Loki Games Closing?

It was gonna happen eventually by L-Wave · 2002-01-23 16:00 · Score: 3, Interesting

I go to the local video game store (yes, a franchise) and what do i see? I can get any linux game for 10 bucks or under. If you consider the Windows version costs roughly 30 bucks or more, this is a huge loss to companies. Loki did some really great ports, but i think linux still has yet to prove itself as a gaming platform.

--
I SURVIVED THE GREAT SLASHDOT BLACKOUT OF 2002!

Re:It was gonna happen eventually by yobbo · 2002-01-23 17:40 · Score: 3, Insightful

Yes, but the fact that you could go to your local video game store and find linux games there is a start at least...
Re:It was gonna happen eventually by lightfoot+jim · 2002-01-23 20:27 · Score: 2, Interesting

Brainiac: Do you really think cheap games is the killer app that will drag down the Windows monopoly and bring users to Linux?

Most home pc owners I know don't ever do word processing. Nearly all own at least a few recent games. Selling ports of games that have already been out for windows for weeks just doesn't make good business sense, but if there were a large number of games that came out for linux first or linux only, I imagine a lot of people would switch.

--
The state is the great fiction by which everyone tries to live at the expense of everybody else. ~F. Bastiat

New icon? by DragonPup · 2002-01-23 16:01 · Score: 4, Informative

No more N64 controller...anyways, ya, sucks that Loki isn't doing well, but honestly, the Linux game market isn't nearly as profittable as the Windows one. Maybe it's because a lot of Linux users have a Win partition and rather than wait for 'Awesome Game X' to get ported, they buy the Win version...

-Henry

--
"Useless organic meatbag" -HK-47

Re:New icon? by 1010011010 · 2002-01-23 16:13 · Score: 2

I just bought Alpha Centauri. I have the Windows version (a gift), but hate having to boot back into Windows.

Now I've got RTCW and Alpha Centauri on Linux. If I just had Age of Empires 2 and Half-Life... I'd be set.

--
Napster-to-go says "Fill and refill your compatible MP3 player", which is a lie. It's not MP3. It's WMA with DRM.
Re:New icon? by Some+Dumbass... · 2002-01-23 17:16 · Score: 2

Maybe it's because a lot of Linux users have a Win partition and rather than wait for 'Awesome Game X' to get ported, they buy the Win version...

Or they wait until the Linux version comes out, then they realize that they can buy the Windows version for about half the price (and in some cases, they can download a Linux binary!)

There are many reasons why the Linux game market is failing. They fact that it's an afterthought to most people is one of them.
Re:New icon? by Jace+of+Fuse! · 2002-01-23 19:38 · Score: 2, Flamebait

There are many reasons why the Linux game market is failing.

The lack of DirectX is the other big one.

--

"Everything you know is wrong. (And stupid.)"

Moderation Totals: Wrong=2, Stupid=3, Total=5.
Re:New icon? by Lumpy · 2002-01-24 01:11 · Score: 3, Funny

that is an atari 2600 controller. NOT a n64 controller. Please get your retro gaming icon name right. I played the Atari 2600, I loved those oblong big ass pixels...

--
Do not look at laser with remaining good eye.

humm, this blows by MaxQuordlepleen · 2002-01-23 16:03 · Score: 3, Insightful

I'm sure it will be said a dozen times again in this thread, but I'm bummed.

I've got five Loki products cramming my hard drive, and even though their products were sometimes indifferently supported and somewhat uneven in quality, I'm really sorry to seem them go as I'll have no reliable source for new products.

I'd imagine the contracts to support UT and QIII were pretty huge for them, it was a bad sign when they went away...

Re:humm, this blows by garcia · 2002-01-23 16:46 · Score: 3, Insightful

Sorry but the games that they ported were already out for a long ass time, didn't really catch my eye, and I really didn't see a need for them.

As far as the comment in another post about how people wanted the Linux binaries for free: I don't think that users should have demanded it but I also don't believe that they were entirely wrong for asking. I don't want to pay $whatever for an old game and I certainly don't want to pay twice for a game I already own.

I am VERY sad to see a company that worked so hard at doing something that was ignored by the community but I don't see how they could have thought that they would turn a profit anyway.

Linux users are so used to receiving games for free (and other apps) I guess they just believe that all apps should be free (this is IMHO as I pretty much refuse to pay for any software).

Sorry Loki, you had a great idea, it was just too slow and too early.
Re:humm, this blows by dougmc · 2002-01-23 19:15 · Score: 2

You all are idiots... We've not spent $$$ on the OS or anything like that, we can afford to pay for games.
No, you're the idiot. I have several computers, two of which I use all the time. I've got my `work' computer, which runs Linux, and my game computer, which runs Windows (because that's what the games run under.)
I buy a lot of games. I enjoy them. I probably spend as much on game software as I do on hardware. I spend *much* less on OS's -- Windows 98 was around $100, and I spent that years ago (XP may run some games, but 98 runs all games. If all the computer is for is Windows games, 98 is what you want.)
Just because I didn't spend $200 on Linux, that doesn't magically give me $1000 to spend on games ...
Re:humm, this blows by dougmc · 2002-01-23 19:21 · Score: 3, Insightful

Sorry but the games that they ported were already out for a long ass time, didn't really catch my eye, and I really didn't see a need for them.
And that's why Loki failed. They ported old games.
By the time a Linux port is available, the Windows version has gone up and down the charts. The people who really wanted that game already bought it, finished it, and have moved on to the next game.
Now, if Loki could get Linux ports out the same day as the Windows version was released, things would be different ...
Linux users are so used to receiving games for free (and other apps) I guess they just believe that all apps should be free (this is IMHO as I pretty much refuse to pay for any software).
That might be a small part, but it's a very small part. You can find lots of good free Windows software too if you just look.
Here's the real clincher -- as a Linux user, why would I pay $50 for a Linux version of Quake 3 when 1) the Windows version of Quake 3 is in the bargain bin for $10, and 2) I bought Quake many months ago (for Windows) when it first came out. And I only paid $30 for that!

What's the big deal... by Mapultoid · 2002-01-23 16:03 · Score: 2, Insightful

... with running a dual-boot system? I understand the desire to get Linux on every desktop that some people have, but it seems to me that Linux ahs strengths and weaknesses. Frivolous wasting of time, such as videogaming (ignoring /., of course) is not it's strong suit. Windows is great if you want waste your time. Why not let Linux do what it does best, be productive, and get better at those things, and let Windows be the big time waster? Is it really so difficult for a person who really wants to play games to get a copy of Windows and slap it on their machine for playing games? Let Linux do what it does best and don't waste money on projects that in the end may not help the system continue to build its reputation.

--
Ben Garrison, a mindless idiot who will be the first against the wall when the revolution comes.

Re:What's the big deal... by Sloppy · 2002-01-23 18:54 · Score: 2, Insightful

There are several reasons for not wanting to do that. Some are lame, and some aren't.

The most obvious one, I think, is that rebooting is a pain in the ass and counter-productive. Just a couple of hours ago, I was playing the "download a tarball, configure, find out I'm missing a library, go find it, download, repeat" game. While waiting for libxml2 to download, I fired up Heavy Gear 2 and spent a few minutes LAACing and VHACing some enemy gears. Reboot? Uh, I'm downloading. I don't want to reboot when my computer is in the middle of something, that's just silly.

Another thing.. I don't have Windows. Yeah, I guess I could trivially pirate a copy from work if I wanted to, so that's not a big deal. But it's something. I'de probably have to juggle partitions too, just to get it to boot. I also remember how hostile I've seen Windows act when you try to install it on a machine that already has other OSes on it. Adios, boot sector and boot manager. That's a lot of hassle to go through just to play games, compared to how easy it has been to enter my credit card number on a web form.

I don't trust Windows. If I were to install it on a machine, it would have write access to the hard disk and access to my network inside the firewall. That's just reckless.

The final reason: Windows is disgusting. I hate the sight of it and I don't want it anywhere near me and I'm sure not going to let it into my house. Bitterness and anger aren't what I want to feel while I'm trying to relax. When I'm at home, I want things to be pleasant. Windows has too much baggage -- emotional, aesthetic, and idealogical -- for that ever to be possible.

--
As copyright owner of this comment, I authorize everyone to defeat any technological measure which limits access to it.

Re:I'm not sad to see them go. by JohnG · 2002-01-23 16:04 · Score: 2, Funny

My job is not to 'support the concept of Linux gaming'. It's to buy games.

You get paid to buy games? That's pretty cool! :)

Re:Color me shocked.... by Bremen24601 · 2002-01-23 16:06 · Score: 5, Insightful

No, the problem is not that we won't pay, the problem is that most people still have a win9x partition to play games on and we don't want to wait a few months for a linux version.

Also despite great strides in the desktop area I still think of my linux boxen as development platforms or servers, I don't play games on them, I program and do real work. Putting mere games on them would be demeaning to them!

--
Blessed are the young, for they shall inherit the national debt. --Herbert Hoover

Hopefully by T3kno · 2002-01-23 16:06 · Score: 2, Interesting

They'll open source everything that they can. That would at least be a silver lining.

--
(B) + (D) + (B) + (D) = (K) + (&)

Re:Hopefully by Krach42 · 2002-01-23 16:13 · Score: 2, Insightful

They already have released everything open-source that they could. The companies that they did the ports for required that the source remain closed.

--

I am unamerican, and proud of it!

I paid! by Krach42 · 2002-01-23 16:07 · Score: 2, Insightful

Damn, I bought a second copy of Descent3 because I wanted the Linux version! I still want my Deus Ex!!! NO!!!! I owned all the games I was willing to buy, and _REGISTERED_ each one! I don't want to see them go!

--

I am unamerican, and proud of it!

Re:I paid! by Cainam · 2002-01-23 16:55 · Score: 2, Insightful

Yeah...I was going to buy SC3K Unlimited and maybe Civ... :(
However, this isn't the end of the linux gaming world. When Linux has more desktop market share among the masses (note when, not if), someone else will come along and be the next Loki. Maybe even some of the same folks! Wouldn't that be cool?
Don't despair.

This sucks so hard. by ACK!! · 2002-01-23 16:07 · Score: 2

Listen I own two of their games.

Alpha Centauri (the full pack with the regular game and Alien Crossfire)
and
Myth II

I was hoping to get Heavy Gear II or Rune next.

Damn this bites so hard because of not only the great games but the progress in terms of ideas for developing games while living with an open-source community without pissing them off.

I was actually hoping the company would cut staff and such and go the mail-order/web sales route.

Some Mac Game porting companies lived that for awhile. This makes me so fucking sad.

________________________________________________ _

--
ACK /ak/ interj. 2. [from the comic strip "Bloom County"] An exclamation of surprised disgust, esp. i

Man this sucks.... by reaper20 · 2002-01-23 16:09 · Score: 2

I own quite a few Loki titles myself. This sucks. At least the open source SDL will live on in someway, so all their effort will not be totally wasted.

At the same time, I wish they would have diversified some of the titles that they offered. One can only play so many Quake knockoffs ....

Red Hat should buy them. by grub · 2002-01-23 16:14 · Score: 5, Interesting

Root^H^H^Hed Hat should buy Loki's assets and licenses. They have a somewhat successful business already, a gaming division for "their" OS would be a nice feather in their cap (cap.. heh, no pun intended)

--
Trolling is a art,

Re:Red Hat should buy them. by Anonymous Coward · 2002-01-23 16:31 · Score: 2, Interesting

red hat is moving towards the server side.
if any linux company were to buy loki, it would be Mandrake. they have a gamers edition, which includes the SIMs, and fresh cash from their recent IPO
Re:Red Hat should buy them. by Rogerborg · 2002-01-24 01:16 · Score: 2

Heck, if AOL/TW are actually interested in shipping a Linux OS at some point, they should buy them and make it a viable alternative to Windoze for Joe AOLuser.

--
If you were blocking sigs, you wouldn't have to read this.
Re:Red Hat should buy them. by HiThere · 2002-01-24 05:11 · Score: 2

No. Red Hat shouldn't buy them. They properly concentrate on system software. (Licensing rights from someone else is another matter.)

None of the distributions should buy them, though backing a company that bought them might be reasonable.

Loki is good for Linux, but most Linux users aren't really gamers. So Loki's business can't expect to be really profitable. So it needs to be supported by someone who derives an ancillary benefit. The arguments in favor of Mandrake are a bit reasonable, but Mandrake software tends to be specialized to the Mandrake distribution. So this isn't too good an idea.

If AOL is serious about moving into the Linux market, then they could be a reasonable purchaser. But I'm not sure.

Unfortunately, every plausible purchaser that I can think of would limit the market for the games further than it has been. At one point I could have seen Corel as a ventor. Unfortunately, it supported it's own distribution (which was a "broken Debian" [probably a timing problem here, glibc was changing just then]), and that drained their funds.

--

I think we've pushed this "anyone can grow up to be president" thing too far.

Entertainment and limited leisure time. by Bigger+R · 2002-01-23 16:14 · Score: 3, Informative

The point of games is entertainment. We've all got limited leisure time. You have to WORK to get a linux box tuned for games. Even then the return on your investment has a smaller pay-off than the windows-environment hassles, because there are fewer choices.

I have a couple of boxen, both W2K and *nix. I really wanted to make it happen, but I just found that I enjoyed playing more than configuring.

I'm just sorry the chickens and eggs did get sorted out(if the "leak" is indeed real).

--
Beta only seems to work for Google. Such a shame.

Re:Entertainment and limited leisure time. by krogoth · 2002-01-23 16:54 · Score: 2

Oh, it was just so much work for me. First I had to download the nVidia drivers (gasp!) and (because I chose the SRPMS) rebuild and install them - that was 4 commands! 4 commands I'll never get back! After that, I downloaded the wolfenstein demo, and when I ran the installer I had to choose a directory to install to (~/wolftest2) AND a binary directory (~/bin)! And, to top it all off, the game doesn't automatically start when I want to play! (I know wolf isn't a Loki game, but it's the same installer)

--

They that quote Benjamin Franklin on liberty and safety deserve neither.
Re:Entertainment and limited leisure time. by Time+Doctor · 2002-01-23 18:42 · Score: 2, Interesting

Honestly, the nvidia drivers are so easy to get set up as long as you already have a reasonably current version of X4.

--
Check out ioquake3.org for a great, free, First-Person Shooter engine!
Re:Entertainment and limited leisure time. by aussersterne · 2002-01-23 22:02 · Score: 2

Gaming on Linux: Install Red Hat 7.2, go to NVidia site to download drivers, rpm -i drivers, run Loki installer.

Gaming on Windows: Install Windows 2000, go to NVidia site to download drivers, double-click on drivers, run Windows game installer.

How is that hard? Or are you one of those have-cake-and-eat-it-too idiots who won't use NVidia with Linux because they won't open-source their drivers, and then has the nerve to complain that all of those non-vendor drivers for the other cards are hard to use?

Honestly...

--
STOP . AMERICA . NOW

what happened to press releases by ab0mb88 · 2002-01-23 16:14 · Score: 2, Funny

Does anyone actually put out press releases any more, or does every company just leak an internal email when they have news?

I'm not really surprised by An+Ominous+Cow+Erred · 2002-01-23 16:15 · Score: 5, Insightful

At Hyperion, an alternative platform game software porting company I work for, we've produced titles for Linux as well as MacOS and AmigaOS. The Linux versions simply bombed, with the Amiga versions outselling them by a good margin. The *AMIGA* versions! The Amiga market, by a good estimate, is around 100 times smaller than the Linux community.

What we got from Linux users were not sales, but tons of email demanding that we put up the binary executeables on an ftp site for free so they could download them and use them with their Windows version of the game. For some reason they just couldn't grasp that it cost us money to both license and port the software, and that we didn't see a red cent for the Windows version they bought. It didn't matter, all they wanted was free beer.

As a Linux enthusiast myself (active in my LUG, promoting Linux wherever I can) it really saddens me that so many users will clamor for Linux games but won't actually pony up the money when they become available. It's very, very depressing.

::goes to cry in his non-free beer::

James Sellman -- Hyperion Entertainment -- http://www.hyperion-entertainment.com/

Re:I'm not really surprised by captaineo · 2002-01-23 17:37 · Score: 5, Insightful

Hi James,
What we got from Linux users were not sales, but tons of email demanding that we put up the binary executeables on an ftp site for free so they could download them and use them with their Windows version of the game.
Maybe this is a clue towards a better marketing angle for your services? Linux customers are in this strange situation where the majority of them also run (and buy games for) Windows. So naturally they see a Linux binary as an incremental "nice-to-have" add-on, whereas they won't look twice at a standalone full-price Linux product.
Have you considered giving these people exactly what they ask (for a small fee of course)? I mean, don't produce or ship a full boxed product, just sell downloadable Linux binaries for say 20% the purchase price of the full game (and maybe charge a bit extra for optional tech support hand-holding). This way you get less revenue per sale, but you might make a lot more sales. Of course the economics of this business model might not work out; I just hope it's something you've considered.
Re:I'm not really surprised by Some+Dumbass... · 2002-01-23 17:53 · Score: 5, Insightful

What we got from Linux users were not sales, but tons of email demanding that we put up the binary executeables on an ftp site for free so they could download them and use them with their Windows version of the game.

