Transgaming and Transitive E3 Announcement

An Anonymous Coward writes: "Breaking news today on the Transgaming website. Today they announced an alliance with the company Transitive. Here's their headline: 'Los Angeles, Ca. TransGaming Technologies, in partnership with Transitive Technologies, unveil their game-porting technology that can allow Windows-based x86 games to be simultaneously released onto multiple platforms. These include the Sony PlayStation 2, Apple Mac OS, set-top boxes, PDAs and wireless devices.'" There's more info on the Transgaming Site. Since Transgaming has ported The Sims already, it's a lot easier to believe that this isn't just vapor.

Comments

So does this use Wine or what?

[Scooby Snacks]

The press release was a little shy on details, so I'm wondering: How are they doing this? Are they using their Wine modifications, or something else? I'd be excited as the next guy if this meant more Linux games. It might not be so good, however, if they use a Windows compatibility layer instead of making it a native executable.

Here's why: Suppose they have everything in their kit that they need to support all Windows games written for Windows versions from 95-XP. Great, right? That means that with just a little bit of effort, a vendor can release a Linux version of a game, giving us more games to play with. However, here's the downside: If by writing for Windows you can target both Windows and Linux (and whichever other platforms they support), then why would anyone write any native Linux programs? Then, in XP+1, Microsoft introduces major breakage into their API, such that it's a long time to get it working correctly with Trans{gaming,itive}'s kit. That means that potentially, there won't be any new Linux releases until they can get it fixed. And if they can't... Well, consider OS/2.

Any thoughts?

The Sims

[Wanker]

I'd just like to be able to buy The Sims for Linux for less than $70US. Mandrake (exclusively) sells it bundled with their Linux distribution, but has no standalone version.

Considering that folks can get it (on Win32) for $50US, there's little incentive to buy it except "for the good of the company". After I found out what Loki did with my money, I'm still a bit jaded about paying a premium for Linux games...

Re:The Sims

[JM]

I'll definitely pass your comment to the MandrakeSoft Sales Director.

Re:The Sims

[Mr.Ned]

Transgaming seems to not be doing any work right now to support the Windows version of The Sims. However, I believe that the topic has come up in a current poll - subscribers will decided what kind of attention that gets.

Have you tried The Sims using the new version of WineX? I don't know about that game, but the admittedly quite different Jedi Knight II works out of the box just as speedy as on Windows for me. I just need to remember to make my Windows partitions user-writeable and I'll be set!

I was very skeptical of buying anything from them, especially a monthly plan, but after I tried Jedi Knight II I think I'm going to sign up. $5/month, $15 minimum - you get precompiled binaries with copy-protection support and voting rights. Think Mandrake Club (or maybe not :)

This will not quite work.

[LordZardoz]

At least not with respect to the PS2. The architecture of that machine is quite simply nowhere near what a Win32 programmer expects.

Input and Sound are handled on the IPU, which is essentially an embedded PS1.

The machine has an insanely low amount of ram for textures that the only way to actually use many is to either compress the hell out of them or use the insanely high memory bandwitdth to contunually load new textures into memory.

The EE / GS (Emotion Engine and Graphics Synth), and the VU0 and VU1 units handle data much differently then a standard 'Wintel' box.

And all of that is just considering the differences between the PS2 and a PC!

Using a well written library, it may be possible to get something to compile. However, all of the games art content (Model geometry and textures) would have to be re-worked signifigantly. Getting a game to run on multiple consoles is a bit more involved then simply switching compilers.

Further complicating this is that for this to work, you will have to write your game with the proposed game engine in mind. This means that if you want to have a simultaneous release, you will have to stick to the lowest common denominator among the selected machines. For some simpler titles, this will be fine, but no game that wants to push a machine to its limits can really get much use from this sort of technology.

END COMMUNICATION

Re:This will not quite work.

[binaryDigit]

Getting a game to run on multiple consoles is a bit more involved then simply switching compilers

I assume that is why they say it goes from two years to two months versus two days. They are acknowledging (though implicitly) that it isn't just a purely simple matter as switching compilers/platforms and recompiling.

Definitely not hype

[JM]

When TransGaming came to us (MandrakeSoft), they said they could port The Sims in less than two months. I must admit I was skeptical at first, but they delivered the merchandise, and we made the Mandrake Gaming Edition, which had great reviews.

When they said they would port Max Payne in the same amount of time, they delivered the merchandise.

Now, when they say they can port to other platforms, I would bet my last dollar they will deliver the merchandise again.

Great to see some fellow Canadians have success! ;-)

Re:no they did NO porting at all

[JM]

Maybe they didn't "port" The Sims, per se, but they
*did* port DirectX to Wine...

The main difference between Loki and TransGaming is
that Loki ported individual games, while the other ports the DirectX layer, so when they work on a game, you suddenly get more games working, eventually to the point where you have hundreds.

I feel compelled to clear up a misconception.

[Anonymous Coward]

timothy: Transgaming did not port The Sims. Please do not continue repeating that falsehood.

