    --

    --
    KMSMA (WWBD?)
    1. Re:As long as I have hack I'll be alright... by NutscrapeSucks · · Score: 5

      the major complaint I hear amongst people wanting to move over to Linux isn't that there aren't enough games but that their existing game collection would go out the window if they were to switch

      Maybe you are trying to convert the wrong people over to Linux? From a pragmatic standpoint, the operating system has to provide applications that the user wishes to run. It's really a simple checklist to determine who is most likely a potential Unix user and who isn't.

      + AOL (stay with Windows)
      + All the latest games (stay with Windows)
      + Powerful scripting and text manipulation functions (Unix)
      + Free programming tools (Unix)
      + Powerful and logical system management functions (Unix)
      + Basic websurfing and e-mail (Both, either, anything).

      For the most part, games don't bring in the users -- users bring in the games. A vast majority of games are sold to the casual gamer who is doing real work on his/her machine. The bleeding edge 'Wintendo' gamer crowd is essentally subsidized by this broader market.

      Really, Loki has the right idea by trying to sell proven hits to a userbase that wants to relax after a hard day of using 'grep'. Even then, it's a pretty much marginal market, and certainly not large enough to attract someone from the dark side.

      I agree, go build the technical infrastructure for portability if that's what turns your screws. But, even if it's technically possible to port games, that's not going to make it economically possible until there's a larger desktop userbase.

      --
      Whenever I hear the word 'Innovation', I reach for my pistol.