This goes back to the dual-booting problem. Linux and Windows both run on x86 hardware, while MacOS and AmigaOS do not (I assume most gamers are using x86 CPUs, not SPARCs :). Thus dual-booting to play games is an option for the Linux crowd only. Then there's Wine and (especially!) WineX, the latter being x86-Linux-only right now. My point being, most Linux users have the option to run Windows games somehow, awkward and unpleasant though it may be.

Meanwhile, Linux gamers had to wait an awfully long time for most games to come out after the Windows version was released. When they did, they cost twice as much as the Windows game because the Linux game was "new". If they already bought the Windows (or Mac) version, tough, they get to pay again. Given all this, I'm not surprised that the Linux game market didn't work out. There were some pretty strange economic models involved. Linux gamers have options that users of other OSes don't have. Yet they were being asked to put up with long delays and higher prices just so that they could have The Linux Version of a game. Of course it didn't work. If Linux users had no options, maybe they'd put up with this stuff. But alas, we do, and thus we tend to demand our games more-or-less on time and more-or-less reasonably priced. If they're not, we buy the Windows version. (In general... I personally own 6 Loki games, plus UT bought from TuxGames).

So now, let's look at those complaints from the perspective of someone who can dual-boot or use WineX. You got complaints from people who already had the Windows version. That is, they already paid for the game once. (I assume they could pirate the Linux version just as easily as the Windows one, so let's assume they have legit copies) There's a good chance they could get that game running on dual-booted Windows, or barring that, Wine/WineX. Isn't it obvious why they don't want to have to buy the game again? "Free beer"? Not from their point of view! They figure that they paid once already, so why pay again ("I'll just dual-boot instead until I can get WineX working...")? Obviously, this doesn't work for Hyperion :) But you see my point, right? The Linux market just wasn't going to work as well as other non-Windows markets, because we tend to have access to Windows. Yes, this may be terrible for Linux; but as far as the mob is concerned, second-class treatment just won't cut it.

I do want to thank you and Hyperion for porting some commercial games to Linux. Thanks for helping us out, especially given that it didn't work out financially for you. (Hindsight is 20-20 and all...) Good luck with the MacOS and AmigaOS markets.
Re:I'm not really surprised by Time+Doctor · 2002-01-23 18:27 · Score: 2, Interesting

This is perhaps the most true comment I've seen.
It is almost always free binaries which people want. Not just demanding them, but _Expecting_ them. Perhaps in the end, this kind of attitude from the large majourity of gamers is what killed Loki.

--
Check out ioquake3.org for a great, free, First-Person Shooter engine!
Re:I'm not really surprised by An+Ominous+Cow+Erred · 2002-01-23 18:38 · Score: 5, Interesting

We actually considered this, unfortunately most major publishers specifically prohibit making their products downloadable -- even after credit card verification. It opens up a big can of worms like credit card fraud and the like so they generally prevent us from doing such things in the license agreement.
In the future as we move more towards distribution of stuff over the 'net, perhaps these attitudes might change, but as it is this is simply not possible. The companies like having that physical box, that keeps the product "real" and makes it harder for numbers to be fudged about the number of copies produced, etc. I do understand this perspective and agree with it somewhat, but the obvious advantages of digital distribution I think will in the end override these concerns. These same issues affect the movie and music industries as well, and they are only just now sticking their toes into the digital content distribution market (after thoroughly sueing a lot of people I might add. :-( ).
We'll see what tomorrow brings.
James Sellman - Hyperion Entertainment - http://www.hyperion-entertainment.com/
Re:I'm not really surprised by bogado · 2002-01-23 23:07 · Score: 2

That is the problem with the llinux game industry, the games are always released after, some times very after, the windows games. People that use linux commonly have a windows partition to play games. What happens people buy the game for windows, and then they simply would not buy the linux version and pay for the same thing twice. If the games were to be released at the same time this problem would be solved.

In fact, in my opinion this porters should work for the game company, and all the versions should come in one CD. The executable part of the game is almost zero if you compare with the rest of the data. And I do think people that use linux would prefer to buy a game that has a little seal with a penguim saing "works with linux".

--
[]'s Victor Bogado da Silva Lins
^[:wq
Re:I'm not really surprised by An+Ominous+Cow+Erred · 2002-01-24 01:58 · Score: 2, Informative

Here's another suggestion then- how about something like a Bleemcast!
equivalent then; charge less for your port, but require the data files
off the 'original' version. I know that Bleem! is dead though, so this
obviously doesn't work _that_ well.

You're missing something here -- we don't make a cent on sales of the original. Our cost in terms of pay to our coders to do the port, and the cost per copy of royalties, and the up-front advance payments all stay the same. If we have to pay $5-$10 a copy (royalties vary depending on the agreement) we can't very well sell your Bleemcast-equivalent for cheap and expect to make anything. Bleem! is a totally different scenario. They didn't have to pay a cent in licensing fees/royalties. They just wrote an emulator. Not only that, but the bulk of the work was done after the emulator was written, it just needed tweaking to run a different game. The cost and effort involved per-title is minimal in comparison to what we do. We have to pay to port each game (although if we do multiple Quake engine or multiple Lithtech engine games the ports are a little easier). We have to pay our coders to port it. We have to pay our royalties/up-front license costs. We have to pay these things that Bleem! did not.

James Sellman - Hyperion Entertainment - http://www.hyperion-entertainment.com/
Re:I'm not really surprised by mpe · 2002-01-24 02:30 · Score: 2

To add another wrinkle: Licensing usually says you don' *own* your copy Mystery Men, or Tribes. You merely bought the right to view or play it. If I bought/own a license to view Mystery Men, why can't I exercise that use on both VHS and DVD without having the buy two separate licenses?

Customers see this (as with issues surrounding replacement of damaged media) as attempts to rip them off. If the major cost of buying the film is the licence then changing or replacing the media should be a marginal cost. (Since magazines can give away DVD's the media coat self evidently isn't that high.
Re:I'm not really surprised by An+Ominous+Cow+Erred · 2002-01-24 02:58 · Score: 2, Informative

Would it be possible to include the Windows and Linux binaries in the box set then, making the data files available to both, but in one package? That way, no distribution channnels would need to change, and Linux users could buy games in their local games store.
Certainly it's POSSIBLE, it's just that the major publishers don't consider Linux to be worth their time -- period. They won't do it.
Unless you're suggesting that we do the port and somehow magically make it appear on all the Windows version discs. You don't understand, we buy a license for the Linux version. We don't make any money off the sales of the Windows version. Even if we somehow did the port before they were done with the Windows version (how can we port something that isn't done?) and convinced them to put our binary on the disc, we would not make a cent because THEY are selling the Windows version, not us. And if you're about to suggest that they would pay us royalties for the privilige of including our port on their Windows version disc, think again! If they really thought it was worth their money and time to include a Linux version on their Windows install discs, we wouldn't have to license it from them!
For some reason people can't seem to fathom that the people who do the ports have to PAY for the rights, because the original publishers JUST DON'T CARE about Linux. *THEY REALLY DON'T GIVE A DAMN*. They are not about to take the risk of investing in something that they don't care about, so we take the risk by making the investment ourselves (by buying the license and funding the port). If the port sells well, we make money from sales (and they make money from royalties, maybe in the process convincing them that Linux is worthwhile). It's as simple as that.
It really frustrates me that time and time again people keep suggesting the same "solutions" which just aren't possible. The only way to get free downloadable Linux binaries, Linux binaries included with Windows version, or even inexpensive binary-only packages that you combine with the Windows version, is if THE ORIGINAL PUBLISHER is the one doing it. Loki, Hyperion, etc. can't. We can only buy the rights and then sell our own version.
James Sellman - Hyperion Entertainment - http://www.hyperion-entertainment.com/

One size... by AntipodesTroll · 2002-01-23 16:17 · Score: 4, Redundant

Dosent fit all. Wholly open source and popular-commercial-gaming just dont seem to go together.

Carmack is right, Linux gaming isnt a viable market. As asthetically displeasing as it is to the faithfull crowd, Windows holds the market on the gaming market. Hopefully this will accelerate the development going on in WINE and other API abstraction layers out there, so one day we can run most any Windows game reliably on Linux. That will be better IMO than Loki (or another company) scrabbling to port a subset of Win games to Linux, after the fact.

It is just plain more efficient for all involved, after all.

--
Anyone who considers arithmetical methods of producing random numbers is, of course, in a state of sin.-John von Neumann

Re:One size... by Ami+Ganguli · 2002-01-23 17:18 · Score: 2

There's nothing fundamental about free software that makes gaming impractical, it just comes down to market share. The Linux desktop just doesn't have the market share yet. It'll be a few more years. Loki is a victim of poor timing.

My worry is that other desktop oriented companies - for example Mandrake, Suse, and Ximian - will have the same problem. Too high of a burn rate to hold out for three more years. The only ones left might well be Red Flag Linux. I bet that would make Americans really happy :-).

--
It is tempting, if the only tool you have is a hammer, to treat everything as if it were a nail. - Abraham Maslow
Re:One size... by Afrosheen · 2002-01-23 19:25 · Score: 2

Keep in mind Transgaming's goal in life. Once they recoup X amount of dollars to recover development costs, their code is going to be merged into the public wine tree and open sourced. So everyone that 'subscribes' contributes to the software being free eventually. Sounds like a good business plan to me, everyone gets what they want.
Re:One size... by Ami+Ganguli · 2002-01-23 19:25 · Score: 2

So are you arguing that general-purpose operating systems like Linux and Windows shouldn't be used for games? Not everybody has or wants a dedicated game machine.

--
It is tempting, if the only tool you have is a hammer, to treat everything as if it were a nail. - Abraham Maslow
Re:One size... by aussersterne · 2002-01-23 21:44 · Score: 2

Wine is crap so far. And it's been crap for years now.

There seem to be all of these Wine fans crawling around saying "Wine is great" and "Wine is beautiful" and "Wine is not an emulator" and "Wine will save Linux and make Loki obsolete because someday we will all run Windows apps under Linux!"

Well right now, the emperor has no clothes. NONE of the major Wine trees right now runs anything terribly well. Wine may not be an emulator, but it certainly sucks memory, processor time, and stability like one.

I for one prefer native software, thanks. Oh yeah, I knew you were going to say that: "Wine IS native software! Wine is an API, not an emulator, duh!"

Fine. Let me make it simple... I for one prefer non-Wine software!

As in "software that works."

Like Loki's.

*sigh*

--
STOP . AMERICA . NOW
Re:One size... by mpe · 2002-01-24 02:33 · Score: 2

Carmack is right, Linux gaming isnt a viable market.

Actually what this proves is that it isn't a viable market to have games written for Windows, then ported to Linux some time afterwards.
It says nothing about what might happen were games to be released at the same tiem for different platforms or for Linux before Windows. Or even a multiplatform version on one box.

The worst part by xwred1 · 2002-01-23 16:18 · Score: 2, Insightful

The worst part of this is that trying to be a Linux gamer will be alot harder, since there's almost nothing coming down the pipeline anymore. I really don't want to use Wine or WineX if I can avoid it. In my experience, Loki's ports have been superior to, if not equal to, the Win32 port's quality.

Maybe I will just because a bitter ex-gamer, and only play Doom 3 (which will by then, probably be the only newish commercial Linux game). Serious Sam will be nice too, but by the time its done, it probably won't be big in the lanning scene, which is where I do most of my gaming.

opensourcing everything by antistuff · 2002-01-23 16:19 · Score: 5, Informative

It looks like a lot of people are saying that loki should make everything opensource. Rather than respond to each thread, ill just post the general response here. They cant. They dont actualy make games, they port them, and the orriginal maker still has the copyright for it. Loki isnt allowed to just release the source to it. Rather than release the source, I hope they sell all their games for like $10 or somthing in a going out of buissness thing. I only bought three of thier games and there are a couple more I would like.

--
Mess Stuff Up

Re:Use operating systems for what they're good for by scorcherer · 2002-01-23 16:20 · Score: 2

If you want to play games, use windows, if you want to program [...] go ahead and use linux.

Someone has to program the games, too.

I agree that right now LoseDoze is much better in terms of available games. Still I can't help thinking .. what if the power of Linux, proven superior in many other fields, could be harnessed to make da ultimate gaming machine.. :-] For instance, watching DivX and MPEG movies on my crap 400MHz box is much smoother under Linux, but that hardly stops people like you from whining.

--

--
The Cap is nigh. Time to get a fresh new account.

OH WELL by rice_burners_suck · 2002-01-23 16:21 · Score: 2

Perhaps Loki Games will somehow find a buyer, and they'll continue to operate under a different name. Like AOL/Loki.

OH WELL.

Re:OH WELL by mgkimsal2 · 2002-01-23 16:28 · Score: 2

It would probably be AOLoki (or maybe that's too obvious?) :)

--
creation science book

Sad to see them go by Evanrude · 2002-01-23 16:22 · Score: 3, Informative

I try and purchase any Linux games I see on store shelves. I was surprised to see Railroad Tycoon II in my local Best Buy a few weeks ago.

I thought that *maybe* Linux gaming was starting to become more main stream. Truly a sad day for Linux gaming

--

~.Evanrude

Every Amiga is 'game ready' by mgkimsal2 · 2002-01-23 16:23 · Score: 2

Every Amiga comes with minimal standard gaming hardware (video chips/sound/etc). MANY "Linux" boxes are just boxes - servers, etc. - without video or sound (or at least video/sound usable for a game). True, there is a great number of Linux machines out there - I'd hazard a guess to say most aren't configured for gaming, and configuring it isn't a piece of cake...

--
creation science book

Delay between Windows and Linux port did them in? by Masem · 2002-01-23 16:26 · Score: 5, Insightful

Most of Loki's port came out 6 to 12 months after the Windows version was released. Now, maybe 5-6 years ago, this would be reasonable, but in today's age, the average lifecycle for a game with a multiplayer element is at most 3 months, with only a few notable exceptions (Half-Life Counterstrike, for example). After that initial 3 months, while people will still be playing these games, there's definitely a lack of servers for that game. While single-player elements can be used 'indefinitely', the lack of a usable multiplayer element when the port is released is a bad selling point.

Understandably, Loki's method couldn't allow them to start the port much earlier, as it seems they waited until a 'popular' game emerged from new releases. The same thing appears to be happening with the Mac market, but maybe not as apparent as a Mac owner doesn't have the same dual-booting option that many Linux users have. A better method, as demonstrated by id, is to work on the port at the same time, either in house or with outside help, such that the binaries for all systems of interest can be released near-simulateously.

--
"Pinky, you've left the lens cap of your mind on again." - P&TB
"I can see my house from here!" - ST:

Re:No reason? by NineNine · 2002-01-23 16:30 · Score: 2, Insightful

Well, since you're new to "business", the reason a company usually stops selling a product is because they're not making any profit on that product.

How this impacts *my* company by b.foster · 2002-01-23 16:32 · Score: 5, Insightful

I work for a small, moderately successful custom software company. We've got 95 employees and serve mostly medium size businesses in the U.S. that need us to engineer supply chain and inventory management software.

You may wonder why a bombshell in the Linux games market impacts us. Well, I did as well, until I started hanging out with my boss and understanding the way the marketing department works. And now I know that Loki's death is yet another nail in the coffin of the concept of ever using Linux on a client site again.

The problem here stems from the fact that customers purchase buzzwords from us, not solutions. Our software is simple - it can be implemeted in FORTRAN and run on VMS, for all we care. In the late 1990s, we began a massive shift from NT to Linux because, well, our clients asked us for a massive shift from NT to Linux. They didn't care that it was free (they still paid us for our "official" copy of Redhat which we made with our CD copies). They wanted it because it was fashionable. And that is why the tide has turned on us Linux fans now. Linux is out; it is not a hot topic anymore. Companies are asking for what they believe to be the "tried and true" solutions, and most of those come from Redmond and from Big Blue (and we aren't talking OS/2 here). If we stuck to our guns and sold Linux products, we would lose a lot of business and wind up in va's situation - barely alive. It's sad but that's the way it is. I want nothing to do with Windows but if I don't learn it, I will inevitably cost my company money and lose my job as a result.

What can we do to turn the tide in our favor again? Learn to write. Offer to write a computer advice column in your local/school newspaper and encourage users to pursue Free solutions. When somebody writes in with an Outlook problem, steer them toward Pine or Mutt. Take the time to teach people how to use Linux - if you let them sink or swim, they will take the path of least resistance and make billg richer. Nobody said it would be easy, but the only way our grass roots movement can succeed is by pursuading users to switch, one at a time.

Bill

Re:How this impacts *my* company by Polyzinha · 2002-01-23 18:04 · Score: 2, Informative

Please, please don't steer them toward Pine or Mutt. If pine had been my first linux experience,
I would have run away screaming. I mean, even techmail was more fun to use than pine. Meanwhile, Eudora (and presumably outlook, kmail, and evolution) will let you sort messages and
even view more than one email at a time. It's really hard to give that up once you're
used to it.

Seriously, you shouldn't be pushing free solutions that are less useful than the windows
or mac equivalents or of course people will conclude that free software is inferior, and
they may never try it again. Concentrate on the linux applications that actually do what they do better than the non-free competition. They're out there.
Re:How this impacts *my* company by dimator · 2002-01-23 19:12 · Score: 2

When somebody writes in with an Outlook problem, steer them toward Pine or Mutt.