If you purchase the Mandrake 8.1 Gaming Edition with The Sims (which I, unfortunately, did do, and it was rather a waste of $80), and you install it, you will receive a copy of TransGaming's WineX in addition. Once you have done the installation, you can start looking around at the setup.

The data is put in /usr/lib/the_sims (by default), which has, in addition to the UserData directories, .the_sims/, simsdir/, and winex_sims/ /usr/lib/the_sims/simsdir/ includes simsinstall.exe (a Windows executable), two .dlls for running, and the default game data. /usr/lib/winex_sims/ includes the normal bin/ and lib/ -- lib/ has all the normal wine libraries (plus, it looks like, some winex-specific and maybe Sims-specific libraries), and bin/ has the normal wine/winex launchers.

/usr/lib/the_sims/.the_sims/ is very interesting, it has a c_drive/ and default wine config files. The c_drive has a Program Files hierarchy (mostly empty, probably for the install program) and a new simsdir, which contains the actual Sims.exe launched by the command 'the_sims' (see below). An analysis of Sims.exe shows that it is NOT a Linux-native binary of any meaningful format -- it is neither a.out nor ELF. It is also not the traditional Windows binary (starting with MZ, with extra stuff after a short DOS stub). Given how SafeDisc works, it's quite possible it's a SafeDisc-style encrypted binary. I haven't thrown it all through a debugger yet to figure out for sure.

The shell script which launches the game (/usr/bin/the_sims) is a bash shell script which sets up the environment to reference that specific winex install, sets a few bits related to it, and runs wine /usr/lib/the_sims/.the_sims/c_drive/simsdir/S ims.exe

From public statements (sorry, no reference handy), it appears that Transgaming had the Windows source -- but rebuilt the binaries to work around some Wine/WineX-specific issues. But they're still Windows binaries and Windows libraries.

PLEASE stop perpetuating the myth that TransGaming is doing "native ports". They are customizing the executable to work better in their existing emulation[*] environment, and the environment to mesh better with the Windows executable.

If TransGaming were truly doing native ports, they would not need a second company to emulate the x86 processor for their technology to work on non-x86 platforms!

(I'll point out that most Windows games are memory and processor hogs, and many of the platforms they mention, such as PDAs, set top boxes (devices on which I develop), PDAs, and wireless devices are very memory and CPU limited. Not to mention that the UIs usually need redesigning, and the binaries heavy optimization just to fit into the tiny memory and screen footprints these devices have.)

[*] I did not say that WINE is an emulator, I said that the environment (in toto) emulates the Windows environment from the perspective of the Windows executable being run.

Definition of "port"

[JM]

According to:
http://foldoc.doc.ic.ac.uk/foldoc/foldoc.cgi? query =port

2. To translate software to run on a different system or the results of doing so. See portability.

I think Transgaming fits that definition.

They did port the DirectX layer, then tweaked the source so it would run fine on Linux.

OK, it's not "native", but I haven't seen the word "native" in the article, on in timothy's comment.

already possible - sort of

[brondsem]

This is already possible if the developers use SDL/OpenGL or CrystalSpace. I don't think either will support PS2 (unless you use the linux kit) and handheld support is probably shaky. But they're open source and cross-platform!

Don't go down that slippery slope!

[IGnatius T Foobar]

This is a dangerous idea. If what TransGaming achieves is true portability of Windows game source code to Linux and console platforms, and if game developers take to it, it makes Windows the reference platform for game development. Is this where we want to be? Specifically, is this where we want to be in another couple of years when Microsoft suddenly starts adding patented "features" to DirectX that can't be brought into the TransGaming WINE environment?

Write your games using truly open standards like OpenGL, and then port to Windows.

Re:Don't go down that slippery slope!

[WinterSolstice]

Yes. We want "A" reference point for games. Windows has done more for the PC gaming industry than any other OS I can think of. You have everything you need to be a successful developer:

A full set of APIs

A large user base

Hardware vendors writing drivers

Major Name Recognition (tm)

Future and Past interoperability (better than, say, NES and GameCube. XP will run lots of Win 3.1 stuff. )

Windows is great for game companies. Better than Mac. Better than OS/2. WAAAAAY better than Linux. If you can make Windows games run out of the box on Linux machines (with small additional cost), you make best buddies out of end users, developers, and gamers. People don't want to have a pile of games written for a specific OS that now needs to be repurchased. I have a stack of OS/2 games sitting around. I have a stack of Apple games sitting around. I even have some older Linux games sitting around (RH 6.5 is not very compatible with RH 7.2, you know). What I don't have is old Windows games sitting around. My current box is able to play everything I have. Norse by Norsewest; Command and Conquer; Wing Commander I, II, and III; Ultima I - IX;

It is always better to tell someone "I don't need to you to change anything, I can generate additional revenue for you for free", then to tell them " I want you to create OS-specific, hardware optimized code for a platform that has a niche market."

Face it: as cool and as useful as Linux is, it is not Windows. It has a fraction of the desktop users, supports a fraction of the hardware, and commands a lot less respect from developers. I don't see "Hot New Linux Game!" in any of my game magazines.

-WS