"Outlook problem, huh? Here, try this, it's called Pine. No, there's no shiny buttons. A help menu? No, you won't need that. You like stuff that has more than 2 colors? You'll get over it. By the way, the '^' in '^X' means the CTRL button. Have fun now, off you go!"

In related news, people who come to me with a problem with their 2001 Corvettes will be redirected to an '85 Plymouth Reliant.

--
python -c "x='python -c %sx=%s; print x%%(chr(34),repr(x),chr(34))%s'; print x%(chr(34),repr(x),chr(34))"
Re:How this impacts *my* company by Alex+Belits · 2002-01-23 19:24 · Score: 2

I can use pine (and only pine!) for my mailbox _precisely_ because it can't sort messages -- mutt can, and this is why I can't use it. My mailbox is currently >200000 messages long, and nothing, absolutely nothing, can read it remotely except a combination of cyrus on the server and pine at the client. Pine happily reads it at usable speed with no significant delays over everything from 100Mbps Ethernet to 14.4Kbps cellular phone, and selections/zooming/coloring functions allow me to handle my email easily and efficiently.

--
Contrary to the popular belief, there indeed is no God.
Re:How this impacts *my* company by xtremex · 2002-01-23 20:00 · Score: 2, Funny

Why would you use Outlook with friends? and Pine for everything else? WHy the hell should THEY care what you use!!?? It's like saying "I use the blue phone when I call friends, but when I make a business call. the blue phone will NEVER do. I use the RED phone"

--
If you're not a Liberal in your 20's, then you have no heart.If you're still a Liberal in your 30's you have no brain.
Re:How this impacts *my* company by _Sprocket_ · 2002-01-24 01:44 · Score: 2

...even view more than one email at a time.

Actually... there is a way in Pine to jump between two messages. Can't remember it off the top of my head. But I do remember going "wow, didn't know you could do that" while we were sifting through my mail one day. I felt smug. Although tempered by the fact that I hadn't known you could do it for years myself.

Having said that... if someone wants/needs a GUI laden environment like Outlook, mutt or pine is NOT the right direction. There are numerous GUI mail clients for Linux that should surfice (although Outlook is more than email). So yea - I can agree on that point (although there ARE times when a good consol mail reader is nice).
Re:How this impacts *my* company by morris57 · 2002-01-24 04:51 · Score: 2

Use $ to sort the index for the current folder that you are viewing in pine. You can sort by subject, arrival, from, to, Date, size, thread, and a few others.

Good luck!

Re:Back to Nethack by MrResistor · 2002-01-23 16:32 · Score: 3, Interesting

I've really enjoyed Tribes2 the past several months. I suppose the patches will stop, the servers will disappear...

Well, at least that's one Linux port that's keeping pace with the windows version. Too bad it's headed the wrong direction...

Everythign about Tribes2 makes me really sad. I bought the windows version when it first came out. It was unstable, but not too bad. I've definitely seen worse. There were a lot of patches that came out in quick succession, but the patches were done very poorly. A patch couldn't be applied to an install with a previous patch, and you couldn't back out of the patches. You had to uninstall it and reinstall it, with all the required reboots, everytime a new patch was released, which in that first month was about every other day. That was the only reason I stopped playing it.

I was planning to buy the Linux port aafter they'd settled down with the patches for a bit, but there's no way I'll have the money by the end of the month. It seems like they could have sold a lot of stuff if they'd given a little more notice.

--
Under capitalism man exploits man. Under communism it's the other way around.

Re:Use operating systems for what they're good for by johnnyb · 2002-01-23 16:34 · Score: 2

My Linux OS plays TuxRacer quite nicely ;)

--
Engineering and the Ultimate

I had hope for Loki Games.. by X-Dopple · 2002-01-23 16:35 · Score: 3, Insightful

..but after spending hours trying to get Quake 3 Arena and Unreal Tournament to work, I had little hope for their future. I checked their support newsgroups some time back; Unreal Tournament support was active with about 4000 posts. Let me detail my experiences with Unreal Tournament:

- Downloaded and installed it with Windows CD.
- ./UnrealTournament. Takes an eternity to load, but I blame that on my slow hard drive and K6/2 500.
- Crashes: Cannot find Glide drivers, even though Glide v3 was installed (Voodoo Banshee, by the way), and libglide.so was sitting plainly in one of the main /lib directories, I forget which.
- To cut a long story short, I was sent on a wild goose chase, trying hack after hack after hack (DRI, Utah-GLX, recompile OpenGL^HMesa, recompile kernel) until I finally decided that I will never try one of Loki's games again unless they can successfully make Unreal Tournament work on a Banshee. Mandrake 7.2, BTW.

Asking on IRC was futile, as my problem was unique.

This experience isn't new for me. LinuxGames.com's instructions on emulating UltraHLE in WINE must involve some sort of magic, as I have never been able to get that working. Quake 3 Arena's demo segfaulted on startup.

Sorry to see you go, Loki.

Re:I had hope for Loki Games.. by Lemmy+Caution · 2002-01-23 18:50 · Score: 3, Insightful

This entire conversation - or rather, the reality that it represents - is one of the reason why linux gaming is so handicapped. SDL, Glide2, Glide3, Mesa, DRI, DRM, nvidia drivers, ggi - the web of interdependcies, conflicts, workarounds, kernel patching, and other nonsense you have to go through to get games (and only games - Linux is substantially easier to work with in just about every other domain) working is enough to drive one bald.
Re:I had hope for Loki Games.. by Time+Doctor · 2002-01-23 19:12 · Score: 2, Interesting

You mention a number of Libraries and I don't believe they are really that hard to get working. With one exception, MESA/DRI for X4 is extremely frustrating. Nvidia drivers however are cake to install. Most of the commercial games for Linux (http://www.icculus.org/~zakk/gamelist.php?license =commercial)
came with all the required libraries besides GL, which is up to the user or the user's distro to get working.

--
Check out ioquake3.org for a great, free, First-Person Shooter engine!
Re:I had hope for Loki Games.. by Afrosheen · 2002-01-23 19:32 · Score: 2

Just as an offtopic aside, the Banshee is/was well supported in XFree4. I used to talk to Darryl Strauss almost daily when he was hacking together drivers for this card and I can say that Quake3 ran fairly nicely on it. UT ran fine also. This is just a config issue.

Well, at least I bought one of your games... by Svartalf · 2002-01-23 16:36 · Score: 2

SiN didn't play any better on my machine than it did under Windows so I didn't buy it. Shogo, on the other hand, was pretty good- I bought that.

--
I am not merely a "consumer" or a "taxpayer". I am a Citizen of the State of Texas

I am going to bookmark this post. by schwap · 2002-01-23 16:38 · Score: 2, Insightful

When someone asks me why there are no linux games (my little brother does), I can refer to this. I hear a lot of people complain that software costs too much or that they didnt get this thing or that thing for free. I sometimes wonder if these people can balance their checkbooks.

Playing vs. Configuring - DOS Days? by Sean+Clifford · 2002-01-23 16:39 · Score: 2, Informative

Remember the DOS days when you had to hack up your autoexec.bat file to get enough free memory to run cool games, configure your sound card, and otherwise hack at your box to make stuff work? Yeah, playing can be more fun than configuring but if I didn't want to configure, I'd buy a console instead of a PC.

Re:Use operating systems for what they're good for by garett_spencley · 2002-01-23 16:41 · Score: 4, Funny

I always laugh when I hear someone say that Linux was not designed to play games (or that Linux is not a gaming/desktop OS or whatever.....)

Here's the thing:

Linux was created to be a UNIX-like OS on a 386 when the only option at the time was minix which was very sub-par.

UNIX was created by Ken Thompson to play games on his PDP-7

Therefore I would argue that Linux was, in fact, designed to play games. Just on a 386 not a PDP-7 :O)

--
Garett

I bought everything they ported by Wee · 2002-01-23 16:42 · Score: 2

Well, nearly everything. I still have to get MindRover. TuxGames sells it (and they should be able to get some copies, since that letter Draeker sent out was an invite to buy up the balance of Loki's stock.

Loki will be sorely missed.

-B

--

Ash and Hickory, straight-grained and true, make excellent bludgeons, dandy for the cudgeling of vegetarians.

No! by Blymie · 2002-01-23 16:44 · Score: 5, Informative

Loki is _not_ dead because they entered a market that couldn't support them. Scott has mentioned several times that he had no intention of showing a profit for a few more years, at least. Loki's intention was to become the defacto standard for porting games to linux, and to capitalize on that ability in a year or two more down the road, when Linux sales _really_ started to generate revenue. At that point in time, they would have developed all the tools necessary to port games to Linux (like an installer, SDL, and so on), and have shown that they have the skill to do it quickly and professionally when they were handed the ball.

The problem for Loki came when all the venture capital dried up. It shouldn't for them, their plan was always sound, and based on profit in a year or two more. Their problems started when the market crashed, and with how quickly all the VC dried up.

Some very short sighted people pulled their money out of Loki, and they ... well, they suck ;) Don't invest in a five year plan, and then pull out 1/2 way through just because the market crashes.

Loki, a victim of circumstances, and a lack of investment fortitude. The sad part is that if Loki could have lasted until the summer, I'm sure that VC would have returned. :/

Re:problem by Cef · 2002-01-23 16:47 · Score: 2

maybe if they had ported some halfway decent games they wouldn't be in this situation. Where is CounterStrike or Starcraft?

I'd ask this question of Valve & Sierra (re: Half-Life/CounterStrike) and of Blizzard (re: StarCraft). Loki only ported games, and unless they got the code and the permission to port the game from the authors, then they couldn't do it.

I'm really somewhat surprised that Sierra/Valve dissed the idea of a Linux client port. They had OpenGL code already, and they had a Linux server port. The audio shouldn't have proved that much of a problem, and I'm pretty sure it would have done QUITE well with Linux gamers. Almost all of Blizzard's stuff was Direct3D only, which does make it harder to port.

I'll miss 'em. I own Q3A (metal box), Unreal Tournament, Tribes2, Soldier of Fortune, Rune, and Kohan. I paid for every damn one of them, and I'm glad I did.

huh? I already got free. by Erris · 2002-01-23 16:50 · Score: 2, Troll

At Hyperion, an alternative platform game software porting company I work for, we've produced titles for Linux ... For some reason they just couldn't grasp that it cost us money to both license and port the software, and that we didn't see a red cent for the Windows version they bought.

I'm having trouble grasping the concept myself. You might try explaining it a little better. Do those compaines pay you to port those games, or do they just give you the source and then give you a chunck of the revenue when you are done? You're not doing for fun are you?

I'm also having trouble imagining the demanding weenies you describe. The Baton Rouge LUG is small, but most of the people there were NOT like this. Me and the people I know don't do Linux for games. I do it for scientific computing, and I'm just resigned to the idea that I can't make a sound card work. My wife's Red Hat machine has bunches of games that I've never bothered to play, at least one of my Debian machines has Quake that I never play. Having not bothered with all of that, I'm not going to bother to harrass your sales clerks. I don't know anyone else who would either. Perhapse the folks at X-Box have strange ways of ammusing themselves.

All that being said, I've got plenty of money that I have not spent on M$ crap that could be spent on games, especially some of the more interesting social interaction games you mention in another post.

The problem you have is threefold. Teaching me how to build a machine that works. Telling me about your game. Finding the time for me to follow your instructions, get your game and actually play it. Oh wait, most of those problems are mine. Oh well.

Games and PC's multimedia that don't really work right are the smallest social cost of the M$ monopoly.

--
DMCA, Hollings, Palladium. What might have sounded like paranoia is now common sense.

Re:This is what happens.... by AHumbleOpinion · 2002-01-23 16:51 · Score: 2, Insightful

...when you try to sell games to cheap-ass Linux users

No, the real problem is that the vast majority of Linux gamers are already customers of the Windows developer/publisher. I.e. they dual boot or use wine.

The perceived Linux game market and the actual Linux game market differ by multiple orders of magnitude. The actual market consists only of those people who will not buy the Windows version of the game or who will buy a second copy to support their preferred platform. There is no large block of new sales waiting to be tapped.

They did it to themselves by Guppy06 · 2002-01-23 16:53 · Score: 2

From what I understand, Loki wasn't exactly kind to its employees. The management wanted as many games as possible translated for as little money as possible (which got reflected in their payroll and hiring practices), and they had a rather vigorous turn-over rate.

At any rate, I liked the N64 controller as a logo better than the 2600, but I'm probably biased anyhow. :)

Re:problem by treke · 2002-01-23 16:55 · Score: 2

Serious Sam is being ported by http://icculus.org

Games news icon by cecil36 · 2002-01-23 16:55 · Score: 2, Funny

Now we're talking a real icon for gaming. Screw that new technology. Give me vector graphics!

Way to go! by seebs · 2002-01-23 16:56 · Score: 5, Insightful

And a hearty round of thanks to all the Warez dudes out there. Remember, piracy is a purely victimless crime; anyone actually put out of work when a product doesn't sell is obviously making stuff up, we all know programmers drive Ferarris and do lots of coke.

*sigh*.

--
My blog: http://www.seebs.net/log/ --- My iPhone/iPad app: http://www.seebs.net/seebsfrac/

Re:Way to go! by Pope · 2002-01-23 18:23 · Score: 3, Funny

we all know programmers drive Ferarris and do lots of coke
Well, it certainly explains Daikatana...

--
It doesn't mean much now, it's built for the future.
Re:Way to go! by magi · 2002-01-23 19:50 · Score: 2

And a hearty round of thanks to all the Warez dudes out there.

The warez community might not be as strong in Linux games as in Wincrap. Warez needs networks of people, but if you don't have enough nodes, their connections won't reach the critical threshold to "crystallize" to form a network. (Everything is explainable with NK nets...)

On the other hand, Loki games didn't (don't...) have much if any copy protection, except in the multi-play mode of some games. This was a very user-friendly feature, as it made it easier to handle the game (no need to carry the cds around all the time), and I thank Loki for it.

Unlike with Windows games, I haven't a genuine illegal copy of any Linux game. (I have 9 Loki games, and you bet I'll be ordering a few more today if they still have them at the retailer.) And Linux games cost about 30% more here than their old Wincrap version, that is, about $60 for new Linux titles.

But yeah, this is a really sad day for me I and believe for much of the Linux community. Loki was very important for Linux.
Re:Way to go! by dinivin · 2002-01-24 03:10 · Score: 2

Even pirates are smart enough to know you don't play games on Linux.

Wrong... Pirates are just too stupid to figure out how. Believe it or not, Linux makes a perfectly wonderful gaming platform. It does not take a genius to set up and run games under Linux.

Dinivin

Re:This is what happens.... by Wakko+Warner · 2002-01-23 16:56 · Score: 5, Interesting

We all know Windows games never get pirated.

They get pirated all the time, but what they lose in piracy they make up for in legit sales. Lots and lots of legit sales.

The problem is that Linux is run by only 0.24 per cent [slashdot.org] of desktop users. You can't support a proprietary software company with 0.24% of the market.

The problem is that nobody bought their games; doesn't matter how many Linux users there are. Loki sold their games in stores nationwide and on their website. They're there for the purchasing. Unfortunately, they're also there for the taking elsewhere on the Internet. If everyone who stole their copy of "Railroad Tycoon 2" or "Sim City 3000" or "Postal" had supported Loki and paid for it instead, we wouldn't be commenting on this story right now.

- A.P.

--
"Remember when the U.S. had a drug problem, and then we declared a War On Drugs, and now you can't buy drugs anymore?"

SiN didn't work... by Wee · 2002-01-23 16:58 · Score: 3, Informative

...with NVidia cards. Well, at least not with my Geforce2. The game simply would not work for a great majority of linux gamers. Word of that got out (too late for me, but others must have heard about about the video issues). Combine that with the fact that it was something like 3 years old when the port was completed and you have a darn good reason why the game didn't sell. I don't think some abnormality endemic to Linux gamers was the cause.

Even if you were simultaneously porting an upcoming Win32 title, you'd still face the "why can't I get a binary free?" issue. Loki had that in spades with Tribes2, but it sold pretty well. (Most people wanted to binary for servers anyway -- id ruined people on that count, IMO.)

I wouldn't use SiN's sales figures as anything but an anecdotal tale.

-B

--

Ash and Hickory, straight-grained and true, make excellent bludgeons, dandy for the cudgeling of vegetarians.

Re:SiN didn't work... by An+Ominous+Cow+Erred · 2002-01-23 17:22 · Score: 5, Interesting

Yes, we're aware of the problem. Something changed in nVidia's drivers after we finalized the game that broke it. I personally led a beta testing group and SiN did indeed run just fine on the GeForce line of cards. After the problem occured we tried to figure out what was changed that was causing it to fail but because of nVidia's complete lack of interest in working with other developers we weren't able to easily identify it. We considered spending more time working on it but by that time the sales were so disappointing we put a freeze on all Linux projects (this freeze is not permanent hopefully but it's understandable why we have it.)
Actually, a bunch of us at Hyperion really, REALLY hate nVidia. They are the prima donnas of the graphics card manufacturing community. We repeatedly asked them for information concerning the functioning of their cards and for the large part they refused our pleas. Their attitude is that everything has to be done internally and they refuse to cooperate with others. Companies like ATI and Matrox have been very cooperative with us, giving us the information we need to make sure our stuff works properly with their hardware. 3DFX, while they still existed, were also somewhat helpful in providing information (though not as good as ATI). There was a problem with the Voodoo GL drivers that actually caused the game to crash when we had glowing objects onscreen in Shogo, but fortunately due easy-to-access information we were able to include a workaround.
I wholeheartedly encourage everyone to NOT use nVidia hardware until they open up a bit with the information so that people can actually SUPPORT their cards. There are many other great companies that make great cards you can buy from. My personal favorite is the ATI Radeon series but there are other worthy contenders as well.
And yes, I know Loki games don't have problems with the new nVidia drivers. And no I don't know why. :-( Loki, to their credit, were more devoted to Linux and certainly did work harder to fix incompatibilities. If someone who's reading this knows what's causing the crash, please let us know. I wish we could afford the time to root out the problem but unfortunately we need to spend it on other projects so we don't wind up like Loki. :-(
James Sellman - Hyperion Entertainment - http://www.hyperion-entertainment.com/
Re:SiN didn't work... by dieman · 2002-01-23 17:44 · Score: 2, Insightful

Once I talked to Nick Triantos in passing at LWCE 2000 he was *very* interested in knowing about bugs in the driver and/or in the opengl implementation. I really doubt that you were either talking to the right people or you were asking the wrong questions. Trying to force a company to 'opensource' a driver isn't going to get you any help.

--
-- dieman - Scott Dier
Re:SiN didn't work... by An+Ominous+Cow+Erred · 2002-01-23 18:05 · Score: 2, Interesting

OK, perhaps I was a little harsh. :-/ We did get some feedback from the Linux driver team but the last I heard it didn't result in getting the problem fixed. :-( For the large part though I do stand by the fact that nVidia is next-to-impossible to work with. Other companies provide us with specs, etc.
I could ask our engineers again what finally resulted from talking to nVidia... Unfortunately it's kind of moot now as management is leery about spending time (and thus money) on the Linux market when even the tiny Amiga market is more responsive. :-(
If we have time at some point I can see if we can get the problem fixed, but our guys are super busy at the moment.
Believe me we're not happy that our game crashes on current rev nVidia stuff. It doesn't exactly reflect well on us. :-(
James Sellman - Hyperion Entertainment - http://www.hyperion-entertainment.com/
Re:SiN didn't work... by Arandir · 2002-01-23 19:12 · Score: 5, Insightful

The Linux community needs to stop pushing nVidia. I don't know why they do, but they do. You see the lists and boards choked with newbies trying to get their cards to work, yet the GeForce still seems to be the recommended card fo Linux. Huh?

The "Linux guy" where I bought my Matrox G450 didn't want to sell it to me. He insisted I buy an nVidia instead because it was better supported under Linux. I had to walk away and get another salesperson who would sell me what I asked for. I've had Linux guys tell me I should take back my G450 because nVidia was better. I've seen posts on boards where some guy wants to know what the best card is and gets a dozen replies favoring nVidia.

--
A Government Is a Body of People, Usually Notably Ungoverned
Re:SiN didn't work... by puetzk · 2002-01-23 19:43 · Score: 4, Informative

excuse me? I have beautiful accelerated 2d AND 3d on my Radeon 7500, using the opensource drivers included in XFree 4.2.

The opensource ATI drivers are IN XFree86! they do very much exist, and they rock it up (about 90 FPS in quake3 at 1024x768, the 'pretties' all on :-). Nothing groundbreaking, but at $99 OEM not shabby. The card even does dualhead (and I'm using that, so it's not wasted).

Plus, I have decent 2d performance, unlike my roomate GeForce3, which could get pasted to the wall by my old mach64 in 2d, much less anything current. The GeForce mad-fast in 3d, I admit; but that's all you get, and it is plenty unstable too :-(

Matrox has weak 3d cards (albiet spectacular 2d), but quit lying about the radeon support. It is right there, in the standard XFree86 and kernel codebases, without needing any extra parts. It could hardly get any simpler :-)

--
The Matrix is going down for reboot now! Stopping reality: OK. The system is halted.
Re:SiN didn't work... by Afrosheen · 2002-01-24 06:50 · Score: 2

Don't forget XFree4.2 is bleeding edge. Most linux users out there that have Radeons will be glad to read your post because I'm betting everyone's still running XFree4.10. This is news to me, and brand new news at that. Good to hear though.
Re:SiN didn't work... by Arandir · 2002-01-24 07:42 · Score: 2

1) Closed Source and Closed Minds. nVidia is the most secretive video card manufacturer there is. You can't get specs, you can't get help, and you get sued if you reverse engineer. If nVidia decides not to "care" anymore for Linux then you're stuck with XFree86-4.1 for the rest of your card's life.

With a Matrox or ATI card I don't have to worry about what Matrox or ATI does. The drivers are a *part* of XFree86. I don't have to hunt down new drivers everytime I upgrade X. I can use their cards on both Linux or FreeBSD. Of course Matrox and ATI aren't the most open of companies, but compared to nVidia they're radical philanthropists.

2) 2D support needed. I don't know what universe you live in, but the number of Linux programs that need the 3D support that only nVidia can provide can be counted on zero hands. I'm not a game player. I have a life. I use Linux/FreeBSD to get stuff *done*. My OS is a productivity tool. That means I care about 2D graphics. And nVidia can't even come close to Matrox or ATI in terms of 2D.

If all you do is play games, just stick with Windows. I'm serious. Don't give me that crap that you have to have Free Software for your OS. We know better than that. You want Unfree nVidia to run your Unfree games designed for an Unfree platform. So just go Unfree all the way. We'll both be happier.

In the meantime I'm perfectly content with 2D Konqueror, XEmacs, Xmms, Dia, Gimp, KOffice, Staroffice, gcc, Mozilla, Windowmaker, etc. The games I play when I do play games are CivIII, Simcity3k, and MystIII, none of which require or would gain from a 3D video card.

--
A Government Is a Body of People, Usually Notably Ungoverned
Re:SiN didn't work... by dinivin · 2002-01-24 08:19 · Score: 2

Heh... I, too, read that review and bought an nVidia card based on it. And then I got home and suffered with constant lock-ups for three driver releases and then occaisional lock-ups for another release or two. And I'm not alone. So, guess what? I threw my nVidia card out the window and will never go back till they change their attitude about specs and source.

Dinivin

Slashdot, LEARN YOUR LESSON by SuperDuG · 2002-01-23 16:58 · Score: 3

This is not the Nerds Rumor Mill, nor does this matter until it's a real problem. If loki was going to go under dontcha think we would have heard about it a little earlier than a WEEK before the so-planned shutdown?

Here's an idea ... how about you call the company in question for a comment ... you know ... like real reporters do ... before they go an just publish things ...

In the real world we like to call this research, I would have thought you'd learned your lesson from the AOL/RedHat deal ... geeze

--
Ignore the "p2p is theft" trolls, they're just uninformed

Re:Slashdot, LEARN YOUR LESSON by SuperDuG · 2002-01-23 17:37 · Score: 2

Yeah, but has Anyone from LOKI called /. to talk about them closing their doors ...
my 8-ball says that all sources point to no ...

--
Ignore the "p2p is theft" trolls, they're just uninformed

What About Their Archives? by Lethyos · 2002-01-23 16:59 · Score: 2

What am I going to do next time I install a Loki port of a game with my Windows copy? For example, someone who owns a copy of Unreal Tournament can use the Loki installer to use Linux binaries with datafiles from the Windows copy. Being that I am horrible when it comes to backups, where am I going to get copies of these binaries in the future?

--
Why bother.

Support transgaming. by HanzoSan · 2002-01-23 17:00 · Score: 2

As of right now you officially have no choice. Its transgaming, or no games in linux. Make your time.
Transgaming

--
If you use Linux, please help development of Autopac

Re:Support transgaming. by rseuhs · 2002-01-23 23:18 · Score: 2

AFAIK if you use WineLib you can compile a Windows-program on a non-x86 Linux platform.
Re:Support transgaming. by Elbereth · 2002-01-23 23:55 · Score: 2

That's totally untrue. I don't know about the rest of you, but I still like to play NetHack. Having a native Linux version of Diablo 2 and Civ 3 would be nice, but I'm content to use a second PC for them.

I've even got enough parts to make a third PC: four sticks of 64MB PC133 RAM, an Asus PII/PIII motherboard, a spare 266 MHz Pentium II CPU (used when I need to flash old motherboards to support the Pentium III), two ATX cases, a 15" monitor, two PCI video cards, many 10 and 100Mbit NICs, and various, small EIDE hard drives (not to mention the PCI Ultra SCSI controller and several 4.5GB SCSI drives).

I'm sure I could even scrounge up a floppy drive and a 4X CDROM if I tried hard enough. I've got some old 486 PCs in the closet.

This is the main problem with companies like Loki. I really did expect that I'd be able to download the Linux binary to my favorite games. I already paid once for the license (not the game, mind you -- according to the EULA, all I own is a license), so why should I have to pay for a license again? It's not my fault Loki has to PAY to port these games... that's pretty fucked up. But it's counter-intertuitive.

I don't want a box, documentation, CDROM, etc. I just want a binary. I already have everything else. At most, I'd be willing to pay $20. Not $50. I laugh at $50.

Even if I didn't already have the game, I wouldn't pay $50 for it. I've never paid so much for a game. Back in the 80s, it only cost $20-$30 for a new game, and that's the price point I'm used to. I wait for the new games to come down to $40, then I use a coupon or promo code to get it down to $25 or $30. Staples and Electronics Boutique sell lots of games for under $20 in the "bargain bin". It's easy to get a somewhat new game for $35 or $40 if you shop long enough or wait long enough. Shelf space is limited, so games go on sale eventually...

I can't believe that Loki wanted me to spend $50 on an old Windows game that was selling for $9.99 at EB. Shyeah, right. I'll just buy it from the bargain bin and play it on my second (or third) PC.
Re:Support transgaming. by rseuhs · 2002-01-24 01:02 · Score: 2

BUT of course, this will not help you, UNLESS you pay the money to license the game's source code.
The company which produced the game in the first place might *gasp* release a Linux-version at virtually no cost.
So, what's the point?
The point is that Wine functions as a bridge to fuel Linux-desktop adoption which is the prerequesite for Linux applications (including games)

Re:Old news? by treke · 2002-01-23 17:01 · Score: 3, Informative

they announched Chapter 11 a few months ago. That was pretty clear that the end was near, but not certain. Now they are saying the doors close at the end of the month.

Re:huh? I already got free. by An+Ominous+Cow+Erred · 2002-01-23 17:04 · Score: 5, Interesting

It actually works totally the other way around. *WE* pay a software company for the right to port the game. We have to pay a big chunk of money up front. These companies do not see fit to make Linux versions of games, so we have to give them money to convince them to do it. While we have also done some contract work (where we were paid to write code) this isn't really how it works for games for any OS besides Windows. Somebody has to pay the original publisher for the rights.

Regarding the number of people who play games under Linux... Well, there certainly has been a clamor for them. While it's true that most installations of Linux are running as servers, there are also many desktop installations. Certainly a larger number than any other alternative OS except perhaps MacOS. We get quite a few requests for ports, and in general there seems to be quite a clamor for Linux games (if you read any website frequented by the Linux community). Loki, as the predominant Linux gaming company, received heaps of praise.

As far as social simulation and other interesting not-common-on-American-PCs genres go... Well, I sure wish we'd release some of those. Unfortunately it is still a niche market, and given that we already cater to a niche market it would be a niche within a niche. :-(

I hope with growing acceptance of Linux there might be a revival of Linux gaming at some point.... But for the time being the attitude seems to be Everything-On-Linux-Must-Be-Free-Beer. People who are willing to buy Windows games are unwilling to buy the Linux version (even though they claim that they want it). Instead they expect it to be supplied for free. I really hope this changes in the future. :-(

James Sellman - Hyperion Entertainment - http://www.hyperion-entertainment.com/

Linux Ports != Linux Games by xtal · 2002-01-23 17:09 · Score: 5, Insightful

What I saw of the 'linux gaming' movement, I wasn't too pleased with.. the idea was noble, but in reality, a) computers are cheap, so I have another machine to play games on besides my linux workstation and b) the ports were either a pain in the ass to get running, or my 3D card was a pain in the ass to get running, or xxx yyy was a PITA to get running. Sorry, no sale. It would have been nice to see a killer title emerge on the linux platform - but Tux Racer just isn't going to cut it *grin*. I think that's what linux gaming was going to need to get off the ground. Games rely too heavily on things that are very platform specific - e.g. controllers and game APIs, and 3D accelleration. Linux loses.

I'm not sure this is all Loki's fault though. Has anyone else here been introducted to OS X recently? I got a Ti Powerbook because I needed a machine that would work for 4 hours on a battery charge. No big deal on the OS, as long as it runs vim (and it does, through XDarwin, natively). OS X is flawlessly integrated. It reminds me of what my amiga was back in the day - a great platform, where everything worked. No, it isn't completely open source. But, "It works".

My beef: Aqua and OS X is what Redhat SHOULD have done when they released linux. Take the open source start, hire a team of developers to make everything work flawlessly and consistantly. Glue it together with GREAT developer tools and documentation. Make new hardware work without three kernel recompiles and a prayer to ye gods. Get solid APIs people can build applications from on a bulletproof kernel. Redhat missed out, and I think the failure of gaming to catch on is a symptom of this bigger problem.

There's sure a lot of successful games for OS X. Even native ones.

--
..don't panic

Re:Linux Ports != Linux Games by xtal · 2002-01-23 19:42 · Score: 3, Interesting

I hope I got people thinking about some possible reasons why Loki had a hard time. You don't learn anything from a failure if you don't know why..
Let me clarify a few points. Yeah, the looks on the Ti Book kick ass. But so does how the OS looks and acts - not to mention the good start projects like fink.sourceforge.net have. XDarwin is great. I needed a machine that'd run for four hours and be thin and light as well. Sony or Apple. Sony's tech support is HORRIBLE (in my opinion). So off to apple I go. I'm really, really glad I chose the Ti book - it introduced me to what some commerical providers can do with the open source communities good starts. Apple brought their best foot forward, and the OS community brought theirs. The results astound me.
But enough about that. I work developing ASICs and embedded systems for a variety of industries in a research lab. I run linux on my primary desktop right now - about as modern a system as you can get, a watercooled athlon, even. Ximian Gnome has come a long way - but it looks like it's going to be woven into the Solaris/SUN fold, and synergies will appear there the way they did with Apple and BSD, I'm sure. FWIW, the design packages I use (Cadence Family) all run on high end Sun workstations. Mentor Graphics has some limited native linux support. Doesn't matter as long as I have a X client.
Redhat does NOT currently offer developers anywhere NEAR the level of support and integration apple does through their developer tool releases and their documentation available through their web site - all gratis. The design of the OS is great, the tools are great, the look and feel is just right - one button be damned.
What Redhat SHOULD have done in my opinion - and to their credit, you're right, they are moving in this direction - is that they should have stepped up to the plate to make sure that common hardware - like, 3D accellerators - are all supported fully by the window manager and display system and are available to games in a user-friendly way. No XF86Config to edit, no nothing. Plug it in and it works. Apple did this with OpenGL. Redhat should have made sure that there is a way for people to watch movies and DVDs without going through 1001 semi-legal hoops, twitches, and jumps for a half working solution. Apple did this with their Quicktime player and iDVD. Apple controls their base motherboards, yes. They work closely with third parties like NVidia and ATI to make sure their cards are supported. Other companies like creative are coming around to provide support, as well - backed by Apple as the provider of corporate sanity and legal guarantees. One thing I'm learning as I get older is the world isn't black and white. Closed source and open source CAN play nice together.
Redhat should have played the role of Apple or Microsoft for the linux world. Yes, they don't control the hardware. They damn well could have worked a lot closer with third party hardware people like NVidia to get their things working right out of the box, so companies like Loki aren't left with 100 line README files on how to make a game work on a given platform. Trying to keep this rant on topic, Loki tried to fit itself in the middle when the installed base wasn't ready and their sales figures reflected that.
What is really troubling to me is that now I can see projects like XDarwin, Fink (fink.sourceforge.net) derailing the effort to get linux on the desktop. Efforts by Sun to intergrate the fruits of open source development - remember, open source users benefit when the installed base goes up - will also further hurt linux on the desktop. Gnome 2.0 with Ximian updates on Solaris is going to make my Sunblade machines a lot more attractive looking!
Apple has a real winner here, and I encourage more people to try OS X. The user experience is something I really missed - reliability and a solid application base.
I really, really, really hope someone at Redhat or any of the major commercial distros looks at what Apple (and Sun, to a lesser degree) are doing and come up with a similar strategy. I don't want there to be any more Loki style failures in the future.
Just my 0.02. cdn, even.

--
..don't panic
Re:Linux Ports != Linux Games by Dr_Claw · 2002-01-24 01:49 · Score: 2, Insightful

I agree with most of your points, and what I've seen of OS X looks as fantastic as you say. I could do with a portable computer (mainly as something that takes up very little space in my bedroom) - I sold my old laptop earlier last year - but sadly I can't justify the cost right now. If I could, I'd buy one of Apple's offerings.

Where I disagree though, is that RedHat should do what you suggest. Whilst they are definitely the company in the best position to do so, it's not currently worth their while. IMO some of the other distros make better choices for people coming from windows who want nice looking graphical desktops which are easy to configure their system from. RedHat is keeping up, but it's not advancing on that. The reason for this is because RedHat needs to be profitable, and sales to desktop users aren't currently going to make that happen. Their profit comes from being good for business who will buy their support and advanced packages (remember RedHat doesn't just produce a Linux distribution). Whilst that's the case, they will continue to focus on providing what their paying customers (other companies) need.

Having said that, I would like to see what you suggest happen, and I think it would be a good thing. I just don't think RedHat are going to do it anytime soon. As the Linux desktop market becomes more viable then perhaps we'll see a shift towards this behaviour. I could see closer relationships with more hardware vendors being a logical start (rather than making desktops nicer).
Re:Linux Ports != Linux Games by DunbarTheInept · 2002-01-24 08:32 · Score: 2

I hope I got people thinking about some possible reasons why Loki had a hard time. You don't learn anything from a failure if you don't know why..
There really big reason Loki had a hard time, and it's pretty much the only one that matters, is that their business model was: "Pay full price a second time for a game you already bought a year ago, so that you don't have to reboot." Linux users are in a different sort of situation than Mac users. For Mac users, playing the Windows version (while perhaps grumbling about it) is not even an option. So for them the year-old port they see is the first ever occurance of them getting to buy the game. Not so for Linux users. As long as Loki couldn't get started on their ports until after the Windows version was already out, they were doomed. Look at the one title they *did* do well with - Civ Call to Power. It was very different from the rest in several important ways - for one it had a publisher who put it out on store shelves right next to the Windows game, and in a very timely manner so it was still around while the original game was in its first round of sales.

--
Don't label something "offtopic" unless you know the topic well enough to tell what's on topic.

Re:problem by Cef · 2002-01-23 17:15 · Score: 2

I think that the people at Blizzard are real assholes when it comes to Linux... And that really gets to me, because I definately would have bought a Starcraft port.

Same, and I know a lot of people who currently dual-boot to play games like StarCraft who have said they would happily buy such a port.

I don't have Windows installed on my machine at home (thankfully!) and I've only used Wine to run the installer for Return To Castle Wolfenstein. Every install of Windows I've had has had 'issues' (particularly video and motherboard drivers), which I am glad to say I have not had under Linux. And since I didn't have to pay for Windows (since I don't use it), I got to spend just that little extra on my machine so I could buy decent, quality components - makes all the difference for stability, no matter what OS you run.

Want games? Play Gamecube. by HanzoSan · 2002-01-23 17:16 · Score: 2

Right, Thats how you sound.

Go play a Gamecube for your games, a PC wasnt designed for Games.

Stupid little man, Some people want to play Games on their PCs, some people dont want to pay $200 to install an insecure Operating System called Windows just so they can play the occassional Game.

Some people want to play games in Linux.

Some Windows users want to run servers.

Some Console owners want to surf the web.

--
If you use Linux, please help development of Autopac

Open Source projects... by Junta · 2002-01-23 17:19 · Score: 2

What about their open-source projects? Though many didn't acheive anything that impressive, smpeg is an extremely useful library for multimedia. OpenAL sounded nice as well, but I don't know how much that would be missed... Though not directly hosted by lokigames, how would SDL development progress, given that it is maintained by Sam Lantinga, same person chiefly responsible for SMPEG.

Granted, at least in the case of smpeg, there are plenty of alternatives (ffmpeg, mpeglib come to mind), but smpeg is *really* easy to write for. But SDL fills a very important role for multimedia and game development..

--
XML is like violence. If it doesn't solve the problem, use more.

Re:huh? I already got free. by AHumbleOpinion · 2002-01-23 17:20 · Score: 2, Informative

Do those compaines pay you to port those games, or do they just give you the source and then give you a chunck of the revenue when you are done? You're not doing for fun are you?

Two classic deals, not Linux specific, Mac/Console too:

(1) When a developer/publisher has no interest in targeting a particular secondary platform themselves what often happens is that some other company pays to license the game for that platform.

(2) When a developer/publisher has a mild interest in targeting a particular secondary platform themselves what often happens is that they hire some other company to do a port for them. Hiring usually involves a flat fee and/or royalties. If the game is expected to sell well the royalty component may be small or non-existent. If the project is riskier then the royalty component offered is often larger.

In case (1) the porting company takes all the risk. Case (2) sounds safer but the profits in that flat fee disappear pretty quickly if the project runs longer than expected. Royalties usually are seen only in dreams, not the real world.

Re:Too bad. by rekoil · 2002-01-23 17:22 · Score: 2, Insightful

IN the case of Q3A, all Loki handled was distribution. Id did the Linux port themselves.

Re:I'm glad they are gone. by Yottabyte84 · 2002-01-23 17:25 · Score: 2

It's only $5 to download it, and vote on what you want worked on. Worth the money IMHO

Re:Use operating systems for what they're good for by HanzoSan · 2002-01-23 17:27 · Score: 2

Or you can try WineX, never crashed on me

--
If you use Linux, please help development of Autopac

I've read most the post by I_redwolf · 2002-01-23 17:28 · Score: 5, Insightful

... On this thread regarding "Why don't you just dual boot". I've got 4 loki games I bought from loki simply because I don't use windows. I don't want to support Microsoft (a company found to be a monopoly which abuses its power mind you). In their quest to basically control what I do with my computer, control what I do online, and control what I do with my career because I like computers. Not only that but I don't care how many games there are for windows if it means I have to pay for a windows license I will not do it. I'm very pleased companies like ID are making ports available and so I support them, I supported Loki.. and I will continue to support any company who will please me with such pleasures as games for Linux. I never used to buy ID games, ever.. I used to just get a copy from a friend but now that they port to Linux I've bought their quake2 set, quake3 and rtcw and will continue to buy from them because they make good games and are now porting to my platform.

I wish this new slashdot crowd would stop being so goddamn "wishy-washy" and make a decision or stay with windows because most of your posts are absolute dribble; "Stand for something, or fall for anything" is what they say. Most of you just fall for anything.

seen this coming.. by Suppafly · 2002-01-23 17:34 · Score: 2

we all should have seen this coming since loki filed for chaper 11 like 6 months ago.. to my knowledge, most companies don't usually recover from that..

its a shame though, the more I use linux, the more I wished the programs I like to use and play worked so I didn't have to switch back to windows to accomplish the everyday things I like to do.

"Linux" on regcard leads to at least winelib build by yerricde · 2002-01-23 17:34 · Score: 2

I could undoubtably run some of these games through wine, but this really defeats the purpose if you want games written for linux.

Well, when you register your software, and the card asks you "what version of Windows do you use?" you can put Mandrake (or whatever). Eventually, publishers will get the message that Microsoft operating systems are not the only PC operating systems that their customers use, and they might consider releasing a native version of their software. (Use winelib in the early stages of porting; go fully cross-platform in later releases.)

--
Will I retire or break 10K?

Until Win/Lin versions released together... by penguin_dance · 2002-01-23 17:35 · Score: 2, Interesting

...this will not change.

This shouldn't come as any surprise.

For Christmas I got Mandrake 8.1 Gaming Edition with The Sims. Very cool and just like the Windows version. The only thing is, on my Windows machine, I've got all 3 add-on packs too. Would I have bought The Sims for Linux had it not been packaged with the upgrade? Probably not.

Until Linux games get released at the same time as the Windows games this won't change. People who have already bought the game under Windows, *most times* don't want to buy it again 1-2 years later just so they can use it under Linux. And they don't want to wait, hoping it will be one of the few ported to Linux, unless that's the only OS they're using AND the Win version doesn't work under Wine.

--
If you've never been modded as "flamebait" or "troll," you've never tried to argue a minority viewpoint here!

Winelib turns your Win app into a native *n?x app by yerricde · 2002-01-23 17:41 · Score: 2

Linux will always be an unfriendly experience, driven by multiple customized and incompatible versions of WINE

Unless you build Wine into the game binary itself. Use winelib to port your app, and it will run natively on linux, bsd, and many other operating systems that implement the same Single UNIX Spec. From there, you can gradually reduce the number of win32 calls you make.

--
Will I retire or break 10K?

Re:huh? I already got free. by kilrogg · 2002-01-23 17:44 · Score: 2

I think the major problem with this (or at least loki's) business model is the fact they ported games after the windows games were already out. You need to cordinate and release at the same time.

People aren't going to sit around and wait 6-12 month for a port when they can just reboot into windows a play the already released game. How can you possibly expect people to buy a second copy 6-12months later just to play it under linux?

Re:I'm glad they are gone. by gmhowell · 2002-01-23 17:47 · Score: 2

Hmmm.... NO. Again, if they don't make games I want, I don't buy. That simple.

--
Jesus was all right but his disciples were thick and ordinary. -John Lennon

Re:Use operating systems for what they're good for by Doomdark · 2002-01-23 17:49 · Score: 2

Is it really that hard to use windows

Perhaps you are glad to pay 50 - 200$ for the bootloader for games. That's what Windows would amount to me. I don't mind paying for games (I have bought enough, including couple of Loki titles... alas I don't care too much about 1st person shoot-em-ups), but I don't want to waste money on OS _just_ to get chance to buy games.

It's not that Windows is that especially for games. Various libs (directX) are ok but similar ones exist on linux (and usually same libs on various other platforms too). It _is_ convenient for developers, due to monopoly position and _good enough_ support for game writing.

--
I like paying taxes. With them I buy civilization -- Oliver Wendell Holmes

Thousands of games on Linux by yerricde · 2002-01-23 17:53 · Score: 2

There are a ton of video games, and support for games on windows and that is not true on linux.

You can run thousands of games on Linux. Free software exists to run titles designed for NES, Game Boy, Sega Genesis, Super NES, and many more. Just get a dumper, hook it up to your cartridges, and you're off. (Or just pirate the ROMs.)

Wine is not an emulator. TuxNES is.

--
Will I retire or break 10K?

Re:MacPlay by AHumbleOpinion · 2002-01-23 18:00 · Score: 2, Insightful

it's still a little beyond me why Loki was able to bring some games to Linux but not Mac OS X

(1) Competition. Loki would face several more experienced Mac porting houses that have well established track records, excellent contacts and history with the developers/publishers who have an interest in Mac titles.

(2) Experience. IIRC Loki has some former Apple people but this does not necessarily mean they had the experience necessary to port games to the Mac. This manifests in two ways. First, programming knowledge for the platform, Linux is very different from MacOS X (more later). Second, a jealously guarded library that developed over time. A typical Windows to Mac library and tools set (even more later) takes a lot of time, consider it overhead. It only becomes a great asset when you get to the point that it can be largely used as is for a new porting contract. An established porting company can perform a port more quickly and for less money than a new company in part because such libraries and tools are already paid for.

Linux is different: MacOS X may have it's roots in NextStep and FreeBSD but that does not mean that MacOS X programs are Unix apps. The vast majority of MacOS X apps and games are usually using Apple's Carbon API, this lets them either target MacOS 9 and X or reuse much of their existing code (recall libraries and tools mentioned above).

Libraries/Tools: Many developers have no interest in targeting anything except Windows and they code accordingly. Their involvement in ports may only be that they cash the check from whoever is buying a license for MacOS/Linux/etc. A porting house has two options. #ifdef all the Windows specific code or write some code that translates/emulates the Windows calls/data. The latter case is advantageous if you expect to be in the business for a while.

Re:I'm glad they are gone. by theoddone33 · 2002-01-23 18:09 · Score: 2, Interesting

I just decided that I'm never, ever, ever signing up for TransGaming simply because you posted this. I might have considered it before, but not any more.

If you think that there are only 2 ways to get games in Linux, the Loki way and the TransGaming way, you are mistaken. Open your mind and you might end up better off in the long run.

Re:This is what happens.... by SirGeek · 2002-01-23 18:09 · Score: 3, Informative

Nationwide ? I NEVER was able to find any Loki Games (which I would have purchased on Principle).. I mean , Yes.. I can download ISO Images for FreeBSD but I STILL buy the 4 disk set each revision just to help support the project.

--
UPS Sucks

If this story is indeed true about Loki closing... by Codifex+Maximus · 2002-01-23 18:14 · Score: 2

then I am truely saddened. I liked Loki and the fun games they ported. Even though the games started out as Windows games, they were ports and as such I consider them to be Linux games.

This damned downturned economy has everybody tightening their belts. But, I've purchased some of their ports and I intend to purchase more if I can.

--
Codifex Maximus ~ In search of... a shorter sig.

Re:X-Box, X-Files style -- paranoia. by ipfwadm · 2002-01-23 18:34 · Score: 4, Insightful

You know, Microsoft really isn't above sponsoring this kind of behavior

Can't we just acknowledge that some problem might possibly exist in the Linux community, and attempt to fix it? Do we really need to invent a Microsoft conspiracy to make ourselves feel better about Loki closing?? You honestly believe that out of however many Linux users there are in the world, that there aren't at least a few obnoxious ones out there that would demand making a binary freely available? Besides, at first glance, it seems natural: "I already paid for this game, why should I have to pay for it again?" At least until one actually sits down and thinks about the economic and business factors involved (see other posts in this thread). Loki could have changed that model, by showing game manufacturers that Linux is an economically viable gaming platform. Unfortunately, it didn't work out. Don't blame that on Microsoft.

Re:huh? I already got free. by Anthony+Boyd · 2002-01-23 18:38 · Score: 5, Insightful

What we got from Linux users were not sales, but tons of email demanding that we put up the binary executeables on an ftp site for free so they could download them and use them with their Windows version of the game. For some reason they just couldn't grasp that it cost us money to both license and port the software, and that we didn't see a red cent for the Windows version they bought. It didn't matter, all they wanted was free beer.
I'm also having trouble imagining the demanding weenies you describe. The Baton Rouge LUG is small, but most of the people there were NOT like this.

Awww... hell. I'm at the cap, let's burn a little.

I am really exhausted by people who just say "I don't (see|believe) it" when someone describes an issue they're having. Let me help my fellow Linvocates.

Saying "I know lots of people, and I've never seen them act as you describe" doesn't mean the problem doesn't exist, it (usually) means you don't have enough experience in the area to know what you're talking about.
Saying "I've done it lots of times and I never make that mistake" doesn't mean other people avoided the mistake too, it (usually) means you have no life and other people do.
Saying "Your real problem is blah" doesn't actually solve the issue for the person, it usually just makes them give up on getting the help they needed.

Why do I bring this up now? Because Loki is closing and another Linux developer here is telling us what a real issue is -- our "collective image" to some software companies apparently boils down to greedy "w@r3z d00d." You can say the people you know don't act like that, but it doesn't change the fact that people you don't know apparently are acting like that. And until we, as a collective group, can agree to change that collective mindset, we're going to collectively find our butts on the curb while companies pass us by.

Part of the reason why I'm "exhausted" by these kinds of responses is that everywhere I see it happen, things get fucked up. Mac apologists are notorious for telling people who point out problems with Apple to leave. "You don't like it? We don't need ya, get the hell out." The problem is that they do leave. And you end up with Quicken leaving the Apple market for a while. Anyone remember that? The workarounds sucked. We've got boatloads of Windows refugees out on Linux newsgroups saying "I didn't understand this" or "this part is too hard." It's a usability goldmine out on Usenet, but Linux users (and developers!) are basically just giving them the finger with comments like "I don't have that problem" or "well, you're just too stupid for this OS, I guess" or any other number of witty retorts that solve nothing. And as this happens, we see Linux lose momentum. Look, you want Linux to succeed, to be more than a source-code ghost-town 10 years from now? Then drag everyone along for the ride, and if they tell you they're uncomfortable, then make them more comfortable. Build momentum, acknowledge people's problems.

--
My Greasemonkey scripts for Digg &

Re:I'm glad they are gone. by Alex+Belits · 2002-01-23 18:51 · Score: 3, Insightful

What kind of performance hit do you take when you run a graphics intensive game under X?

Same as under any other platform if you use a hardware-accelerated OpenGL.

I don't play games on my Linux box but I have noticed certain applications that crawl under Linux but perform very well in Windows or MacOS, even with lesser hardware. Flash and Blender just to name a few.

Your card is running as 2d-only because it's either unsupported, or you are too lazy to install an OpenGL driver -- and probably is a piece of junk because everything non-junk has some decent driver already. As for Flash, its Linux port simply sucks because Macromedia knows about Linux as much as I know about the inhabitants' of the Andromeda Nebula taste in paintings.

--
Contrary to the popular belief, there indeed is no God.

Re:huh? I already got free. by kilrogg · 2002-01-23 18:55 · Score: 2

Wrong! you develop the port in parallel.

In the move industry, for example, translations are done while the movie is still being produced (music, editing, etc). Movies released in French in Quebec, for example, get release the very same day as the english movies in the rest of north america. There's no extra delay to the release schedule do to the translation effort.

Doing a port is a little like doing a translation, most of the core work is the same (graphics, music, etc.), and so most of the porting work can be done while development on these is on going.

Re:huh? I already got free. by kilrogg · 2002-01-23 19:02 · Score: 2

As a side note, if a port in parallel isn't realistic, then my argument that loki had a bad business model still stands. Releasing well after the windows version is simple dumb. (It might make more sense for mac users, though, since they can't reboot into windows.)

Re:flamebait??? by Alex+Belits · 2002-01-23 19:09 · Score: 2

Because he uses broken charset and has a hotmail address, therefore he is obviously a Windows-only users, and his opinion on Linux games is absolutely irrelevant.

--
Contrary to the popular belief, there indeed is no God.

How I see the games and entertainment software by Anonymous Coward · 2002-01-23 19:13 · Score: 2, Interesting

First to say if true it is a sad day. But remember someone else will start again.

What do I see in the world of Free Unix and games is that we need to concentrate on getting development environments going. What do I mean by this?

As I see it Loki just ported games after their shelf life expired. What we need is Linux games created first then ported to Windows. This way we trully see if a Game sells the OS or the OS sells the game. How is this done? Again to repeat is create a quick game development environment.

What should this package have?
1. Sound System that cross platforms to Windows.
2. Basic Install Shield system which allows the developers to forget this aspect of the development.
3. Graphic Rendering packages that allow the artistic part.
4. Some game dynamics package.

All this is easy to say but hard to write. So Open Source development is in order here. That is make some game ideas that could share library packages. Those Library packages are LGPL or BSD licensed for Comercial development. These are then used my the Comercial houses to create the games for Linux, BSDs, MacIntosh, and Windows in one go. Make the development environment not on Windows will allow the Linux or other be ported faster.

How to sell the new game which is developed and shipped for Linux first? Because we need to get the largest market. Simple have a version of Linux be attached to the game which can be installed on any M$ Windows platform and be executed from a running Windows Icon. This will make the system a Linux Box either taking complete control until finished or being a Process. Either way if the person has a pure linux system it will be installed there as a native app, minus the special linux version.

Hence above is a good project to work with. Instead of WINE how about Linux Is Not Emulated (LINE) project.

Iain

Linux on Desktop meme back again by banky · 2002-01-23 19:19 · Score: 2

Boy, I sure was hoping after the flood of "linux on the desktop is dead" stories we could stop talking about it for a while. I'm sad to see Loki go; although without lots of companies throwing ports at them, it was kind of expected. I own a number of their games which I will have to now repurchase for MacOSX.

(the irony is I left Linux on the desktop for OSX, and I now have access to fewer native games than Linux)

Transgaming will have to carry on, I suppose.

--
ZOMG I WOULD LOVE TO KNOW ABOUT YOUR FEELINGS ON MACINTOSH VERSUS WINDOWS, VI VERSUS EMACS, AND HOW YOU'RE NOT A DORK

Even though Loki will be missed, its not the end. by michaelsimms · 2002-01-23 19:27 · Score: 2

Even though this has happened, Linux Games are not going away.
Tux Games still has Loki stock. We buy from a lot of other places too.
There is a new porting company out there, Linux Game Publishing who have already released one title, and have another announced. Dont forget NeverwinterNights is coming too. Return to Castle Wolfenstein has just been released, and is looking to be one of the most popular games we've ever had.
Yes, we will all miss Loki, and yes it is very sad.
BUT the game goes on, games will keep appearing - lets just try and make sure that people BUY them this time, and stop this happening again.

--

Tux Games. Your complete source for native Linux games.

Loki never had VC by Anonymous Coward · 2002-01-23 19:32 · Score: 5, Interesting

At least, that's what the employees were told. In fact, several efforts at securing real VC were prevented due to reluctance by the owner(s) to part with any shares in the company.

When the fecal matter had clearly hit the rotating blades, an outside consultant was brought in to try and get the company funded, merged, bought, or something. He tried for six months, and never got anywhere -- in part because so much debt had already been accrued. Also, at least one structured deal, liquidating existing boxed product, fell through when the partner filed for Chapter 11 (and had already taken possession of the game boxes, but not paid the remuneration owed).

The debt caught up with the company, and the creditors started demanding their money (including the 1/4 million owed to the company that printed all those nice boxes and manuals that the first 10 or so titles came in).

WAY over-producing the Q3 tins (due, in part, to the enthusiasm of the Slashdot crowd (which has never been backed up in sales), and due in part to mis-judgement of the market), burned through what capital there was A LOT faster than it needed to be.

Add lack-luster sales of all titles other than CTP, and decreasing sales from title to title, and there's not a lot to sustain it there.

Re:Delay between Windows and Linux port did them i by Time+Doctor · 2002-01-23 19:38 · Score: 2, Interesting

You're right, the few users who actually bought Linux games, and kept buying them weren't enough. As far as QuickTime goes, there isn't any native player for the sorenson (which is the popular kind) codec mov files. The only player which is available, is via the 'crossover plugin' which uses wine.

--
Check out ioquake3.org for a great, free, First-Person Shooter engine!

Huh? by cduffy · 2002-01-23 19:51 · Score: 2

WINE includes DirectX support -- but (with SDL available, and Loki's work acting as a demonstration of the feasability of porting DirectX apps to SDL) I don't see why it's an issue.

Re:Huh? by Jace+of+Fuse! · 2002-01-24 08:25 · Score: 2

I admit, SDL is bridging that gap, and with continued progress hopefully it will fill it entirely.

Until then, DirectX is still the single best reason to write games for Windows. For performance, ease of developement, and user base reasons.

Ethical reasons play no part in this. Video games have become a business, unfortunately.

--

"Everything you know is wrong. (And stupid.)"

Moderation Totals: Wrong=2, Stupid=3, Total=5.
Re:Huh? by cduffy · 2002-01-24 17:34 · Score: 2

DirectX must have improved quite a bit, then -- 'cuz comparing DirectX 4 (the last one I learned back when I was still a Windows coder) with SDL, the latter is far, far more developer-friendly. Granted, DirectX has a larger installed base -- but SDL has a much larger applicable user base (ie. write a SDL app corectly and it targets Win32, MacOS, Linux and others with very little extra devel time per platform), and since you're including SDL with your app anyhow (linked static so the user's weird-ass library... err, DLL versions can't throw ya off, right?), it doesn't matter.

Performance is the only issue you name with any real validity. Since SDL calls through to DirectX on the only platform where DirectX runs at all, I'd expect its performance penalty to be minimal -- though the only real way to answer that would be benchmarking, of course.

Being that most new games written these days are 3D anyhow, though, the real question is not SDL versus DirectX but OpenGL versus Direct3D. I don't usually shy away from religious issues (never minded a good editor debate or an OS war), but I'm not touching that with a 10-foot pole.

And of course video games are a business, and of course "ethical" reasons have no place in a technical discussion. I'm disappointed you'd expect me to resort to such poor reasoning.
Re:Huh? by cduffy · 2002-01-25 07:58 · Score: 2

Hmm... must have been 3, then, as it was a released version, past 2 and prior to 5 (Needless to say, it's been a few years).

I'll take your word that the API is significantly improved.

As for my reasons for pointing to OpenGL or Direct3D as opposed to DirectX on 3D games, on 3D games it's the 3D API where most of the difficulty lands; the APIs for input, sound and such are almost insignificant in comparison. A DirectX game that supports OpenGL (like an SDL game that supports OpenGL) has its performance and ease-of-development characteristics determined primarily by OpenGL, as opposed to by DirectX or SDL.

I'll admit that there are some capabilities that Direct* have (ie. DirectSound3D) without close parallels in SDL (wrt DS3D, maybe OpenAL is a viable alternative right now, maybe not -- games aren't my thing) -- but for a great many projects, SDL (with the possible addition of OpenGL) is a great option, combining ease of development with excellent portability.

Re:This is what happens.... by abdulla · 2002-01-23 20:05 · Score: 2, Insightful

i think the real problem was there business model, to pay the developers to have the right to convert there games, shouldn't it be more that the developers should pay them to covert the games and then the developers boxed it in with the windows copies or put an alternate linux binary on the website for use, that would have been a smarter way to do things, they earn money from the developers paying them for linux compliance and sdl would thrive. they got greedy, they believed they could become fat cats off there alternate busniess model, but it was the cause of there doom

Re:huh? I already got free. by An+Ominous+Cow+Erred · 2002-01-23 20:29 · Score: 2, Informative

You pay them a "big chunk of money", for the right to pay all of the porting expenses, so that you can pay them some huge percentage of the unit profit margin when you're done with the port?

Sounds like the size of the Linux market and the alleged expectations of Linux users aren't the only problem with the business model.

It's not just Linux. This is how licensing a port works in the real world. Companies that license Playstation ports do the same thing. Just about EVERY Mac port is made this way. Basically unless the original publisher decides ON THEIR OWN to create a port of the game (and then either does an in-house port or subcontracts), then you have to pay them for the right to port the game and to sell that port. They won't let you do it for free, and they won't let you do it without up-front payment (otherwise non-serious people could just secure the rights for free and then sit on them).

This REALLY IS how it works, and companies like Loki, Macplay, and any other company that specializes in porting games all do it this way. What you are buying is the rights to the game. They don't think the port is worth their time, but you do. They won't give you the rights for free though because not only do the aforementioned non-serious people create a problem, but it also costs them money to pay the lawyers who read and okay the license agreement. If they can't make a certain amount of money from your license then it's not even worth their time to license it to you.

James Sellman - Hyperion Entertainment - http://www.hyperion-entertainment.com/

This sucks, and it's the fault of Linux users. by aussersterne · 2002-01-23 21:25 · Score: 5, Insightful

I see all these people saying "if you're a gamer, you want the game now and you want it cheap, so why pay a premium for a late Loki game when I can just dual-boot?"

This from people who complain about the "Microsoft Tax."

Well, folks, you have to decide: are you going to be a "hardcore gamer" and pay the Microsoft Tax you claim to hate so much just so you can have a game three months sooner or $10 cheaper, or are you going to put your money where your mouth is and support Linux companies?

I for one own every game Loki released, and I paid for every one of them, even one or two I didn't care for, just to support Linux gaming. I can hear the crazy free-market folks already who will flame me (as they do every Loki story) saying that the market should decide, that I shouldn't have bought games I didn't like, that Loki should fail if it is destined to fail.

Well, apparently it was. Feel better now? I certainly don't. Too bad so few Linux users are willing, as I have been, to put my money where my mouth is. On a similar note, I also bought the Corel Draw for Linux and Corel WordPerfect Office for Linux retail software packages before Corel withdrew them due to (direct quote from a sales inquiry to Corel) "lack of interest in non-free software."

I'm beginning to think that Linux will never grow out of Free Speech and Free Beer. Both are great, but alone they are not enough to make for a full life, or to build a userbase beyond geek-freeks.

Goodbye, Loki. I for one will miss your excellent ports when I am struggling to keep the truly abysmal but ever-so-free "Wine" emulator [or *sigh* not an emulator] running over the next few years.

--
STOP . AMERICA . NOW

Re:This sucks, and it's the fault of Linux users. by !Xabbu · 2002-01-24 02:25 · Score: 2

One might argue that if Loki had of put a little more risk into the business from the start and actually got in with games being built at the time, they wouldn't have had half the problems they are in. Ya ya.. capitol = success.. it was the dot com revolution.. the money was there.

For example, Loki hears that Blizzard is in the middle of working on World of Warcraft. They approach Blizzard and say 'hey, we will port the game to linux if you let us develop along side of you. You give us ??% of the sales on the linux port and we will call it even." I'd even go as far as saying a very small percentage of the windows version as well as I'm sure Loki would have been able to help on that as well in small ways.

Their business model was flawed. No word about it. I own one game of theirs (Kohan) and loved it. Very unfortunate :(

--

- Jimbob
Re:This sucks, and it's the fault of Linux users. by praedor · 2002-01-24 07:14 · Score: 2

I'm with you. I cannot say that I've bought all Loki's games, but I have bought 4 and was holding off buying Deus Ex until Loki released their linux port of it. Now it looks like I'll have to pay for the windoze version (anyone get it working under wine?).

If I wanted a game and Loki had it or was planning on producing a port, I would ALWAYS buy it from them or wait until they released it. Now, me thinks this really is a deathnell for linux taking much on the desktop. It is symptomatic and goes along with the other rather doom-and-gloom articles produced of late about the linux revolution that wasn't.

I'll keep using it but it also means I will have to keep a pirated copy of windoze on my machines to play games that wine can't handle.

Many linux users are hypocritical children who can't wait a short while to buy a port of a windoze game. Well, this is the result. Yet ANOTHER linux game company bits the dust.

--
In Bushworld, they struggle to keep church and state separate in Iraq as they increasingly merge the two in America.
Re:This sucks, and it's the fault of Linux users. by DunbarTheInept · 2002-01-24 08:43 · Score: 2

If I am interested in a game and I *know* Loki is going to do a port, then I'll wait and buy the loki version. But to date there was only ever one game where Loki made the announcement in time for me to do that and that was Civ Call to power, and so that's the only Loki game I own.

The problem is that when the game is first available for Windows, I don't even know yet whether or not there will be a Loki port later on. The chances are high that there *won't* be - given that they only can do a small fraction of the games that ever come out.

And some games don't last on the store shelves that long. A game that I like isn't
necessarily going to be a game that others like.

You are (and Lokisoft was) asking people to gamble by waiting a year to see if a linux port will exist, in a situation where waiting that long often results in *never* being able to buy the game in any form.

In that one instance where Lokisoft got the announcement out early enough to forestall this effect (Civ:CTP), they did well. Unfortunately, that was an isolated incident.

--
Don't label something "offtopic" unless you know the topic well enough to tell what's on topic.
Re:This sucks, and it's the fault of Linux users. by aussersterne · 2002-01-24 11:51 · Score: 2

I know people who bought the Linux version *after* they bought the Windows version.

There's nothing wrong with this.

It all depends on whether you are too cheap to support the growth of Linux. Many people don't feel that's a good investment. The result is that Loki closes up shop and puts the final nail in the "Linux for the desktop" coffin.

--
STOP . AMERICA . NOW
Re:This sucks, and it's the fault of Linux users. by DunbarTheInept · 2002-01-24 12:43 · Score: 2

If charity is what you want to support, then by all means do so. But don't try to disguise it as a normal businesss transaction. If I had chosen to buy a Loki version of a game I already owned and already cold play, then that would be charity plain and simple. I think that donations to sourceforge and the like are better ways to support the linux community than charity disguised as a business transaction.

And gaming on Linux isn't dead. Loki was just the first attempt.

--
Don't label something "offtopic" unless you know the topic well enough to tell what's on topic.

Re:I'm not sad to see them go. by aussersterne · 2002-01-23 21:30 · Score: 2

Well, friend, if you don't buy games, there won't be any more games, so you *for sure* won't get any games you were interested in ported to Linux, and you will *continue* to need Windows to play all of your games.

Do you feel smarter now, or do you just feel a little bit lighter in the pocketbook for all the copies of Windows you will continue to buy for the next decade, just to play some games...

Or do you just warez your Windows?

Sometimes I get very disappointed in the Linux "community" who seems to be more bark than bite.

--
STOP . AMERICA . NOW

Re:Use operating systems for what they're good for by aussersterne · 2002-01-23 21:38 · Score: 2

I don't want to pay $300 for Windows. I'll buy a PS2 before I'll shell out $300 for Windows.

Why are some people so against the concept of playing games under Linux? It seems only natural: if you prefer Linux, use Linux all the time, then why wouldn't you want to play your games in Linux, if Linux is capable.

And Loki has certainly proved that Linux is capable.

Yet some people in the Linux community have this angst about games showing up for Linux, like it will ruin Linux... Sort of like the Palm users feeling terribly threatened by color displays and fast CPUs.

It makes no sense. Games for Linux can only be a good thing. The Linux world is *smaller* and will grow *more slowly* because of Loki's death.

--
STOP . AMERICA . NOW

What about the UPDATES? Will they be freed? by aussersterne · 2002-01-23 21:49 · Score: 2

There are a number of updates that are required to keep Loki games running under new distributions or with new hardware.

Loki used to offer these for download as executables, but lately they switched over to an auto-update system which connects to a Loki server, downloads and installs the update for you, meaning that I haven't been able to archive updates for more recent games.

What will happen to the updates? PLEASE tell me that Loki will release the updates to the community so that their products will continue to work (and be installable on newer systems) after they are gone!

--
STOP . AMERICA . NOW

Re:Use operating systems for what they're good for by rseuhs · 2002-01-23 22:13 · Score: 2

And the pathetic thing is, it's the best Linux has to offer...

No, there are aviplay and mplayer.

aviplay has great functionality and good usability while mplayer is uncrashable and plays adequate even on slooooowww machines.

WMP has bad functionality and uses a lot of resources.

Re:Use operating systems for what they're good for by rseuhs · 2002-01-23 22:17 · Score: 2

I never said that Linux was "BAD" at running video games, and I never quoted any benchmarks claiming windows was faster.

You said that you shouldn't run games on Linux which sounds pretty dumb for me.

It all boils down to the usual: If the app is available on Linux (natively or via Wine, doesn't matter), use Linux, if not, reboot to Windows.

Linux certainly is able to run games and I don't see a reason why I should not use Linux to run games.

Re:huh? I already got free. by Anthony+Boyd · 2002-01-23 22:25 · Score: 5, Insightful

Good post, but there's a fundemental difference between the Linux community and the Mac community -- The Mac people actually like the idea that their platform is used by millions of iMac-buying lusers. Fundementally, the Linux people are trying to get away from that culture and associate the OS with a certain level of l33tness.

OK. Let me ask you this: are Linux people also happy to have Eazel out of business and VA teetering on the edge? Do we want video card manufacturers to refuse to give us drivers? Are we trying to discourage Dell's Linux efforts? Are Linux people happy to see Loki closing their doors? From the posts here, it appears they range from indifference to disapointment. I don't see many people celebrating it. My point was not that we need to cater to "lusers" who have nothing to contribute. But we just witnessed, 4 posts above ours, a highly qualified insider at Hyperion give us good information that was almost immediately discounted with commments like "My friends don't act that way, you must be full of it." Is the Linux community so hell-bent on being 133t that we're going to flip off people who are more qualified than we are? These are not lusers! We are just stupid if we persist in being this self-destructive.

--
My Greasemonkey scripts for Digg &

Re:Way to go! - THIS IS THE END FOR ME by q-soe · 2002-01-23 22:28 · Score: 2

Please note i am not trolling but i really cannot understand the Warez analogy - you all support something called the free software movement - some of you out there resent paying anything for your software and think all source code should be free.

How do companies make money in this ideal world of yours ? Or is it simply that everything belongs to the people? Didnt communism fail once already?

Facts as i see them
-Companies need to sell product to survive.
-Linux as a community frowns on anyone who sells product.
-GPL discourages people from developing product only to have their source ripped off
-Linux is dying slowly on the desktop and it should be getting stronger
-The concept of open source is dying
-MS have done a far better job with XP than any of us ever thought possible
-This hurts us as users more than ever see linux as an OS for 'geeks'

And you are all arguing about warez doodz and esoterica like this ? Arguing about he color of the doors whilst the wheels fall off?

How about a desktop OS that makes it almost impossible for the average windows user to install and use a sound card, video card, play a DIV-x movie, open a document or in most cases even in some cases to simply install the damn OS next to impossible for anyone non geeky.

EVERY single time a user resorts to a console command to get something running you have lost.

-Every Make/config they have to run you have lost
-Every incompatible version of GCC or a library you have lost
-Suggesting users give up their simple to use OS and software like outlook for pine (another thread on this post) is another nail in open source - users want simple to configure and use software.

Windows games sell for $90 in australia and they sell well.

Linux games sell for about $50 and dont sell well

People want to install a game and play it not hunt for the latest drivers for their video card or that library version they need to get sound - simply they want to bung it in and use it.

If a windows user can pay $90 why cant you guys pay half that ?

Just my thoughts and i really care - i dont want to see Open Source die i want to see it grow into an alternative operating system for all users - but i cant stand the holy wars or meaningless bitch fights anymore, im off to format the notebook and server and install XP and 2000 server on them - im sorry but ive spent years trying to get users to use linux and years apologising beacuse the implementation of it they chose sucked or wont work etc and i spend hours fixing it and showing them how it works and then they want to watch a movie or something and give up in disgust.

I cant do it anymore.
Im sorry

I mourn LOKI, i mourn many other companies. They wont be the last i fear and i mourn that.

I know im getting modded down for this - it will be offtopic or flamebait - the maturity of the moderators never changed - and i worked hard and posted intelligently to get to 50, but hell i can't watch it anymore, i cant see a community tear itself apart like this anymore

--
I refuse to argue with Anonymous Cowards - if you want a discussion get an account....

Re:huh? I already got free. by rseuhs · 2002-01-23 22:37 · Score: 3, Interesting

As far as social simulation and other interesting not-common-on-American-PCs genres go...

I think this was a major reason for Loki failing - they concentrated on the American market where Linux is scarce on the desktop.

I've made a small statistic on the basis of newsgroups. It shows that in the average American, non-technical newsgroup there, about 0 to 5% are posting with Linux, in the average German, non-technical newsgroup, about 5 to 25% post using Linux.

Even with less than 1/3rd of the population there are almost certainly more Linux-desktops in Germany alone than in the U.S.A.

Re:huh? I already got free. by SilentChris · 2002-01-24 00:00 · Score: 2

"Games and PC's multimedia that don't really work right are the smallest social cost of the M$ monopoly."

Are you kidding me? Why do you think Microsoft is touting the XBox so much? They know that high-performance applications, like games, drive the market for upgrades and new PC purchases. Purchases equal new versions of Windows, which equals money. Microsoft can't rely on the business world to fork over money for *every* upgrade -- they have to hope that the hardware market pushes users to buy new computers more often. The XBox is supposed to not only help Microsoft get involved with the "living room", but also get more developers to use the DirectX tools and (MS hopes) come back to the PC for development. More games = major profits for MS.

Re:huh? I already got free. by Rogerborg · 2002-01-24 01:07 · Score: 2

I'm also having trouble imagining the demanding weenies you describe. The Baton Rouge LUG is small, but most of the people there were NOT like this.

Take the blinkers off. Most users of any given system aren't dedicated and civic minded. They just want to use it.

An example. When I was at university, my computer science class got bitten by the Netrek bug. We had at least a dozen dedicated (league) players, plus hangers on from other classes, playing it in DEC workstations. Of that group (say 20), only one of us (me) had even compiled the client, let alone developed it and fed back into the community. Out of a computer science class, putting in countless hours playing a game competitively, not one other person could be bothered even trying to tweak the client. They just wanted to play.

Games players - players - are not typical hackers (in the good sense, a lot of them are script kiddies). That's the point under discussion here, not your cozy ivory towered LUG.

--
If you were blocking sigs, you wouldn't have to read this.

AOL/TW, step up to the line by Rogerborg · 2002-01-24 01:22 · Score: 5, Funny

It occurs to me that if AOL/TW do actually want ship a Linux OS that can actually wean AOLusers off of Windows entirely, then they could do a lot worse than to use some pocket lint to buy Loki and help make Linux a viable games platform.

Picture the difference:

Hello, nVidia, this is Joe from Loki calling about your shitty Linux drivers, if you've got a minute, sir, please, please god, don't hang up on me again...
THE AOL/TW COLLECTIVE DEMANDS BETTER SUPPORT FOR AOLINUX. RESISTANCE IS FUTILE.

--
If you were blocking sigs, you wouldn't have to read this.

Re:This is what happens.... by RickHunter · 2002-01-24 01:25 · Score: 3, Interesting

What universe are you living in? I've never once seen a Loki game in stores. If I had, I would've snapped it up immidiately. Unfortunately, I don't order games online much, if at all. I buy games that look interesting in the store, when I have some free money and free time. Since I can't predict either ahead of time, having to wait weeks for a game to arrive just doesn't work.

That said, that wasn't Loki's fault. Most gaming stores believe that all gamers run Windows (or, even worse recently, that all gamers use consoles), and thus don't want to stock Linux games because there's no market for them. Which becomes a self-fulfilling prophecy. No desktop success because no games -> no market for games -> no games stocked -> back to square one.

Re:huh? I already got free. by mpe · 2002-01-24 01:33 · Score: 2

It actually works totally the other way around. *WE* pay a software company for the right to port the game. We have to pay a big chunk of money up front. These companies do not see fit to make Linux versions of games, so we have to give them money to convince them to do it

THis probably means that the game companies are happier with things than the customers.

Re:huh? I already got free. by mpe · 2002-01-24 01:36 · Score: 2

I think the major problem with this (or at least loki's) business model is the fact they ported games after the windows games were already out. You need to cordinate and release at the same time.

This would appear to be more a fault of the games companies concerned. The porters appear to be trying their best, just that they are in a situation where it's probably impossible for them to operate a reliable business model.

Re:problem by Gehenna_Gehenna · 2002-01-24 01:40 · Score: 2

I shall miss them as well. I Happily own Quake 3, Soldier of Fortune, Descent 3, Heroes of Might and Magic, and Unreal Tournement.

Unfortunatly their business model just didn't make a whole lot of sense. Whay pay more for a port of (what was often an older) game that runs fast and cheaper in windows. I understand, not all Linux users dual boot, so not all have the oppertunity to run games in windows...

In the meantime, I'd suggest sending some money to the good folks at Transgaming. It's essentialy Wine with special consideration for direct x, and runs many games spledidly. I've had a good deal of success wih it.

--

Re:huh? I already got free. by mpe · 2002-01-24 01:46 · Score: 2

Now, we have a delusional attitude that Linux is going to be some kind of MS killer, but that's just wishful thinking until the needs of the AVERAGE home user are addressed. That user doesn't want to have to know ANYTHING about the hardware behind the beige box.

In which case Windows isn't what they really want anyway. They either want something whereby applications stay entirely on read only media, be they games or wordprocessors, or they need a system which very effectivly separates the role of "user" from that of "admin"/"mechanic"/"techie". In the latter case commming with the same kind of "no user servicable parts" type label they expect to find on every other domestic appliance.
Expecting end users to be installing software, etc (which is the MS model) is as daft as expecting them to adjust the convergance on their televisions.

Re:huh? I already got free. by mpe · 2002-01-24 01:48 · Score: 2

The fact is that the core developers of the Linux system never intended it to be a Windows replacement,

However Microsoft has, for some years, pushed Windows as a "unix replacement".

Re:huh? I already got free. by Gleef · 2002-01-24 01:50 · Score: 2

Not just release at the same time, but ideally release on the same CD. Most of the actual contents of these CD's is data anyway, having two binaries and two installers on one CD shouldn't be a big deal.

--

----
Open mind, insert foot.

Why Gamers Deserve Linux Ports by BadBlood · 2002-01-24 02:01 · Score: 3, Insightful

IMHO, Linux gamers deserve Linux ports of their favorite games from the original developers. Why? I believe you cannot have a successful ONLINE multiplayer game without the support of Linux-based dedicated servers.

Quake 1 and 2 set the stage as their Linux ports allowed server administrators to set up dedicated servers and donate their bandwidth. Because there were SO MANY servers, there were SO MANY clients and each game flourished.

No enter the original Unreal. No Linux port. No Linux dedicated server. Multiplayer options were null (and for reasons based in less than steller network performance).

Enter Unreal Tournament. Epic wises up and ports it to Linux - for free. Tons of dedicated servers spring up and the game flourishes even to this day.

Half-Life's Counterstrike also has a dedicated server and that game continues to flourish. I consider it a mistake that Valve has not released a client as the multitude of servers continues to keep the game popular.

That's why I salute id, even though their Linux ports are not simultaneously released, they do recognize the service that Linux based dedicated servers give to them. Therefore they continue to port games to Linux (and for other technically sound reasons).

I realize my arguement holds only for multiplayer titles, but that's what got the ball rolling originally. Those of us that have hosted Linux dedicated servers do indeed deserve a little condiseration from the developers for a Linux client.

--

Praying for the end of your wide-awake nightmare.

Re:X-Box, X-Files style -- paranoia. by mpe · 2002-01-24 02:03 · Score: 2

Can't we just acknowledge that some problem might possibly exist in the Linux community, and attempt to fix it? Do we really need to invent a Microsoft conspiracy to make ourselves feel better about Loki closing??

The problem about an invented Microsoft conspiracy is that it would probably be rather milder than the one they actually managed to pull off with their dodgy OEM deals. The results of which are that the whole PC and associated market are completly warped... Effectivly we have a private company controlling a market in ways not seen outside of government monopolies. The difference being that Microsoft is probably in a more secure position than most governments on the planet, since it does not face being voted out of office, revolution or military conquest.

Besides, at first glance, it seems natural: "I already paid for this game, why should I have to pay for it again?" At least until one actually sits down and thinks about the economic and business factors involved (see other posts in this thread)

In a situation of pure capitalism you have customers who selfishly look out for their own interets. Which is really all those of the "I'm prepared to pay for this once, not twice" crowd are doing. Especially since the customers are being told that they have actually bought some kind of licence to play the game.

Originality is key by beth_linker · 2002-01-24 02:46 · Score: 2

Porting Windows games, good as they may be, won't create a market for gaming on Linux. I think that a successful Linux gaming company would have to take its cue from the console game companies.

People choose a Nintendo system as their gaming platform because you can play Nintendo games on it and you can't do that anywhere else. If the only games Nintendo put out were ports of last year's Playstation games, there'd be no incentive to buy a Nintendo console.

Similarly, if a company wants people to buy Linux games instead of Windows games, then it really needs to "sell" Linux (even to people who already use it but don't see it as a gaming platform). What Linux really needs is the next Mario or Sonic - something that you can play on a Linux box that's so much fun that Windows gamers start repartitioning their systems just to try it out. Without that, Linux gaming won't go anywhere.

fast divx by scorcherer · 2002-01-24 03:11 · Score: 2

MPlayer with ffmpeg libraries for decoding (you'll add them into the MPlayer source tree, read MPlayer's manual). MPlayer must be compiled by yourself (for legal reasons!) but it is then fully optimized to your processor. It's one of the few programs that use MMX, 3DNow etc.

I'm getting fullscreen (800x600) DivX playback on a K6-3+, 400 MHz machine. In fact this is a recent achievement, because only with X 4.2.0 I have XVideo and DGA available. Without those, the VESA driver is probably the fastest.

Hmm.. this is probably the nth question about DivX playing.. time for a FAQ perhaps? :-)

--

--
The Cap is nigh. Time to get a fresh new account.

./ Financial geniuses. by Gannoc · 2002-01-24 03:11 · Score: 2

I've read "Lets hope they get bought" by a bunch of people.

Why the hell would anyone buy them? Loki's only assets are a bunch of old Linux ports which clearly aren't selling well enough to keep them in business.

Do you all think that AOL is some special company who buys anything that competes w/ Microsoft just because they bought netscape?

Re:./ Financial geniuses. by Dr.Dubious+DDQ · 2002-01-24 06:01 · Score: 2

Loki's only assets are a bunch of old Linux ports
Yes - the work on which is already DONE. A lazy company only needs to buy the 'license to redistribute' off of Loki, and a CD-copier. A GOOD company will also have a few programmers to work on patches and such, but all in all, the BULK of the work on everything Loki sells is already done, and that's the expensive part...

--
Hacker Public Radio is our Friend

Re:huh? I already got free. by rho · 2002-01-24 03:37 · Score: 2

Nice try, but I think you'll find your words wasted.

I could write an essay on the topic of culture choice and how it affects a community, but I'll boil it down to this: Linux devotees chose the "elite techie" culture whereas Apple zealots chose the "enthusiast" culture, and it shows.

Where there are Mac admin mailing lists frequented by hundreds of helpful Mac managers who will patiently (if not exactly happily) answer the same question over and over again, for Linux users there is IRC and Usenet--which is quite funny, considering how difficult it sometimes is to get your Linux box online.

Linux users tend towards elitism, whereas Mac users tend towards snobbery. They sound similar, but in reality are quite different. It's the difference between wealth and royalty: make enough money (or buy a Mac), and you're in the club. But unless you're born of royal blood (or have the hacker-nature), you just can't join the clique.

I'm afraid your words will fall on many deaf ears, as very few people are intellectually honest enough with themselves to admit that they might be wrong, and need to change.

--
Potato chips are a by-yourself food.

Re:Way to go! - THIS IS THE END FOR ME by seebs · 2002-01-24 03:43 · Score: 2

BSD, for me. I support the idea that *I* will write code, which I generally give away - but if you feel you need to sell code to make money, go ahead and sell code. I won't try to stop you, and you can use my code.

Thus, I'm making it cheaper to develop software, closed or not, and I'm not barring people from making money using my code.

I still have a day job, but I do a fair amount of bespoke programming, and that pays the bills. In the long run, maybe that'll be the dominant form - or maybe it won't.

However, the key distinction is *consent*. When I download NetBSD, I'm downloading something that was *given away by the owner*. I'm not stealing something. Free software is not about getting stuff you don't pay for - it's about giving away stuff you don't need to get paid for.

--
My blog: http://www.seebs.net/log/ --- My iPhone/iPad app: http://www.seebs.net/seebsfrac/

An idea: by Chris+Burke · 2002-01-24 03:46 · Score: 2

An idea:

Same thing, binaries only, 20% of full retail price.

Put it on a CD. Ship it in the same way you ship the full boxed version.

You still get your nice physical object whose existence and sale can be easily tracked, and dual booters don't have to pay full price twice for the same game.

--

The enemies of Democracy are

Re:An idea: by Chris+Burke · 2002-01-24 09:54 · Score: 2

Maybe you just haven't gotten the situation. This would be evidenced by your argument that "the data files need not be ported, and do not really cost Hyperion anything; the binaries do" actually proves my point, and the assertion that it would "lower Hyperion's income by 80%" is ludicrous. Let me elaborate.

First, there are 3 (relevent) types of people in the situation:

1) already owns the Windows version, will not pay full price for the linux version.
2) does not own Windows version.
3) already owns the Windows version, will pay for linux version.

The people who are asking for a binaries-only free download are people who already have the game for Windows. They already -have- the data files. They don't -want- to have to pay for them again. They don't want to pay the full retail price for a game they already own, just to play it under Linux. This is perfectly reasonable.

However, it is not reasonable for Hyperion to offer that free download, since the binaries, as you point out, are the thing they actually had to port. And they have made no money off the person who has the windows version. If they allowed binary downloads, they would give the person what they want, but make $0 off of him.

Result? The person with the game doesn't buy the linux version, and Hyperion gets $0 anyway.

If they offered the binaries only on CD, then the people who already own the data files could purchase this. This increases sales, and thus revenue, for Hyperion. The reduced cost would be offset by the fact that it would only be going to people who would not have bought the game anyway.

People who -don't- have the data files wouldn't get any use out of the binary-only CD, and thus would buy the full version.

In short, those that needed the full version buy it, and those who wouldn't have bought it now buy the binary-only version. This would be observed as an increase in income.

The potential for lowering comes from those who already had the windows version (and thus the data files), and who -would- buy the full linux version anyway, but now buy only the binary version. Obviously I have no hard numbers on this, but Hyperion's own comments indicate that many were reluctant to do this. In fact, they directly blame people unwilling to re-purchase the full game for their low sales. If they are correct, then they would not have any significant loss from this group, because it is very small.

Which means that this would only have a positive effect on Hyperion's bottom line.

--

The enemies of Democracy are
Re:An idea: by Chris+Burke · 2002-01-24 10:46 · Score: 2

First, sorry about the confusion. Clarity is a virtue, they say. Instead, I just talk a lot. :)

Second, you're right. Hopefully the cost of Windows + binary linux CD Full linux CD.

The delayed releases, though, are a huge problem anyway (I think the major reason why, for example, Linux Q3 was a bomb), and this would help. Dual-boot gamers are not going to wait for the linux version, but this way at least -some- money could be recouped.

Last, I suggested the idea because that Hyperion guy said they were actually considering selling the binaries off their web page (pay via credit card to download), but the original manufacturer didn't like that because CD's are easier to track. So I suggested just doing the same thing, but with CD's. :)

--

The enemies of Democracy are

Which OS? by Dragoness+Eclectic · 2002-01-24 04:15 · Score: 2

How about a desktop OS that makes it almost impossible for the average windows user to install and use a sound card, video card, play a DIV-x movie, open a document or in most cases even in some cases to simply install the damn OS next to impossible for anyone non geeky.

Are you referring to Windows 98, Windows NT 4.0, or OS/2 2.x?

I have had problems with all of the above on all of the above. Anyone who thinks Windows is easier than Linux to install and get working correctly with all the hardware is someone who got Windows pre-installed from the factory and has never added new hardware. A Windows install to a virgin system is just as complex as a modern Linux distribution install--in fact, I have fewer weird hardware driver issues with, say, a Redhat install than I do with a Windows 98 install. Finally, if you want to configure your Windows install in anything other than the default Microsoft-dictated "you entire disk is one huge paritition named C:" set up, it's a royal bitch compared to the ease of configuring multiple partitions your way in a Linux install.

And God help you if you want to install Windows on a spare partition of a disk with another OS! For the most part, it simply won't do it. With Linux, it's a no-brainer.

--
---dragoness

Re:Which OS? by q-soe · 2002-01-24 17:05 · Score: 2

Normally i dont respond but i will

This is such bullshit

Windows installs take me less than 40 minutes and thats with all sofwtare installed and running, my mother can do it in less than 1 hour and shes 56 and has Multiple Sclerosis.

Want more than 1 partiton - run fdisk and make the then tell the os where to install by CHOOSING the partition.

No a windows install from virgin is not as complex as linux, even mandrake requires user knowledge windows never ever needs and just wait until you hit a problem with Xfree86. My notebook here is a Dell LS400GT and on windows it automatically finds the drivers (on NT i needed to install them but thats easy) - in Mandrake it wont work with the right drivers and redhat causes strange glitches - the card is a standard NeoMagic 128- installed in millions in notebooks across the world and its considered a standard- XP just works no worries and even sets 1024x768 native.

I have never had a hardware issue with windows 98 - never - im an IT manager and support over 300 staff and i havce installed 98 and NT4, 2000 and XP countless times and never seen it with any STANDARD hardware (yeah you get it with NON compliant and legacy stuff which MS state CLEARLY they dont support anymore)

NT4.0 had a whole pile of quirks and issues but it was always designed as a business OS and as DOS and 16 bit software was prevented from direcly accessing the OS it was a pain but was never an os for the home user

The less said about OS2 the better (i supported it for 18 months)

The fact is linux has always been my choice for home and personal use and i have pushed many many users towards it - but i wont anymore and emails like your badly thought out and plain innacurate and misleading statements only prove to make my point.

this is an OS people and not a religion

--
I refuse to argue with Anonymous Cowards - if you want a discussion get an account....

Thank you, thank you, thank you! by roystgnr · 2002-01-24 04:26 · Score: 2

I've been impatiently awaiting Radeon 8500 support, simply because I had no idea there were any dualhead 7500 cards, and I certainly didn't know they were supported by Linux. Xinerama, I assume? Would you please email me a copy of your XF86Config file?

Fuzzy anti-aliasing, etc... by Svartalf · 2002-01-24 04:44 · Score: 2

Their algorithms produce consistently lower quality results per frame than ATI's stuff right at the moment. However, one should note that while this is the case, unless you're slowing things down, you're less likely to notice anything being amiss. However, the complaint IS valid. I would rather have peak quality with slightly lower framerates- less abusive to one's eyes, etc.

--
I am not merely a "consumer" or a "taxpayer". I am a Citizen of the State of Texas

Am I the only one who never had any problems? by Unknown+Lamer · 2002-01-24 04:45 · Score: 2

I swear, I've never had any problems with OpenGL. My XF86Config-4 already had the DRI stuff in it (I was using XF3 until I got my v3, and the Debian default config has the DRI section in there). I just copied my modelines over, set my driver to tdfx, set up XF4 as the default X server and installed the card. Worked perfectly the first time. No hassles. It took 10 minutes to set it up.

Onto the games I have purchased: (loki)

Heroes of Might and Magic III
Solider of Fortune
Sim City 3000
Quake 3 Arena
Descent 3
Heretic II

Every one except for Sim City (it needed a quick update to work with my graphics card) worked right, the first time I installed it. All of them. What the hell are all these problems you people are having? I also have Q3A:TA, Quake I and II, and UT running fine. QuakeII took a bit of work (libc5 binaries...), but with the q2hack it runs ok (except for crashing on exit...and I don't use the source because it is a lot slower than the id binaries).

I'm wondering why my hobbled together box (most of it is second hand, including the motherboard and processor that I got from timothy...yes, that timothy). My only issue now is that that voodoo3 drivers are slow. Or maybe it is my processor (Q3A runs fine, but Q3A:TA runs at 10fps). Maybe the problems everyone is having has something to do with the nVidias evil drivers. Everyone I know who has a geforce anything has issues. A lot of them. But, my friend Mike got his Radeon working with X/DRI (I was there to help) in 5 minutes. Yes, 5 minutes. All he had to do was install XF4.1 and he was playing OpenGL games at amazing speed. And this was back around July.

--

HAL 7000, fewer features than the HAL 9000, but just as homicidal!

Re:Am I the only one who never had any problems? by Unknown+Lamer · 2002-01-24 07:36 · Score: 2

Which Radeon card? Also, just out of interest, seeing as you've had no problems, what exactly is your card? 3dfx voodoo3, but with how much memory? AGP or PCI? Is the memory SDR or DDR?

My voodoo3 is a Voodoo3 3000 PCI with 16MB of SGRAM (it is a late model). Mike's Radeon was (he has an 8500 now, that bastard) the original Radeon 64MB DDR (running @ 4x AGP). It was really easy to get working. Just compiled X (which is easy if you download the entire thing, just uncommented '-fno-string-reduce' and added -march=i686 (for better optimization) in one of the makefiles and typed make World && make install), did the above configuring (change vesa to ati), and restarted X. Ran legacy doom at too many FPS.

--

HAL 7000, fewer features than the HAL 9000, but just as homicidal!

WineX is relying on T&L support for their stuf by Svartalf · 2002-01-24 04:47 · Score: 2

Gavriel said as much in the DRI Developers IRC meeting this Monday. It's very, very likely that there's something about there being no T&L support right at the moment (though there's plans afoot to fix that omission...) in the DRI drivers.

--
I am not merely a "consumer" or a "taxpayer". I am a Citizen of the State of Texas

Miscellaneous thoughts by Sloppy · 2002-01-24 06:35 · Score: 2

To all the people who say this proves that selling Linux games isn't viable: you're wrong. Now, maybe it really isn't viable, but Loki's death doesn't really tell us much.

Maybe you know something about Loki that the rest of us don't, but from what us outsiders were told:

Most of the debts we are restructuring through the Chapter 11 are well over a year old. They represent mistakes made by a young company. We've learned from our mistakes and become cash positive.

Cash positive. Assuming this was the truth, Linux gaming was making money.

This is plausible and makes sense, too. Remember that all these games required some initial library work, in the form of SDL, OpenAL, etc. and Loki did expend time/money on this stuff. But those libraries are mature now, an advantage Loki didn't have in their early days when they were

Spending money foolishly, which all businessmen do their first time around
Spending money developing libraries instead of working on something (the games themselves) that would directly generate revenue.

So we just can't conclude that selling games to Linux users isn't profitable. Not yet.

I just want to mention that I think losing Loki really is sad news. Over the last couple of years, I ended up buying ten of their games: RT2, Myth2, Tribes2, SMACX, MindRover, Kohan, SoF, HG2, SC3K, and Postal. A few of them turned out to be not as fun as I thought they were going to be, and a few of them turned out to be more addictive than I expected (e.g. I thought SMACX would bore me to tears, and instead it ate up my all my free time for a few months there in the summer. ;-) I still use HG2 to blow off steam, and I haven't exhausted Kohan yet. I guess some people didn't find many of their games to be very attractive, but I thought Loki did a reasonably good job of picking games.

There's one thing about Loki that I will really miss: they did quality work. With the exception of Tribes 2 (I never got that working well enough to really play), I found their games to be very close to perfectly crash-free, glitch-free, and insult-free. Insult-free? Yep. I got used to Loki's stuff acting like programs should: no intrusive copy protection, it just let me install on my HD and forget about mundane issues, like "where's my CD?". I was shocked when I bought a non-Loki game (Uplink) and ran into copy-protection. I hadn't dealt with that kind of bullshit since the 1980s, and it was jarring. Loki got some things right, which I don't think people will appreciate until they experience the absense.

To those who think commercial software is incompatable with Linux, I don't think you get it. The Linux userbase is not homogenious, and we're not all screaming "software must be free!" fanatics. Some of you are, and that's fine with me, you're not really causing any harm as far as I'm concerned. I think Free Software is a really neato thing, but it's not an absolute requirement for everything, especially things that don't need a lot of maintenance or create network effects. Games fit perfectly into that. I use Linux because my Amiga just isn't mainstream enough, and I got tired of being a full-time hermit. (Yes, I consider Linux to be mainstream -- it really is, compared to where I come from.) I think, -- no, I know -- there are other people like me out there, who have Linux and don't have any faux-idealogical problem with paying for software. Whether there's enough of us or not, I don't have a clue, and Loki's death doesn't change that.

--
As copyright owner of this comment, I authorize everyone to defeat any technological measure which limits access to it.

Re:Use operating systems for what they're good for by garett_spencley · 2002-01-24 06:44 · Score: 2

No one gets my humour. Oh well. I was hoping it would be modded as funny. Not interesting.

--
Garett

Tell them that Windows != Microsoft Windows by yerricde · 2002-01-24 06:53 · Score: 2

After all, if linux users can get windows games to run on linux, why bother with a linux version???

It might convince developers to make sure that the win32 build works on both Microsoft Windows® brand win32 implementations and Wine brand win32 implementations.

--
Will I retire or break 10K?

Re:Back to Nethack by MrResistor · 2002-01-24 08:04 · Score: 2

That's true, I'm sure I'll be able to pick up unopened boxes on ebay a year from now, but my intention was to buy them direct from Loki. The reasoning being that Loki would get the full benefit from the purchase and I would be furthering my own desires by supporting those who provide what I want, now and in the future (like a copy of Deus Ex that is actually playable because it doesn't hard-lock my machine every 20 minutes).

Along those lines, I've made a personal commitment not to pirate Linux software. Sure, I try Free alternatives first, if available, and if they don't cut it I pay for the non-Free package that does. Again, it comes down to supporting those who produce what I want in the hope that they will continue producing.

The real problem, though, is that I have a very hard time shelling out cash for software that's totally unsupported, as all those boxes at Software, Etc will be next month. What's more, purchasing those boxes will help support only the middlemen, not the actual producers, and unfortunately for them the RIAA has made that an issue for me. The only remaining reason for me to purchase a copy of one of Loki's games is to get a legitimate CD-Key so I can play online (which isn't an issue for some games, UT and Q3 come to mind).

It's more of a moral issue for me than an availability issue. When it get's down to it I can get any software I want. As long as I'm willing to use a pirated copy, someone will be willing to provide it.

--
Under capitalism man exploits man. Under communism it's the other way around.

I don't have that kind of power by DunbarTheInept · 2002-01-24 08:06 · Score: 2

You seem to think that I can do something about how another person acts. I don't understand where you think I got that power from, but trust me, I don't have it. Therefore saying that the solution is to change how other people act is the same thing as saying there is no solution.

The reason *I* only bought one Loki game is simply that the games they ended up porting are not the ones I liked. The only exception to this was Civ:CTP, which got released onto store shelves alongside the Windows version, and was thus easy to buy, and I did.

Plus, they took too long to get a port out, and they didn't announce ports until after the windows version was alredy out. This might not be their fault, but it is the main reason they failed. If a game you want hits the stores today, and you don't even know yet whether or not Loki will be doing a port, are you going to wait 1 year to find out before deciding to buy the windows version?

--

Don't label something "offtopic" unless you know the topic well enough to tell what's on topic.

No, it's sponsorship. by himi · 2002-01-24 08:35 · Score: 2

"Pay us this money so that we can do this development, and when we're done we'll make it publically available"

That's not extortion by even the broadest definition imaginable.

himi

--

My very own DeCSS mirror.

Re:I'd say you burned some, you old troll. by Anthony+Boyd · 2002-01-24 08:51 · Score: 2

Well I thought about whether to respond for a while. I decided I should, even though the thread is probably dead now.

Erris, I'm sorry. You obviously feel like I just poured a heap of abuse on you, and to some degree I think it's fair for you to be pissed. I hung a lot of hats on your comments, so to speak -- and some of it was baggage from other posts that I never responded to. So, sorry for that.

At the same time, I think the moderators might be giving you a hint that I am not trolling. Your ability to locate years-old posts of mine at BSD sites is both deliberate on my part -- I always post with the same name so that people can find my history -- and is also an indication that I've been trying in earnest to influence the community (sometimes successfully!) for quite some time. What you see as my fatal flaw, I see as my credentials, my proof that I've been here a while and might have my hands in it enough to know a little bit. Don't forget, back when I made those comments about Linux insecurity, Red Hat 5.2 & 6.2 installed with services on by default. Ports wide open. People haven't had to worry about that problem for a long time, so of course, "Linux insecurity" has less punch nowadays. In fact, in light of WinXP's recent foibles, I'd say Linux is a great alternative for security & privacy reasons. But look, how did Linux improve? It improved because the people using the product raised the issue, and the people working on the codebase listened. I just wish we could have more of that, that's all.

--
My Greasemonkey scripts for Digg &

Re:I'm not sad to see them go. by gmhowell · 2002-01-24 16:37 · Score: 2

I have windows '98. When that will no longer suffice, I will remove myself from the PC market. At that time, those 'old' PS2's and X-Box's should be available for around $100 on eBay.

Or I'll dump the money into a MAME cab, or pick up a Battlezone, Frogger, or any of a dozen video arcade games I'd like to have.

The most important thing is that relative to the cost of games, the cost of Windows is trivial. I spent around $40 for Roller Coaster Tycoon and Baldur's Gate. More for Red Alert and some other RTS games. I would have bought Deus Ex at full price when it came out, but had other things to do with my time. Now, let's say I spend $20/month on games. Probably close to what I spend. Now let's say I have to upgrade Windows every three years (reasonable, given '95, '98, and the current OSes fighting it out now). Let's further assume that I pay the full $209 cost. That's less than $7 per month. Keeping current hardware costs more than that. ($150 video card every two years, $150+ for processor/mobo a little less often).

It ain't cost. I've got enough money. Trust me. My bike probably costs more than the car of the average /. reader.

If there are no more games... big fucking deal. Way more to do with life than engage in a twitch fest.

--
Jesus was all right but his disciples were thick and ordinary. -John Lennon

Re:[OT] Re:Way to go! - THIS IS THE END FOR ME by q-soe · 2002-01-24 16:53 · Score: 2

no its people without the balls to put their names to the comments they make

The ONLY thing you need is for the systems to be used on the desktop at the current level of windows and MAC os

The geek saturation market is sending companies to the wall and unless linux moves to the desktop it will die - this is a fact.

As long as you persist in calling other OS'es dumb and sit on your moral high horse the Open Source movement will go downhill - the point of linux is an os for the common man, not some geek genius

--
I refuse to argue with Anonymous Cowards - if you want a discussion get an account....

Re:I'm glad they are gone. by Alex+Belits · 2002-01-25 19:02 · Score: 2

If ya cant just dubbel klik it and and make it go with flashy bits and stuff, then you just lost 95% of your users.

I don't care about 95% of the users -- Windows, if it was sold in boxes and not preinstalled, would be unavailable for 95% of users, too. The point is, in this case stupid user is at fault, and he should shut up.

--
Contrary to the popular belief, there indeed is no God.

196 of 727 comments (clear)